To my other muslim CD s - please do not mistake me or my words ... I am courteous and friendly with all of you -- its just that such fundamentalist mindset needs to be weeded out and opposed for a common unity and peaceful co existence .

You recognize and appreciate my religion , I do that to yours - where s the question of superiority ... and then there are certain things beyond and more important than religion like friendship / humanity / patriotism .

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fido.

And how modern day Jihad came into been. Two countries which are at the epic centre of terror. The elephant in the room which can not be ignored.

see this article - excerpt

The Saudi Connection - How billions in oil money spawned a global terror network



The charities were part of an extraordinary $70 billion Saudi campaign to spread their fundamentalist Wahhabi sect worldwide. The money helped lay the foundation for hundreds of radical mosques, schools, and Islamic centers that have acted as support networks for the jihad movement, officials say.

U.S. intelligence officials knew about Saudi Arabia's role in funding terrorism by 1996, yet for years Washington did almost nothing to stop it. Examining the Saudi role in terrorism, a senior intelligence analyst says, was "virtually taboo." Even after the embassy bombings in Africa, moves by counterterrorism officials to act against the Saudis were repeatedly rebuffed by senior staff at the State Department and elsewhere who felt that other foreign policy interests outweighed fighting terrorism.

Saudi largess encouraged U.S. officials to look the other way, some veteran intelligence officers say. Billions of dollars in contracts, grants, and salaries have gone to a broad range of former U.S. officials who had dealt with the Saudis: ambassadors, CIA station chiefs, even cabinet secretaries.

Washington's unwillingness to confront the Saudis over terrorism was part of a broader strategic failure to sound the alarm on the rise of the global jihad movement. During the 1990s, the U.S. intelligence community issued a series of National Intelligence Estimates--which report on America's global challenges--on ballistic missile threats, migration, infectious diseases; yet the government never issued a single NIE on the jihad movement or al Qaeda.

Propaganda. Saudi officials argue that their charities have done enormous good work overseas and that the problems stem from a few renegade offices. They say, too, that Riyadh is belatedly cracking down, much as Washington did after 9/11. "These people may have taken advantage of our charities," says Adel al-Jubeir, foreign affairs adviser to the crown prince. "We're looking into it, and we've taken steps to ensure it never happens again."

To understand why the Saudis would fund a movement that now terrorizes even their own society, some history is in order. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was born of a kind of marriage of convenience between the House of Saud and the strict Wahhab sect of Islam. In the 18th century, Mohammed ibn Saud, a local chieftain and the forebear of today's ruling family, allied himself with fundamentalists from the Wahhab sect. Over the next 200 years, backed by the Wahhabis, Saud and his descendants conquered much of the Arabian peninsula, including Islam's holiest sites, in Mecca and Medina. Puritanical and ascetic, the Wahhabis were given wide sway over Saudi society, enforcing a strict interpretation of certain Koranic beliefs. Their religious police ensured that subjects prayed five times a day and that women were covered head to toe. Rival religions were banned, criminals subjected to stoning, lashing, and beheading.

The Wahhabis were but one sect among a back-to-the-roots movement in Islam that had limited attraction overseas. But that began to change, first with the flood of oil money in the 1970s, which filled Saudi coffers with billions of petrodollars. Next came the Iranian revolution and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, in 1979. Most ominously for the Saudis, however, was a third shock that same year: the brief but bloody takeover by militants of the Grand Mosque in Mecca.

Threatened within the kingdom, and fearful that the radicals in Tehran would assert their own leadership of the Muslim world, the Saudis went on a spending spree. From 1975 through last year, the kingdom spent over $70 billion on overseas aid, according to a study of official sources by the Center for Security Policy, a Washington think tank. More than two thirds of that amount went to "Islamic activities"--building mosques, religious schools, and Wahhabi religious centers, says the CSP's Alex Alexiev, a former CIA consultant on ethnic and religious conflict. The Saudi funding program, Alexiev says, is "the largest worldwide propaganda campaign ever mounted"--dwarfing the Soviets' propaganda efforts at the height of the Cold War. The Saudi weekly Ain al-Yaqeen last year reported the cost as "astronomical" and boasted of the results: some 1,500 mosques, 210 Islamic centers, 202 colleges, and nearly 2,000 schools in non-Islamic countries.

Key to this evangelical tour de force were charities closely tied to Saudi Arabia's ruling elite and top clerics. With names like the Muslim World League and its affiliate, the International Islamic Relief Organization, the funds spent billions more to spread Wahhabism. The IIRO, for example, took credit for funding 575 mosques in Indonesia alone. Accompanying the money, invariably, was a blizzard of Wahhabist literature. Wahhabist clerics led the charge, causing moderate imams to worry about growing radicalism among the faithful. Critics argue that Wahhabism's more extreme preachings--mistrust of infidels, branding of rival sects as apostates, and emphasis on violent jihad--laid the groundwork for terrorist groups around the world.

After the Soviets left Afghanistan in disgrace, bin Laden moved his fledgling al Qaeda to Sudan, in 1992. By then a perfect storm of Islamic radicalism was gathering across the Muslim world.

The Saudi charities opened offices in hot spots around the globe, with virtually no controls on how the money was spent, U.S. officials say.

In a classified report in 1996, CIA officials finally pulled together what they had on Islamic charities. The results were disturbing. The agency identified over 50 Islamic charities engaged in international aid and found that, as in the Balkans, fully a third of them were tied to terrorist groups. "Islamic activists dominate the leadership of the largest charities," the report noted. "Even high-ranking members of the collecting or monitoring agencies in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Pakistan--such as the Saudi High Commission--are involved in illicit activities, including support for terrorists."

As front organizations, the charities were ideal. Some provided safe houses, false identities, travel documents. Others offered arms and materiel. Nearly all dispensed sizable amounts of cash, according to the CIA, with little or no documentation. And they were, it seemed, everywhere. By the mid-1990s, the Muslim World League fielded some 30 branches worldwide, while the IIRO had offices in over 90 countries. The CIA found that the IIRO was funding "six militant training camps in Afghanistan," where Riyadh was backing a then obscure sect called the Taliban, whose religious practices were close to Wahhabism. The head of a Muslim World League office in Pakistan was supplying league documents and arms to militants in Afghanistan and Tajikistan. Another Saudi charity had begun funding rebels in Chechnya.

"Chatter." Although they called themselves private foundations, these were not charities in the sense that Americans understand the term. The Muslim World League and the IIRO, for example, are overseen by the grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, the kingdom's highest religious authority. They receive substantial funds from the government and members of the royal family and make use of the Islamic affairs offices of Saudi embassies abroad. The Muslim World League's current secretary general, Abdullah Al-Turki, served as the kingdom's minister of Islamic affairs for six years. "The Muslim World League, which is the mother of IIRO, is a fully government-funded organization," the IIRO's Canadian head testified in a 1999 court case. "In other words, I work for the government of Saudi Arabia."

Despite the mounting evidence, the issue of Saudi complicity with terrorists was effectively swept under the diplomatic rug. Counterterrorism experts offer several reasons. For one, this was five years before the 9/11 attacks, and terrorism simply wasn't seen as the strategic threat it is today. Only a dozen or so Americans were killed each year in terrorist attacks. Moreover, in many of the jihad struggles, Washington was neutral, as in Kashmir, or even supportive, as in Bosnia. When Saudi money began financing jihadists headed to Chechnya, Washington responded with "a wink and a nod," as one analyst put it. The level and impact of all the Saudi funding were also difficult to discern. "We knew the outlines," explains Judith Yaphe, a senior Middle East analyst at the CIA until 1995. "But before 9/11, much of it had to be intuited. It was like the blind man examining the elephant."


There were other reasons. In much of official Washington, a growing movement of Third World religious zealots was just not taken seriously. For years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, those running U.S. intelligence were "Soviet people" still fighting the Cold War, says Pat Lang, who served as chief Middle East analyst for the Defense Intelligence Agency during the 1990s. "The jihadists were like men from Mars to them." Peter Probst, then a senior counterterrorism official at the Pentagon, agrees. "Any time you would raise these threats, people would laugh," he recalls. "They would say I was being totally paranoid."

The fact that the movement was based on Islam made it more difficult to discuss. "There was a fear that it was too sensitive, that you'd be accused of discrimination," Probst says. "It was political correctness run amok." Others say the message was subtle but clear. In the CIA, merely getting permission to prepare a report on a subject can require up to five levels of approval. On the subject of Saudi ties to terrorism, the word came back: There was simply no interest. The result, says a CIA veteran, was "a virtual embargo."


The FBI fared little better. By 1998, a sprawling investigation in Chicago into terrorist fundraising had led federal agents to $1.2 million looted from a local chemical firm. The money, they suspected, had been sent to Hamas. The G-men found the source of the cash curious: a Saudi charity, the IIRO, which had funneled the money through the Saudi Embassy. Senior Justice Department officials expressed concerns about "national security," and the case, eventually, was dropped. "Did someone say to me we can't do this because it would offend the Saudis? No," says Mark Flessner, a prosecutor on the case. "But was that always an undertone? Yes. Was that a huge issue? Yes."


It didn't hurt that the Saudis had spread money around Washington by the millions. Vast sums from Saudi contracts have bought friends and influence here. In his recent book Sleeping With the Devil: How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude, former CIA operative Bob Baer calls it "Washington's 401(k) Plan." "The Saudis put out the message," Baer wrote. "You play the game--keep your mouth shut about the kingdom--and we'll take care of you."

The list of beneficiaries is impressive: former cabinet secretaries, ambassadors, and CIA station chiefs. Washington lobbyists, P.R. firms, and lawyers have also supped at the Saudi table, as have nonprofits from the Kennedy Center to presidential libraries. The high-flying Carlyle Group has made fortunes doing deals with the Saudis. Among Carlyle's top advisers have been former President George H.W. Bush; James Baker, his secretary of state; and Frank Carlucci, a former secretary of defense. If that wasn't enough, there was the staggering amount of Saudi investment in America--as much as $600 billion in U.S. banks and stock markets.


That kind of clout may help explain why the House of Saud could be so dismissive of American concerns on terrorism. Official inquiries about bin Laden went unanswered by Riyadh. When Hezbollah terrorists killed 19 U.S. troops with a massive truck bomb at Khobar Towers in Dhahran in 1996, Saudi officials stonewalled, then shut the FBI out of the investigation. So sensitive were relations that the CIA instructed officials at its Riyadh station not to collect intelligence on Islamic extremists--even after the bombing--for fear of upsetting their host, former officers tell U.S. News.


Payoffs. The attacks on the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in August 1998 changed all that. Within weeks, the NSC formed its task force on terrorist finances, drawing in members from the Treasury Department and the CIA's Illicit Transactions Group. (The ITG was later absorbed into the agency's Counterterrorism Center.) In the movies, U.S. intelligence often seems capable of extraordinary feats. In the real world, alas, Washington's reach is all too limited. Officials on the task force were quickly sobered by the handful of people they found with true expertise on the Middle East. Those knowledgeable about terrorist financing numbered even fewer. So limited was the CIA's knowledge that it began using al Qaeda's real name only that year--10 years after bin Laden founded the organization. Even less was known about al Qaeda's fellow jihadists around the globe. Its top ally in Southeast Asia, Jemmah Islamiya, was not targeted until after 9/11, according to an Australian intelligence report

Other challenges loomed. The Islamic world has always been a difficult target for Western intelligence services, and terrorist cells are among the toughest to penetrate. Following criminal money is also a tortuous task. Drawing a bead on al Qaeda combined all three challenges. The NSC task force tried to formulate what staffers called "a theory of the case." Their first questions were simple: What did it cost to be bin Laden? How much did it take to fund al Qaeda?
Terrorist acts, even the so-called spectaculars like 9/11, are relatively cheap to carry out. But the more the task force studied al Qaeda, the bigger its budget appeared. With its training camps and operations, and payments to the Taliban and to other terror groups, the amount was surely in the millions, task-force members surmised. After finding that bin Laden's inherited wealth was largely gone and his Sudanese businesses failing, the question was, where did the money come from? The answer, they eventually concluded, was Saudi charities and private donors.


The charities, by 1999, were integrated even further into the jihadist movement. In India, police detained Sayed Abu Nasir, a longtime IIRO staffer, for plotting to bomb U.S. consulates. Nasir confessed that the organization was secretly supporting dozens of jihadist training camps in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Equally striking was the al Haramain Foundation, one of Saudi Arabia's largest, which dispensed $50 million a year through some 50 offices worldwide. U.S. officials would eventually conclude that its branches in at least 10 countries were providing arms or cash to terrorists, including those in Indonesia, Pakistan, and Somalia. In Southeast Asia, al Haramain was acting as a key source of funds for al Qaeda; in Chechnya, Russian officials suspected it of moving $1 million to the rebels and arranging the purchase of 500 "heavy weapons" from the Taliban.


There was more. In the Middle East, the CIA learned, Saudi donations were funding as much as half of Hamas's budget and paying off the families of suicide bombers. In Pakistan, so much Saudi money poured in that a mid-level Pakistani jihadist could make seven times the country's average wage. Jihad had become a global industry, bankrolled by the Saudis. Daniel Benjamin, the NSC's counterterrorism director, knew that Palestinian terror groups had used local charities, but that was nothing like what the Saudis had wrought. "The structure was not astonishing," Benjamin says. "The ambition and scale were."
Underlying the reluctance to confront the Saudis was a more fundamental failure--Washington's inability to recognize the strategic danger posed by the growing jihad movement, of which al Qaeda is but the head. The U.S. government, in effect, largely missed the gravest ideological threat to national security since the end of the Cold War. "There were people who got it at the analyst level, at the supervisory level, but all of us were outnumbered," says Pat Lang, the former Pentagon analyst. "You just couldn't get people to take seriously the world of Islam and the threat it represented."


Consider the work of the National Intelligence Council, which is tied closely to the CIA and reports directly to its director. In 1999, the NIC brought together experts from across America to identify global trends--key drivers, they called them--that would affect the world over the next 15 years. A senior intelligence official, the anonymous author of Through Our Enemies' Eyes, which chronicles the rise of al Qaeda, described to U.S. News how he perused the NIC draft report and was shocked to see that Islamic fundamentalism was not listed among the key drivers. The analyst sent a note to the NIC chief, stressing that there were nearly a dozen Islamic insurgencies around the world, knitted together by Saudi money, al Qaeda, and thousands of Afghan veterans. The response: "I got a Christmas card back with a note hoping my family was well," the man recalls. The NIC's final report, Global Trends 2015, barely mentioned radicalism in the Islamic world. The NIC's vice chairman, Ellen Laipson, later wrote that their report "shied away" from the issue because it "might be considered insensitive and unintentionally generate ill will."


The 19 hijackers, of course, obliterated any lingering concerns about sensitivity and Saudi ill will. Over the next year, police raided the offices of Saudi-backed charities in a half-dozen countries.

But as more evidence has become public, Saudi officials have finally admitted that something is indeed seriously wrong. In June of this year, they promised reforms. Charities would be audited, officials in Riyadh vowed, their overseas activities curtailed.

Getting serious. Not everyone, obviously, agrees. A $1 trillion lawsuit names Saudi princes, businessmen, and charities for funding the terrorists behind the 9/11 attacks. Brought by more than 900 victims' family members, the suit is winding its way through the U.S. courts. The withholding of 27 pages in Congress's 9/11 report last June--detailing Saudi funding and ties to al Qaeda--has only fed suspicions. Counterterrorism officials also remain wary that the Saudis will make good on their pledges to reform. Only after triple suicide bombings struck Riyadh on May 12 did the regime get serious about cracking down, they say. Since then, the Saudis have arrested more than 200, broken up a dozen al Qaeda cells, and begun sharing intelligence as never before. "The Saudis didn't really get it," says Wechsler, the former NSC coordinator. "They didn't get it after the '98 embassy bombings, after the Cole bombing, after 9/11, after Bali. They got it after May 12.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by icecube


Coming from India, I lack the Indianess that most of the people from India expect; denounce Pakistan as an enemy state or support the Indian team in a match against Pakistan or support India on the Kashmir issue. For reasons beyond description, I could do none of that.

---

Thanks for watching my movie MINK. Ok.
I must confess, johar was very worried as
he had doubts about the success of his offbeat
dumb movie, with insipid story....but i assured him..main hoon na.

So I created that hype after arousing enuf suspicion in that gora security officer in new york airport to detain me, then used it to create big controvery in media, both for me and the movie - MINK (wink wink)

And of course shiv sena controversy was god sent, I was told to apologise and end the matter by johar, but I decided, it was worth milking this further...and what a way it went
people were fighting with Shiv sena to watch the movie after paying hundreds of bucks..

I just luv my fans...they will watch any movie
as long as i'm in it. You see I have only 1500
crores , My humble aim is to make another 1500 crores ....and I know my fans are their besides IPL moolah. Its a great life...thanks to my dumb fans ...inshalah.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by looklook

Thanks for watching my movie MINK. Ok.
I must confess, johar was very worried as
he had doubts about the success of his offbeat
dumb movie, with insipid story....but i assured him..main hoon na.

So I created that hype after arousing enuf suspicion in that gora security officer in new york airport to detain me, then used it to create big controvery in media, both for me and the movie - MINK (wink wink)

And of course shiv sena controversy was god sent, I was told to apologise and end the matter by johar, but I decided, it was worth milking this further...and what a way it went
people were fighting with Shiv sena to watch the movie after paying hundreds of bucks..

I just luv my fans...they will watch any movie
as long as i'm in it. You see I have only 1500
crores , My humble aim is to make another 1500 crores ....and I know my fans are their besides IPL moolah. Its a great life...thanks to my dumb fans ...inshalah.

---

This movie has been a total Secular Media Hype.

The movie has been a flop in India.

The pro SRK, Dharma Production guys are not revealing the true collections.

The theater wide collections are out and it is a flop.

The foot traffic dropped 30% on 16th Feb, another 20% on 17th Feb and now it is running to empty theaters and are being pulled out for TEEN PATTI of Big B.

The movie has been salvaged by the overseas markets.

Still the distributor Foxlight will not be able to cover its cost. The earnings uptil now is about INR 42 crores in India and about INR 45 crores abroad. It total to about INR 97 crores while SRK has sold it for about INR 100 Crores.

After this movie it is clearly established that the order of pecking in Bollywood is as follows:

Amir Khan, SRK and then Salman Khan.

There are two camps at work on the trade reports of this movie.

The pro SRK, K Jo camp which is Taran Adharsh who reports on bollywoodhungama.com.

The anti SRK camp is on www.bollywoodboxoffice.com.

The pro camp is verysilent on the boxoffice reports. There has been lot of fancy accounting of the foreign collections which was not the case with 3 Idiots.

The movie of 3 Idiots has been released by Anil Ambani of Reliance and they were very open on collections. The movie 3 Idiots was released against AVATAR globally, while this movie of MNIK had no competition and all the hype.

The foreign market they typically account the net proceeds of ticket after deducting the taxes of the local land. In MNIK case they used the gross ticket sales and for eg if it 13% in Ontario their gross will go up by 13%. In 3 Idiots they only reported the net ticket sales abroad.

The foreign exchange rate used in MNIK also has been higher to play it up by another 0.2 Crores to make it look big.

The whole episode of this movies release is a sham.

Some of you might ask why this comparison with 3 Idiots. We did not start it but SRK started it by starting this comparison on his website and now he is caught with his pants down. The movie 3 idiots is still going strong and will hit about INR 300 Crores in India and a total of about INR 450 to 500 crores globally.

http://www.mynameiskhanthefilm.com/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.mynameiskhanthefilm.com/150_CRORES_IN_10_DAYS.pdf

MNIK CROSSES 150 CRORES IN 10 DAYS
THIS WEEK, ‘My Name is Khan’ joined an elite group of successful films & became only the third film in Bollywood history to touch 150 crores worldwide within 10 days of release.
Trade Analysts expect that within the coming week, the film should become the highest grossing Shah Rukh Khan film ever.
Only Shah Rukh Khan could do this in February, rather than in the Summer Holidays or the festive Oct-Dec period. Traditionally, February is not considered a strong period for a major film release as it is affected by cold weather and exams in parts of India. But despite controversies and blasts, MNIK has done record business for this time period. Just to put it in perspective, within 10 days the film has done business double the size of any other Bollywood film ever released in a February.
The film is still running strong across international markets. The film is already the biggest Bollywood film of all time within 10 days in the UAE, South Africa, Holland, Hong Kong, Singapore, Indonesia, East & West Africa, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Thailand & Mautiius.
In the Middle East, the film has not only smashed all existing Bollywood records within 10 days, but even beaten the Fox Searchlight’s previous highest grosser ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ in Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, Kuwait, UAE and Egypt. Fox Searchlight is proud of this achievement and according Mario Haddad, Head of Empire International Middle East, “The film has incredible legs. The drop in the second week is less than 10%. We expect it to have a long run here. Due to the demand, we are opening in Jordan, Lebanon and Syria on March 10th.”
In the UK, the film has become the fastest film to cross GBP 2m, managing the feat within just 11 days. The strong run in UK continues even in the second week, and is on its way to breaking the all-time record K3G in the UK within the coming week.
In the US & Canada, MNIK is already the highest grossing SRK film of all time, within just 10 days of release.
Vijay Singh, CEO of Fox Star Studios says, “We are delighted to be entering this elite group with our first major Bollywood venture. The film was created for a global audience and continues to break records worldwide. It is truly proving to be India’s first global Bollywood film.”

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please read and also in between the lines on these two websites to find that this movie is not it is being potrayed as it to be.

DO NOT READ THE HEADLINE BUT READ THE FIGURES AND YOU'LL UNDERSTAND THE TRUTH.

How cleverly they do not say hit or miss when they report that 3 Idiots is an alltime Block Buster hit.

www.bollywoodhungama.com - PRO SRK

http://www.boxofficeindia.com/ - Anti SRK

All at what cost ?. The loss of 16 innocent lives at PUNE and still counting. None of these guys including SRK, Shabana Azmi, Bhatt Saab have come out and made a statement on the Pune incident.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sunny Leone a true Canadian DESI now back in India !.

Vandematram, you're right on all counts, especially Taran Adarsh. For him anything that AB, SRK, Yash Chopra touches is gold. Taran Adarsh, who gave 4 stars to MNIK, 4 to Blue (I'm still laughing out loud).

The figures that SRK, KJo employs are all murky given that all his movies are crap to the peak.