Kal Tak 04th July 2008

Host Javed Chauhdary.
Guests:
Ayaz Meer PML (N) & Um-e-Hasam ( Incharge of Jamia Hafsa)
After 1 year of Lal Majid operation.

[shasnahn]

@noumanali26:

you are unable to answer my questions because of your emotional attitude towards the world. In Lal Masjid, criminals were punished after being given six months to change their ways. They refused to do so and died fighting the government. Please dont feel sympathy for criminals just because the fought from a masjid and are now dead.

[javed_hb]

Jazak Allah Notorious for posting this programme.
This is the only forum where i can keep myself updated by watching the informative programmes and talkshows by different pakistani channels. By the way mr. shasnahn get out of the blue man... No one in the Lal Masjid stockpiled weapons and decided to go for war against the Islamic Republic of Pakistan... Have fear of Allah, or otherwise you have heard in the programme what happened to Benazir for favouring the then government on the Lal masjid Issue... Hope you got the bottom line...

[shasnahn]

javed_hb:

I think you need to get over your denial. I saw the Lal Masjid "students" wearing gas masks, carrying automatic rifles, committing crimes and threatening the public. I think they deserved to be condemned.

Benazir was assasinated by terrorists, not some "aam admi".

[miranda]

I think we wont know the real story behind the Lal Masjid in hour life.Allah knows who was behind all these.

[abdul]

@shasnahn
"The Lal masjid folks chose to stockpile weapons"
If thats true then why nobody (media) was given permission to go inside or come anywhere near the lal masjid even after the several hours of operation.

Musharaf said there were foreigners/Al-Qaida etc people inside.
Have they found any? Even a single one was mentioned?

"went to war with the state, One should not feel sympathy for criminals or terrorists just because they are now dead"

For God sake, That woman's son was killed in that pogrom. and what war? if you remember precisely the number of events that initiated the Lal Masjid issue, Lal Masjid students first went to the police to sort out their problems. It was now public that what police said to them and the people whose name came forward.

You need to be dead inside out to argue in favor of Lal masjid operation.

[shasnahn]

abdul:

The weapons they stockpoled were the ones they fought with. Given their crazy behavior, it was neither safe for media to go inside Lal Masjid, neither was it necessary in order to establish that Lal masjid folk were armed.

You cannot deny that they committed many many crimes and refused to surrender themselves to the law. In such a situation the state has to use force. This woman's son and the other kids who were in Jamia Hafsa went there for education, not for criminal acts or jehads.

[NoToRi0uS]

I think this issue was staged & used
& slowly slowly yeh Government ke ghale ki wo hadi ban geya jis ko na ughal sakte the na nighal sakte the
aur nuqsan kis ka huwa
jo masoom bache wahan parhne gaye thei
jin ko kuch pata nahe tha ke yahan kia ho raha hai aur kia hone wala hai

[commoner]

Look at this psycho woman Umme Hassaan, She is wearing glooves in the month on July.
The erstwhile supporters of Amir Yazid are thinking of themselves as Hussainis, Allah ki shan hay.
Every time I listen to this psuedo-intellectual, story teller host, I am reminded of Ch. written with his name, which certainly do not means chaudhry.He sucks.
He over sensationalizes ,he tries to work up emotions and religious sentiments. He is hardly objective. He thinks the global escalation of petrol prices and food inflation is related to Lal Masjid. What a shame, what a perverted logic.

[abdul]

" The weapons they stockpoled were the ones they fought with"

The weapon they showed contained rocket launchers and hand grenades as well, and there was no use of such weapons. That weapons could cause huge number of destruction on Army's side.

"it was neither safe for media to go inside Lal Masjid"
Again before the operation there was a Capital Talk episode conducted inside Lal Masid that included Hamid Mir, Both Gazi brothers and one PMLq minister (i don't remember his name from top of my head), it was safe then? and it wasn't safe after the operation when all the people in side which included girls and teenagers, were killed by our own Army.

" You cannot deny that they committed many many crimes and refused to surrender themselves to the law."
O' C'mon, before the operation the only demand from the Lal masjid was to let them come out safely. They completely surrendered before the operation started. They asked for safe passage, Gazi's last statement was to let him go to his village safely. C'mon plz don't distort the facts.
Army (who has balls only to kill their own ppl) could have given them the safe passage and once everything got cooled down and lives (1000's of) were saved they could proceed the case in court according to law. But this is Musharaf and his very own army, which he has been using against pak for last 8 years.

[shasnahn]

Originally Posted by abdul

" The weapons they stockpoled were the ones they fought with"

The weapon they showed contained rocket launchers and hand grenades as well, and there was no use of such weapons. That weapons could cause huge number of destruction on Army's side.

"it was neither safe for media to go inside Lal Masjid"
Again before the operation there was a Capital Talk episode conducted inside Lal Masid that included Hamid Mir, Both Gazi brothers and one PMLq minister (i don't remember his name from top of my head), it was safe then? and it wasn't safe after the operation when all the people in side which included girls and teenagers, were killed by our own Army.

" You cannot deny that they committed many many crimes and refused to surrender themselves to the law."
O' C'mon, before the operation the only demand from the Lal masjid was to let them come out safely. They completely surrendered before the operation started. They asked for safe passage, Gazi's last statement was to let him go to his village safely. C'mon plz don't distort the facts.
Army (who has balls only to kill their own ppl) could have given them the safe passage and once everything got cooled down and lives (1000's of) were saved they could proceed the case in court according to law. But this is Musharaf and his very own army, which he has been using against pak for last 8 years.

Its good that now you acknowleged they had weapons. It was these weapons with which they fought the security forces and with which they killed army, rangers and civilians.

The Lal masjid folks did NOT surrender, only some foolish boys and girls came back to reality once they were teargassed and surrended. The Lal Masjid mullahs and their hardcore element remained inside and continued fighting. Here is a declaration of the mullah:

BBC NEWS | South Asia | Pakistan cleric makes defiant vow

The deputy leader of radical Islamic students besieged at the Red Mosque in Pakistan's capital Islamabad has said he would rather die than surrender.

Read the above story.

[abdul]

I didn't say they had weapons, i said if they had those which were displayed, there would have been lot more destructions. And can you tell me how many civilians were killed, how many army ppl were killed? these are just words. Instead there was one army person, who lead this operation, reported dead, which also is very ambiguous who killed him, as that person sustained a bullet wound from the back.

And the link you sent..... yeah right BBC.. even them read the article yourself.

".......But Mr Ghazi said he had insisted the authorities promise not to detain anyone who they could not prove belonged to any banned militant groups, or were not wanted for any crime. The cleric also demanded a guarantee of safety for himself and his family, saying he wanted to remain on the premises with his sick mother until they were able to move elsewhere......."

[shasnahn]

Originally Posted by abdul

I didn't say they had weapons, i said if they had those which were displayed, there would have been lot more destructions. And can you tell me how many civilians were killed, how many army ppl were killed? these are just words. Instead there was one army person, who lead this operation, reported dead, which also is very ambiguous who killed him, as that person sustained a bullet wound from the back.

And the link you sent..... yeah right BBC.. even them read the article yourself.

".......But Mr Ghazi said he had insisted the authorities promise not to detain anyone who they could not prove belonged to any banned militant groups, or were not wanted for any crime. The cleric also demanded a guarantee of safety for himself and his family, saying he wanted to remain on the premises with his sick mother until they were able to move elsewhere......."

The weapons they used caused deaths of army commandos, Rangers and civilians. So they did not have the weapons for display.


Regarding the article I sent you, the small piece you took out shows that Ghazi had impossible demands which nobody could fulfill, and the entire article is about his refusal to surrender, rather he would die fighting. That is what happened.

[abdul]

well with this kind of intellect i just put my hands up. And whatever is going on in pakistan we all deserve it. we all getting what we deserve.

[shasnahn]

Originally Posted by abdul

well with this kind of intellect i just put my hands up. And whatever is going on in pakistan we all deserve it. we all getting what we deserve.

you surrender to facts. Good.

[wab4u]

I've got to admit that I am really surprised that there are people out there who think murdering innocent teenagers is justified ..........