If Pakistan is so angry, give back our aid

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,400
1,667
113
If Pakistan is so angry, give back our aid


By Andrew Marr
20/06/2007
The telegraph


Pakistanis have every right to voice their anger at the award of a knighthood to Salman Rushdie.

Equally, the rest of us have every right to express our anger at the deeply offensive response of Mohammed Ijaz ul-Haq, Pakistan's religious affairs minister who invoked the world's 1.5 billion Muslims and said: "If someone commits suicide bombing to protect the honour of the Prophet Mohammed, his act is justified."

He later "clarified" his words, but we all know exactly what he was up to. And what of the Labour peer Lord Ahmed, who responds by saying Rushdie has "blood on his hands".

Some people like Rushdie's novels, others don't. Some say he's smug, others say he's delightful.

Yes, he has cost this country a lot in protecting him and through him, a core value of freedom of speech. But unless there is a strange and violent back-story we didn't know, Sir Salman hasn't the smallest drop of blood on his hands.

If Pakistan is so offended, however, there is a dignified way to deal with the problem.

Last year, Tony Blair went to Lahore to praise its "enlightened moderation" and to announce a rise in our aid budget to Pakistan from £236 million to £480 million. If this is tainted money, it can presumably be returned.


dailymail.co.uk
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Given Pakistan's complicity in engendering and propogating violence terrorism and feeding into the various conflicts.....Why isn't the world community bringing sanctions against it? If the "threat" of an elusive arsenel of weapons of mass destruction is the criteria....We already know that both Pakistan and India have those weapons...and are prepared to use them...
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Sorry.... for the dim among the lurkers and observers....Aren't we seeing a double-standard in the American neo-con approach to fighting its war on terrorism.....?????
 

snfu73

disturber of the peace
So, what is the aid to pakistan for? What is the reason that Tony Blair increased the amount? Where is the aid going? Need more information to be able to accurately back or not back what is being said in opinion peice. Also, should the words of one minister be taken as a representation of the entire nation of Pakistan? I mean, how many conservative or liberal ministers have said some pretty rough things that don't exactly match with their party policy, let alone the thoughts of Canadians.

But, I think MikeyD brings up a good point here. I don't think there is any doubt that Pakistan has had a fair involvement in the events of recent years. Yet, Iraq is attacked? I don't get it. Not saying that I think that Pakistan should be attacked. However, I think Pakistan has one clear advantage...the nuclear bomb. They are not a country that it is to be attacked any longer. Nor should it be attacked. BUT....but....what can be done?
 

snfu73

disturber of the peace
Sorry.... for the dim among the lurkers and observers....Aren't we seeing a double-standard in the American neo-con approach to fighting its war on terrorism.....?????
Not the first double standard by any means. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are wrought with hypocrisy, false information and secret political idealologies. Much of what is going on right now under the leadership of the US government ain't making alot of sense.
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Unfortunately he'd probably say "Buy stock in Raytheon or General Dynamics..."
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Triedit...I'll give it a try but remember now I'm only a simple old man...

The movement...the impetus if you would...behind American foreign policy was once regarded as the most highly regarded, honest and principled rationale ...when the looming necessity for dramatic action demanded imminent response.....

America has ceased to represent very many "ideals" to the world I'm afraid....

A great deal of the impetus behind Gulf War I was the protection of American interests in Kuwait...

At this time, a group of Ex-Presidents, Ex-owners, managers and Ex-CEOs' of various corporations combined their political and financial influence in the domestic and international marketplace. Ex-FBI Ex-CIA, even a Canadian flunky got onto the executive of the Carlyle Group. The major stockholder in the Carlyle group of corporations......Richard Chaney.....Paul Wolfowitz....Richard Pearle...many names you'd be familiar with from other stories and news coverage of developments in Iraq and on the soon to be coverage of America's "War on Terror"....

Haliburton Ucol Oil KBG and a slew of American (and international corporations based in other nations achieved representation in the boardrooms of Carlyle.

The billions upon billions of dolars Americans are paying to "support the effort on America's "War on Terrorism"....are actually beneficiaries of all the various contracts let ....signed to by America's current Administration.

In every way imaginable, the influence of globalization that sees protesters in Quebec. Spain, Seattle, all over the world...as the most financially and politically influential representatives of multi-national international mega-corporations gather keeping the common rabble at bay behind chain link fences with high pressure water canons and barbed wire....

Raytheon and several Canadian corporations for that matter have profited immensely from the slaughter initiated in Iraq by America....
 

MikeyDB

House Member
Jun 9, 2006
4,612
63
48
Howdy Eaglesmack....:)

Gettin ready to smack me upside the head...:)

No offence intended...just observation...
 

triedit

inimitable
Mikey--ok and i agree--i thought you meant Edwards was in the Raytheon pocket.

Eagle--there's no doubt in my mind. Florida in the first one, Ohio in the second. Clear problems with the vote counting in both states, and in each case the number of delegates was crucial.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
Aid to Pakistan is designed to support its pro-west military dictatorship. Fearless leader Pervez Musharraf who seized power in a coup. Without western aid there is a good chance that nuke power Pakistan might elect an Islamic fundamentalist. As a result, many countries hold their noses, close their eyes and give Musharraf the support he needs to crush popular opposition.