Blackwater
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2012
- Messages
- 21,156
- Likes
- 12,211
:biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2:
Nawaz booed by Pakistanis but Modi welcomed by Indians in new York UN meeting
- Thread starter Blackwater
- Start date
:biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2:
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2009
- Messages
- 4,951
- Likes
- 16,836
Another Jahil Jihadi Paki? Or even worse, a braindead khalistani?
Moron, the Dancing guy is not Khalsa, but a Punjabi doing Bhangra, just as they did after the Battle of Longewala. A Punjabi, can be a Sikh, a Hindu, a muslim or a cheisrian or anything by religion, but who speaks, lives and breaths Punjabi.
You know who were those guys? They were soldiers from A-Company, 23rd Battelion of Punjab Regiment who held a whole Brigade strength thrust of Pakistani army for 6 long hours till IAF got around to decimate them in the morning.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Longewala
And, about Modi being criminal and persona no-grata in USA, the recent reception and the earlier one tell the whole story. Whether Modi is a criminal or not, I wont even bother to reply to a moron of such a grand size like you on that matter, but I would like to point out purely for my gloating rights as I like the way you whine, Modi's got the big stick, and he is the big boy, and the big boy clubs never closes doors to big boys like Modi. Power speaks boy. May ve when you'll grow up and grow some hair down there, you'd understand or not.
Srinivas_K
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2009
- Messages
- 7,420
- Likes
- 12,945
How about you worshiping Ghori, Gaznavi, Aurangzeb etc...etc...??
You even worship Qasim who butchered and raped your women.
Blackwater
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2012
- Messages
- 21,156
- Likes
- 12,211
These sikhs are from Mecca in Saudi Arabia demanding khalistan :biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2:
PM Modi Meets Sikh, Gujarati Community Members in San Jose
thethinker
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2013
- Messages
- 2,808
- Likes
- 6,489
:biggrin2:
Pakistan complaint to UNSC against India is sound and fury signifying nothing
http://www.firstpost.com/world/paki...ry-signifying-absolutely-nothing-2446510.html
Pakistan lodging a complaint to the United Nations Security Council against India for India's alleged attempt to construct a wall along the 197-km-long Working Boundary in the Jammu region is the familiar din from Pakistan, signifying nothing.
Pakistan has complained to the UNSC against India hundreds of times in last 68 years but has always failed to get any traction.
Any of the 193 member states of the UN are free to approach the world body for lodging complaint against another member and UN charter makes it clear that only UNSC is the competent authority to deal with matters of peace and security. That explains why the UNSC was brought into the frame.
It is important to understand this procedural matter as the common perception generally associates UNSC as something big because it involves five veto-wielding permanent members (US, UK, France, Russia and China) and therefore people may think that taking a matter to UNSC is something very serious.
There are three ways that the UNSC can be approached: (1) by the deemed affected member state; (2) by another third-party state; and (3) by the UN Secretary General himself.
The last two scenarios happen only when the threat to world peace or security is deemed to be serious. Since this has not happened it means that it is nothing serious. That is why India has not even bothered to come up with a formal response to the UNSC though India has trashed Pakistan's charge and reserved its right to take it up at an appropriate time.
Another interesting thing is that Pakistan's all-weather friend China could have raised the issue on behalf of Pakistan but did not do so. This in itself is significant.
It is inconceivable to even think that Pakistan wouldn't have consulted China before lodging its complaint with the UNSC. It is highly likely that Pakistan may have even made discreet inquiries from the Chinese if they were willing to do the honours.
Had China done so it would have been serious from diplomatic viewpoint, but this is only for the argument sake. China has a vibrant relationship with India and knows the importance of this relationship.
Moreover China knows in the hearts of its heart that Pakistan is habitual of playing the broken record of Jammu and Kashmir. Yes, China had recently bailed out Pakistan by stonewalling India's efforts at the UN to take action against Pakistan for sheltering terror fountain Hafiz Saeed, but that doesn't mean that China will always prop up Pakistan at the UN.
In fact, the UN charter also provides that once a member state (read Pakistan) lodges a complaint against another member state (read India), a third member state (read China) can pursue the complaint. But in this case it is highly unlikely that China will do even that.
Therefore, Pakistan's complaint to the UNSC against India is nothing but sound and fury, signifying nothing.
However, from the perspective of India-Pakistan bilateral ties the episode is important as it demonstrates yet again how India continues to be an anathema for Pakistan.
Interestingly, it also shows the hand in glove nature of ties between Pakistan's state and non-state actors. This is because Pakistani complaint to the UNSC against has come by way of two letters written by Pakistan's Ambassador to UN Maleeha Lodhi to the President of the UN Security Council, Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin in which one of the letters quotes notorious terrorist Syed Sakahuddin for making the allegation.
The letters written by Lodhi on 4 and 9 September alleged that India was planning to construct a 10-metre high and 135-feet wide wall along the Working Boundary to convert the LoC "into a quasi international border".
The 9 September letter quotes Syed Salahuddin, who is looked upon by India as "global terrorist", for making the charge against India. This speaks volumes about Pakistan's policy on not only India but so terrorism.
Pakistan complaint to UNSC against India is sound and fury signifying nothing
http://www.firstpost.com/world/paki...ry-signifying-absolutely-nothing-2446510.html
Pakistan lodging a complaint to the United Nations Security Council against India for India's alleged attempt to construct a wall along the 197-km-long Working Boundary in the Jammu region is the familiar din from Pakistan, signifying nothing.
Pakistan has complained to the UNSC against India hundreds of times in last 68 years but has always failed to get any traction.
Any of the 193 member states of the UN are free to approach the world body for lodging complaint against another member and UN charter makes it clear that only UNSC is the competent authority to deal with matters of peace and security. That explains why the UNSC was brought into the frame.
It is important to understand this procedural matter as the common perception generally associates UNSC as something big because it involves five veto-wielding permanent members (US, UK, France, Russia and China) and therefore people may think that taking a matter to UNSC is something very serious.
There are three ways that the UNSC can be approached: (1) by the deemed affected member state; (2) by another third-party state; and (3) by the UN Secretary General himself.
The last two scenarios happen only when the threat to world peace or security is deemed to be serious. Since this has not happened it means that it is nothing serious. That is why India has not even bothered to come up with a formal response to the UNSC though India has trashed Pakistan's charge and reserved its right to take it up at an appropriate time.
Another interesting thing is that Pakistan's all-weather friend China could have raised the issue on behalf of Pakistan but did not do so. This in itself is significant.
It is inconceivable to even think that Pakistan wouldn't have consulted China before lodging its complaint with the UNSC. It is highly likely that Pakistan may have even made discreet inquiries from the Chinese if they were willing to do the honours.
Had China done so it would have been serious from diplomatic viewpoint, but this is only for the argument sake. China has a vibrant relationship with India and knows the importance of this relationship.
Moreover China knows in the hearts of its heart that Pakistan is habitual of playing the broken record of Jammu and Kashmir. Yes, China had recently bailed out Pakistan by stonewalling India's efforts at the UN to take action against Pakistan for sheltering terror fountain Hafiz Saeed, but that doesn't mean that China will always prop up Pakistan at the UN.
In fact, the UN charter also provides that once a member state (read Pakistan) lodges a complaint against another member state (read India), a third member state (read China) can pursue the complaint. But in this case it is highly unlikely that China will do even that.
Therefore, Pakistan's complaint to the UNSC against India is nothing but sound and fury, signifying nothing.
However, from the perspective of India-Pakistan bilateral ties the episode is important as it demonstrates yet again how India continues to be an anathema for Pakistan.
Interestingly, it also shows the hand in glove nature of ties between Pakistan's state and non-state actors. This is because Pakistani complaint to the UNSC against has come by way of two letters written by Pakistan's Ambassador to UN Maleeha Lodhi to the President of the UN Security Council, Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin in which one of the letters quotes notorious terrorist Syed Sakahuddin for making the allegation.
The letters written by Lodhi on 4 and 9 September alleged that India was planning to construct a 10-metre high and 135-feet wide wall along the Working Boundary to convert the LoC "into a quasi international border".
The 9 September letter quotes Syed Salahuddin, who is looked upon by India as "global terrorist", for making the charge against India. This speaks volumes about Pakistan's policy on not only India but so terrorism.
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2014
- Messages
- 2,149
- Likes
- 1,377
Looking like one more new dumb paki in the forum....
Welcome to DFI Forum.......
guru-dutt
Regular Member
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2015
- Messages
- 475
- Likes
- 356
munna if you dont take stocks of the situation and keep dreaming and living in a parellel virtual universe where very mistake in past is denyed and every misfortune is blamed on others what happens is what you see in pakistan and much of the islamik world and even today in this age of hyper information revolution if you still deny facts then tell me how are you going to cerrect then in the first place .... think about it
Sylex21
Regular Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2014
- Messages
- 439
- Likes
- 333
Absurdly stupid comment. Unworthy of a more detailed response.
sorcerer
Senior Member
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2013
- Messages
- 26,919
- Likes
- 98,471
Yeah. USA welcomed Nawaz Sheriff whose puppet govt is sitting and watching Blochis getting killed, blasphemy cases, the pak army chief who kills Balochis and promotes attacks in Balochistan,
Afghanistan and Jammu and Kashmir, a State in the Union of India.
USA also welcomed Eleven Jinping of china who is promoting violence in East Turkestan..Tibet etc.
For pakistan butthurt reaction is statecraft
For sovereign nation..calculated move is statecraft.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2009
- Messages
- 10,569
- Likes
- 25,230
Blackwater
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2012
- Messages
- 21,156
- Likes
- 12,211
ganja english bol raha ha but According to history of 50000000000000000000yrs old pakistan he should speak arabic becaue paki=arabs
:biggrin2::biggrin2:
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2009
- Messages
- 10,569
- Likes
- 25,230
Doesn't matter much since no one is gonna "listen" to someone who represents a nation which hid Osama and supports terrorism and also kills Muslims in Millions.
ganja english bol raha ha but According to history of 50000000000000000000yrs old pakistan he should speak arabic becaue paki=arabs
:biggrin2::biggrin2:
No one cares for Pakistan the Terrorist State.
swastic_1170
Regular Member
- Joined
- Jul 17, 2014
- Messages
- 101
- Likes
- 85
oh my God one more stupid.. under false flag..
sob
Mod
- Joined
- May 4, 2009
- Messages
- 6,425
- Likes
- 3,805
Welcome to DFI buddy.
You have been given an infraction for your very first post. This must be a record.
Introduce yourself on the Introduction thread and be warned that if you continue in similar fashion, your stay might be a short one.
Blackwater
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2012
- Messages
- 21,156
- Likes
- 12,211
Nawaz Sharif's meeting with Bill Gates .
PM asking Bill Gates to establish Laptop factory in Pakistan. Bill Gates shocked and informed PM that he is into software not hardware.
— Ahmad Jawad (@AhmadJawadBth) September 27, 2015
In reality though they spoke about funds given for polio eradication and the state of that program:
PM Sharif, Bill Gates discuss polio eradication in Pakistan
PM asking Bill Gates to establish Laptop factory in Pakistan. Bill Gates shocked and informed PM that he is into software not hardware.
— Ahmad Jawad (@AhmadJawadBth) September 27, 2015
In reality though they spoke about funds given for polio eradication and the state of that program:
PM Sharif, Bill Gates discuss polio eradication in Pakistan
Blackwater
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2012
- Messages
- 21,156
- Likes
- 12,211
Netanyahu refused to be in same restaurant as Nawaz Sharif:biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2:
Israel avoided a potentially uncomfortable New York confrontation with Pakistan during UN General Assembly week by canceling a dinner reservation for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after learning Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would be eating at the same spot.
The billionaire Pakistani leader ate at Serafina Always on Tuesday night.
Netanyahu’s team had booked tables there, too, “but decided not to proceed after learning the Pakistani pol would be there,” a source told us, adding the decision to cancel was made “for security reasons.”
Sharif, speaking in 2014 about the Gaza conflict, said, “[The] world must stop Israel from this naked and brutal aggression.”
Netanyahu is scheduled to address the UN General Assembly on Thursday and is expected to talk about Islamic extremism and the Iran nuclear deal.
A witness at Serafina said Sharif dined for three hours on the second floor with his wife, who “looked beautiful” dressed in gold, and 10 others in his entourage, while his security detail occupied two separate tables.
His party was adamant that there could be no alcohol nor meat, and they ate pizzas and drank sodas. For dessert they ate apple pie, cheesecake and chocolate soufflé.
But they declined the tiramisu because it contains a splash of amaretto.
When they left the place at 10:30 p.m., we’re told Sharif and his wife spoke in Italian to the staff, saying, “Grazie.” (Jo banda mun main naala daal kay shalwar band ta hai, ussay italian kahan say agaee?)
A source added of Netanyahu, “He opted not to eat at Serafina after learning Pakistan’s leader would be there. Netanyahu has the best security in the world. But one can assume that it wouldn’t make sense for him to be at a restaurant at the same time as Sharif.”
http://nypost.com/2015/10/01/netanyahu-refused-to-be-in-same-restaurant-as-pakistani-leader/
Israel avoided a potentially uncomfortable New York confrontation with Pakistan during UN General Assembly week by canceling a dinner reservation for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after learning Pakistan’s Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif would be eating at the same spot.
The billionaire Pakistani leader ate at Serafina Always on Tuesday night.
Netanyahu’s team had booked tables there, too, “but decided not to proceed after learning the Pakistani pol would be there,” a source told us, adding the decision to cancel was made “for security reasons.”
Sharif, speaking in 2014 about the Gaza conflict, said, “[The] world must stop Israel from this naked and brutal aggression.”
Netanyahu is scheduled to address the UN General Assembly on Thursday and is expected to talk about Islamic extremism and the Iran nuclear deal.
A witness at Serafina said Sharif dined for three hours on the second floor with his wife, who “looked beautiful” dressed in gold, and 10 others in his entourage, while his security detail occupied two separate tables.
His party was adamant that there could be no alcohol nor meat, and they ate pizzas and drank sodas. For dessert they ate apple pie, cheesecake and chocolate soufflé.
But they declined the tiramisu because it contains a splash of amaretto.
When they left the place at 10:30 p.m., we’re told Sharif and his wife spoke in Italian to the staff, saying, “Grazie.” (Jo banda mun main naala daal kay shalwar band ta hai, ussay italian kahan say agaee?)
A source added of Netanyahu, “He opted not to eat at Serafina after learning Pakistan’s leader would be there. Netanyahu has the best security in the world. But one can assume that it wouldn’t make sense for him to be at a restaurant at the same time as Sharif.”
http://nypost.com/2015/10/01/netanyahu-refused-to-be-in-same-restaurant-as-pakistani-leader/
Blackwater
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2012
- Messages
- 21,156
- Likes
- 12,211
:biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2:
