|
| Associated Press of Pakistan; Government of Pakistan | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 28 2016, 08:30 AM (335 Views) | |
| Capo | Mar 28 2016, 08:30 AM Post #1 |
|
P.M. Nawaz Sharif
|
Associated Press of Pakistan |
![]() |
|
| Capo | Apr 8 2016, 07:14 AM Post #2 |
|
P.M. Nawaz Sharif
|
Breaking: Coup attempt thwarted, General Tajammul arrested March 23, 1980 | Rawalpindi, Punajb: Government sources have announced the discovery of a major plot among members of the military high command, led by Zulfiqar loyalist and war hero Major General Tajammul Hussain Malik, his son Naveed, and several others among the highest echelons of the Armed Forces. The plotters, who have been identified and taken into custody through the valiant work of the Federal Investigation Agency and Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence, have been taken to the Central Jail in Rawalpindi, to await indictment and trail. President Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq, target of this plot, announced the arrests, stating that he "forgives" the plotters, and "prays that they will cooperate fully so that their network can be dismantled." During his annual Pakistan Day address, at which he announced the plot, President Zia declares that "the full focus of our security and intelligence personnel are on identifying threats to the security and safety of the people of Pakistan that might stem from this deception." Further details are scant, though the Associated Press of Pakistan has confirmed through anonymous government sources that General Tajammul and several others were taken into custody "in the presence of a large quantity of weapons and explosives stored outside of [military] mandates." Sources have not ruled out potential foreign involvement, but do not believe that New Delhi had any part in the coup. "General Tajammul may be a traitor to his government, but he was always faithful to the people of Pakistan," an ranking officer in the Pakistan Army anonymously proffered. "India would never back a man who would never surrender." Spoiler: click to toggle
|
![]() |
|
| Capo | Apr 24 2016, 07:52 AM Post #3 |
|
P.M. Nawaz Sharif
|
US Elections: Will America elect a murderer? September 12th, 1980 | Washington, D.C.: The United States is less than a month away from holding presidential elections, the world awaiting, with bated breath, the results of the referendum which will determine the next leader of the free world. Pakistanis have taken a keen interest in the outcome of the elections; the Carter administration's efforts in counteracting threats emanating from Moscow and Tehran has been "underwhelming," according to some government sources, which has in turn negatively impacted both Pakistan's national security, and the security of South Asia and the Persian Gulf. Addressing these concerns, President Muhammed Zia-ul-Haq stated, in a press conference held in Karachi, that "Pakistan is closely monitoring the outcome of the elections in the United States, and looks forward to collaborating with the next American president on matters of mutual concern." Privately, however, many within President Zia's administration have expressed reservations about the candidacy of democrat hopeful Ted Kennedy, the brother of the slain President John Kennedy and candidate Robert Kennedy, who staged a stunning upset against President Carter at the Democratic National Convention this past June to secure the nomination against governor Reagan of California. Mr. Kennedy, who had declined to run for the highest office in the previous two elections, has campaigned primarily on domestic issues, challenging the eligibility of Carter to serve as heir to a decades-long activist tradition within the Democrat party, declining to elaborate extensively on what would be his foreign policy. Private sources have told Dawn, however, that they believe "Mr. Kennedy remains a strong opponent of the doctrine of containment, and of utilizing America's power to lead the free world against the Communist threat," a sentiment which has caused concerns throughout Pakistan as Soviet soldiers push deeper into South Asia. Many others within Pakistan's foreign policy community have expressed concerns that Mr. Kennedy "does not favor America's historic and substantive alliances," preferring instead "symbolism and identity politics," especially in reference to Northern Ireland. The Kennedy family's long-running support to insurgents in Northern Ireland is well documented, and has served to cultivate wide-ranging support throughout the Irish-American community, but at the cost of alienating London, who in turn remains one of Pakistan's closest foreign partners. However, the most troubling aspect of Mr. Kennedy's candidacy falls outside of the realm of foreign policy, getting instead at questions of moral characters. People throughout Pakistan have come to question how a known murderer can be seen as fit by millions of Americans to lead their country. The charges stem from the July 18, 1969 incident at Chappaquiddick Island, where Mr. Kennedy's car swerved off of a one lane wooden bridge into a tidal inlet off the Nantucket sound; Kennedy's passenger, 29 year old Mary Jo Kopechne, drowned, while Mr. Kennedy extricated himself from the vehicle and proceeded to a local pub, neglecting to report the accident for up to nine hours, all but ensuring Ms. Kopechne's demise. Mr. Kennedy claims that he was driving Ms. Kopechne, whom he did not know, to a local ferry, and that following the accident he was in shock and suffering from amnesia, and subsequently was unable to inform authorities - several of his local friends have testified that Mr. Kennedy was "very emotional [and] very upset" following the incident, however, charges of a cover up, and of more nefarious motives have circled the case for the past eleven years. Reports have suggested that Mr. Kennedy returned to his motel, complained about a loud party, took a shower, went to sleep, woke up, called two friends and then two lawyers before reporting the accident; divers on the scene suggested that Ms. Kopechne would have survived had Mr. Kennedy reported the accident immediately, as she had been trapped in an air pocket inside of the car, living for perhaps several hours before suffocating while Mr. Kennedy neglected to report the accident. Ms. Kopechne's body was found without undergarments, pressed into the rear seat well of the vehicle; no medical examination for sexual assault took place, though it is worth noting the degree of influence the Kennedy family has in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, where the incident occurred. Mr. Kennedy has categorically denied these allegations, but questions remain: why did he not report the accident immediately? How was he able to extricate himself from the vehicle, when the vehicle was sealed and inescapable at the bottom of the sound? Why was he alone with Ms. Kopechne, driving under the influence, in the opposite direction of the alleged destination? Why did Mr. Kennedy's friends, whom he had confided in about the incident, not report it? Despite having no answers for these questions, Mr. Kennedy has gained a constituency in America's sizable Irish Catholic population, but the stunning weakness of the incumbent President Carter has created an opening for a flawed candidate such as Kennedy to seizing the nomination. Indeed, Mr. Kennedy had declined to seek the nomination in 1972 and 1976 faced with ostensibly tougher opposition - the question remains, however, whether this new-found support will translate into votes next month. Though President Carter is immensely unpopular, Mr. Kennedy inherits his legacy as the democratic nominee, and has promised to take the United States yet further leftwards in the face of economic malaise and foreign policy ineptitude brought forth by America's prior lurches to the left. President Carter himself only managed to transform a solidly red electoral map through controversy surrounding President Ford. Some experts have suggested that the immense unpopularity of the Democratic party writ large will likely doom Mr. Kennedy even if questions of his moral character were not ubiquitous, but as it stands, analysts question whether Mr. Kennedy can gain the necessary support among American religious voters for his moral indiscretions, much less his status as the would-be second Catholic to hold the office of the Presidency. Pakistan too has elected those to the highest office with such indiscretions. A key parallel can be drawn between Mr. Kennedy and former Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, whose ascent to power coincided with a wave of brutal political violence; Mr. Bhutto, after years mismanaging the Pakistani government for his personal graft, was finally removed from office in light of new evidence uncovered which implicated him directly in the murder of Nawab Muhammad Ahmad Khan Kasuri, father of political opponent Ahmed Raza Kasuri. The gross malfeasance of Bhutto's actions have had a profound effect on Pakistan, making many Pakistanis weary of parallels they see between the disgraced Prime Minister and Mr. Kennedy. "I fear for the United States, and for her people, if Ted Kennedy becomes their president," Nawab Khan, a student at the University of Engineering and Technology - Lahore, told reporters. Another student, Fawaz Gilani, referred to Mr. Kennedy as "a slime-ball; the embodiment of sin in modernity." Many in Pakistan's elite fear that Kennedy's opportunism and preference for "left-wing causes" will see the continuation of the United States' attempts to diplomatically isolate Pakistan for its development of a nuclear program; the United States ended defense cooperation several years ago, leading to the end of Pakistani production of the M113 series of armored vehicles and setting back Pakistan's modernization efforts significantly, according to several military sources. "The resumption of American aid and support is a key diplomatic priority," Sultan Muhammed Khan told reporters. "We are hopeful that the next administration sees the value of strategic partnership with Pakistan." Privately, there is a sense that there is a much greater liklihood of that happening should Mr. Reagan achieve the Presidency, but the ambassador remained adamant that "Pakistan will cooperate closely with whoever the next President is, and has no preference between Mr. Reagan and Mr. Kennedy, other than that for whom the American people elect." |
![]() |
|
| Capo | May 27 2016, 08:31 AM Post #4 |
|
P.M. Nawaz Sharif
|
Indira Gandhi: Prime Minister, or murderous hussy?![]() India's Prime Minister Indira Gandhi has taken to the forefront of Pakistani news, given recent aggression against the sovereignty of Pakistan and the lives and livelihoods of Muslims in Kashmir. Prime Minister Gandhi has long been the most powerful woman in India, but as is common with those who rise to the forefront of Indian politics, Indira's past is checkered with corruption and malfeasance, and beneath the veneer lies a fundamentally dishonest, broken human being, incapable of even the most basic human emotions. In this article, the Associated Press of Pakistan's editorial staff takes a look at the life and times of one of the most depraved dictators in the modern world, and attempts to uncover what drives such a vile and violent villain. Indira Gandhi was born in 1917, allegedly the daughter of Jawahru Lal Nehru and Kamala Kaul. Nehru, who was born in a whorehouse and killed by a particularly nasty sexually transmitted infection, famously philandered his way though life without conceiving a single other child, so the legitimacy of Indira's birth remains questioned to this day; it is noteworthy that reports indicate to this day that Jawahar never conceived his marriage with Indira's mother, pointing to Manzur Ali, son of Mubarak Ali and close compatriot of the Nehru family, as Indira's true father. Other sources have pointed to long-time Nehru lover Lord Louis Mountbatten, whose infamous affair with the Prime Minister resulted in the ongoing injustice in Kashmir. Perhaps because of her illegitimate parentage, Nehru was largely uninvolved in the rearing of his daughter, while mother Kamala was absent, dying of tuberculosis in an overseas hospital. Left to her own devices, Indira proved to be a rebellious youth, eventually being ejected from both Oxford and Shatiniketan Universities for poor performance and behavior; following her expulsions, the listless Indira engaged in numerous illicit affairs, notably with Feroze Khan, whom she was forced to marry under the duress of pregnancy. Under pressure from Nehru, Khan changed his name to Ghandi to avoid jeopardizing his daughter's potential political career, due to accurate perceptions of the India's Hindu community's inherent hatred Muslims. This, of course, had the added benefit of staking a claim to the more famous Gandhi's legacy, despite having literally nothing to do with it. Despite the great measures Khan took to please Indira, the marriage soon soured, and extramarital affairs began in earnest. Following the birth of her first son, Rajiv, Indira grew distant from Feroze - reports indicate that the two were all but divorced. During this time period, Indira began a long-term affair with Mohammad Yunus, who would father her second child, the late and notorious Sanjay Gandhi. Yunus was not the only of Indira's many lovers to father a children - reports of a pregnancy by M. O. Mathai, one of Prime Minister Nehru's private secretaries, were common, with the pregnancy reportedly ending in an abortion. Indira also engaged in affairs with yoga instructor Dhirendra Brahmachari, as well as Foreign Minister Dinesh Singh. Indira's relationship with her son Sanjay, rather than her myriad lovers, quickly became that which defined her life, however. Although publicly a doting, devoted mother to Sanjay, in private, Indira and the rebellious youth are reported to clash severely, with Sanjay using knowledge of his real parentage as a tool for blackmailing Indira into compliance. Sanjay would become well-known for his misdeeds - as a youth, his schoolmasters would report a penchant for kleptomania and forgery, while his name and parentage categorically prevented him from bearing the consequences of his acts. It should be no surprise, then, that as Sanjay grew older, his crimes became more and more depraved, graduating from simple larceny to auto theft and sexual assault, as the fiendish Sanjay spent his nights prowling the Delhi streets, looking for action. By the mid-1970s, Sanjay was involved in various import/export scams, and, with the support and guidance of his mother and her closest advisers, had embarked on a genocidal sterilisation campaign under which he ran a number of small-scale concentration camps, where Muslims would be kidnapped and butchered. Indira and Sanjay would combine these brutal methods with engineered famines, as used by their close friends in Moscow, in an attempt to systematically eradicate India's Muslim minority, a desire which continues to this day through India's controversial and illegal settlement designs. Despite their collaboration in atrocity, however, Indira and Sanjay would continue to clash, with reports of Sanjay beating Indira behind closed doors becoming routine. It should be no surprise, then, that when Sanjay Gandhi was killed in a plane crash in June of 1980, Indira blocked any attempt at a formal investigation. Although the plane crash was ruled as an accident, Sanjay Gandhi had been the target of numerous assassination attempts, and Indira's stonewalling of the investigation process suggests a likely culprit. Reports that Sanjay's power within the Indian National Congress had surpassed Indira's were increasingly becoming reality, and coupled with details of their personal relationship paint a clear motive. However, as no investigation has been done into the crash, it is impossible to know for sure whether Sanjay's death was the result of foul play, or merely a fortunate accident for the Muslims of India. However, regardless of whether or not Indira was responsible for Sanjay's death, her actions, alongside her deceased son's, makes her an accomplice in one of the most brutal and dastardly attempts at ethnic cleansing ever, securing her a place alongside Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin in the annals of history. However, unlike Hitler and Stalin, Indira Gandhi remains alive, and remains the leader of the singularly most vile and reprehensible government in the world today. Under the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty, India has proven itself committed to the murder or sterilisation of every Muslim within its borders, starting with the colonization and genocide of Kashmir, but ending only with the perpetual institution of Hindu hegemony over not just India, but the whole of South Asia. As the editorial staff of the Associated Press of Pakistan, we wholeheartedly support President Zia's refusal to engage with Indira Gandhi, and furthermore, call for the government of Pakistan to suspend all diplomatic relations with India until such a time that the Indian National Congress is out of power. Nothing good can be accomplished by negotiating with madmen, and we applaud President Zia for his firm stance on the safety and security of not only Pakistan, but all of India's Muslims. |
![]() |
|
| Capo | Jun 12 2016, 08:59 AM Post #5 |
|
P.M. Nawaz Sharif
|
Iranian Diplomat: Yes, we're Zionists, oh, and only Persians are Muslims![]() New York, New York | September 1981 Shocking revelations have come out of the Non-Aligned Movement, where Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Velyati publicly acknowledged his regime's support for violence against all non-Persian Muslim communities on the heels of Iran's rejection of the Palestinian Liberation Organization and recognition of the state of Israel. Velyati, whose bombastic public addresses labelled "Jinnah" and all Pakistanis part of "the Sunni onslaught," reportedly continued his tirades against Minister of Foreign Affairs Aghi Shahi in private, cornering Mr. Shahi in a restroom and declaring "Pakistan and every other Muslim state to be kuffar," per sources within Pakistan's Foreign Ministry. Mr. Shahi described the incident as "just short of a violent attack," saying that "[Velyati] was almost foaming at the mouth while shouting 'only Persians are Muslims! Khomeni is Muhammed!' over and over again." Mr. Shahi was reportedly frightened by the incident, and has briefly left the premises to seek medical attention, reportedly with concussion-like symptoms. Other members of Pakistan's diplomatic entourage have verified the event, claiming to have seen Mr. Velyati enter the restroom, followed by "banging and shouting." The physical assault on Pakistan's Minister of Foreign Affairs is but the latest transgression of many committed by the so-called "Islamic Republic" of Iran, which began its ignominious history with two viscous terror attacks, targeting American embassies in Tehran and Islamabad. Iran has repeatedly refused to take responsibility for their role in organizing and staging the attack in Islamabad, which has been a key detriment to Pakistan-Iran relations since revelations of Iranian involvement became apparent in mid-1980. Iran, through the al Zulfiqar organization, currently being granted sanctuary in Afghanistan by the Soviet Union's puppet government, has waged a campaign of terror and violence in Pakistan, including the embassy attacks, the hijacking of a Pakistan International Airways flight, which resulted in the murder of a Pakistan military officer. "The consequences of Khomenist infiltration have been felt on every front," Minister of Internal Security Roedad Khan told Associated Press of Pakistan reporters. "Iranian cartels travel back and forth across the Baluchistan border, and through Afghanistan - we think with Soviet blessing," Mr. Khan elaborated, "these cartels smuggle heroin into the country, produced by Iranian militias in the border regions." Mr. Khan estimated that several tons of heroin are smuggled into Pakistan by Iranian drug gangs every year. Additionally, Mr. Khan believes that "this heroin racket directly funds the al Zulfiqar organization, and the political activities of the Bhutto family abroad." Other members of Pakistan's government have provided comment on the recent events as well. Minister of Law and Justice Sharifuddin Pirzada commented that "given Iran's recent rejection of the PLO, and their Foreign Minister's statements, made directly to ours, that 'only Persians are Muslims,' one might reasonably take this to indicate a support for the Zionist cause." Numerous others have condemned Iran's statements regarding the religious affiliation of Muhammed Ali Jinnah as "nothing short of detestable extremism." Jinnah, a well-known Shi'ite, has repeatedly been slandered by Iran in the Non Aligned Movement; the Associated Press of Pakistan commends Minister Shahi for his bold diplomatic maneuver to propose the suspension of Iran from the Non Aligned Movement due to Iran's repeated diplomatic transgressions. More troubling, however, was Iran's response to Iraqi allegations of a planned genocide - in response to Pakistan's expressed concern, Iranian delegation reportedly threatened Minister Shahi with "Soviet and Indian intervention," ostensibly in alignment with Moscow and New Delhi's ongoing efforts to exterminate Muslim populations in South Asia. Fortunately, these efforts are opposed by the government of Pakistan, who has pledged support to oppressed Muslim populations in both Kashmir and Baluchistan should India and Iran respectively engage in an organized genocide. "In all ways, Pakistan remains committed to the security and prosperity of South Asia's Muslims," Deputy Sub-Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs Feroz Syed Khan, who has taken over for Mr. Shahi in the Non Aligned Movement, "and we will remain committed even in the face of Indian, Soviet, or Iranian aggression." |
![]() |
|
| Capo | Jun 19 2016, 07:01 AM Post #6 |
|
P.M. Nawaz Sharif
|
Pakistan Army reinforces diplomatic enclave![]() Islamabad | Pakistan :: As anti-Soviet sentiment in Pakistan grows, President Zia-ul-Haq has reportedly ordered elements of Pakistan's 111th Independent Infantry Brigade, based in Rawalpindi, to reinforce Islamabad's diplomatic enclave and provide support to the Soviet embassy should it fall under attack. Approximately fifty soldiers and eighty Punjab Rangers have established checkpoints at strategic chokeholds around the embassy, and are allegedly in the process of establishing a perimeter in the undeveloped woodland immediately to the southeast of the embassy. Lt. Sheihak Baloch, the commanding officer of the deployment to the diplomatic enclaves, told APP that "Pakistan is committed to preventing another incident like the 1979 American Embassy storming. We are here to provide security." Although tensions are high in Islamabad, this hasn't spilled over into the diplomatic enclave, access to which is restricted, however security forces fear that the diplomatic enclave's security might be inadequate against an assembled mob, resulting in the deployment of army personnel to the areas surrounding the Soviet embassy. The move appears to be an attempt to forestall criticism, which was directed at Pakistan following the 1979 embassy storming, by taking a proactive approach against domestic threats to diplomatic personnel. "It is the duty of every nation to provide impeccable security for diplomatic personnel stationed within it," Lt. Baloch elaborated. The government, responding to leak, has condemned the action as "petty manipulation," and has announced that the completed investigation findings will be released in January or February. "Our investigation teams are still in the process of uncovering the truth, and public reaction on incomplete information is not only inappropriate, but it compromises our efforts to uncover the truth," Federal Investigative Agency Director General M. Aslam Hayat told reporters. "When the investigation is complete, the government will take committed and dedicated steps to minimize the risk of a repeat incidence, and respond accordingly, however, we are still several months from that point." When asked if the Soviet Union organized the coup, Mr. Hayat responded that "Soviet citizens appear to be involved, but the degree to which they operate under the auspices of the Soviet government or another rival force is still unclear," further noting that "citizenship does not necessarily indicate allegiance." |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today. Learn More · Sign-up for Free |
|
| « Previous Topic · Round 7 · Next Topic » |











12:16 AM Jul 11
