BBC BLOGS - The Editors
« Previous | Main | Next »

Pakistan: Britain's terror heartland?

Tom Giles | 08:28 UK time, Wednesday, 17 December 2008

It's never easy to make documentaries in Pakistan - especially for journalists who, like those on Panorama, aren't based there.

Panorama logoGiven the startling access Jane Corbin and her cameraman/producer Nikki Millard got - not only to the troubled areas around Peshawar, but also to the Pakistan army's battles with militants linked to al-Qaeda and the Taleban in the tribal areas - the new civilian government at least appears serious about showing (some) of what it's up to.

And, despite a war of words over the Americans' use of Predator drones to target militant bases in these areas, Pakistan's efforts have so far been welcomed by many in the US. And that matters. President-elect Obama has made a great deal out of promising to shift the focus of the "War on Terror" to Afghanistan.

Many are sceptical that he can pull off what will be one of the biggest issues of his administration. So both Washington and London will be exerting maximum pressure to ensure that future troop deployments won't be undermined by a porous Afghan-Pakistan border and an ambivalent Pakistani government.

Just how damaging this ambivalence has been in the recent past is eye-poppingly chronicled in this, highly-influential book. None of which makes the job of reporting or filming there any easier.

Jane Corbin with Pakistani familyJane and Nikki took sizeable, if considered, risks in getting some of their footage. They arrived in Peshawar - already a very tense city - on the day an American aid worker was shot dead and an Iranian diplomat kidnapped.

There are regular threats to Western journalists in Kabul too. So there had to be a clear reason to take such risks. The title, Britain's Terror Heartland, gets to the nub of it. Obtuse - even provocative - perhaps, but the facts and figures bear it out.

Separately, Gordon Brown stressed this on Sunday. British security services are believed to be monitoring some 2,000 individuals - and an estimated 30 active terror plots - the majority connected to Pakistan in some way.

Perhaps as a consequence, we also had to obscure or drop the identity of at least one person in the film for legal reasons. This will be a sensitive, challenging, subject for a long time to come.

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    Pakistan, imv, has been given too light a hand for too long over terrorists: the large hole in the net which everybody has ignored.
    Pakistan is the next world flash-point.
    Or am I not allowed to say that?
    Well, that's what I think.

  • Comment number 2.

    #1 I agree, but what do we do about it?

    The problem is that Pakistani society (and indeed government) is seriously fragmented. The actual politicians don't want terrorists operating in their country (not least because the politicians will be the first up against the wall if the radicals get power) but there is strong evidence that senior pakistani intelligence officers are organising terror strikes. Most of the population don't want suicide bombers in the market place but rather too many do.

    Any fiddling on our part could make things worse rather than better, not least because Pakistan has some sort of nuclear deterent.

  • Comment number 3.

    It appears that Pakistan is the biggest threat to British security due to the reluctance of politicians in both countries to take action (other than the giving and receiving of financial aid). Sadly as many British people of Pakinstani descent view themselves more Pakistani than British (the reasons for which being complex and manifold) if the UK were to take action against terrorists in Pakistan it is highly likely to result in civil unrest here (unfortunately to the benefit of the right wing). So in the short term nothing will be done, until the elephant in the room becomes too big to ignore, by which time it may be too late. I'm not advocating military intervention in Pakistan, but the Pakistani government must make more effort to minimise the threat to the rest of the world from within its boundaries if it expects to be part of the global community.

  • Comment number 4.

    terrorism is the new growth industry
    money, power, arms, drugs, politics
    the real danger is in recruitment of the youths
    but it is a generic problem all over the world

  • Comment number 5.

    it's a funny world - sometimes 'terrorists' are set up by 'covert cia operatives' to 'instigate revolutionary organisations' and 'terror attacks' to overthrow foreign governments.

  • Comment number 6.

    #5

    And we all know how well thats turned out...

  • Comment number 7.

    Pakistan is an underdeveloped country..a large number of pakistani people are uneducated and deprived of their basic needs..they are oblivious of the terror attacks all over the country.

    fighting with internal sectarian and political issues keeps them busy.
    their main issue is to find the next meal for the day.
    a majority of people have been leaving their newborns and toddlers and even school going children to the orphanage as they are unable to provide them food and shelter.

    the rich and middle class are turning a deaf ear to the cries and chaos around them.
    busy in their own lives and with little or no efforts to clear their positions.


    my husband himself(settled in uk) turns a deaf ear whenever one of these attacks occur ,saying i am embarassed to be a pakistani and a muslim~!!!


    the actual people responsible for these terror attacks in pakistan are just a minority that live and share their interests and views at afghan border.they are the residents of tribal areas that defy pakistani law ,they have their own courts and their own laws.
    for years military and these tribes have had numerous encounters.

    these tribes (just like the ones in africa only more dressed) are very primitive and uneducated.they marry their girls to the holy book(the Quran)!!!!,suicide bombing is for them a way of waging holy war(jihad) and many more of such weird concepts.
    but i'd like to clear to the world that these are not Islamic concepts,these are clearly developed due to LACK of religious knowledge.
    notice how the developed muslim nations(turkey,saudia) are hardly ever involved in these attacks.

    suicide (as quoted in Quran ) is forbidden in islam,and under no circumstances will the suicidee be pardoned..and forever will dwell in hell ..

    jihad is a war that you take part in only when attacked and you have your life at stake or family endangerd , or a possible risk of having your life savings taken away!

    these are the basics of survival for everyone anywhere in the world..jihads the term that muslims use..

    in no way can these terror attacks be taken as a form of jihad no matter how you distort them.
    no religion can justify the killings of innocents and nor does Islam.there's an

    article/chapter in Quran in Arabic (al-kafiroon)*****

    **Al-Kafiroon
    In the name of Allah, the Beneficent, the Merciful
    Say: O disbelievers! (1) I worship not that which ye worship; (2) Nor worship ye that which I worship. (3) And I shall not worship that which ye worship. (4) Nor will ye worship that which I worship. (5) Unto you your religion, and unto me my religion.**

    the detailed and indepth knowledge of this chapter is that practice your religion in peace and let others practice theirs.

    I'd appreciate if these terrorists are not linked to islam and muslims,these are just really messed up people and act and behave in response to violence around them.

    pakistan is a rich-in-culture country,with broad minded and liberal people.a practicing muslim can not bring harm to others.
    pakistan is no threat but those tribal areas and the free exchange of everything at the afghan border is the real threat..not only to the world but also to pakistan..

    pakistan is itself a victim of the suicide attacks,and attacks by al-qaeeda and these fanatic groups.

  • Comment number 8.

    The BBC have confused me: this article claims that Pakistan is the heartland for the majority of people wishing to carry out "terror" attacks against the UK and it's interests.

    Yet, never have I heard a BBC journalist call people who carry out atrocities 'Terrorists', instead we are told these people are "Extremists, Militants or Freedom Fighters", paradoxically nearly all State and Private run Media outlets outside the UK use the word "Terrorist" to describe the people who carry out atrocities such as the Mumbai attacks.

    So should not the article be changed to: Pakistan: Britain's Freedom fighters Heartland?.

  • Comment number 9.

    Tom Giles: Thanks for the excellent diary entry....

    Now, I think that Panorama, has conducted an good investigation in to the story...

    For legal reasons, it is always best to dropped any persons names from the record....

    This story, will be sensitive and challenging for a very long time...

  • Comment number 10.

    I would also like to say thanks to Jane Corbin and her cameraman/producer Nikki Millard; for taking many risks and overcame the challenges to work on an important investigative of a very important news story...

  • Comment number 11.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 12.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 13.

    Well done for having the bottle to go there and provide a balanced report...none of the usual "all Pakistan Muslims support the taleban" "the taleban are 'resurgent', no one could ever beat them" etc

    Leaving aside the usual BBC politics/spin and providing a complex analysis of a complex situation was excellent.

    Congratulations to your reporters and I hope we can have more of the same.

  • Comment number 14.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 15.

    We`re now in a quandary. Leave Afghanistan and it’s a major propaganda coup for the Taliban and Al Qaeda. e.g. `The west is weak, the west can be beaten, our brand of Islam can reign`
    I doubt that the majority of Afghans would welcome back either a Taliban govt. or a descent back into factional war between warlords. Iran would want `influence` as well.
    There would be an exodus of Afghans (I wouldn`t blame them) and who`ll take them? Us?
    There`s no doubt that the Al Qaeda training camps would return, with a vengeance! After all, who`d invade twice?

    I think just pulling out would be a costly mistake in the long term. Iraq was a neocon **** up (regime change, ha!), but we had good reason to go into Afghanistan after 9/11; I think we`d regret letting go. We’re in this for the long term; I don`t see anything currently that changes that.

    Pakistan, is almost a failed state. Invasion would be worse than invading Iraq. India can`t act as a proxy, because it would turn into a border war and Hindu India could never rule Pakistan, So we`re left to make the best we can of a messy affair.

    Costly in lives, yes; but we lost 510 pilots and gunners just in the Battle of Britain, 1,000 more on D Day, some decades ago. Should we have given up at that point? Extremism is a virus that infects a tiny minority, this infection can be seen through. It is in our interest to do as much as we can.

  • Comment number 16.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 17.

    I dont under stand why BBC repeatedly refferes to the perpetrators of Mumbai attacks as gunmen and militants and loses notimein calling the attackers of Manchester Airport as terrorists. It only shows their implicit racism

  • Comment number 18.

    Pakistan and its' neighbours India have been at loggerheads for centuries. The fact that they are now both in posession of nuclear warheads is terrfying. The dispute over afghanistan is over-rated. Britain has to look seriously within itself and its enormous immigrant populations of both Pakistani and Indians who have gained citizenship. Do not believe that living in the green and pleasant land will have diminished the hatred between the big two and if it boils over there it will boil over in England. Afghanistan has been brought about by the insistance of Blair (supporting the megolomanic Bush) to take over Iraq. When will politicians stop fooling around with our country and risking it for their own political self esteem. Stay OUT of others arguements and secure our own doors and windows.

  • Comment number 19.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 20.

    We should learn from history that partitioning people to assuage unrest is never a good thing. There are those in Pakistan who have much to gain from destabilising the region and they will revel in uncoordinated attempts to locate and eliminate them. It is up to us all to enter into discussions with these people if we want to prevent terrorism from spreading further, faster and more strategically.

    Escalating the situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan by threatening and taking military or covert action is foolhardy; the Red Army was no match for the Taleban, and even the united fighting force there at the moment is faring little better.

    This battle is not going to be won by killing people or battening down the hatches to try to prevent terrorist attacks. That will only remove freedoms with no guarantee that the bombs will stop. There has to be a solution that gives true democracy a voice, and gives the people in the region a sense that all views are counted up before decisions are made.

    The real enemy is the lack of concern shown by the wealthy for the less wealthy and the way many values have been forced down the throats of people who have differing views. Religious zealots can exploit injustice by blaming it on an Islamic versus Christian war and Bush and Blair fell for this notion at the first fence. We are still reeling from that mistake. Pray that we do not make the same mistakes in Pakistan.

  • Comment number 21.

    # robinstp

    India and Pakistan were formed in 1947 so don't know where you got the centuries from. The unrest and political situation between them is due to a disputed territory and is not something related to the fanatic agendas of the general terrorists which have come about in the last decade or so. This article is to highlight the fact that Pakistan is allowing use of its land for these activities and hide out for these people and Pakistan govt has little control over that. Get your facts right before making comments about things which might be little complex than you seem to think.

  • Comment number 22.

    17 "I dont under stand why BBC repeatedly refferes to the perpetrators of Mumbai attacks as gunmen and militants and loses notimein calling the attackers of Manchester Airport as terrorists. It only shows their implicit racism"

    The BBC offends many people in the UK with the insistence by some of it's staff in calling people 'militants' or 'insurgents'

    Many of them implicitly support, or at least condone, islamist violence due to their hatred for Bush.

    If you look carefully at articles where they use 'terrorist' or 'terrorism' eg. recent bombing convictions, you will usually find those words are from quotations of someone else or the name of the legal offence - not the BBC's words.

    It's because the BBC's acceptance/support for TERRORISTS is so pervasive that I was pleased to see the quality of the Panorama report mentioned in this blog.

  • Comment number 23.

    Pakistan created this monster of terrorism to terrorize and destruct other international democratic free states, and now Pakistan is fighting against the same monster and is seeing the same carnage and destruction in Pakistan that has been caused all round the world.

    Pakistan has now learned a valuable lesson that rather than creating a campaign of hate it should educate its self in the art of diplomacy and help educate its people to respect appreciate humanity.

  • Comment number 24.

    India has suffered Terrorist Acts for Decades at the hands of organized camps in Pakistan, for decades Pakistan has created a hate campaign against India and allowed and encouraged hate amongst its people and for these Muslim Clerics to oppress people with this,
    Therefore is suffering from its own creation of hate.

  • Comment number 25.

    Lets_debate

    Only Pakistan was created in 1947, India has been around for a lot longer

  • Comment number 26.

    Yeah you're right, I meant as separate nations.

  • Comment number 27.

    Ah yes, the "Active terror plots" specter is raised once more to keep the sheeple trembling.

    Only ... Isn't plotting terrorism illegal? If there's any active terror plots, why are they just being "monitored"?

    If Brown has enough information to say there's 30 active terror plots, then that should also be enough information to arrest and charge the plotters. Anything else isn't "active", it's hype.

    Which the BBC dutifully trots out so it can avoid yet another public and humiliating spanking now it's been thoroughly cowed into never asking politicians awkward questions like that.

  • Comment number 28.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 29.

    Surely the question is not where they are from, but more about their beliefs. Most terrorists believe their fight is a religous one, fighting their good against our evil. These fanatics, are located everywhere, in Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and even in the UK. Even making a dent in so many separate splinter groups is going to require a global effort. Whether this can be acheived or not is another question...

  • Comment number 30.

    #27

    Exactly.

    This Government used "lies" to justify the attack on Iraq, so how can it be trusted on anything it says? It is just too easy to trot out glib sound bites to justify limiting our freedoms and we do not appear to have anyone in the House of Commons with the gumption to stand up and call it as it is.

    I have no doubt there are plenty of people in every country of the world who wish to kill and maim but that does not make them terrorists. There are plenty who have dreamed up imaginative ways of gaining revenge but that does not make them terrorists.

    A crucial part of the dumbing down process is how it highlights individuality - the free thinker - and isolates them like a leper. "you will obey" is all that matters in this engineered environment we live in now. If you have money, lots of it, you can break away, but for most of us the problem is getting lots of money or even wanting lots of money.

    We are supposed to live in an age of diversity and yet there is no diversity - there are privileged groups who have been identified by politicians to meet their own ends. Individuality, to them, sucks.

    A person is a person, nothing more nothing less. Sticking a label on them is the first part of removing their freedom.

  • Comment number 31.

    #25. 'India' is a british creation. before Britain arrived it was dozens of interwarring princedoms that we played off against each other. Muslim and Hindu periodically fought each other in the subcontinent for centuries. We used Hindu troops to keep the Muslim tribesmen in the North west frontier 'pacified' for 150 years.

  • Comment number 32.

    #28: The provos and the loyalists in NI are christians, what do you think either of them would do if they got their hands on something even nastier than their nail bombs or their vigilante groups running around?

    Oh wait ... I get the feeling they're part of your religion, and christianity doesn't have fundamentalists does it?

    All those splinter anglican churches glomming onto african archbishops that spread hate and preach intolerance must be just misguided, along with that continent too?

    Let's not even go into the KKK or the Westboro Baptist Church - claimed christians, claiming the christian bible justifies their behaviour.

    You might want to turn around and say the groups named above, and others like them, are cults, splinters, offshoots, not representative of christianity - but you can't then turn around and ignore muslims who have been saying the same thing about AQ and their ilk.

    There's a word for that.

    Religion is, and always has been, a red herring - right up until people like you go and prove the lies and distortions used to goad people into *becoming* extremists.

    Can't say I blame them if they turn around and think "Well, we're damned by the ignorant anyways, so we might as well just go ahead and do what they all think we're going to anyways".

  • Comment number 33.

    #32

    Shortly after 9/11 the US Internet chat rooms were filled to the brim with people calling for "death to the rag heads". It is so easy for anyone, even a hopeless President, to stoke up the fire. And you are right. The US is full of very extreme views, it is just that being a US citizen allows you to have such views.

    Religious flags have always been convenient colours to march into battle under. Fanatical religious figures have "illuminated" history through the ages. It does not take much to create the spark. And politicians find scapegoats ever so convenient at times when they haven't a clue what to do next. Religion has always been a popular scapegoat.

    I find no threat from people with deeply held views. I find threat from those who perpetuate the myth that anyone who has passion for something is somehow a maniac.

    The people who are using martyrdom to drive followers into suicidal atrocities know exactly what they are doing and it is they who are evil not the misguided who see no way out. That is as true of all leaders not just Islamic fundamentalists.

  • Comment number 34.

    Peter_sym

    Yes the Bristish did divide and rule India, but India was not a Bristish creation, there have been previous indian ruling empires before the bristish from Mauryan Empire and Chandragupta Maurya to the reign of Emperor Ashoka to the Kushan Empire.
    India history started well before the British arrived

  • Comment number 35.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 36.

    I dont have any problems with Pakistan or India.

    However Pakistan wants to change my culture whilst India is happy to live by my side.

    I am quite happy for wave upon wave of Eastern european immigration to hit upon the shores of England.

    I am not happy in one iota, and nor are The People, that we must roll over and make welcome people who do not like us in the first place.

    I welcome the day when folks from Pakistan learn from our friends i India on how to be friends together with us all in the UK.

  • Comment number 37.

    As an organization, the BBC is doing a marvelous job.

    How feasible is it to introduce perspective?

    For example, the Kaplan article above is talking about short term tactics. But, why did the Soviets, with 150,000 [?] troops, lose?

    The British were unable to hold Iraq in 1926-1932. They tried with several hundred thousand, claimed that they needed 500,000 and had to leave.

    Examining the writing by and about G. Bell will show the occupying coalition repeating the same mistakes of the British of eighty years ago.

    Is it feasible to toss in a little perspective on such policy questions?

  • Comment number 38.

    Some of the posters above may be unaware of the tremendous amount of study that has gone into the "why" and "how" and "response" to terrorism.

    Much of it was conducted on government contract and is thus of very little value.

    The Saudis think that they have a response to rehabilitate terrorists. Let's hear more about it and then learn how successful it is.

    Two points that nearly everyone agrees on:

    a) humiliation is a root cause of terrorism

    b) punishment, collective or individual, increases humiliation and reduces any guilt over revenge.

  • Comment number 39.

    Re stalisman.
    Very good comments on Indians and Pakistanis. I think the difference is the attitudeof the religions. Indian religions do accept other religions but even they will never integrate into our society. on the other hand Muslim leaders in Britain do not accept other religions.They appear intent to get people to adopt to Islam.
    In my opinion it is a religion ruled by fear, and muslims have no choice in their opinions, but are forced to obey their Imams and clerics.

    M W
    Cannock
    Staffs

  • Comment number 40.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 41.

    To the anonymous user hiding behind a user ID @ 40:

    "There is no place in Western Europe or the USA for this savage , evil cult"

    Are you speaking of the Osmonds fan club, or the BNP? In either case, I wholeheartedly agree.

    Just remember, the same freedoms that permit the BNP permit Muslims, left wing totalitarians like Brown, Dame Edna, Clive James, and the Lobster Liberation Front as well.

    "Islamification of Europe" makes for a great sound-bite, even if it's about as reliable and based on reality as a political promise - but you also need to remember that Europe *already* tried Fascism, and at the end of the day, Islam (or even the Osmonds) would on balance be a far better ideal than Fascism.

    Until the ultra right wing change the record, their song is going to continue to be one sad, lonely, lament of phantasmal glories lost (kind of like the Osmonds really).

    Since right-wingers tend to be so conservative it's a wonder they even change their underwear, however, I don't think we'll hold our breath (except for obvious reasons).

    (With thanks for proving my point about christian extremists)

  • Comment number 42.

    Thanks #40 for that useful bit of advice. I did just what you said and moved from the UK to the UAE recently thinking I would be with my 'own kind' - you know - those no good Muslims who hate everyone.

    Only guess what, its coming up to Xmas and there are loads of fir trees and lights giong up in all the shopping malls. Worst of all Cliff Richards is playing in some shops.... arrgh. What's going on? I thought it was a left over from Eid but no the rulers are actually letting non muslims celebrate their festivals - in a Muslim land! Then there was all that Diwali stuff too. Come on - I thought we hated everyone.

    Actually turns out Islam preaches live and let live and respects the religions of 'the book' - Christianity and yes, shock horror, Judaism! The rulers of the UAE are not democratically elected but are actually proper Muslims who live and let live and so long as you don't go nuts, will let you eat your pork scratchings and drink yourself silly too.

    Get over the media stereotype of the gun totting, wife beating, hate mongering Muslim wearing a dish cloth on his head living in a cave #40.

    We have friends and colleagues from different faiths and we should celebrate diversity - wherever we live. We should faith in our own religions and beliefs without having to worry about others and we should tolerate other views - that's Islamic fundamentals!

    If you 'cleanse' Europe of Islam then expect the same return of people from the Gulf and Islamic nations and also for the oil and gas to be turned off. Good luck flying your warplanes without oil - I'm sure you'll be just fine once you get those solar panels working - the ones that work on a grey summers day in August - lol

    I think if you could get a just peace deal sorted in Palestine, Chechnya and Kashmir then the fuel that drives people to terrorism will evaporate. But whilst there is a neo-con agenda and both sides have spoliers nothing will be done.

    As for Kashmir and Pakistan, I say let the people of the valleys decide. Do you want India which is actually doing not bad economically or Pakistan which is a basket case - I think they will make the right decision! (BTW, I'm Pakistani). After that Pakistan can get on with not funding the military but funding education and once we get rid of the Bhutto-Zardari dynasty and truly elect some democratic leaders then we will all be in much better shape!

  • Comment number 43.

    # 42 was breathtakingly good!!

  • Comment number 44.

    What Would Mohammed Do?

    http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/WWMD.htm

    Let's see if this is allowed or if it's only certain parts of the Koran that the BBC allows to be published.

    DO NOT TRY TO PRETEND THAT YOU CARE ABOUT OFF-TOPIC POSTS WHEN YOU REGULARLY ALLOW ALL POSTS ABOUT DAILY MAIL, BUSH, IRAQ AND ISRAEL ON ANY AND ALL HAVE YOUR SAY TOPICS!

  • Comment number 45.

    Blame the company (in India?) the BBC outsources moderating its communities to, if you believe there are inconsistencies in the moderation standards.

    Funny how you only object to the spammage that doesn't match your own positions on things though ...

    But in your case, I think "Off Topic" was probably the best close match available on their little drop down menus, since "linkage to bigoted packs of lies and smears" probably one of the reasons on their software.

    p.s. If you believe the stuff on the site you keep linking to, could I interest you in helping me launder this pile of cash I recently came into that once belonged to the aide to a former dictator in a little known African state?

    (Note to moderators: That's sarcasm)

  • Comment number 46.

    I am Pakistani and just want to say here,
    You guys do not need to do anything about Pakistan, and please do not blame Pakistan about jahdies etc.
    These all People were created by US Uk and Pakistan againts the Soveit Unions, that time these Jahdies were freedom fighters now they become terrorists. why do you have double standerd.
    I am not here to defend these jhades but We have to go throw on reality.
    If you blaming Pakistan then You have to blame US and Uk as well for that.
    Now it wil take time to clean all problems
    but blaming Pakistan I think wil create problem in the future.

    I hope for the best of world

  • Comment number 47.

    Moonwolf #41

    I think you will find the facism is the preserve of the LEFT not the right, socialism not conservativism.

    Conservativism in its most extreme form is about a all out oligarchy, survival of the fittest and indifference to others.

    Socialism in its most extreme form is about total control, facism.

    Don't beleive me?

    Hitler - socialist

    Mao - socialist

    Stalin - socialist

    So why do you sit there making out right wingers are the racist/facist ones? And that socialists are some sort of caring people that want to help?

    Socialism is the root of facism it always has been and always will be.

  • Comment number 48.

    I do not understand why all western countries blame Pakistan for terrorism, Pakistan is paying high prize of so called war on terror, our soldiers and civlions are dying everyday. No one realise this instead start blaming my country.
    If you you want to blame Pakistan because of jahdeis etc then you have to do the same with CIA as well. Becuase these people were traind by CIA aganist Soviet union. We have to go throw on reallty to deal with the problems.

    We Pakistani love to live in Peace and we are peace loveing People. Blacksheeps are every where in every country, and there is way of dealing with them.
    However I strongly belive that many Afgans crimals have been traind recently by CIA aganist Pakistan, which is known by most of Pakistanis. This is not going to work and I think it will never be suitable for anyone in the region or world as whole.

  • Comment number 49.

    All travel other than for official government business should be banned to and form pakistan. It is absolute insanity we allow our own young people to go over there to train to come back here and kill us.

  • Comment number 50.

    bigsammyb,,

    Why not Governemt business as well must be banned from Pakistan. I would love to hear that because then we might be able to know the reall reality and realise anything.

    I would support british Government if they stop trading or banned any official links with Pakistan. That would be great.
    I think Pakistanies has to realise as well that in name of war on terror Pakistan has been put on danger postions instead of fighting agansits jahdes still blame game.

    But this war on terror itself is drama, the main perpose is to control china trade and Pakistani nuclear missilses thats all further more to destabalize whole regoin.
    But how long it will work there, everyone knows its a fail policy but UK and US.

  • Comment number 51.

    bigsammyb: I think you're making the normal mistake of confusing social and political theories, lumping them together and criss-crossing definitions when it suits.

    As for "And that socialists are some sort of caring people that want to help?" - would you care to quote exactly where I said anything of the sort?

    And somehow I doubt Griffin et al would appreciate you calling them "socialists" anyways :P

    I take it by your comments that you consider yourself somewhat "right-wing", so answer me this if you would - how do you explain the right wing's constant carping on about the "radicalization of Muslims" - and how it omits any reference to reducing the radicalization of conservatives, such as yourself?

    I mean, let's be honest here. Look at all the stuff being spread by right wingers, all the fear and paranoia and distortions and downright racist isolationist crap, how it keeps stirring up the mob - what exactly is the difference between Griffin/BNP's vitriol and rabble-rousing and that blind one handed Muslim preacher's?

    The preacher stirred up jihad against the west - BNP stirs up jihad against anything it considers to not be "English" enough. Go ahead, tell us all what the difference is between the two, and why Griffin/BNP shouldn't be tossed out of the country under the same laws the right wing demands be implemented?

    Then explain just how it differs from Hitler's goals for racial purity.

    If you can.

    if you dare.

  • Comment number 52.

    What is it with GB that he has turned in to Condi Rice the endless travel giving forth on how other countries should kow tow to him or the USA right now and how the world is full of those who want to hurt us no one says why? well not the truth it is sold as they want us to be like them and take on their idealogical which usually means pray five times a day and wash before we do it and be under the thumb of the men in the family and wearing of the veil it all spells the influence of Islam yet we are more influenced by the Jewish faith and now we have to put up with GB love of the Zionist sect and what they do it is passed off as right he is a hypocrite and can not look after his own country like Blair, all they are good for is stirring up trouble and listening to the rantings of the sad bad and mad Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, and all this to get more cannon fodder. I notice none of there families are out there killing may god forgive them because I do not.

  • Comment number 53.

    I am kind of fed up with all these biased editorials and reports by these so called self-proclaimed experts. When darling of the west india was attacked by a few terrorists, the whole world cried out, and we were treated to out of breath journalists panting their breasts on tv screens..yet months before when a posh 5 star hotel in islamabad was attacked ,the coverage was limited to a few minutes here and there...without any huffing and puffing by these journalists. Everyone knows, the police in india is the most advanced in the world as they discovered within an hour (what would have taken CIA days to find out)where these terrorist came from,which was pakistan of course where else?No evidence needed at all. India is a cunning fox...doesn anyone know that a few years back a bus on route to pakistan was blown up and this was also blamed on pakistan within hours..Yet it was later discovered it was in fact blown up by a serving colonel of the indian army,and the man who caught this colonel was conveniently killed in the mumbai attacks...hmmm, something smells fishy there...india's intelligence agency RAW is as crooked as its politicians. And I wouldnt be surprised for one bit if they had something to do with this mumbai carnage.

  • Comment number 54.

    ""but there is strong evidence that senior pakistani intelligence officers are organising terror strikes""

    Correct. It was the CIA who after training the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the war with Russia then supported the Pakistani Government and the ISI... who in return, gave all the arms to the Taliban and Al Qaeda and it wasnt until it was pretty much too late did we find out about it... we now hear of weapons being stolen from the police station after being confiscated in the Red Mosque horror... First of all.. we got to get more routes into Afghanistan with aid and support for the troops and then make sure we get another 35,000 over there with them between the US & UK. We then support the Indian Government wholeheartedly and provide urgent training and counter terrorism measures which can be adapted almost immediately. We then support the Pakistani Government and provide the same support and together crusg this vile hate filled interpretation of Islam into the gutter where it belongs. And then take a look at our own back yard...

  • Comment number 55.

    Moonwolf
    Hi there.
    I for one do care about radical Islamic extremism here in the UK.. I fear it very much. I moved to the Middle East in 78 aged 14, I grew up in Abu Dhabi, I Schooled there, had many many Arab Friends of all religions from all Middle Eastern states. I have lived and worked in Baghdad, not living in the Green Zone, but the Red City itself. I have Seen the horrors this vile interpretation of Islam teaches and it deserves to be exposed and dealt with... BNP has nothing at all to do with it.. Islam is not a religion of peace, Asalaam means peace, Islam means submission. There is no compulsion under Islam however Apostates are finally punished with death. Its pretty simple...

  • Comment number 56.

    marcmarc @ 55

    Hi back.

    I'll admit to being a little confused, and wonder if you could clarify if you typo'd or did the same as me and your mind finished a sentence for you that never made it to your keys - you said "this vile interpretation of Islam teaches" but then said later "Islam is not a religion of peace"?

    The two kind of don't mesh together, so I'm hoping you will clarify?

    I can understand you worrying about radical Islam in the UK, anyone with any sense should be worried about *any* sort of radicalism. But it begs the question, do you also care about radical christianity in the UK, or radical british nationalism?

    Those are just as potent a threat as radical Islam, yet only Islam gets mentioned, only islam is being concentrated on, completely ignoring that part of the reason many Muslims probably get radicalized is because they're being told that, even if they're British, or English, they have no right to be in the UK solely because of their religion.

    The double standards are partly to blame, but no-one seems to care that someone is deciding who should remain, who is "worthy" of being British, based on skin colour, or religion.

    The BNP hasn't got everything to do with it, but I'll stand here and say point blank that they're feeding the crap the militant Islamists are spreading - it's people like the BNP help give credence and validity to the distortions, and they bear some of the responsibility for the radicalization of both Muslim youths *and* British youths.

    If you jump on one, you *have* to jump on them all.

    But that would require people actually admitting radicalisation is something independant of any one religion.

    But it's interesting, though, of the figures Brown quoted - how many of those suspected terrorists are "domestic terrorists" like SHAC, ALF, ELF, and the like? How many are war protestors considered to be a threat?

    And, what the hell does "connected in some way" mean anyways?? They're from Pakistan? Of Pakistani descent? Have a brother living there? Once went to school with the best friend of a third cousin of someone's niece whose brother's step-father's foster parents' uncle went on vacation there once?

    Everyone assumes that terrorist == Muslim, but that's not true however much you want to re-badge the provos in the name of "reconciliation", and let's not forget the lead-up to Israel's creation.

    Although from one angle I *can* understand why people would be scared of Muslims in general - They actually believe in a God and don't mind showing it.

    Heaven (no pun intended) forbid anyone actually have any sort of convictions whatsoever in the world these days.

    That, perhaps, is their biggest crime as a *religion*.

    And this is coming from an athiest.

    If you want to start accusing a religion based on the actions of radicals, then stand back and bring *every* religion down in flames, right now, because *all* of them have radicals who will kill in the name of their God.

    So how about it? If all Muslims are evil terrorists or terrorist supporters because of the actions of their radicals, why can't we all turn around and accuse all christians of being terrorists and terrorists supporters because of the actions of their radicals?

    After all, christian terrorists murdered more people in Northern Ireland and the UK than Islamic terrorists have.

    Or is it because they're white christians that they get a pass?

    Who's making it a war on religion?

  • Comment number 57.

    Pakistan is and alway was a violent and backward country. But it's our problem only because our assinine politicians imported whole populations from there to live in the heart of our green and pleasant land.
    The British people were never given an opportunity to reject this policy, and even protest was ruthlessly suppressed. Now the chickens have come home to roost. Enoch Powell was right.

  • Comment number 58.

    extracheeseplease,,

    Pakistan is land of Pure If some Pakistani comes to your country UK etc so what, there are many educated Pakistani lives in Uk. I will be greatfull if a British Governemt take a decisons to stop Pakistanies comming down to Britian.
    But my questions is this, Is it going to solve the problem?

    I studed in Uk and get my degree and to be honest here I found british people very friendly. However If any country feel that some of the community or people become threat to them, one should take decent actions. I as a Pakistani will love to see all Pakistanis live in their country and work for country inculding myself.
    But every country in the world somehow depend on other.

  • Comment number 59.

    Land of Pure, eh?. I understand this relates to spiritual purity.

    Any country which aspires to spiritual purity is unlikely ever to be at peace with itself, I would suggest.

  • Comment number 60.

    How refreshing to read Sumisal's comments (17/12/08 No 8). It seems the British population are constantly fed negative news constantly about Muslims. Most , or at least a lot of people I know are now extremely worried about the UK's immigration policy and the amount of people in the UK who are anti UK.
    If I was the prime minister I would do what the USA does and get them to swear an allegiance to the flag, the one they have chosen to live under and recieve the benefits having that country as their home. If the powers that be discover a person is encouraging other people to bear arms against the country, not just the UK they should be arrested, given a fair trial and if found guilty extradited along with their family. We are a soft touch.
    If you invited someone into your home and they displayed any behaviour not acceptable to you and your family you show them the door. If they behave appropriately you build a friendship and they are welcome to stay with all the benefits of your friendship. Its how the world works. One of the comments reminds us what Enoch Powell said in his Rivers of Blood speech many years ago, we are not quite at this stage, and hopefully never will be. We do need to hear the voice of the everyday muslim who fulfills all the criteria of normal peaceful living and not the anger and venom of the radicalised youth who are angry at the issues between the UK and their homeland. Talk will always resolve issues, bombs, threats and hate will build predudice, bigotry and mistrust. We all need to talk, nicely sometimes to each other. Happy christmas to everyone.
    Danthe jock x

  • Comment number 61.

    Yes land of Pure Pakistan,
    Any country which aspires spiritual purity dont have peace itself?

    It is just your thinking, There was a peace in Afganistan and in Pakistan before 9/11. but since Nato and Americans etc came to destroy Afganistan in the name of Terror, all of them try their best to destabalse Pak as well. I never heard sucide bombing in my life before any problems in our border regions.
    Now countries like UK and USA or some other westerns dont have this what you said spiritual purity, then why they always go for fight???? Because people do not have internal peace in them and they are not statisfiy with anything.

  • Comment number 62.

    First of all I hope everyone has a happy Christmas and a New Year.

    Just for those of you who think you know it all by listening to the mainstream media, it would be a good idea to do research into any matter.

    A lot of people are realising that when certain people/groups are blamed for things in the mainstream media, it is a load of cobblers.

    People should know that mainstream media is censored, they only show what they want you to see. At this moment in time, only the Internet is not censored but I'm guessing it soon will be because of the stuff that you can find out on here which the media does not report on.

  • Comment number 63.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 64.

    One wonders if the growing percentage of BBC staff of Pakistani origin has any bearing on the number of posts removed because ' They broke the house rules '? Provided that those posts have not broken the law, they should not be removed at the whim of a state funded PC lackey.

    The BBC would do well to remember that we, the tax payer, owns them; also, we, the tax payer increasingly feel that the BBC is a) becoming increasingly politicised with a strong left wing bias, and b) we do not feel that any such organisation should be pleading poverty with a budget of over £3Bn.

    The BBC was impartial; no longer is. Given that, the case for retention of the extorted license fee grows weaker year by year.

  • Comment number 65.

    "Go ahead, tell us all what the difference is between the two, and why Griffin/BNP shouldn't be tossed out of the country under the same laws the right wing demands be implemented?"

    Could it be the small matter that Islamist terrorists are blowing hundreds and thousands of people to smithereens every year worldwide while the BNP doesn't?

    It's amazing this moral equivalence in which offending people is regarded as just as bad as murdering them.

  • Comment number 66.

    Another joke by Bath_ed.

    Islamist terrorists blowing hundreds and thousands of people?
    Who promote and created these terrorists? Dont just ignore it in your ignorant ask yourself.
    There was not any type of terriorism before americans and UK etc went to War in iraq and afganistan for nothing.

    What would you call it, when your soilders and americans kill hundreds and thousands of people (muslims) in the world every year.
    According to Australian news agencies more than 1 milllions iraqies have been killed so far. Did all of them blow up their self?
    What is resons behind this killings?
    Very common questions that every muslims have in their mind.

    Interesting enough

  • Comment number 67.

    machaggis52 @ 52: I thought the BBC was actually being gradually taken over by the Welsh, to be honest, given programming of late - but your amusing theory would be less side-splitting if you actually paid attention and realized a lot of BBC Communities moderation is done by an outsourced private company.

    bath_ed @ 65: Ummm ... are you sure you don't work in a civil service position handling official government approved and stamped statistics?

    I'm just amazed the phrase "Won't someone think of the children???" wasn't in your post somewhere.

    However, here's a question for you - are you so morally selective that you think BNP extremists should somehow *not* be considered just as dangerous as Islamic extremists?

    I'm assuming you're not perturbed by the radicalization of English Christian youth by the BNP, presumably you think you're immune as being, for example, white and christian yourself?

    I'm sure there's lots of gay, foreign-appearing-yet-born-and-bred-english, non-Christian people would disagree with that position.

    Next time you want to try to quote figures to counter the perfectly supportable point I made that more people were murdered in the Province by *Christian* terrorists than have been murdered in *Europe* by Islamic extremists, at least try to come up with real numbers instead of propaganda, hmm?

  • Comment number 68.

    omegaImran1 @ 66:

    Actually, there's a rather large crater on Manhattan Island that proves there was terrorist before Iraq and Afghanistan. Whilst Iraq was adventurism, you can't avoid the fact the Taliban decided to really annoy the world by refusing to hand over bin Laden for mass-murder, they brought the results down on themselves and bear the responsibility for their choice and the consequences on the people they purported to protect.

    If you believe that there was not any type of terrorism before Iraq and Afghanistan, then you too have fallen for the canard that the only terrorists are Muslims - I suggest you go look up "IRA" "PIRA" "Real IRA" "INLA" "Baader-Meinhof", "Red Brigades", and "Shining Path"

    I wouldn't believe everything you read in the Australian media however - on *that* subject, look up "Rupert Murdoch".

  • Comment number 69.

    Moonwolf,

    Straight after 9/11 Bin laden interview cam on some type of Media where he denied that he carried out 9/11 and even Mulla Omer his friend. But whatever, whoever carried out, it was horrobile. But still many americans themself are saying it was inside job they way bulding were collapses. Afgasitan talabian Governemt that time asked US to give us Proof that Osama done it, we will hand in osama to you. But proof were given to Tony Blair and Musharraf why? Is that a kind of joke to go for one person and destroy a country and kill poor people? Have you seen afgasitan one of the poorest country in the world. All afgan people are suffering becase of this so called war on terror which has no end.

  • Comment number 70.

    Moonwolf
    You talk a lot about Christian terrorists, when you mean terrorists who happen to be Christians. The IRA were not Christian terrorists, or even Catholic terrorists. They never justified their actions by reference to Christian scripture, or the example of Jesus Christ. Indeed they couldn't - Jesus' whole life was based on peace and non-violence.
    Islamic terrorists are different. If I explained exactly why, however, this post would be deleted. There are some truths one is simply not allowed to speak these days.

  • Comment number 71.

    extracheeseplease @70

    Well said!

    "There are some truths one is simply not allowed to speak these days".

    We have all but surrendered to the terrorists wishes to silence us thereby giving them a free hand to go about their merry ways.

  • Comment number 72.

    Exactly the same way, I have posted some questions but did not get reply because people are in ignorant.

    There is much more to say but simply it will not appear and no one will understand anything except which suite them

  • Comment number 73.

    #70

    you purport to know how a Christian terorist thinks

    how so/

    are you engaged in both religions or spouting from neither?

    Certainly you are assuming that we believe you dicotomy.

    Why should we?

  • Comment number 74.

    @70 ... More like if you explained why, it would then be able to be completely shot down with actual facts rather than the stuff sheeple are force-fed by Sky and Faux News?

    You want to draw some kind of distinction between AQ et al and the Provos, feel free to try, but it's going to be a complete pile of steaming ... something.

    If people are going to try to delude themselves why they hate, and refuse to see that they're not actually any different from the deluded individuals they're claiming are representative of a whole religion, it boils down to hypocrisy - a truth they absolutely don't want to hear.

    The simple truth is - people hate "other". You'll come up with all kinds of rationalization to somehow de-escalate one set of terrorists, who just *happen* to be Christians, while using the same warped rationalization to demonize another group of terrorists - who just *happen* to be Muslims.

    And because of that "other" factor, you'll cherry pick the extremism you think is representative while refusing to acknowledge that not only do Christian terrorists do exactly the same, you end up supporting their rationalizations to boot.

    What does that end up making you?

    What's even funnier is you could take clippings of the stuff said about Muslims now, and overlay it with the stuff said about Jews just under a hundred years ago, and you'd find them to be so similar you'd wonder if the same propogandists were ghost writing - literally :P

    If you can be honest with yourselves, don't expect anyone with an IQ greater than room temperature to think you're being honest about anything them.

    Sixty years from now, are people going to look back on Christians and ask "Why didn't they do something?" the same way people still ask about the Germans of 60 years ago, or the UN over Rwanda of far more recent history?

    To be honest, I don't see that much difference between the hate-inducing warped perceptions of Islam coming out of the west and the hate-inducing warped justifications for terrorism coming out of Islamic extremists.

    Both need hate to feel relevant in the world, both need hate to feel like they have a purpose in the world - and both need hate to feel like they're better than everyone else in the world.

    That's a truth extremists of any stripe will never accept, whether it gets moderated or not.

    Bigotry is the last refuge of the insignificant.

  • Comment number 75.

    This is typical of the moral relativists to go off at a tangent, waffle and mock without actually giving any relevant facts.

    The fact is that Islamist terror is claiming thousands of victims per year in dozens of countries from Morocco to the Philippines. Tell us of comparable Christian, Jewish, Buddhist etc terror campaigns. Lets have facts.

    Lets have no nonsense about the IRA (a localised problem) who *never* justified their crimes with religion.

  • Comment number 76.

    They're terrorists who happen to be Christian. AQ et al are terrorists who happen to be Muslims. Baader Meinhof were terrorists who happened to be Marxists.

    Your problem is you can't tell the difference between Islamist and Islamic, any more than people can tell the difference between Zionist and Jew, catholic or protestant.

    In YOUR world view, since AQ happen to be Muslims, all Muslims must therefore be terrorists. I'm simply using your own warped logic and prejudices right back at you.

    What "thousands of victims"? A slight climb down from "hundreds and thousands". But since you're obviously just going to toss around vague numbers, here's a few numbers for you (bear in mind that since no-one can accurately define "terrorist", the criteria I'll use here is simple: extra-judicial murder of non-combatants/non-criminals)

    Rwanda. 800,000+ killed by ... oh, the Hutu are "predominantly" Catholics.

    Gujarat, 2002 - Muslims killed 58 Hindus on a train, the riots afterwards resulted in 790 Muslim dead, 196 Hindu dead.

    Oklahoma City Bombing: 168 dead, Timothy McVeigh was a Catholic.

    ETA: 800+ at last count - They're Marxist Leninists.

    Red Brigades (more wonderful Marxist-Leninists: Some people quote the figure at 1200+, others at ~90, I tend to go for the latter, but it's still more than 7/7.

    Hmmm. So much for that good old Christian message of peace and love. By no means is this a comprehensive list, and I'll bet you'll try to disqualify all of it as not counting because some mysterious "terrorist" label hasn't been assigned to participants, but that's OK, the point still stands: You claim hundreds and thousands of people murdered by Islamist terrorists, which justifies your fear and hatred of all Muslims, but you turn a blind eye to mass-murder if it's committed by your own.

    Let's have no nonsense about you trying to define terrorism as being categorized by "cause", which convieniently then excludes your own religion from being so classified.

    Pick a logical argument that's actually logical.

    Sauce for the goose and all that good stuff.

    Terrorists are terrorists, regardless of religion or cause.

    And while you're at it: Those Christian terrorists planted two bombs in the Province last week.

    Hmmm. Is that a cricket I hear?

  • Comment number 77.

    You people are so blind. It's unbelievable. Wake up to the truth. Look at the state of America. Anyone would think that it should be called Israel. Why don't the Zionists build a home there instead of occupying Palestinian land. Who was Bernard Madoff? Where did the $50+ billion go. Yes he was a Zionist. No the money didn't dissapear into thin air. Yes it could be that Israel has it. While the rest of the world is in recession, Israel are doing just fine with the American's money.
    It wouldn't be so hard if people did research into whatever they read or watch. Don't trust the mainstream media. 9/11 was an inside job, only the blind will not believe it.

  • Comment number 78.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 79.

    Not everything in the world is a grand zionist conspiracy, you know.

    Does that mean they wouldn't take advantage of events and twist them to their own ends? No. But everyone does that. It's politics as usual.

    You losy it when you claimed 9/11 was an inside job. Can we try to keep the grand conspiracy theories and crazy ideas out of at least *one* thread on the BBC Editor's blogs?

  • Comment number 80.

    Moonwolf - You don't know the half of it. Why don't you look into it?

    Why is it hard for you to believe that 9/11 was an inside job. Use your brain or common sense for that matter. Who created the Taliban, America did, it also funded it. Apparently they were freedom fighters then. Who was Bin Laden, apparently he was an CIA agent by the name of Tim Osman - check it out. His family and the Bush families get on just fine, there good family friends. The CIA (America) were having talks with the Taliban back in 1999 over an agreed pipeline deal which the Taliban later rejected. There was disagreements and we all know what happened after that. Those pipeline (deals) were imperative. What was the best way for America to get into Afghanistan. Blame someone on an attack on American soil.

    How can two planes hit two towers three quarters of a way up and suddenly crumble, look at how they crumbled and look at controlled demolitions, spot the difference, there is none.

    By the way what happened to the building that was near the twin towers, did you fart and it came down, no that was pulled too.

    You can carry on researching for yourself. Is that enough for you.

  • Comment number 81.

    If nothing else, you do tend to give weight to my point about the radicalization of non-Muslims being ignored - though probably not in the way you hope.

    About the only thing you missed from the usual comments, I think, was that you forgot to mention Mullah Omar is really Elvis.

  • Comment number 82.

    Moonbat
    My, you do hold a lot of opinions.
    But let's see what you actually know.
    Simple question:
    Jesus Christ and the Prophet Muhammad - compare and contrast.

  • Comment number 83.

    "Simple question: Jesus Christ and the Prophet Muhammad - compare and contrast."

    I think that the only people who would regard any contrast as simple are the poor, brainwashed, superstitious drones who believe in their irrational fairy stories. To everyone else, they are the root cause of the vast majority of human suffering... As the ancient greek saying goes, 'The believer is happy, the doubter wise".

  • Comment number 84.

    swisscheesebrain @ 82

    You could always try responding to the points made previously first.

    I think you're avoiding having to admit some things that aren't very flattering about prejudices by trying to make me defend my "opinions", except you're forgetting you're the one who's stated racist extremist viewpoints.

    You're the one who needs to defend their opinions, the question is can you?

  • Comment number 85.

    "I think that the only people who would regard any contrast as simple are the poor, brainwashed, superstitious drones who believe in their irrational fairy stories."

    BNP members you mean?

    You could actually apply that definition to the topic and those people who blindly believe Brown's pronouncement however.

    There's still been no clarification of how many of those 2,000+ suspected terrorists are in Northern Ireland, or are "domestic terrorists" like the ALF, why no arrests have been made for the crime of "conspiring to commit acts of terrorism" or whatever for those 30 or so "active terror plots", and what "connected to Pakistan in some way" actually means.

    There likely won't be either, a) because the BBC won't dare risk disturbing and upsetting their Overlords with such awkward questions any more, and b) people might have to face the fact that terrorists can also be white, christian, boy-next-door types.

  • Comment number 86.

    There was a group at my college "The Pakistani Massive".
    This group was made up of students who's parents had come here from Pakistan. Instead of finding the atrocities around the world horrible they celebrated them. What on earth are they being taught at home?

    They bullied Asians like myself, who either aren't Muslim or who are nicely integrated into British society. It's sick that this is allowed to happen because the teachers didn't want to believe that these people could be capable of such things (they knew they were doing it but the PC Brigade would've had their heads for saying so)

    I'm also concerned about what non-asians are being taught in this country. I come from a Sikh family. My dad has a big Turban because (like all good Sikh men) he's got VERY long, VERY thick hair. We get on the train and you can pretty much see peoples' blood pressure rising rapidly. But on a tube in London, I saw a guy wearing the full Muslim religious dress, had a huge backpack, looked very nervous etc and who was reading a book entitled "The Fortress of the Muslim"... no one seemed to bat an eyelid!!!

    Education please!

  • Comment number 87.

    Pakistan is doing more than any other country in the world to try and combat 'terrorism' and yet the UK USA and India are continually accusing them of sitting back and funding or assisting the terrorists. To be honest since even before Pakistan offered to help the West I knew that they would eventually turn on Pakistan in order to enter their country for their natural resources- which the pakistanis are not taking full advantage of- especially their fuel in the form of natual gas and coal.
    Its a predictable pattern of the Western countries namely UK and USA to do this and not surprising at all, however it is extremely infuriating when the US is bombing Pakistan - but no coverage of this is being shown on the BBC as they have been banned from doing so. People are dying in ths secret war everyday yet all people would like to talk about is how well pakistan is aiding the people who are bombing it.

  • Comment number 88.

    Tarantulette @ 86

    I have no idea how Sikhs managed to get lumped into the whole mess, but it's really just an extension of radicalized English hating "other".

    They don't understand it, don't want to understand it, and even if you're born and bred English, you're not "their people".

    It's not your religion that's at fault - it's their "religion" of nationalism.

    Most people aren't like that, but they hear the same vitriol time and again in the quiet places, down the pub, or watching TV at their mates' house, or in the car park when they're having a cigarette.

    And it sticks.

    English radicals rarely risk showing themselves in the light of day where they can be shot down, as demonstrated by the way none of them has actually come up with replies here.

    So yes, it's education. And to do that, the "others" have to be more open about who and what they are, shoot down the crap being spread by the extremists.

    It sucks that they have to defend themselves, but when the alternative is the only voices being heard are those of hatred, it's defend or quit.

    The other side you mentioned, of 1st and 2nd generation coming in and trying to maintain their cultural ways and *impose* them on others, is a problem too.

    They need to separate religion from culture, and practice the former whilst realizing the latter can't be foisted on people.

    And it's those who think they *can* impose their *culture*, not their religion, on others that give ammunition to the extremist nationalists.

    It's a mess, and it needs to stop.

    But it won't as long as so many people are in denial about themselves.

  • Comment number 89.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 90.

    Moonwolf said: "English radicals rarely risk showing themselves in the light of day where they can be shot down, as demonstrated by the way none of them has actually come up with replies here."

    Such hubris. Like most moonbats you are enormously verbose and have a compulsive need to get the final word. When normal people tire of your inability to see the obvious, and go off to do something more useful, you interpret this as some sort of victory.

    Well, I have got more important things to do. So be my guest - have the last word again.

  • Comment number 91.

    The actual fact is that Pakistan has been a Hub of Terrorism since almost last two decades but the World at large has been generally ignoring this fact. How else can one understand that in most of the Terrorist Attacks across the Globe, somewhere down the line, the name of PAKISTAN crops up whether in providing training to the perpetrators of the crime or in providing other help like logistics, finance etc. But our leaders tend to ignore for whatever reason they best might know but are unable to disclose it. One thing is very clear. In Pakistan, the political situation is very fragile. There is no one power centre. Although currently democratic, there are too many behind the scene actors who actually call the shots. The fact is that an average Pakistani is able to taste the sweet called DEMOCRACY only in bits and that too probably is also only being shown to him but maybe he doesn't have the will or guts to ask for that sweet. Even the Mumbai Tragedy was beinn unfolded, the political establishment in Pakistan were constantly in denial mode as is normally the case (they didn't accept the dead bodies of their soldiers after their Kargil Debacle to prove that the inflirtrators were not Pakistani). When the entire world is pointing finger at Pakistan to set their house in order, they are asking more evidence which in any case they are not going to accept. Even two highly ranked cabinet ministers of the Government of Pakistan are singing different tunes to the arrest of one of the Key Terrorist.

    HENCE WE MUST ACCEPT THAT PAKISTAN IS A FAILED STATE AND THE WORLD MUST UNITEDLY STAND AGAIN THIS HOLY LAND OF TERRORISM.

  • Comment number 92.

    No country in the world knows Pakistan better than India. Having fought the Pakistan sponsored jihadi terror, when the rest of civilized world used to preach India on rights of Kashmiris.

    It looks a nightmare as the fire has reached the shores of UK now. A sincere advice from Indian experience is to not allow any more Pakistanis than they are already in the country. Even a small percentage turned to terror will cause havoc in our country. More importantly, pressurise the only major country that supports Pakistan and nuclearised it - China.

  • Comment number 93.

    I have certainly valued the BBC news and commentary whilst based in Mumbai.

    The advent of terrorism is certainly not new to the minds of Indians and given the global context of the adversity, particularly the complex inter-relationship of countries on the subcontinent, wholistic coverage of the issues by agencies such as the BBC becomes even more important. Having been affected directly by the recent Mumbai attacks covered in my bollywood blog, the situation is more real to me now than ever before.

    The sooner the international terror networks and cross border links between them are exposed, the better for all innocent citizens liable to be affected by their destruction. Keep up the good work

    Jo

 

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.