Alex Jones - Hamid Gul - Osama Bin Laden Death - part 1/2

Part 2/2

LUMS Admission 2011

LUMS Ad. Admissions 2011

Liberated Libya rejects US intervention

Libyans overwhelmingly reject foreign intervention! A US subsidiary the UNO came to help the people of Libya who did not at all want the kind of help US provided.

Supporting Libyan Revolution, Opposing Foreign Intervention

Leave it to the people of Libya to decide. If not now, they'll bring the revolution a few years later. Let THEM do it!!! Why make their army weaker? It is loss of Libyans too!!

Julian Assange and Raymond A. Davis | Sabbah Report

Julian Assange and Raymond A. Davis | Sabbah Report

Most U.S. aid to Pakistan still in America’s hands | The Cable

Most U.S. aid to Pakistan still in America’s hands | The Cable

Balancing parking tickets against murders

By Murtaza Haider

For the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, a parking ticket violation is more atrocious than a murder. As a junior senator from New York, Mrs. Clinton wanted to revoke the diplomatic immunity for scofflaw diplomats who were stationed at the United Nations in New York and had racked up $21.3 million in parking violations. As the Secretary of State, however, she is invoking diplomatic immunity for Mr. Raymond Davis, who is accused of murdering two young men in Lahore.

Read full article Balancing parking tickets against murders

Salman Taseer sayin he is against blasphemy

this video does not tell he did blasphemy or supported blasphemy... yes he pointed out some improvements in registration of the case.

Salman Taseer talks abt Blasphemy Law on CNN

in this video he does not seem to b in favor of repealing the law. though he mentioned towards the end tht the penalty shld not b death sentence...

Unfriendly and Irresponsible US Behavior

I was just reading about the blunt US warnings to Pakistan if it does not act aggressively against US defined terrorists. Actually US has an impression that Pakistan is avoiding direct conflict with the 'terrorist' because of strategic and political reasons.

I was wondering if US should issue such warning without showing its own progress and success after 100s of drone attacks on Pakistani soil? I think USA and its non-Pakistani allies should also present a report about their progress in Afghanistan in the last few years. They should also compare their performances with Pakistani army during the same period, to decide who fought better with the militants in almost similar terrain. I was also wondering where did US army go when Pakistan army was carrying out operation Raah-e-Nijaat? I have mentioned in one of my earlier posts that USA removed its check posts from Pak-Afghan border when Pakistani army was fighting TTP in South Waziristan. This was the best chance to sandwich TTP but the International armies missed it। Shouldn't we doubt their intent? They not only missed it, they wasted the efforts made by Pakistani army. Missing its own opportunity, US is now pressing Pakistan army for no reason. It makes me wonder, why does such events don't affect US image all over the world and US impression on Pakistan :s

US should be aware of the facts that Pakistani army does not have to see the western border only. It is already very stretched out:
1) On going war against militants all over Pakistan
2) Recent uprise in Indian occupied Kashmir requires Pakistani army to be ready for any situation
3) Recent floods in Pakistan

I'd question USA and the rest of the world if they would prefer saving and rehabilitating their citizens after a natural disaster or they would open a new war front against someone who is considered a 'bad guy' by some suspicious friend?

Regarding new Video of Stoning a Woman

These days people are talking about another pretty blur video of, allegedly, Muslim radicals stoning a woman to death for her misconduct. Given the information that another such video, of whipping, has turned out to be fake, it is pretty naive to believe that this video is credible. But still I findd very few people who doubt the video. Rather, based on the video of some guys who misuse one Islamic law, people start criticizing the Islamic law of stoning to death if misconduct is proven through proper trial. Very disturbing!!!

Video: From Protest to Engagement - WebIslam.com

Video: From Protest to Engagement - WebIslam.com

Permanently Deleted my FB Account

Atlast I deleted my fb account today, though I planned to do it on June 30. The reason for deletion is:

FB's acceptable usage policy (AUP) prohibits hate speech. This criterion was n/a on the Everybody Draw Muhammad page, leaving no option for reporting that page. Subsequently, someone created a "H1tler" page using a fake ID. That page was removed overnight and the owner’s account was deleted, citing breach of AUP as the reason.

If you want to permanently delete your fb account goto the following link and click submit:

http://www.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=delete_account

Taxonomy of a Secular Mind

Taxonomy of a Secular Mind

From Holy War to Holy Terror: 18 Years in Afghanistan

Recent streak of blasts!!!

I have a few things to write but unfortunately not getting time to post the analysis on the recent series of blasts in pakistan, statements of indian FM and US gen. patreaus, visit of indian PM to KSA and death of a few indians in afghanistan... i wish i get time next week to present my analysis of the situation... 

Killing more than two birds with one stone...

This saturday a notification for appointment of judges was issued by the presidency... general response was like "PP walon ko kia ho gaya hai?", "wht made zardari do so?", "is he insane???", "can we afford any such turmoil at the moment?", "is this a time to confront?" is he nuts??? and blah blah... but wait...

PPP is not a party of amateurs, we must not think tht it was just a mistake.
keeping in mind the past of PPP and zardari, makes me beleive that zardari had a plan... see the following:

"Referring to the extraordinary step of constituting the three-judge bench in such an unusual manner, the expert suggested that the step was needed because if the notifications had not been suspended and the two judges had refused to take oath in accordance with them they would have been deemed to have retired as enunciated in the 1996 Al Jihad Trust case."

DAWN.COM | Front Page | Attorney general holds good meeting with CJ

perfect plan... both the judges are not useful for us (they r from CJ group)... we need some 'better' guys here in judiciary... we know tht they'll refuse... and they dont know tht we have more than two ppl ready to replace them :)

taking benefit of the situation, raja of lahore mr. salman taseer rejected the recommendations sent to him by CJ LHC :) tht's why i call it "killing more than two birds with one stone"

wanna learn politics? join PPP... PPP rocks

bechara gilani ab phir maamla suljhanay mein ulajh jaye ga...

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Why is South Asia so tense?

For the past 63 years, South Asia has remained in a state of tension. The eight countries that make up this geopolitically sensitive region do not share a friendly and harmonious relationship with each other. This is despite their efforts to come on a single platform of Saarc to develop a major economic and political bloc. All smaller countries were enthusiastic about this model of cooperation to succeed in gaining progress and getting rid of pervasive poverty. But in the end it just collapsed.

All these countries have a closely interwoven history and common ethnic, linguistic, cultural and religious heritage but still they failed. It happened because all the contiguous states on India’s periphery are fearful of its hegemonic designs and its policy to dominate and dictate.

In case of India and Pakistan, given the historical divide between Hindus and Muslims, it is understandable that a certain amount of acrimony and distrust would impact their relationship. Instead of accepting Pakistan’s emergence in 1947 as a reality and resolving bilateral disputes in a spirit of understanding, India adopted a belligerent course. The resulting discord and three wars have plagued their relationship to this day, both countries diverting huge and precious financial resources to defence and development of nuclear weapons.

Even if Indo-Pakistan relationship is set aside for a moment as one of peculiar nature and even if Pakistan is presumed to be responsible for all the wicked behaviour, the question arises why do other countries of the region find it so difficult to forge a closer relationship with India? Why is it that India has failed to evoke trust and confidence among its neighbours to make any worthwhile collaboration impossible, including Saarc? Isn’t it time for hostilities to give way to a congenial environment among South Asian neighbours too?

The fact is that for regional alliances, political or economic, to succeed it is imperative for all stakeholders to treat each other as equals, irrespective of their size or strength. This comes with respecting each other’s sovereignty, willingness to set aside political differences and showing a degree of flexibility to promote a common cause. In case of South Asia, this has not happened. India has disputes with almost every neighbour, which has strained their relationships for years at end.

In Sri Lanka, India overtly and covertly supported the insurgency against the state by LTTE, a nationalist Tamil group in the northern Jaffna region of this small island country, which kept it politically and economically destabilised for decades. In the end, India paid a price for interference when its prime minister, Rajiv Gandhi, was assassinated by a Tamil activist for having betrayed the movement.

With Bangladesh it is locked in an unresolved dispute over Farakka barrage that deprives Bangladesh of its water share. Despite the gratitude Bangladesh owes to India for having militarily dismembered Pakistan in 1971 to midwife its birth, relations between the two have often sunk to the rock bottom on a host of issues, including border dispute.

The tiny mountain state of Nepal has complained of persistent Indian dictation and interference in its internal affairs. That India employs economic blockades and manipulates transit facilities to this poor landlocked country for arm twisting is no secret.

Although not a part of South Asia, China’s relations with India for decades have remained frosty, at best. They went to war in 1962 over a border dispute. Competing for regional leadership, it does not hesitate to antagonise China by hoisting Dalai Lama off and on to keep the issue of Tibet alive. Lately, having aligned itself with America to contain China, India is bargaining for a tense Sino-Indian relationship in the years to come.

With Pakistan, India maintains the worst of relations mainly because of Pakistan’s political and military standing and its ability to reject Indian domination. Outstanding disputes including Kashmir, water distribution, dams that India constructs in violation Indus Water Treaty and border issues have remained unresolved.

By joining the American bandwagon in Afghanistan and positioning its troops in the name of infrastructure development, India created enough concerns for Pakistan. But by its collusion with CIA and Mossad to take out Pakistan’s nuclear assets through subversion in Fata, the NWFP and other areas using the militants of Tehrik-i-Taliban, India is slamming shut the door on the peace process that Pakistan has been persistently trying to keep open ever since 1947. With a history of constant endeavours to balkanise Pakistan, Indian military build up in Afghanistan is seen by Pakistan’s military as an effort to put it in a nutcracker.

That growing Indian influence in Afghanistan is a destabilising factor in the region, is acknowledged even by Gen McChrystal in his recent review of the war in Afghanistan. The make and types of sophisticated weapons, communications equipment and satellite pictures of troop movements recovered from the militants provide undeniable evidence about Indian involvement.

Mr. Ehsanullah Aryanzai, advisor to the Afghan regime has said that India is using Afghan soil to conduct anti-Pakistan activities. The executive editor of ‘News Indian Express’ has acknowledged the evidence of Indian activities in Balochistan in the issue of July 31, 2009. And evidence was recently handed over by Pakistani prime minister to his Indian counterpart.

The Indian psyche that breeds arrogance and expansionism is clear from the words of Pundit Nehru, India’s first prime minister, who said ‘India must dominate or perish’. Perish it will not. So dominate it must. To Hindu extremists, all others on this land are aliens who do not belong there and this includes Muslims and Christians. This justifies the commonly witnessed ethnic cleansing of non-Hindus and leads to the ultimate dream of the creation of Vrihata Bharat — a Greater India.

To ensure that this fatherland is reunited under Hindu rule, India pursues designs of expanding its boundaries to eventually include Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Burma, Nepal, and Bhutan and create the huge Indian empire.

It would be very naive not to see the direction towards which India is headed. Far from becoming the sole ruler of the entire Indian Ocean, India is destabilising South Asia and working its way towards its own disintegration. This is not only because it is surrounding itself with angry and insecure neighbours, but also due to its troubles at home.

shahidrsiddiqi@gmail.com

DAWN.COM | World | Why is South Asia so tense?

Blogged with the Flock Browser

How to clear the mess? Article by Imran Khan

Read the article in URDU

The reason why there is so much despondency in Pakistan is because there is no road map to get out of the so-called War on Terror - a nomenclature that even the Obama Administration has discarded as being a negative misnomer. To cure the patient the diagnosis has to be accurate, otherwise the wrong medicine can sometimes kill the patient. In order to find the cure, first six myths that have been spun around the US-led “Global War on Terror” (GWOT) have to be debunked.

Myth No. 1: This is Pakistan’s war

Since no Pakistani was involved in 9/11 and the CIA-trained Al Qaeda was based in Afghanistan, how does it concern us? It is only when General Musharraf buckled under US pressure and sent our troops into Waziristan in late 2003-early 2004 that Pakistan became a war zone. It took another three years of the Pakistan army following the same senseless tactics as used by the US and NATO forces in Afghanistan (aerial bombardment) plus the slaughter at Lal Masjid, for the creation of the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). If our security forces are being targeted today by the Taliban and their suicide bombers, it is because they are perceived to be proxies of the US army. Iran is ideologically opposed to both Al Qaeda and the Taliban yet why are its security forces not attacked by terrorists? The answer is because their President does not pretend to be a bulwark against Islamic extremism in return for US dollars and support.

Michael Scheuer (ex-CIA officer and author of the book Imperial Hubris), writing in The Washington Post in April 2007, cited Musharraf’s loyalty to the US even when it went against Pakistan’s national interests by giving two examples: the first was Musharraf helping the US in removing a pro-Pakistan Afghan government and replacing it with a pro-Indian one; and, the second, for sending Pakistani troops into the tribal areas and turning the tribesmen against the Pakistan army. To fully understand Musharraf’s treachery against Pakistan, it is important to know that almost a 100,000 troops were sent into the tribal areas to target around 1000 suspected Al-Qaeda members - thus earning the enmity of at least 1.5 million armed local tribals in the 7 tribal agencies of Pakistan.

The most shameful aspect of the lie that this is our war is that the government keeps begging the US for more dollars stating that the war is costing the country more than the money it is receiving from the US. If it is our war, then fighting it should not be dependent on funds and material flowing from the US. If it is our war, why do we have no control over it? If it is our war, then why is the US government asking us to do more?

Myth No. 2: This is a war against Islamic extremists ó an ideological war against radical Islam

Was the meteoric rise of Taliban due to their religious ideology? Clearly not, because the Mujahideen were equally religious - Gulbadin Hekmatyar (supported by the ISI) was considered an Islamic fundamentalist. In fact, the reason the Taliban succeeded where the Mujahideen warlords failed, was because they established the rule of law - the Afghans had had enough of the power struggle between the warlord factions that had destroyed what remained of the country’s infrastructure and killed over 100,000 people.

If the Pushtuns of the tribal area wanted to adopt the Taliban religious ideology then surely they would have when the latter was in power in Afghanistan, between 1996 and 2001. Yet there was no Talibanisation in the tribal areas. Interestingly, the only part of Pakistan where the Taliban had an impact was in Swat where Sufi Mohammad started the Shariat Movement. The reason was that while there was rule of law (based on the traditional jirga system) in the tribal areas, the people of Swat had been deprived of easy access to justice ever since the traditional legal system premised on Qazi courts was replaced by Pakistani laws and judicial system, first introduced in 1974. The murder rate shot up from 10 per year in 1974 to almost 700 per year by 1977, when there was an uprising against the Pakistani justice system. The Taliban cashed in on this void of justice to rally the poorer sections of Swat society just as they had attracted the Afghans in a situation of political anarchy and lawlessness in Afghanistan. It is important to make this distinction because the strategy to bring peace must depend on knowing your enemy. Michael Bearden, CIA station chief in Pakistan from 1986 to 1989, wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine that the US is facing the same Pushtun insurgency that was faced by the Soviets in Afghanistan. According to him, as long as NATO is in Afghanistan, the Taliban will get a constant supply of men from the 15 million Pushtun population of Afghanistan and the 25 million Pushtuns of Pakistan. In other words, this Talibanisation is not so much religion-driven as politically-motivated. So the solution to the problem in the tribal belt today does not lie in religion and “moderate” Islam but in a political settlement.

Myth No. 3: If we keep fighting the US war, the super power will bail us out financially through aid packages.

Recently, the Government’s Adviser on Finance stated that the war on terror has cost Pakistan $35 billion while the country has received only $11 billion assistance from the US. I would go a step further and say that this aid is the biggest curse for the country. Not only is it “blood money” for our army killing our own people (there is no precedent for this) but also nothing has destroyed the self-esteem of this country as this one factor. Moreover, there is no end in sight as our cowardly and compromised leadership is ordered to “do more” for the payments made for their services. Above all, this aid and loans are like treating cancer with disprin. It enables the government to delay the much needed surgery of reforms (cutting expenditures and raising revenues); and meanwhile the cancer is spreading and might become terminal.

Myth No. 4: That the next terrorist attack on the US will come from the tribal areas.

First, there is an assumption, based purely on conjecture, that the Al Qaeda leadership is in the tribal areas. In fact, this leadership could well be in the 70 % of Afghan territory that the Taliban control. More importantly, given the growing radicalisation of the educated Muslim youth - in major part because of the continuing US partiality towards Israeli occupation of Palestinian land - why can it not follow that the next terrorist attack on the US could come either from the Middle East or from the marginalised and radicalised Muslims of Europe, motivated by perceived injustices to Islam and the Muslim World.

Myth No. 5: That the ISI is playing a double game and if Pakistan did more the war could be won.

If Talibanisation is growing in Pakistan because of the covert support of ISI in the tribal areas, then surely the growing Taliban control over Afghanistan (70 % of the territory) must be with NATO’s complicity? Surely a more rational understanding would be to see that the strategy being employed is creating hatred against the US and its collaborators. Aerial bombardment and its devastating collateral damage is the biggest gift the US has given to the Taliban. According to official reports, out of the 60 drone attacks conducted between 14 January 2006-April 8 2009, only 10 were on target, killing 14 alleged Al Qaeda. In the process almost 800 Pakistani civilians have been killed, while many lost their homes and limbs.

Despite its military surge effort, the US will eventually pack up and leave like the Soviets, but the “do more” mantra could end up destroying the Pakistan army - especially the ISI which is being targeted specifically for the mess created by the Bush Administration in Afghanistan.

Myth No. 6: That Pakistan could be Talibanised with their version of Islam.

Both Musharraf and Zardari have contributed to this myth in order to get US backing and dollars. Firstly there is no such precedent in the 15-hundred years of Islamic history of a theocracy like that of the Taliban, outside of the recent Taliban period of rule in Afghanistan. However, as mentioned earlier, the Taliban’s ascendancy in Afghanistan was not a result of their religious ideology but their ability to establish order and security in a war-devastated and anarchic Afghanistan.

In Swat, the present mess has arisen because of poor governance issues. Also, it was the manner in which the government handled the situation - simply sending in the army rather than providing better governance - that created space for the Taliban. Just as in Balochistan (under Musharraf) when the army was sent in rather than the Baloch being given their economic and provincial rights, similarly the army in Swat aggravated the situation and the present mess was created.

What Pakistan has to worry about is the chaos and anarchy that are going to stem from the radicalisation of our people because of the failure of successive governments to govern effectively and justly. Karen Armstrong, in her book The Battle for God, gives details of fundamentalist movements that turned militant when they were repressed. Ideas should be fought with counter ideas and dialogue, not guns. Allama Iqbal was able to deal with fundamentalism through his knowledge and intellect. The slaughter of the fundamentalists of Lal Masjid did more to fan extremism and fanaticism than any other single event.

Pakistan is staring down an abyss today and needs to come up with a sovereign nationalist policy to deal with the situation. If we keep on following dictation from Washington, we are doomed. There are many groups operating in the country under the label of “Taliban”. Apart from the small core of religious extremists, the bulk of the fighting men are Pushtun nationalists. Then there are the fighters from the old Jihadi groups. Moreover, the Taliban are also successfully exploiting the class tensions by appealing to the have-nots. But the most damaging for Pakistan are those groups who are being funded primarily from two external sources: first, by those who want to see Pakistan become a “failed state”; and, second, by those who wish to see the US bogged down in the Afghan quagmire.

What needs to be done: A two-pronged strategy is required - focusing on a revised relationship with the US and a cohesive national policy based on domestic compulsions and ground realities.

President Obama, unlike President Bush, is intelligent and has integrity. A select delegation of local experts on the tribal area and Afghanistan should make him understand that the current strategy is a disaster for both Pakistan and the US; that Pakistan can no longer commit suicide by carrying on this endless war against its own people; that we will hold dialogue and win over the Pushtuns of the tribal area and make them deal with the real terrorists while the Pakistan army is gradually pulled out.

At the same time, Pakistan has to move itself to ending drone attacks if the US is not prepared to do so. Closure of the drone base within Pakistan is a necessary beginning as is the need to create space between ourselves and the US, which will alter the ground environment in favour of the Pakistani state. It will immediately get rid of the fanaticism that creates suicide bombers as no longer will they be seen to be on the path to martyrdom by bombing US collaborators. Within this environment a consensual national policy to combat extremism and militancy needs to be evolved centring on dialogue, negotiation and assertion of the writ of the state. Where force is required the state must rely on the paramilitary forces, not the army. Concomitantly, Pakistan needs serious reforms. First and foremost we have to give our people access to justice at the grassroots level - that is, revive the village jury/Panchayat system. Only then will we rid ourselves of the oppressive “thana-kutchery” culture which compels the poor to seek adjudication by the feudals, tribal leaders, tumandars and now by the Taliban also - thereby perpetuating oppression of the dispossessed, especially women.

Second, unless we end the system of parallel education in the country where the rich access private schools and a different examination system while the poor at best only have access to a deprived public school system with its outmoded syllabus and no access to employment. That is why the marginalised future generations are condemned to go to madrassahs which provide them with food for survival and exploit their pent up social anger. We need to bring all our educational institutions into the mainstream with one form of education syllabus and examination system for all - with madrassahs also coming under the same system even while they retain their religious education specialisation.

Third, the level of governance needs to be raised through making appointments on merit in contrast to the worst type of cronyism that is currently on show. Alongside this, a cutting of expenditures is required with the leadership and the elite leading by example through adoption of an austere lifestyle. Also, instead of seeking aid and loans to finance the luxurious lifestyle of the elite, the leadership should pay taxes, declare its assets and bring into the country all money kept in foreign banks abroad. All “benami” transactions, assets and bank accounts should be declared illegal. I believe we will suddenly discover that we are actually quite a self-sufficient country.

Fourth, the state has to widen its direct taxation net and cut down on indirect taxation where the poor subsidise the rich. If corruption and ineptitude are removed, it will be possible for the state to collect income tax more effectively.

A crucial requirement for moving towards stability would be the disarming of all militant groups - which will a real challenge for the leadership but here again, the political elite can lead by example and dismantle their show of guards and private forces.

Finally, fundamentalism should be fought intellectually with sensitivity shown to the religious and heterogeneous roots of culture amongst the Pakistani masses. Solutions have to be evolved from within the nation through tolerance and understanding. Here, we must learn from the Shah of Iran’s attempts to enforce a pseudo-Western identity onto his people and its extreme backlash from Iranian society.

The threat of extremism is directly related to the performance of the state and its ability to deliver justice and welfare to its people.

Source: The News

Rise of Pakistan

Blogged with the Flock Browser

The war in Afghanistan

by Javed Hussain

AFTER the air bombing campaign had routed the Taliban in 2001, euphoric shouts of victory resonated across the United States, the loudest coming from the White House and the Pentagon.

But these were short-lived as the characteristic Afghan resistance began. Eight years on the American servicemen and women in Afghanistan are gasping for breath because their former president, who was also their commander-in-chief, and his staff had underestimated the enemy.

Not only that, they had also committed two strategic blunders, the consequences of which are being suffered not only by their servicemen and women, but also to a much greater degree, by the Pakistani people and their servicemen. Their strategic thought was distinguished by their stunning mediocrity.

The first blunder was to allow the Taliban to escape to Pakistan. Had they secured the Durand Line crossing sites prior to initiating their air-bombing campaign, this could have been pre-empted. The second blunder was to place their main military effort in the wrong direction — Iraq, which left the main theatre, Afghanistan, undermanned. They had several years after the resurgence of the Taliban in 2002 to correct their strategy, but their obsession with Iraq blinded them to the operational requirements in Afghanistan.

Instead, they found it politically and militarily expedient to blame Pakistan for their failures, and thus started their ‘do more’ refrain that continues unabated, even though Pakistan has done far more than them, and in the process, suffered more than all the countries put together in the coalition.

...

The Americans went to Afghanistan to fight a war. They should plan to win it — unless they want to be known as a superpower defeated twice by guerillas. Blaming Pakistan and prodding it to ‘do more’ would not win the war for them.

Full Article: DAWN.COM | Pakistan | The war in Afghanistan

Blogged with the Flock Browser