Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Pakistan contradicts itself on Masood Azhar

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • When External Affairs Minister Pranab Mukherjee said on Sunday that Pakistan has been contradicting its statements, one of the key contradictions he was referring to was on Jaish-e-Mohammad chief Maulana Masood Azhar.

    South Block sources said there have been at least eight public statements from Pakistan since December 9, including that of Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani, Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi and Defence Minister Chaudhary Ahmed Mukhtar, which have been contradicting each other. This, according to sources, exposes that the Pakistan establishment was trying to shield Masood Azhar — who was let off in exchange for Indian hostages after the IC 814 hijacking in Kandahar — though he was proscribed by the UN Security Council’s anti-terror resolutions.

    To understand the contradictions, consider the following sequence of statements:

    Dec 9: Pakistan media gives initial reports of Masood Azhar’s detention at his home in Bahawalpur.

    Ads by Google

    Dec 9: Bahawalpur police officer Azhar Hameed Khokhar tells Aaj TV that Masood Azhar’s movements had not been restricted.

    Dec 9: Defence Minister Chaudhary Ahmed Mukhtar tells CNN-IBN that Masood Azhar had been detained and Pakistan “might allow” Indian investigators to question him.

    Dec 10: Pak PM Yousuf Raza Gilani tells reporters “we are awaiting the latest reports about Maulana Masood Azhar; the other two are being investigated”. He did not confirm or deny Azhar’s detention.

    Dec 17: Pakistan High Commissioner Shahid Malik, in an interview to Network 18, says the government had not detained Azhar as part of the ongoing clampdown on militant and terrorist groups. He even claims Azhar is not in Pakistan.

    Dec 17: Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, while speaking to Dawn News channel’s 9 pm News Eye programme, says “important people that were required have been taken into custody. They are under detention”. Asked if these people include Azhar and whether he had been put under house arrest or was in custody, Qureshi replies, “yes, in custody”. He clarifies that he was speaking on the basis of information available with him.

    Dec 17: State-run APP news agency puts out a report quoting Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi at 10 pm, “Maulana Masood Azhar is wanted by the Government of Pakistan, but he is not in our custody and he is at large”.

    Dec 18: A Pakistan Foreign Affairs Ministry press release, “in response to media queries”, says the Foreign Minister had clarified his remarks regarding Azhar’s whereabouts. “The minister said Azhar is wanted by the law enforcement authorities of Pakistan and is at large”.

    Sources said these statements clearly indicate the inherent contradictions in the public pronouncements of the Pakistan Government, even as internationally-wanted terrorists are finding a safe haven in their territory.

    And you are suppose to trust Pakistans fight against TerrorismBy: Rakesh | 22-Dec-2008 Reply | Forward It is a drama and it will continue like this until Indian govt stop talking and start acting.
    Ministry of Manipulation and LiesBy: Kundan | 22-Dec-2008 Reply | Forward Pakis in general and their government departments in particular are pathological and shameless liars and manipulators. They seem to have a chain of commands to start misinformation to every Paki on earth who then regurgitates their own version of events. Their favourite ruse is to turn the event on its head and blame the 'enemy' with a conspiracy theory.
    Waste of Time By: subburaj | 22-Dec-2008 Reply | Forward So what? Is this Government is going to act. Not at all. They are and been fooling the whole world. Some one is backing them fully (China) and partially by USA in dillemma. Even if you have birth certificates or passports of these terrorists having Pakistan official seals, we are not going to do anything. Why are we wasting our energy in issuing statements which is good for keeping the media busy. Please ask Mukherjee to keep quiet.
    Who will be losing during war?? so peace is betterBy: Asif Raja | 22-Dec-2008 Reply | Forward I am thankful for very practical approach for my friends. Pakistan is not very easy to deal with as Indian master assume. Look what best india can do with Pakistan is using it more than 1000 fighter jets for carpet bombing on a coutry with just 9 billion dollar reservers out of which 7 billion dollors are borrowed from IMF. See what Pakistan will do in resopnse. They will use their 450 fighter jets (leaving nuclear option). Indian can stop only some of those jets. Other will destroy commercial hubs like Mumbai, Calcutta, Banglore and most importantly New Delhi. So my friends India will be losing its growing economy of Trillions of dollars. So who will be losing.My friends Wars are not solution. If you will hit some one other though being so weak can atleast give you a nudge but tactically that nudge can hit a fast growing economy ang biggest democracy in such a big way that India will be back to 1947 economy. I say peace peace peace which is more important for india than Pakistan because Pakistan has nothing to lose but much to hit on. It is not emotional statement but facts please both Indian and Pakistanis need peace. Long live cease fire
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.