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
India-Pakistan
’Killing Hindus’ is the best approach: LeT founder
2003-04-03
The founder and former head of the terrorist group Lashkar-e-Taiba has dismissed Pakistani efforts for talks with India over Jammu and Kashmir, saying "killing Hindus" was the best approach.
The religion of Peace and Tolerance talking from the "ally" in the war against terror once againe
"The solution is not to kneel down before India and beg for dialogue... India has never been sincere in resolving issues through talks," Hafiz Saeed said on late Tuesday. "Our policy of 'Kashmir through jihad (holy war)' is absolutely right... India has shown us this path for jihad. We would like to give India a tit-for-tat response and reciprocate in the same way by killing the Hindus, just like it is killing the Muslims in Kashmir." Saeed, released from seven months' arrest in December, was speaking after addressing a conference of terrorists.

Hafiz Saeed is the head of Jamaat ad-Dawa, which is the latest incarnation of Lashkar. Its strategy appears to be to push India and Pakistan into a nuclear war, and then to pick up the pieces in both countries when it's all over, to establish a caliphate. Hafiz has a very small vocabulary, consisting for the most part of one word — "jihad" — used over and over again. He's very devout. Saeed's treatment at the hands of the Paks is an excellent illustration of the hypocrisy with which the Perv regime has been pursuing the war on terror.
Posted by:rg117

#11  TJ Wankson,
at least in India the guy/party with the largest number of votes actually wins the election. Unlike your screwed up system where the guy who gets the minority of votes whilst taking it up the ass from Kenny Boy gets his daddy's judges to put him in power.
And as far as India being close to USSR is concerned. India was in the non-aligned movement but whilst the US didn't sell any defence equipment to India the USSR was quite happy to provide the goods. Might I add, at the same time the US was cosying up to both the Jihadi Paks and Bin-Laden.
Do you even know anything about Indian elections. There is a huge number of political parties each with some power, the central government is made up of about 30 different parties. So when you say that the same people keep running the government, you're talking from your ass.
Posted by: rg117   2003-04-04 07:51:00  

#10  Comon guys India an ally? India was the nearest thing the USSR had to an ally during the cold war. It has continually demonstrated an anti-American posture. We need another France? The Pakis and Indians deserve each other. And don't give us that India is a democracy muck, the wankers kill over 2,000 people each election and the same people keep running the government. Its sort of Chicago democracy, except for the murders.
Posted by: TJ Jackson   2003-04-04 00:41:28  

#9  I agree rg. But sooner or later the US will shift alliances toward India.
Posted by: RW   2003-04-03 16:04:12  

#8  It's seems so incredebly strange to me as an Indian, that the US government seems to think that India (the world's largest democracy, nuclear trigger in the control of the civilian government) should be treated as an equal to Pakland (the islamic, extremist, fundamentalist dictatorship, nuclear trigger in the hands of the Military). Even going so far as to deny India Defence technology [US: Aid conditional on no "Phalcon" sale to India]. Whilst at the same time, China continues to provide Pakland with both Nuclear and Missile technology [Is China wanting to have an Indo-Pak war?]
Posted by: rg117   2003-04-03 12:06:17  

#7  liberalhawk:
As I write, Musharaf's puppet party - Pakistan Muslim League (Qaid e Azam) is preparing to unite with the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, to control Pakistan's Parliament. The MMA can put millions of people in the streets at short notice, so Musharaf is bowing down to them, while the State Department whitewashes Pak jihadism. The benefits of Bush's engagement with the terror state don't come close to covering the costs.
Posted by: Anonon   2003-04-03 10:33:25  

#6  Personally, I think it unfair to compare the Islamist in Turkey to the Fundos in Pakistan. The Turkish government is Islamic in much the same way the UK or US government is Christian. The Pak Government is Islamic in the way that the KKK is Christian.
Posted by: rg117   2003-04-03 10:27:30  

#5  in fact the jihadis lost in most of Pakistan.

In turkey the islamists who won have been stepping gingerly so far.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2003-04-03 10:15:57  

#4  For some reason, the Paks keeps saying that there isn't any evidence against the Fundos. Its not enough that they openly campaign for the killing of Hindus, Jews, and Christians. Its not enough that they openly generate funds for their terror cause. An its not enough that after each terror attack in Kashmir, they celebrate and gloat about it. But this still isn't enough proof for the Pak authorities. Obviously they are not psychotic, they're just misunderstood.
Posted by: rg117   2003-04-03 10:13:25  

#3  Pakistani clerics have just advocated the use of Pak nuclear weapons against Americans, in defense of Iraq. And the Bush' media will suppress coverage of this atrocity, as they covered up Jamaat-i-Islami harborage of al-Qaeda.
http://nni-news.com/today/main/main-06.htm

The Bush government's indulgence of religious fanaticism while promoting one-time "democracy" in Muslim tyrannies, has delivered Islamist victories in Pakistan and Turkey. Iraq will be next, unless every Muslim jihadi - including the clerics who preach genocide in mosques - becomes a war target.

One Pakistani jihadi has this to say: "Despite their disingenuous talk of freedom and democracy, Bush and Blair must know that bringing true democracies to the Middle East, and the Muslim world in general, will have the oppostie effect to the one they hope for and will go against their own interests. It is unlikely that any democratic Muslim country today will ever elect a pro-Western government." Polls conducted in various Muslim majority countries indicate open support of 40-60% for al-Qaeda. Jihad cults dominate national life in these entities.
http://www.balochistanpost.com/item.asp?ID=3669

It is pure folly to spend billions on behalf of limited war, while the bigger enemy waits in the wings to be delivered victory in the name of one-time "democracy." It is urgent that Coalition troops target both Saddamites and Islamo-Fascists in Iraq, and prohibit Islamic constitutionalism, as a threat to humanity.


Posted by: Anonon   2003-04-03 09:54:34  

#2  He did seven months and a judge sprung him? Pakistan: The system works. Better waste this psycho next time.
Posted by: tu3031   2003-04-03 08:53:04  

#1  maybe we're just overlooking our cultural differences? "Killing Hindus" might have a totally different meaning there? Or was it a Freudian slip? Naaahhhhh
Posted by: Frank G   2003-04-03 08:19:11  

00:00