Cameron is right: Pakistan does sponsor terrorism
Posted on Friday 30 July, 2010
Filed Under International
IT IS not logically possible for anyone to have ‘gone off script’ during an ‘unscripted appearance’. That David Miliband can construct a sentence accusing David Cameron of such an offence is unfortunate proof that the the control freak mentality that characterised New Labour throughout the ‘on message’ mid 1990s is alive and well.
The occasion for the outburst came in an appearance on the World at One yesterday, in which the former foreign secretary discussed the current prime minister’s suggestion that elements within the Pakistani state are complicit in terrorist attacks in Afghanistan and India.
That this is the case is not in doubt to anyone who reads international relations journals, or even serious newspapers. The involvement of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence with the Taliban is not something that has only just come to light thanks to the classified material published on WikiLeaks earlier this week. Nor will the idea that the ISI covertly backs Kashmiri militants shock many observers of south Asian affairs.
The spluttered denials from sources in Islamabad lack even a semblance of conviction. To hear a senior official of Jamaat-i-Islami – a party of clerical authoritarian war criminals – warn Cameron that his words might foment ‘anti-American, anti-West’ sentiment only compounds the irony.
There are many grounds on which it is right for Labour politicians to criticise Cameron and the administration he leads. But simply stating commonly-known facts in plain English in response to a question at a press conference does not strike me as one of them.
<<Go back
Comments
71 Responses to “Cameron is right: Pakistan does sponsor terrorism”
Leave a Reply
Talk about pot calling the fucking kettle!!!
We have wikileaks discussing Afghan civilian death cover ups, we have more and more evidence of the illegality of Iraq and you concentrate on this!!
You should judge an author on what he chooses to talk about and what he chooses not to talk about. Clearly you are an apologist for British state terror.
I see Mr Angry is off again, understatement not his forte .
Dean, do you think Dave might perhaps be in the pay of MI5 ? I mean, he may even be more than an apologist .
Clearly you are an apologist for British state terror.
Clearly. You can find repeated instances on this blog. Can’t you, Dean?
Heh Dave
Maybe Dean thinks you should be on the side of the Taliban/ISI/Jamaat resistance to British and US Imperialism. Really Dave, you should just shut up about women’s and working class solidarity in Afghanistan and Iraq and concentrate on screaming hate-filled slogans at UK troops. What are you Dave – some sort of social imperialist, labourite, bedwetting, CIA backed renegade? How dare you tell the truth you…you…shactmanite!!
Martyn,
Why does being against British state terror put you on the side of the Taliban?
Dave’s articles clearly show where his values lie, on the side of British state terror. What he doesn’t talk about speaks volumes.
Once again Dean demonstrates the logic that gives the left a bad name. Anybody opposed to the evil forces of the western world must be on the side of the angels. No grey areas – we are the bad guys – end of.
Dean, you should read this: http://laborpakistan.org/
Tariq Ali points out that Cameron was stating the obvious in today’s Guardian.I’d be a tad surprised if he is working for the security services.
Bears frequently excrete in woods
Pope said to be in favour of Catholicism
Lily Allen desires to exhibit nipples
Queen fond of corgis
Pakistan sponsors terrorism
See?
Nothing to it!
Repeat aloud as necessary !
Why does being against British state terror put you on the side of the Taliban?
It doesn’t.
So by excatly the same logic, why does being against the Taliban put you on the side of British state terror?
Jeez, Dave, we’ll have you voting Tory next. ;o)
What does Baroness Warsi have to say about all this?
Dean. We can only comment on what Dave says not what you think he shoud say. You can say what you think he should say. It does not take Cameron to say the obvious about Pakistan. Pakistan has been since partion from India an Islamic terrorist exporter. We all know about Iraq and Afghanistan. Afghanistan was a haven for terrorists. Iraq no proof at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZ9myHhpS9s&feature=related
For Dean.
Is the cat out of the bag and have the beans been spilled?
We can look forward to the outpouring of DON’T BE HORRID TO PAKISTAN …
… as begun by BANANAMAN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-WaXrsFLgo&feature=related
.. rather like this
Dave – Much like Cameron’s speech, your remarks would have been better balanced if you had acknowledged two particular and highly relevant issues. The first is the need to tell India that its treatment of Kashmir is not acceptable and that the Kashmiris should be given the right to determine their own future – which would probably be in favour of neither Pakistan nor India but for independence. For as long as Indian repression of the Kashmiri movement continues the more the Islamist terrorists like it. Secondly you might have drawn attention to the fact that the US and its allies, while demanding that Pakistan severs any ties with its favoured Taliban factions, is also urging Pakistan to persuade those same factions – Haqqani etc – to begin at least covert talks on a political settlement with Kabul. Cameron’s remarks in Turkey about Gaza were spot on. His gross lack of balance in India had more to do with trade and investment than a serious political intervention over terrorism in Pakistan/Afghanistan.
Could John Palmer please clarify if he prefers ‘self-determination’ for an indpendent Kashmir or it becoming part of Pakistan.
This strikes me as wishful thinking, given the geopolitics of the area. Indpendence means Pakistan.
In any case is this the sole cause of Islamicist murdering? There’s been plenty of that in Kashmir regardless of the Indian vicious repression.
Palmer of course sees the causes Islamist terrorism everywhere but in the ideology of those who carry it out.
I have another question for him regarding Pakistan.
How is it that India has a large Muslim minority while Pakistan, which had large Sikh and Hindi minorities in the Punjab (notably) has none today?
Could it be that a state with religious intolerance in its very constitution is not exatly an honest broker on the issue of Kashmir?
Andrew – A little understanding of the realities on the ground would help. Most polls taken in Kashmir indicate consistent support for independence rather than integration in either India or Pakistan. You may not know but Kashmir was absorbed in newly independent India because it had a Hindu feudal ruler not because of any popular support for that outcome. Naturally I support the preferred option favoured by most Kashmiris. What alternative does Andrew Coates offer? I have no idea what Coates means when he says “Palmer of course sees the causes of Islamist terrorism everywhere but in the ideology of those who carry it out.” I don’t imagine anyone else understands either. India has the advantage of a more democratic and pluralist system (including its legal system) than the confessionally derived Pakistani state. But that has no bearing on the injustice and oppression under which Kashmiris and many Muslims have struggled too long. Unlike Coates I do not allow my criticism of the politics of the Islamists to get lead to equivocation and even support for some of the outrages which Muslims suffer at the hands of Islamophobes. It leads to the politically obscene outcome we have in France where some on the left (supported by Coates) end up hand in hand with the right and the far right in banning the burka as an insult “to French values and traditions.”
Pauv’ Palmer, si près de Dieu et si loin de la Raison.
Though not an old Kashmir hand like John I did know that the Hundi Raja of the place was not in favour of being absorbed into Pakistan (the alternative on offer at Indian indpendence).
Your criticism of Dave is that he should back the demands of the Kasmir ‘militants’ to stop them being terrorists.
Though I have not the benefit of direct experience of the country – lanquid evenings abord Palmer’s House-Boat on Dal Lake – I have noted that the most active forces against the Indian army have a tendency to murder non-Muslims and religiously cleanse the area.
This suggests to me that they are a cause to keep a distance from.
As for the rest of John’s wistful dreams on Coatesism’s line on the burqa – no doubt a by-product of those sunny days with a pipe of Bhang – I suggest he reads what I actually say, Blog and Weekly Worker included.
Very humorous Andrew. But you only confirm that you are out of your depth in discussing this issue. But at least I suppose you can take comfort from the fact that you share enthusiasm for the status quo in Kashmir which was engineered by the Maharaja. Sadly, all such a long, long way from Pablo’s Pabloism.
Solutions for Kashmir:
Snip it into cantons, like Switzerland.
Let it be a sort-of Andorra. [Which is an independent and unarmed country and Andorran independence is guaranteed by France and Spain.]
This would work only if everyone concerned has the political maturity of the Andorrans or even the political maturity of Belgians and/or Canadians.
In case not all here know it, a great many Hindus have – quite understandably – fled Kashmir and tempting them back home would be quite a difficult task in itself.
Ethnic cleansing directed against non-Muslims in Kashmire …
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oSIQRF_AHM
One consequence of the insecurity in Kashmir was that cool highland resorts elsewhere were overwhelmed by summer tourists fleeing the ghastly heat of Indian cities; Manali and Vashtist in the Kulu Valley in particular.
Both have semi-permanent communities of semi-stoned young Japanese living on remittances sent by presumably-sorrowful parents in Nagoya and Osaka.
According to Penelope Chetwolde, who spent part of her childhood in the Kulu Valley and who later married the poet John Betjeman, those cool, groovy laid-back people in the marijuana-’n-apple country of the Kulu Valley murdered every single one of their Muslim neighbours at the time of partition; those who fled to the protection of the police were promptly murdered by the police.
Talking of dispossession, ethnic cleansing and exile in Kashmir reminded me of this …
http://www.city-journal.org/2010/20_3_nakba.html
… from CITY JOURNAL, an excellent if Right-of-centre site – Theodore Dalrymple writes for it, too.
John Palmer. You can forget about your verbal diahorea about Kashmir. The world and more importantly India knows it is about Islamic fundamentalism spreading their poison. The world is awake Mr Palmer. It did take a while for Blair and Bush to get of the rocking chair but that is what happens when complacency sets in.
Andrew, it’s ‘Raptis’, not ‘Rapitas’. ‘Michel Pablo’, or ‘Michalis Raptis’ are the generally recognised names for your declared hero. Get the names right, but preferably ,at least, get ‘Pabloite’ politics right, otherwise it looks a bit, well, like a silly pose with added French.
Well, having spelled out my PEACE PLAN FOR KASHMIR, I need add no more.
From the ‘Mail’ – it is infuriating that a somewhat simplistic article about Stamboul and Turkey is far more spot-on-accurate than “better-educated” and far more detailed stuff in the pages of ‘Al-Grauniad’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1299213/Peter-Hitchens-disturbing-picture-growing-repression-heart-Eurabia.html
For more on Turkish realities, check out the ‘Daily Zaman website. For more on Kashmir, start with the ‘Times of India’ and the various jihadist websites.
For us in Dobrich [formerly Tolbuhin, formerly Hadzhioglu Bazardzhik], the immensity of Micklegarth / Tsarigrad / Byzantium / Constantinople [etc.,] is our Great City – there are seven buses a day from Dobrich to Stamboul [the yarn is that the bus services, like the Movement for Rights and Freedoms Party*, are subsidised by Ankara.]
Where is the Rat? Taken a vow of silence?
* The political party which derives most of its support from Turkish, Pomak, Circassian and Tartar Bulgarians.
As an introduction to jihadist websites, start here …
http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/
… but there are scores more
Old boys who remember BOY’S OWN PAPER will have been thrilled to bit by the news about INSPIRE …
http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng/content/2010/07/14/12287.shtml
… how to do encrypted messsages and make bombs, eh?
This is JUST WILLIAM on steroids!
As an Indian who has an active interest in the Kashmir situation, I can clarify a few things. I am a news producer, apart from being a script writer for movies and I have recently written a script based on Kashmir issue too, where I have met and heard many voices on the issue. This is apart from the knowledge I have which is gained over the past 10 years through my research, many visits to Kashmir and other things.
A little history. When the British left India after the creation of India and Pakistan, there were many princely states who were yet not either part of India or Pakistan and were given the option of joining the country of their choice. A few were a problem, like Hyderabad in South India and Junagarh. Even though the ruler of Hyderabad wanted to be part of Pakistan, India could not allow that as no country can have an enemy nation right in the middle of it’s heart. It’s like the USA having Pakistan in place of Washington DC. Apart from that, majority of Hyderabad kingdom were Hindus and there would be no future for them in a Islamic Pakistan whereas India has chosen a secular path. India invaded Hyderabad and took control of it.
Whereas in Kashmir’s case, the Maharajah of Kashmir, Hari Singh wanted Independence but both Pakistan and India said it was not acceptable and wanted him to chose one of the two. He was given time to decide and meanwhile, both India and Pakistan were involved in managing some affairs of Kashmir. Pakistan handled the postal network while India took care of food distribution and other matters. Everyone thought that the situation would peacefully resolve. But being the evil that Pakistan is, in October of 1947, Pakistan sent Military and tribal thugs to invade Kashmir. They ran over most of the Kashmir and were about to approach the capital in a few days when the ruler panicked and asked India to intervene. India refused and told him that they have no authority to intervene unless the ruler signed an accession of Kashmir to India. The Maharaja had no option but to side with India and immediately, India sent it’s armed forces and routed the attackers. India allowed Pakistan to retain some part of Kashmir which is the so called “Azad Kashmir” in control of Pakistan.
The United Nations then ruled that the Kashmiris would decide on a referendum where they would want to go and as a condition to the referendum, they said that Pakistan has to withdraw from their occupied positions. Till date, Pakistan has not withdrawn from “Azad Kashmir” and India said that the UN ruling is now void and Kashmir is a part of India. Pakistan, on numerous occasions attacked Kashmir and precipitated the situation but India always maintained self control.
Lobby Ludd, thank you for generously sharing your extensive wisdom for the tenth time on this subject.
Now what has this got to do with this post?
‘Made in India’ could, if so minded, probably provide a long list of Pakistani assistance to terrorist groups.
How easily we forget Pakistani duplicity [this is a sub-species of White Liberal Self-Hatred and the opinion, widespread among the doubleplusgoodthinkful, that brownish-skinned people are especially virtuous] but some incidents DO stick in the mind …
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_2008_Mumbai_attacks
Lefties can never take each other at their word can they? Plenty of us seem to think we know each other’s minds better than they do, on all sides. It would be nice if the “they said something so they must *really* be Islamo-fascists/anti-semites/pro-Western imperialism” was kept to gutters like Harry’s Place.
Where is the Rat?
This is the sort of thought-provoking piece she’ll enjoy …
http://www.vdare.com/taylor/080929_malaysia.htm
… Indian Muslims in Malaysia are not among the elect; although Muslims [GOOD!] they are non-Malays [BAD!] and therefor enot Bumiputeras.
OFF WITH THEIR SNOUTS!
Just in case you missed it, there are those savants and strategic thinkers over on HARRY’S PLACE who feel that OUR BRAVE BOYS ought to stay in Afghanistan for many a happy year to come to ensure that every Fatimah has her nose attached to her face.
http://hurryupharry.org/2010/07/31/the-time-cover/
Can’t Germaine Greer – or Lindsay German – be parachuted into that benighted land to persuade the Afghanis that this sort of thing “simply isn’t done” [to quote Noel Coward.]
Madeinindia: Thank you for your contribution which was concrete and constructive. Corr and Glesga we can leave to rant on in the saloon bar. But the point, Madeinindia, is what should happen now. I believe that a withdrawal of Indian and Pakistani forces from their Kashmiri zones of occupation (possibly mandating the UN for peace keeping purposes) should be followed by an internationally supervised referendum on the future of Kashmir (choice between being part of India, part of Pakistan or an independent state). Ideally (although this may be one bridge too far) this could be followed by a sub-continent wide referendum to approve the creation of an economic and political union of all states who wish to join on the sub-continent.
It may come as news to John Palmer that the U.N. actually IS in Kashmir and has been for decades.
The U.N. personnel in Kashmir drive in 4×4 vehicles along the Line of Control and keep their eyes peeled for nasty armed people crossing from Azad Kashmir into Indian-Controlled Kashmir.
For reasons too numerous to list, they are about as good at doing this as the Woodcraft Folk and the Dagenham Girl Pipers would be.
Faith in the U.N. is widespread among those who know least about the U.N. and its works and pomps in reality.
Sadly, only a teeny weeny handful of people – mainly rather disagreeable and embarrassing people on the American Right – are willing to say aloud that that the U.N. – like the ha-ha-ha-ha Commonwealth – is a corrupt, grotesque and meaningless organisation and the sooner the forty of so decent countries in the world walk out of it, the better.
I’m sure someone else here can tell us all about UNMOGIP and how much it has cost over the years and what a wonderful job it has achieved over the last six decades …
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSISL226995._CH_.2400
… of course, what the Kashmir Question really needs is for Botswana, Bhutan, Belize, Burkino Fasso, Burundi, Belarus, Bosnia and Brasil to send peacekeepers, all paid for by those countries which actually pay their U.N. dues.
A little on UNMOGIP …
http://www.un.org/en/peacekeeping/missions/unmogip/
… my, talk about REAL job security!
Every bit as good as UNRWA, now catering for the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the tragic Palestinian refugees* !
* It will be remembered that only Palestinians can pass on their refugee status. The 8+ million German-speakers driven from the German East and Central Europe had no such privilege.
I used to dream of …
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/08/thanks-for-nothing-british-pm-cameron-burned-in-effigy-in-karachi.html
… being burned in effigy in Karachi.
Dave – Worth adding on the Jamaat lecturing Cameron, that its party line on suicide terrorism in Pakistan is that it is ALL carried out by US security firm Blackwater:
http://www.emoiz.com/munawar-blames-blackwater-for-lahore-bombings
These guys are little more than 9/11 conspiracy whackos, only sadly with more power and influence.
Is it acceptable [halal] or unacceptable [haram] to draw attention to these people …
http://www.englishdefenceleague.org/
… who are – now – it is alleged to have Jewish, Sikh, gay and feminist wings?
LESBIANS AGAINST SHARIA! NOW!
“You should judge an author on what he chooses to talk about and what he chooses not to talk about.”
Those are Dean’s words and when you think about them they convey what is most important on his mind, whether or not the type of topic is an approved one or not.
You might expect for a political activist that the quality of the argumentation or even the evidence would be the issue, but no, rather it is an almost immediate accusation of bad faith against Dave.
But it’s more than that, it indicates that Dean, like many ultra-leftists, is not overly concerned with the merits or demerits of an argument.
Still less is he concerned with the evidence, either because as an ultraleftist he doesn’t use evidence to reach conclusions or rather he knows very littleabout the ISI.
In any case, it is surely a bit of an indictment of British political activism when evidence and reason are secondary to a political discussion.
Incidentally, I am not terribly interested in Dean or his views, but his attitude is often to be found on the British Left and probably part of the reason for its lack of success.
I was a generation or two short when mentioning UNRWA in the context of the inheritability of refugee status, which is an outright flaming disgrace so obvious that nobody dares mention it aloud.
Say a woman of 20*, a daughter of a refugee from what is now Israel, gave birth in 1950. Imagine that her daughter gave birth at age twenty in 1970, her grand-daughter gave birth at age twenty in 1990 and her great-grand-daughter gave birth at age twenty in 2010.
That would be a total of six generations who are or were wards of UNRWA, including the generation which was expelled or which chose to flee at the time of Israeli independence.
* Twenty is about the right age to choose, even today. In Scandinavia a generation would be more like 25 or even 30 years.
OH WHAT AN EFFING MESS!
http://hurryupharry.org/2010/08/02/clarification-of-abodes-a-primer-of-islamic-jurisprudence/#comments
… What doth the Rat say about all this?
modernity. The ultra left are not unlike the Islamists. Their actions are just a means to an end. That is why they are comfortable in bed.
You may not see THIS on Socialist Unity …
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1299844/Missing-Manchester-girl-plied-drugs-forced-prostitution.html
… unless it’s in the form of a claim that this was a ‘racist’ frame-up.
How long has this sort of thing been going on? A decade? Two? More?
Shiraz Socialist has, for some reason, pointed approvingly to Nick Cohen’s moan at Cameron .
I’ve posted this:
I’m not sure why Cameron’s statements on Pakistan have raised such waves. Sure, Islamicist extremists are causing all sorts of trouble in Pakistan, and could possibly destabilise the place, but who let the genie out of the bottle in the first place? The crucial sponsorship of the Taliban by important — and not (at that point) rogue — elements in the Pakistan state machine cannot be denied. Jockeying for strategic positions in the mess in Afghanistan, going back three decades, saw the Pakistan intelligence (sic) forces give these gangsters arms and much more. And it was official state policy at the time.
Pakistan did export terrorism to Britain: the lunatics who blew up themselves and a further fifty plus Londoners five years back obtained their lethal training in Pakistan. The fact that Osama bin Laden has been going for nine years after the World Trade Center affair is down to his ability to hide somewhere, at least some of the time and probably for most of it, in Pakistan. The rulers have Pakistan have often played with Islamicist extremism, and now the country’s people as a whole, and places outwith its borders too, are paying for it.
Pakistan is a permanent basket case, a confessionally-based slither off the side of India, kept alive through corruption and military rule, not to mention a religious national definition that militates against any genuine modernising trends. Of course Cameron was playing to the gallery in India, but why the indignation when, even for disingenuous purposes, he actually tells the truth?
Great post Dave. Concise and to the point.
John Palmer: Too much has happened since the partition and we cannot go back to the old conditions, whether set by United Nations or any other interested parties.
When the Pakistan Army and the tribal raiders were invading Kashmir, thousands of Hindu women were raped and killed. Many women who did not to be defiled, broke their window glasses into pieces and ate them, and some threw themselves into rivers and gorges. Hindus till today cannot forget those incidents. When the insurgency started in Kashmir in the late eighties, thousands of Kashmiri Pandits (Hindus) were driven out of their own state. Today they live in refugee camps in Jammu. In fact, even before the Muslims came to India, Pandits have been living there for centuries, who are really the original owners of the state. There are around 200,000 Kashmiri Pandits living in the refugee camps, living as refugees in their own country.
After seeing Pakistan’s track record of how it treats its minorities, how can India even think about parting with that state? What about the voice of the Kashmiri Pandits, who are the original inhabitants of that state?
It is well known that any political party in India which compromises on Kashmir issue will write its permanent obituary. So you can safely assume that India will never let go off Kashmir. On the other hand, Pakistan is also in the same state. The best and practical way to go forward is to accept the LoC (Line of Control) which divides PoK (Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) and Indian Kashmir as the International Border. Let Pakistan keep its part of Kashmir and let India manage its part of Kashmir.
The other reason India will never let go off Kashmir is water. All the major rivers of India originate in Himalayas and some flow through Kashmir. It’s like your neighbor whom you hate is in control of the taps of your house.
A major thing is, Pakistan has morally lost any right to claim Kashmir. It has failed as a nation continuously, where military coups, emergency and lawlessness is rife. It is an accepted fact that Pakistan is in fact not in control of some major portions of its own country.
Where as India has grown its democratic institutions and made them strong. It is the best party out of two who can provide a better future for Kashmiris.
Also, did you know that Kashmiris in Pakistan occupied Kashmir cannot participate in the national elections of Pakistan? They have no say in the national election process.
Ask any International journalist about which part of Kashmir is easier to access, Pakistan Occupied Kashmir or Indian Kashmir? That should answer all your questions about who is right.