You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Afghanistan
Mulla Omar’s aide wants regime change in Pakistan
2003-11-05
A close aide to Taliban leader Mullah Muhammad Omar has said he hopes the Pakistani government will change soon and Islamabad’s help to Islamic militias resumes with President Pervez Musharraf’s exit from power. In an interview with Daily Times at an undisclosed location in southern Afghanistan, Maulvi Akhter Muhammad, an economic advisor to Mullah Omar, said President Musharraf and a few other generals “betrayed” the Taliban and they would not stay for long in power. “(President) Musharraf and a few generals acted against Islam and the Taliban (after September 11). Such people will not hold power for long in Pakistan,” said Mr Muhammad.
Not if Qazi, Fazl and Sami have anything to say about it...
He said the Taliban had nothing to say against Pakistan. “We know the people of Pakistan still support the Taliban. What we have to say about Pakistan is that Musharraf and a few generals caused damage to the Taliban’s cause,” a Daily Times source who met Mr Muhammad quoted him as saying. He denied Pakistan supported the Taliban’s attacks against Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government and argued, “How can one support you when he is your enemy? After September 11, Pakistan has not been helping the Taliban. The Pakistani ruler is no longer the Taliban’s supporter. He is now our enemy.” Asked how the Taliban financed their struggle against the present Kabul regime, Mr Muhammad said, “Through public donations.” Pressed to give details as to how the Islamic militia was able to get donations and whether they came from outside Afghanistan, he responded, “Let’s keep it secret.”
Big secret. I think we can guess where the money comes from...
The Daily Times source said he was amazed the way the Taliban was regrouping and said it was a clear sign of long-term resistance. “They have good means of communication and even Pentium-4 laptops are being used to stay in touch with other people. I also saw nice 4x4 vehicles and motorcycles, which they use for transportation in rugged, hilly areas,” the source said.
Posted by:Fred Pruitt

#14  Pak Independence Day : 14th August
Indian Independence Day: 15th August
(You should watch/hear the mud slinging matches they have when both PMs (or usually general in case of Pakland) given their speaches on their respective independence days.)
Indian republic day: 26 January (i.e. when it got a constitution and democratically elected government). Don't know about Pakland.

With regards to the British wanting to keep the country united, I'm afraid that's not true. They told Nehru they would only grant independence if he agreed to partition. Which he agreed to since he was a fucking Commie anyway and splitting up the country would be small price to pay for his dynasty.
Posted by: rg117   2003-11-5 1:07:59 PM  

#13  Robert, you may be right. I'll have to check more than one source - I've found more than one factual error in the "History of the British Commonwealth" I own. Either way, Pakistan lost Bangladesh - formerly East Pakistan (with a bit of Indian help), and have been whining about it ever since. I personally thought the decision had been made inside the British Raj, since both Pakistan's independence day (Oct 1, 1947) and India's attainment of Dominion Status (Aug 15, 1947) are so close - only a matter of days. India didn't become an independent state until almost three years later - January 1, 1950.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2003-11-5 12:13:01 PM  

#12  The British partitioned the old Indian Raj into a Hindu state (India) and a non-Hindu state (Pakistan, also including what is now Bangladesh). It was supposed to cut down on sectarian violence.

Hate to disagree, OP, but I'm pretty sure that's not right. The British wanted India to remain united, even after it became free. It was (shockingly!) the Muslims that wanted their own, separate state. The partitioning was done after independence, and stripped away the Muslim majority regions to form Pakistan.
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2003-11-5 11:41:20 AM  

#11  Sounds like a job for... Lo-Jack!
Posted by: Fred   2003-11-5 11:17:49 AM  

#10  If I were Mullah Omar, I'd be very, very careful about what I said, and even more careful about what I did. Can you see the Indians sitting by while a Taliban-supported government took power in Pak-land? India, close to 1Bn people, Pak-land about 240mil. India, huge reserves of just about EVERYTHING, most unexploited, Pakland about 40% desert, with some gas and oil, but with Bugtis blowing up the pipeline every couple of months.

The British partitioned the old Indian Raj into a Hindu state (India) and a non-Hindu state (Pakistan, also including what is now Bangladesh). It was supposed to cut down on sectarian violence. Unfortunately, Muslim Pakistan never took that seriously (Jammu & Kashmir, Muslim infiltration of Hindu territory elsewhere). Sooner or later, India will have to respond. When that happens, it won't be pretty. Mullah Omar's interference into Pakistan politics may be the tipping point.
Posted by: Old Patriot   2003-11-5 11:09:27 AM  

#9  If they're using infidel technology, then they can be found, and eventually will be.
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2003-11-5 11:05:24 AM  

#8  Might actually work in our favor. With the guy that (supposedly) supports us out of there, it'll give us free reign to go in and bomb the shit out of those Taliban base camps in the NWFP.
Posted by: tu3031   2003-11-5 10:10:32 AM  

#7  Laptops, 4x4 vehicles and motorcycles? Hmmm. Correct me if I'm wrong but aren't these all products that were researched, designed and manufactured by infidels, crusaders and maybe even joos? How come they aren't using Islamic products, designed by the skilled graduates of the reknown Islamic universities and built in the great Islamic industrial centers?
Posted by: SteveS   2003-11-5 10:00:11 AM  

#6  As much as I'd love to see Powell out and someone with a spine in charge of State (Rumsfeld!), can you imagine the reaction if Bush ousted Powell?
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2003-11-5 9:56:32 AM  

#5  whatever you think of NMM's comments, yesterday i saw yet another quote in a respectable newspaper quoting a "senior admin official" criticizing DoD policy in Iraq. It obviously wasnt a DoD official. Im sure it want Condi. I doubt the paper was lying, or misusing the word "senior" Id be very surprised if it wasnt a certain ex-JCS chairman who now holds a senior cabinet position. Yet again speaking out of turn, attacking his own admin via leak. And what doe Dubya do about this pal of his Dad? This noted friend of Saudi? NOTHING.

The Dems (with one or two shining exceptions) may be stupid in foreign policy, but this admin has plenty of its own problems.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2003-11-5 9:38:35 AM  

#4  "I also saw nice 4x4 vehicles and motorcycles"
Good, especialy the motorcycles have a very nice FLIR signature.
Posted by: chinditz   2003-11-5 9:34:44 AM  

#3  I see NMM is trying to set a daily record for stupid comments - the solar flare, governorship losses, and yesterday's comments record got him really jacked up - switch to decaf NMM
Posted by: Frank G   2003-11-5 8:32:11 AM  

#2  Maulvi Akhter Muhammad, an economic advisor to Mullah Omar

I wonder what sort of advice he gave, considering the Taliban's entire treasury was kept in two chests in Mullah Omar's house.
Posted by: Paul Moloney   2003-11-5 2:59:36 AM  

#1  And don't even get him started how many Escalades they got with double deuces! Courtesy of Saudi Arabia the Bushes home away from home.
Posted by: NotMikeMoore   2003-11-5 12:29:49 AM  

00:00