I think that General Gulzar Kiyani was paid to give interview and lie blatantly on media. If one look at what he said in his interview an think, one would find may lies and contradictions. When someone start lying and giving contradictory statements, nothing what he/she says is reliable or could be taken on face value, but has to get investigated and looked into. Everything has to have references and whatever said should be intelligently viable.
**There should be probe not only on Kargil, but Nawaz statements and Gulzar Kiyani statements too. There should be probe as Nawaz agreed to withdraw in USA from Pakistani land handing that over to India, that amounts to treason (remember, Kargil is Pakistani land like all of Kashmir, occupied by India). Even if Kashmir is disputed territory than also Pakistan occupying that land is their right but Nawaz giving it back to India was treason. India did the same on Siachin and never withdrew **
There are many lies and contradictory statements in Gulzar Kiyani interview but I am pointing out few most relevant. Nawaz says that he was not on board about Kargil operation. But general Gulzar Kiyani in his interview on GEO says that Nawaz was on board (though this general was lying left, right and centre and was contradicting his own statements many times, still he spilled the beans). Here is what he said about Thug Nawaz and his devious crooked character.
http://thenews.jang.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=15086
Just look at what Gulzar said that shows he was paid to give that interview: At one place he says:
**
**
Now if Nawaz did not knew anything than how Gulzar can also claim at other place that Nawaz was briefed? [Even if one accepts … not thoroughly … something his statements contradict … still, if he was told than he knew something].
So according to interview, Nawaz was briefed everything relevant by Gulzar Kiyani himself, still Gulzar claims that Nawaz was not briefed. How can Gulzar claim that Nawaz was not briefed anything and then claim that Nawaz was briefed. Both cannot be true. His claim is ridiculous, isn’t it?
Above statement is very revealing but quite contradictory and funny, It tells the character of Nawaz. Let see:
So, according to Gulzar Kiyani: Nawaz did gave green signal for the operation (when? On May 17, 1999).
As according to character of Nawaz, this thug gave conditional support (as Nawaz does to all who follow him … even to his party PML-N members. What is Nawaz conditional support?
True to his devious and untrustworthy character, Nawaz only supports if thing are going good and later deny that support if thing starts going bad. Nawaz is good in lying and going back on his words. He is habitual liar.
Nawaz did same regarding Kargil operation that he supported Kargil operation but when he lost everything on table in USA he started lying and denying that he gave green signal and was supporting the operation, ditching all what he should have supported … including his own green signal … but that is character of this Thug. Nawaz did same after Oct 1999 military coup. He did not stood with his party but instead of staying and supporting them, he saved his life, made a deal, ran away to Saudia, and ditched them in Pakistan. He did same after agreement that he would stay outside Pakistan for 10 years. He denied and started lying until guarantors came on surface. Lying is habit of this thug and most of his party members. They are characterless liars.
Now coming to what Nawaz went to USA for?: Gulzar Kiyani obliging Nawaz again lied: Here is what Gulzar said:
But is this general (Gulzar Kiyani) telling truth? We go to what happened in USA. There were three people in the meeting … Nawaz, Clinton and Talbot. Talbot wrote a book and spilled the bean regarding what happened there:
Now read what former US deputy secretary of State Strobe Talbot writes in his book**: ‘Engaging India - Diplomacy, Democracy and the Bomb’. **[If you want detail, you should find the book and read it too]
[Obviously, Musharraf could not have forced Talbot to write what he wrote … something that also gives bad image of Clinton that how he got red in anger on Pakistani Prime Minister and how Nawaz started sh*tting in his Shalwar … such that Nawaz agreed everything whatever Clinton asked him, including surrendering Pakistani land to India …
We should remember that Nawaz was not giving up Indian land but was agreeing to withdraw from Pakistani land as Kargil belongs to Pakistan just like all of Kashmir (on the other hand, Kargil was with Pakistan since 1948 until Z A Bhutto gave it to India after Shimla Agreement)].
If Nawaz was in USA to save prestige of Pak Army than instead of asking something for withdrawal, obvious is that Nawaz should be begging Clinton to stop India attacking Pakistan army so that he can ask Pakistan army to run for their life. But obviously Pakistan army was well in command of those land and Nawaz did not went to save prestige of Pak Army but when demand from USA (and world) came to withdraw, Nawaz went to USA to tell USA that Pakistan would only ask forces to withdraw if India agree to solve Kashmir issue.
That is confirmed from what Talbot wrote. According to Talbot, Talbot wrote that: Nawaz talk with Clinton was not for face saving but Nawaz wanted something from Kargil victory (something he could only have done if he did not go to USA to save prestige of Pakistan but with Pakistan military upper hand on Kargil, that he wanted to use and should have used, to get something for for that) but when Clinton gave Nawaz a good lecture, Nawaz got scared and started shi*ting in his shalwar and agreed to everything. … Worse is that, after agreeing whatever Clinton asked, Nawaz got scared to face anyone in Pakistan and wanted something to show to Pakistanis.
Other reports (that I am not including here … though if anyone wants, I can dig for reference of that too) tells that Nawaz was so scared that before leaving Pakistan, Nawaz took pledge from Clinton that USA would protect Nawaz in Pakistan** … **[and if you would start reading the press of that time, USA start warning Pakistan army that they would not tolerate any non-constitutional step in Pakistan. Please read and I am sure that if you would read, you will feel ashamed of this pathetic person called Nawaz].
http://www.jammu-kashmir.com/archives/arch...r20040711c.html](http://www.jammu-kashmir.com/archives/archives2004/kashmir20040711c.html)
Clinton snubbed Sharif for linking Kargil war with Kashmir issue
11 July 2004
The Hindustan Times
Press Trust of India
**Washington: At the height of the Kargil conflict, former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif told then US President Bill Clinton that he was prepared to help resolve the crisis if India committed to settle the ‘larger issue’ of Kashmir in a specific time-frame, but the American leader snubbed him saying it would amount to a ‘nuclear blackmail.’ When Sharif visited Washington in 1999 to discuss Kargil with Clinton, he insisted, ‘I am prepared to help resolve the current crisis in Kargil but India must commit to resolve the larger issue in a specific time-frame,’ former US deputy secretary of State Strobe Talbott writes in his new book Engaging India - Diplomacy, Democracy and the Bomb. ‘Clinton came as close as I had ever seen to blowing up in a meeting with a foreign leader,’ and told Sharif, ‘If I were the Indian Prime Minister, I would never do that. I would be crazy to do it. It would be nuclear blackmail. If you proceed with this line, I will have no leverage with them. If I tell you what you think you want me to say, I will be stripped of all influence with the Indians.’ ‘I am not - and the Indians are not - going to let you get away with blackmail, and I will not permit any characterisation of this meeting that suggests I am giving in to blackmail,’ Talbott writes, adding, Clinton also refuted Sharif’s accusation that the Indians were the instigators of the crisis and intransigents in the ongoing standoff. When Sharif insisted he had to have something to show for his trip to the US beyond unconditional surrender over Kargil, Clinton pointed to the dangers of nuclear war if Pakistan did not return to its previous positions. Seeing they were getting nowhere, Clinton told Sharif he had a statement ready to release to press that would lay all the blame for the crisis on Pakistan. ‘Sharif was ashen.’ ‘Clinton had worked himself back into real anger - his face flushed, eyes narrowed, lips pursed, cheek muscles pulsing, fists clenched. He said it was crazy enough for ****Sharif to have **let **his military violate the Line of Control, start a border war with India, and now prepare nuclear forces (US had received intelligence Pakistan was preparing nuclear forces for attack against India) for action,’ Talbott says in his book. ‘Sharif seemed beaten, physically and emotionally’ and denied he had given any order with regard to nuclear weaponry. Taking a break, Clinton spoke to then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee over phone and told him what had happened till then. ‘What do you want me to say?’ Vajpayee asked. ‘Nothing,’ Clinton replied, he just wanted to show he was holding firm.