Pakistan: How US is making her problem Pakistan’s problem

When we study wars one of the most effective weapons to fight huge and powerful armies is guerilla warfare. Over the centuries many fights are won using this strategy and the most recent examples of Soviet Union in Afghanistan and United states in Vietnam, when smaller forces with inferior weaponry able to crush the occupying forces are testimony to this.

United States learning lessons from Vietnam failure, able to maintain her hegemony in Iraq because of one clear strategy. US learnt that they failed to defeat the guerilla warfare in Vietnam because of the local support these guerillas enjoyed. With local support they were able to hide, get supplies and most of all get more people to join their cause.

When the Iraq war started and US presence was seen as occupation many people joined the resistance movement. For US war efforts this was the disaster, having no post war strategy US applied lethal counter guerilla strategy. This strategy involved isolating resistance fighters – physically, politically and morally. This is when US started bombing and killing Iraqis and started blaming them on the resistance fighters. A bomb planted in a busy market place where ordinary civilians are present will create kind of anger which if directed towards the guerillas will remove the moral support they thrive on. This strategy worked to an extent, where today local tribal chiefs are working with the US to remove the resistance. Whether this strategy will continue to work in future is still to be seen.

Coming back to Pakistan and the occupation of Afghanistan. The Pushtoons who live on the western border of Pakistan never saw the Durand line as real borders. British never able to occupy this part of the region and they successfully defeated the Soviets with US weapons. These tribes posed serious threats to US foreign policy objective in Afghanistan. Hamid Karzai government had no control outside Kabul and when the Afghan resistance movement started they were able to find sanctuary and weapons in vast amount on Pakistan western borders. The local tribes never saw them as aliens as they spoke the same language and have similar culture. Fighting the occupying force also seen as a moral cause, but this is not all, the problem gets bigger when the population of Pakistan also saw US presence in Afghanistan as occupation and they extended their moral support to Afghan resistance forces. (See USIP and World Public Opinion survey 2008)

The problem Pakistan faces is real i.e. Pushtoon fighters who are named as 'local militant Talibans' but to treat this problem Pakistan need to look at the root causes rather than applying cut and paste solutions from US  which benefits US foreign policy objectives.

This problem didn't exist before the WOT. Pakistan policy to go after its own population in Waziristan and Bluchistan on the behest of United States is turning the population against Islamabad. US seeing the long term implication of occupation knew very well that they need to make this war Pakistan's war.

Lessons learnt from Iraq and Afghanistan are now to be applied on Pakistan. The year is 2006-2007. Bombing campaign in Pakistan, Talibans taking responsibilities and ordinary civilians are casualties. US can now present to the Pakistani establishment that this is not US war but 'our war', terrorism is a common enemy to both the countries and fighting with US is in Pakistan's interest. As the bombing continues, the more public opinion is going to turn against the resistance in Afghanistan and more it will be look like a Pakistani problem.

The year now is 2008 U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Jan. 24 that the United States is "ready, willing and able" to conduct joint counter-resistance combat operations with Pakistani troops in northwestern Pakistan if Islamabad agrees to such an arrangement. While U.S. military and intelligence forces have been running limited ground and air operations on Pakistani soil, this is the first time a very public move from covert to overt military operations is voiced, this could exacerbate the tensions within Pakistan where overwhelmingly Pakistanis still view US as imperialist, occupying force in Afghanistan.

Speaking at a Pentagon press conference with Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen, Gates said that, while Pakistan reserves the right to accept or decline the U.S. offer, Washington will "continue the dialog" on the matter. Gates added that the United States would send a very small contingent of troops and expressed surprise that the Pakistanis have not "fully thought through" how they want to deal with the resistance fighters. Mullen said that the security situation in Pakistan is changing, and that Islamabad's decision on dealing with it "is a really important question for all of us."

These remarks — the most direct yet from Washington about its willingness to have U.S. forces operating on Pakistani soil — came two days after Adm. William Fallon, head of the U.S. Central Command, flew to Islamabad to meet with Pakistan's new army chief, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani.

US is running covert military operations in Pakistan with the full knowledge of Musharraf administration as early as late 2003 and early 2004. But the issue of the United States sending troops into Pakistan has only gained traction in the global media over the past year or so. In the last several months, it has become the subject of discussion within Pakistan as well, a development that has somewhat removed the shock regarding the subject from the Pakistani national psyche. That said, the move from limited covert operations to a broader and overt U.S. military role (which is what Gates and others are laying the groundwork for with these latest statements) is bound to exacerbate the situation in the country.

It is also important to note the recent meeting between Musharraf and top two U.S. intelligence officials, who made a secret visit to Pakistan in early January to seek permission from President Pervez Musharraf for greater involvement of American forces in Pakistan. This secret visit by CIA Director Michael Hayden and Mike McConnell, director of national intelligence is part of the effort on how to make these operations accepted to Pakistani people. Michael Hayden also said last week that he believed terror networks directed by Mr. Mehsud were responsible for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. The New York Times also quoted one senior official as saying the purpose of the mission "was to convince Musharraf that time is ticking away" and that increased attacks on Pakistan would ultimately undermine his hold on power.

But the reality is that Islamabad can only go so far in refusing Washington, and many within the government and the country believe they need U.S. assistance to deal with the resistance fighters. This is where US need to present the Afghan resistance movement as Pakistani problem. In the coming months it won't be surprising if there are more 'suicide bombings' in Pakistan to which some murky video from Taliban will take responsibility. A report released this month by the Pak Institute for Peace Studies, a nongovernmental research center based in Lahore, said suicide bombings in Pakistan had soared to 60 last year from 6 in 2006.

More coordination, training and even joint operations with Pakistani forces could be in the works. It remains to be seen what future operations might look like; possibilities include everything from small teams of U.S. Special Forces operating alongside larger Pakistani paramilitary units or Pakistani interpreters and commanders accompanying U.S. units to large blocking maneuvers by Pakistani forces to facilitate a major U.S. raid.

Ultimately, the Pentagon is clearing the way for larger-scale military operations (though they probably will not get too big) and more overt and heavier use of U.S. airpower. How the political arrangement — much less the situation on the ground — will play out remains to be seen. But any new geographic limit for operations Islamabad might arrange with Washington will not stop U.S. forces from going after targets any more than the Pakistani border has stopped them. Should the resistance fighters fleeing 'counterinsurgency' operations seek shelter deeper in Pakistan to reflect a hypothetical new limit on U.S. operations, U.S. forces will move to follow. And because the resistance fighters' sphere of operations is not limited to FATA but stretches into the adjoining Pashtun areas in the North-West Frontier Province and Balochistan, military operations could extend into those regions as well.

After such a scenario, the cross-border problems would be pushed back into Pakistan. At the end of any operation, after a Taliban or resistance fighters' stronghold was smashed, U.S. forces likely would be found dusting off and flying back to Afghanistan (as after Soviet war), leaving the Pakistanis to clean up and stabilize a situation complicated by public backlash and an assertive media.

United States foreign policy objective for Pakistan is to weaken the Army and destroy Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. This requires a justification such as US created using Afghan jihadist strategy. In any case Pakistani leadership needs to ask themselves, how seeing the above scenarios, it is in Pakistani interest to be part of US War on Terror. In this war Pakistan has lost the influence once she enjoyed deep into Eurasian region through Afghanistan. How many Pakistani soldiers and civilians have died during this war? How many Pakistanis are kidnapped and sent around the world to secret CIA jails.

Today Pakistan is ethnically divided, CIA and FBI operatives are roaming freely, US bases are in Pakistan and its sovereignty is in danger and the army is entrenched in Pakistan's politics and economy. 

To come out of the present mess Pakistani leadership need to consider the following points as solution. Expel US/NATO from the region by stop supporting US war on terror. Ideologically and politically bind Pakistanis using Islam. Create union with Afghanistan and use the resistance fighters' elements on the western borders of Pakistan to western borders of Afghanistan. Work to place a civilian government in Pakistan which allows Military to go back in the barracks using the model of Caliphate. This civilian government in turn will allow Pakistan to have independent foreign policy, independent judiciary, an economic system which will destroy feudalism, a social system which will remove fahashee which is rampant, and political system which guarantees accountability and representative rule.

 

--
To remove yourself from the mailing list - reply with "No" in the subject line. Thank you.

Visit for news and analysis
http://www.paknewsblog.com/
http://pakrevival.blogspot.com/

Government Blasts Musharraf Critics

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) — Pakistan's government responded angrily Friday to a group of retired military commanders who appealed to President Pervez Musharraf to resign in order to promote democracy and combat religious militancy.

Meanwhile, a former top intelligence official joined the calls for Musharraf to leave office.

Information Minister Nisar Memon described the retired military officials' call as unconstitutional, and said he was "dismayed at such lack of understanding of national issues by people who have held important positions in the past."

On Tuesday, Pakistan Ex-Servicemen's Society urged the U.S.-backed leader to resign immediately "in the supreme national interest," in a statement signed by more than 100 retired generals, admirals, air marshals, other senior officers and enlisted ranks.

Memon said that rather than issuing "irresponsible press statements," the group should focus on improving the welfare of retired military personnel.

The timing of the call appeared designed to embarrass Musharraf, who was in Europe on a tour aimed at reassuring Western leaders about his ability to restore democracy and prevail in the escalating combat between government troops and Taliban rebels along Pakistan's mountainous border with Afghanistan.

While the group of retired servicemen does not speak for active officers, its tough stance could help erode military support for Musharraf, who was commander of the army until stepping down last month and whose popularity has waned considerably in the past year.

Speaking in Davos, Switzerland, where he was attending a meeting of the World Economic Forum, Musharraf lashed out at his critics, describing them as "insignificant personalities" whom he had dismissed from service.

He vowed that his government would carry on the fight against terrorism, and said parliamentary elections scheduled for Feb. 18 would be free and transparent.

But criticism of Musharraf continued at home.

Joining the calls for Musharraf to step down, a former head of the Intelligence Bureau, Pakistan's main domestic intelligence agency, said the president's "naked assault on the judiciary" had "devastated" Pakistan.

The crackdown added "to the widespread belief in the country that you and your government has now become a huge part of the problem," Masood Sharif said in a letter to the media received Friday.

"While the army and paramilitary (forces) are deployed to fight in many parts of North West Frontier Province, the police and rangers are busy beating up civil society in the city streets," Masood said.

This fall, Musharraf purged the Supreme Court — which was poised to scupper his recent re-election by a pliant parliament — and briefly suspended the constitution, setting back expectations of a restoration of democracy. The top court's chief justice remains under house arrest, along with other prominent judges and lawyers.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jIE0IUn4WIiaMBpjG8SI_6H5RXzgD8UCQBL00

Pakistan: Understanding Upcoming Elections and Beyond

Pakistan: Understanding Upcoming Elections and Beyond

 

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf started his tour of Europe on Jan. 17, an eight-day tour on which he will visit the United Kingdom, France, Belgium and Switzerland. Musharraf told reporters that his trip is intended to "clear certain misconceptions" about events in Pakistan.

 

Back home we are hearing about the flight of capital from the country and the real estate market taking a plunge, with prices falling and a lack of buyers. The public mood also is being described as increasingly pessimistic with basic goods and services e.g. flour and electricity turning into luxury for ordinary Pakistanis.

 

Speculation has been rife in Pakistan that President Pervez Musharraf is trying to delay by a year parliamentary elections that are scheduled for Feb. 18. Rumors continued on Monday this week that Musharraf has been negotiating behind the scenes with the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) and Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) to replace the current caretaker government with an interim administration that would represent a broader political spectrum. However, neither party is willing to do business with the former general on this matter, which means the elections are still on track.

 

Musharraf's need to delay the elections is obvious: In any relatively free and fair election especially after the assassination of its corrupt leader and two-term former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, the fiefdom called PPP would win the largest number of seats on the backdrop of sympathy votes. The party therefore would be leading a coalition government engaged with the president in a tug-of-war for supremacy. Unlike in the 2002 elections, when he was able to indulge in an elaborate scheme of electoral engineering, Musharraf is operating with far fewer options at his disposal, especially because he is now sharing power with new military chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani.

 

Kayani is trying to steer the military intelligence establishment clear of the political process.Chairing his first corps commanders conference since becoming chief of the army, he flatly stated, "Ultimately it is the will of the people and their support that is decisive." That, he said, will allow the army to "thwart and defeat all kinds of threats."

 

 Further, should the government's allies PML-Q win a disproportionately large number of seats, the vote would be viewed as fraudulent, exacerbating the current crisis of governance that plagues the Musharraf administration.

 

Therefore, the only remaining option is to somehow postpone elections in order to buy time to redivide the opposition into manageable parts. If there is one thing Musharraf has had going for him throughout his eight-year rule, it is his ability to maintain divisions within the opposition — a situation that has allowed him to maintain power despite the past year's growing crisis of governance. But Musharraf's move to eliminate an assertive judiciary — for which he had to suspend the constitution — and then the Bhutto assassination have undone the divisions he has worked hard to sustain.

 

Musharraf has therefore tried to exploit the calls for a neutral caretaker government from certain segments of the opposition in the hope that the offer of a seat in such a government will entice the opposition into accepting a delay in the elections. But Musharraf knows the PPP will be extremely difficult to persuade. However, PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif — another corrupt and two-term former prime minister whom Musharraf ousted in the 1999 coup — just might be willing to play ball. Sharif's party already is divided and would not gain much from the coming elections.

 

It should be noted that though he has been negotiating with the PPP to ensure the survival of his regime, Musharraf has maintained a rather uncompromising attitude toward the PML-N. That he is now willing to re-engage Sharif and risk creating problems with his current allies, and Sharif rivals, in the pro-government Pakistan Muslim League speaks volumes about Musharraf's dire situation.

 

Sharif might have secretly negotiated with retired Brig. Niaz Ahmed (a one-star general turned wealthy businessman who has acted as a mediator between the Musharraf administration and the Sharifs) to end his purgatory, but he knows better than to cut deals with Musharraf, especially this late in the game. In fact, it would be political suicide for Sharif to abandon his own uncompromising stance toward Musharraf — one faction of his party already is allied with Musharraf. Dealing with a weakened Musharraf could do nothing but perhaps breathe life into what is an otherwise fading regime.

 

Moreover, from Sharif's point of view, Bhutto's assassination has left him as the only major politician in the country, given that there is no one else of his stature. He also is calculating that, while the PPP would emerge victorious in the coming elections, in the long run the leadership vacuum left by Bhutto's death is his to exploit. The PPP is unlikely to fracture, but could weaken because of potential disagreements among its leadership — a possible situation in the not-too-distant future that could return Sharif to his old job.

 

In such a situation, Sharif would not just be thrown up as the country's leader because of the configuration of domestic forces, he also could find international support (especially from Washington) who remember his services to them from the Kargil days and since he is someone the rest of the world already knows how to deal with.

 

It is clear from the above that whether elections happen or not, the military will remain in power. West may be chanting slogans for the sham called democracy; the truth is they will never allow Muslims of Pakistan to have a representative rule. It is clear from the experience of Algeria, Palestine and Egypt that whenever representative rule is allowed Muslims overwhelmingly vote for Islamic change. This is something which has been reflected in different opinion polls over the years.

 

Pakistani leadership need to look at Islam more than just a tool to name tanks and missiles, more than to just start speeches with "Bismillah". They must understand that people of Pakistan demanded and sacrificed for Pakistan only because the platform provided was one which called for the Ideological State, where they can practice Islam under the shade of Quran and Sunnah. This is despite the fact that some of the leaders of the movement were secular yet they named the League - Muslim League. If there is anything that can unite ethnically divided country like Pakistan, remove Western interference, bring about independent judiciary, independent foreign policy, representative rule and exit for the military from politics then it is the Khilafah. This is the alternative to the two failed colonial projects of dictatorship and democracy.

--
To remove yourself from the mailing list - reply with "No" in the subject line. Thank you.

Visit for news and analysis
http://www.paknewsblog.com/
http://pakrevival.blogspot.com/

The myth behind electricity shortage in Pakistan and its soultion.

A shortage of hundreds of megawatts of power has hit large parts of Pakistan since the onset of the summer heat, causing riots and violence. Karachi, the country's financial capital and a city of 14 million people, is the worst affected.

This year, Karachi has witnessed the worst power failures and load-shedding in the history of the metropolis. Citizens and experts both agree that Karachi Electric Supply Corporation's non-professional, private management and lack of investment are to blame for the dismal situation.

"The private Saudi owners who bought KESC's controlling shares in November 2005 have no interest in investing in KESC's insufficient and fragile generation sector," a KESC insider told TFT. "Their attitude is very damaging considering that shortage of generation is the main reason for frequent and prolonged breakdowns this summer in Karachi."

When General Pervez Musharraf seized power through a bloodless coup in 1999, General Zulfiqar Ali Khan was heading both KESC and WAPDA [Water and Power Development Authority]. This arrangement remained in place for the next five years and through it, KESC did not face any difficulty in getting required energy from WAPDA whenever it was needed.

The situation changed when the government sold 73 percent controlling shares of KESC to Kanooz Al Watan, converting a state-run organisation into a private sector entity run by a foreign conglomerate. (Kanooz Al-Watan is in consortium with long-term German technical operator (Siemens) in Pakistan.)

Sources say Frank Scherschmidt, the German CEO, hired by the new management wanted to improve the generation and distribution systems. He opened KESC's records for journalists and stakeholders and shared all plans with the media. Scherschmidt also took up the matter of a new HR policy for 18,000 employees and announced billions of rupees to improve different aspects of the organisation.

"Scherschmidt's employers did not appreciate him taking these initiatives, which is why his term was abruptly ended in March this year," said a senior official at KESC. "The new CEO, SM Amjad, a retired army officer, has failed to take any initiatives to relieve consumers. In fact, he has expedited the collapse of the system. KESC's Operations Director, Adnan Bashir from Siemens, does not have any past experience running a power utility. He has miserably failed to pull the utility out of the current crisis."

Sources say senior executives and chief engineers with years of experience handling power crises have been sidelined and the entire system is being looked after by Bashir, who is an IT professional. "No standard operating procedures or rain emergency plan was in place even though the Met office had forewarned of heavy rainfall. It was the first time that an emergency plan was not prepared to tackle the situation," says the source.

Also, Siemens attempted to purchase a 20-year-old, used power plant after declaring it a new one. Later, KESC's board of directors, at a meeting held in December 2006, revoked the deal. No action was taken against those responsible for striking the dubious deal.

Of the state-run corporations, KESC was undoubtedly the worst hit, facing negative gross margins since at least 2000. Costs of producing electricity for the corporation were always higher than revenues from sale of electricity. At the time it was sold, KESC was making huge financial and technical losses attributed to, among other factors, a high rate of electrical theft. Transmission and distribution losses averaged around 36 percent of total generation capacity. The federal government was providing an annual subsidy of 12 billion rupees to make up for the corporation's losses.

KESC was privatised with the hope that things would change. As one official of the Privatization Commission said at the time: "We will see a definite turn-around in the company's performance in the next few years and Rs12 billion which goes as subsidy to the company will be saved."

Some 26 months have passed since KESC was privatised; whether things have improved is not a moot question.

After KESC was privatised, WAPDA demanded Rs5.01 per unit from KESC's new owners instead of Rs3.62 per unit, which it was charging before the privatisation deal for supplying 600 MW to 700 MW. WAPDA authorities maintained that since there was no longer a deal between KESC's new management and WAPDA, power would be supplied under new terms and conditions keeping in view the increase in tariffs globally.

The new owners refused to pay the increased tariffs, as a result of which WAPDA reduced its electricity supply to KESC. While WAPDA authorities increased supply on the intervention of the President and the Prime Minister of Pakistan, its officials say KESC owes billions of rupees to WAPDA as payment under the new price schedule.

Sources say KESC's power generation capacity was 1500 MW when the new management took over; it has now declined to not more than 1200 MW. "An ambitious project of setting up a 750 MW power generation plant was started in 2006 and scheduled to be completed in April 2007. This project has been abandoned by the management without citing any valid reasons and a 250 MW plant is being planned to replace it. Lets see what happens now," says an insider.

The roots of the current electricity crisis can be traced back to the mid-1990s, when Benazir Bhutto's government barred public power utilities from installing new power generation units under a policy of encouraging private power producers.

KESC last installed a power generation unit in 1996. After that, no new sources have been added to Karachi's power supply barring two private power producers –Tapal and Gul Ahmed – which started production in the late 1990s.

Conclusion and Solution:

The current K.E.S.C. crisis is not because of inadequate supply of electricity, as people were facing similar crises even when our rulers were claiming that we can export electricity. The electricity crisis exists because of the dishonest policies of our rulers who do not utilize the enormous resources of water, coal, uranium and gas in Pakistan to produce electricity.

Instead of utilizing resources available in Pakistan oil is used to produce costly electricity. China and America produce 60 percent and 25 percent of electricity through coal respectively. Pakistan does not have any big project to produce electricity through coal even though Pakistan has one of the largest coal reserves in the world estimated around 1845 billion ton .

Because of these corrupt policies government organizations like K.E.S.C. cannot provide basic necessities to the people and the government starts the process of privatization in the name of getting better results which is just another smokescreen to deceive the masses. Latin America's experience has confirmed that the privatization of water, electricity, oil and gas helps some capitalist to increase their wealth manifold but produces severe negative effects on the people.

The K.E.S.C. crisis is because of the Capitalist concept which encourages governments to privatize such organizations which provide basic facilities to public at low cost; furthermore, the government's refusal to provide subsidies to these organizations in the name of free market economy is also a Capitalist solution. By just increasing the power generation capacity, the present crisis can not be addressed permanently.

The only permanent solution to this crisis is the destruction of Capitalist system and the re-establishment of Khilafah state. Islam makes it mandatory upon the State that it provide at cost price electricity as well as other basic necessities to its citizens, regardless of their creed, how far they live, or what ethnic community they belong to.

The Shariah (Islamic Law) has designated electricity (including other energy resources) as a public property collectively owned by the masses, and specifically prohibited it's ownership by companies, individuals and even the government. The role of the government is in fact to administer its production and then distribution to the people tax and profit free!!!

The prophet of Allah, Muhammad (saw) said:

"Three things can not be prevented (from people): Water, grass and fire" [Narrated by Ibn Maja].

And said:

"The Muslims are partners in three, water, grass, and fire, and its price is forbidden" [Narrated by Ibn Maja].

Here fire is used in the meaning of energy resources. The Ummah now knows the treacheries of their rulers and the terrorism of capitalism. The need of the time is to re-establish the Khilafah as this is the only solution that will eradicate the Ummah,s problems.

Sources:

http://pakrevival.blogspot.com/2008/01/kesc-crisis-dishonest-government.html

http://forum.atimes.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=10568

The Friday times: Let there be light.

Fake wheat predictions in 2006/07 to improve GDP figures.

Reported Last year 07/06/2007, and consequences are witness by nations today.

 

 

ISLAMABAD (July 06 2007) : The Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Livestock (Minfal) is facing embarrassment due to unreliable wheat output statistics as some of the policy makers are contesting the production figures of 23.5 million tonnes.

Business Recorder on Thursday interviewed some government officials and private sector individuals who were unanimous that the actual wheat production was about 21 million tonnes but the government projected it at 23.5 million apparently to show GDP growth of 7.02 per cent in 2006-07."

 

Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz, in his speech to the National Economic Council (NEC) on May 31, said that production of wheat was 23.523 million tonnes, the highest ever in the country. "I am a witness to it that last year one million tonne wheat was added in the overall wheat production figures just on telephone call to improve the GDP growth figures ," claimed one of the top official on condition of anonymity.
 

Call for shift in US policy towards Pakistan

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The US Congress has passed its first 2008 legislation by condemning the murder of Pakistan's ex-premier Benazir Bhutto amid a call for a shift in US policy towards Islamabad.

"What is clear is that before Pakistan devolves any further in chaos and violence, US policy has to change," Democratic lawmaker Gary Ackerman said Thursday after his resolution, which "condemns in the strongest terms" Bhutto's assassination," was approved by a vote of 413 to 0 in the house of Representatives.

It was the first piece of legislation to be taken up and passed by Congress this year.

Ackerman said that the reliance by President George W. Bush's administration on "war on terror" ally Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf to restore democracy while fighting against extremism had not worked.

"There has been neither success against terrorism nor a return to democracy," he said, as he chaired a separate House hearing on US-Pakistan relations.

The United States, he said, needs a new approach to Pakistan that puts as much emphasis on building stable, free and moderate institutions as it has on fighting terrorists.

Ackerman, a senior member of the influential House committee on foreign affairs, cited a recent survey by the United States Institute for Peace and World Public Opinion which showed that Pakistanis overwhelmingly view having elected leadership as important.

"The Bush Administration needs to build on the Pakistani view of the importance of democracy and needs to start by insisting that the elections on February 18 are free and fair," Ackerman said.

He also called for "a fundamental reappraisal" of US assistance to Pakistan, saying Washington has for too long provided the country's military with the bulk of its aid and "neglected" those aimed at building and strengthening democratic institutions.

The House resolution reaffirmed the US commitment to help Pakistan battle terrorism and promote democracy and backed efforts to "expeditiously bring to justice" those behind Bhutto's assassination at an election rally in Rawalpindi on December 27.

The resolution also expressed support for the freedom of the media, the ability of political parties to express their views without restriction, and the independence of the judiciary in Pakistan.

South Asian security expert Ashley Tellis cautioned at the House hearing that any post-election violence with significant fatalities as a result of military action could force Musharraf's exit.

"The potential for civil unrest and instability emerging from a flawed election in Pakistan, therefore, ought to remain the most problematic contingency from the viewpoint of the Bush administration," said Tellis from the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

Lisa Curtis, a former CIA analyst and ex-senior State Department advisor on South Asia, warned that US-Pakistan relations were "crossing troubled waters," and "anti-Americanism is reaching the boiling point."

She said a strong US public stance supporting the process of democracy without focusing on any one particular leader or party would help calm the situation.

"Washington should increasingly view Musharraf as a transitional figure whose influence is likely to decline in the months ahead," she said.

India, Pakistan exchange lists of nuclear facilities

Special Correspondent

NEW DELHI: India and Pakistan on Tuesday, through diplomatic channels in New Delhi and Islamabad, simultaneously exchanged lists of nuclear installations and facilities. These are covered under the Agreement on the Prohibition of Attack against Nuclear Installations and Facilities between the two countries. The agreement was signed on December 31, 1988 and came into force on January 27, 1991.
Under the agreement, the two countries, on January 1 of every year, are to inform each other of nuclear installations and facilities to be covered by the agreement, an official release said here.

Blogs Banned in Pakistan

Today on MSN i was telling my cousine to visit my blog Pakistan Revival and he was not able to access it. Later on I recieved the following email:

__

In another desperate measure the government has banned access to blogs (particularly blogspot/wordpress) from Pakistan.

Don't worry. They can't stop us.

Sites you can use to access banned blogs:

1) www.pkblogs.com

So for instance you want to access The Emergency Times, type

http://www.pkblogs.com/pakistanmartiallaw

2) Free Online Anonymizers such as

http://www.siatec.net/proxyanonymizer/index.php

Anonymizers conceal your IP hence making tracking activity even harder.


Stay safe. Stay a step ahead.

-Admin

Our Pakistan Problem: Turmoil Requires a Shift in U.S. Policy

A suicide bombing that claimed nearly two dozen lives earlier this week in Pakistan's second largest city, Lahore, is part of a growing trend of violence that claimed thousands of lives in the past year, including former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. In the wake of this growing violence, the United States and other countries should resist the impulse to offer unconditional support to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, who has portrayed himself as a last bastion against the terrorists.

In Pakistan and other key countries, the United States has made the mistake of putting so much focus on individual leaders and personalities, when a broader approach that seeks to support institutions and develop the entire country is what is needed now more than ever. Indeed, the turmoil in Pakistan exposes dramatic shortcomings and inconsistencies in U.S. policy toward Pakistan dating back to the Cold War up through the present day.

President George W. Bush inherited a flawed and ad-hoc policy to Pakistan from previous administrations, but his approach to Pakistan has offered no improvements. By offering Musharraf billions of dollars and years of unconditional support, the Bush administration has made three major mistakes:

• Ignored Facts on the Ground. One central justification for President Bush's sustained support for President Musharraf has been that the Pakistani president is a crucial ally in fighting terrorism. Yet on Musharraf's watch, extremism is growing in Pakistan. The Taliban and Al Qaeda have reestablished safe havens in Pakistan from which they have launched attacks into Afghanistan, Pakistan, and throughout the world. Recent thwarted terrorist attacks in Germany, Scotland, and England can all be traced back to Pakistan. Today's suicide bombing is an indication of the growing strength of these extremist groups, who have conducted numerous attacks in the last year.

Full Story: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/01/pakistan_problem.html
--

The Bhutto Assassination: A Tough Case for Scotland Yard

In my opinion asking Scotland Yard to help in the investigation is a time buying tactic – as the following article suggest. Government is hoping by the time investigation will finish the situation in Pakistan will cool down and return to status quo. However Pakistan in 2008 is a Pakistan born out of the crises of 2007 – Lal Masjid, Karachi CJ massacre, Lawyers revolt, Musharraf departure from Army, Bhutto Death, rising poverty, basic good scarce, ethnic divisions high and Army busy fighting their own people. Lets hope this year we be able to see change of system based on representative rule rather than new faces with old corruption and the musical chair of democracy-dictatorships.

__

By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart

Stratfor

The Pakistani government is committed to finding and bringing to justice those responsible for the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, a spokesman for President Pervez Musharraf told the media Jan. 8. The spokesman also said he hopes Scotland Yard's technological expertise will help Pakistani investigators solve the case.

A team of five investigators from London's Metropolitan Police — Scotland Yard — arrived in Pakistan on Jan. 4, more than a week after the Dec. 27 assassination. The British have some of the best investigators, forensic technicians and laboratories in the world. Moreover, after decades of investigating Irish Republican Army attacks and, more recently, attacks by jihadist operatives in London, they not only are extremely proficient, but highly experienced. However, the investigators sent to Pakistan face a daunting task.

The Investigation
Following an attack such as the Bhutto assassination, the crime scene investigation would need to proceed in two fronts, one focusing on the shooting and the other on the bombing.

The shooting investigation would be concerned with determining the number of shots fired and from where they came. The investigators also would conduct a forensic examination of the evidence to match any recovered slugs and shell casings to any recovered weapons. The recovered weapons and shell casings would be examined for latent fingerprints in an effort to determine who handled them.

Even in the best of times and in a location where the crime scene is able to be secured and carefully preserved for investigators, bullets can pass through a victim and never be recovered, or they can deform or fragment — making a forensic comparison difficult. It also can be very difficult to recover identifiable latent fingerprints from a weapon after it has been handled by police or other first responders at the crime scene. This difficulty will be magnified in the Bhutto case because the prints could have been smudged or obliterated as a result of the subsequent bombing, or the gun could have been touched by others during the ensuing chaos. To complicate matters even further, the crime scene was quickly cleaned up and hosed down after the attack, which might have washed away valuable evidence such as bullet fragments and shell casings.

In Pakistan, particularly in the town of Darra Adamkhel near Peshawar, there are many skilled artisans who specialize in making guns from scratch, and some of their products are of high quality. Because of this cottage gun industry, the country is literally awash in weapons that cannot be tracked to a specific maker or by serial number to a specific gun dealer or owner. This means the manufacturer of the gun involved in the Bhutto assassination might never be identified. Moreover, even if the maker were found, the lack of firearms sales records would prevent him from identifying the owner, even if he were willing to do so. Additionally, the gun could have changed hands several times since it was first acquired.

As for the bombing crime scene, the investigators would want to recover pieces of the improvised explosive device (IED) in hopes of determining the components used and the construction technique. This combination of components and construction technique, often referred to as the bombmaker's "signature," would then be compared to devices used in other attacks or unexploded IEDs that had been recovered in an effort to determine who made the device. (It most likely was not constructed by the bomber himself).

Although it is hard to believe, most components of an IED survive the detonation rather than simply vaporizing. They might be shattered — and scattered — but quite often things such as batteries, switches and even pieces of the timer, tape and wires can be recovered after an explosion. One very good place to find such evidence is in the bodies of those killed, as the force of the blast can hurl small pieces of the device into the victims. Although it is a morbid process, X-ray examinations of the victims can result in the recovery of important evidence. In countries with few refrigerated morgues, or where religious customs call for a speedy burial, victims often are interred without having been X-rayed.

Another obstacle for investigators is the difficulty of identifying a suicide bomber after the explosion, especially one who was not carrying identification or was carrying false identification, something that is easy to procure in Pakistan. However, two factors could aid the investigators in this case. First, Pakistan requires fingerprints for its national ID cards. Second, the bomber's hands might have survived the blast. It is possible, then, that the bomber's fingerprints can be compared to the fingerprints of potential suspects.

Even if that were the case, though, another problem arises. There is a phenomenon in explosions in which body extremities are ripped from the torso of those in close proximity to the blast. This phenomenon, called sudden traumatic amputation, is the reason the heads of suicide bombers frequently are recovered in good shape. Because of this effect, it is not uncommon to find dismembered hands and especially feet at a bombing scene. However, it often is difficult to connect these hands and feet to specific bodies, so even if the bomber's hands survived the blast, they could have been buried with someone else's body.

Much has been made in the media about the failure of the Pakistani government to preserve the crime scene. In our experience, however, the condition of the crime scene in the Bhutto case is not unique, nor is it an indication in and of itself of a cover-up attempt. Such crime scene contamination routinely occurs — especially in the Third World. In many cases, crucial evidence walks off on the soles of people's shoes, is washed away with hoses and street sweepers or is collected and thrown away. In addition to clean-up efforts at the scene, time also works against investigators because weather and vehicle and pedestrian contact can all work to eliminate trace evidence such as explosive residue. Because of these factors, by the time a Western forensic team can get to a place such as Pakistan, much of the crucial evidence might have disappeared.

There are cases, however, in which forensic teams have been creative or have caught lucky breaks. For example, the American team that went to Buenos Aires in 1992 to assist the Argentine government in the investigation of the Israeli Embassy bombing there found that the crime scene had been completed cleaned up and hosed down, as was the Bhutto crime scene in Pakistan. However, the investigators discovered a bomb fragment that had penetrated a hollow light pole, and thus had been preserved. From that piece they were able to recover explosive residue that allowed them to identify the type of explosives used in the bomb.

The armored vehicle in which Bhutto was traveling was heavily hit by shrapnel from the IED. A careful examination of the vehicle will likely yield bomb fragments covered in explosive residue, which could allow forensic chemists to identify the explosive used in the device. The vehicle also could have been struck by one or more of the shots fired at Bhutto, and thus could also yield some useful ballistic evidence. In the end, the vehicle could prove to be the most valuable source of evidence for the forensic team.

The Major Obstacles
The biggest obstacles facing the Scotland Yard investigators in this case are not the shape and age of the crime scene, but the uncertainty over the exact cause of death and the fact that Bhutto was buried without an autopsy having been performed. The autopsy not only would have determined what killed her, but perhaps also would have resulted in the recovery of the bullet that struck her — if indeed it was a bullet that caused her head wound and killed her. It is unlikely that Bhutto's body will be exhumed for an autopsy. From a forensic standpoint, the Scotland Yard team could be able to tie the shell casings recovered at the scene to the gun used by the shooter — assuming the gun is ever recovered. However, since no bullet was recovered from Bhutto's body, it will be impossible to verify precisely which gun was used.

Without accurate documentation of the wound, it might also be difficult to determine the angle from which the gun was fired, meaning where the shooter was in relation to Bhutto. This will greatly add to the ambiguity surrounding this case, and could very well prevent the team from reaching any firm conclusions. Regardless of Scotland Yard's proficiency, experience and technical capabilities, the investigators simply cannot analyze evidence they do not have. Given the missing pieces, they will have to be extremely creative — and perhaps a bit lucky — to find evidence that will allow them to reach a conclusive determination.

However, given the historical context of political assassination in Pakistan — some investigated by Scotland Yard — it will come as no surprise if the investigation turns up little. In 1951, Scotland Yard was summoned to help in the investigation into the death of Pakistan's first prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, who was shot in the park that now bears his name, Liaquat Bagh Park. (This, incidentally, is where Bhutto attended a political rally just minutes before her death). Then, in 1996, Scotland Yard was again asked to provide investigatory assistance in the assassination of Bhutto's brother and political rival, Murtaza Bhutto. In both cases, the investigations were inconclusive — as was the American-led investigation into the death of President Zia ul-Haq, who died in a mysterious plane crash that also killed U.S. Ambassador Arnold Raphel, U.S. Gen. Herbert Wassom and several Pakistani generals. Incidentally, Zia was buried without an aut opsy.

Thick clouds of doubt have surrounded these past assassinations — doubts that have lingered despite the involvement of outside investigators. The Bhutto case will likely turn out to be similarly shrouded in ambiguity.

--
To remove yourself from the mailing list - reply with "No" in the subject line. Thank you.

Understanding assassination of Benazir Bhutto

Understanding assassination of Benazir Bhutto

Pakistanis find themselves again at cross roads, again where their leaders fail to answer basic questions linked to law and order. Pakistan has become a place where political killing is not a new phenomena but no one would have thought that a personality like Benazir Bhutto will be targeted. But more surprises to follow, she was a politician who along with her husband pillaged Pakistan twice when they were in power, yet there is an effort by the West and amongst those who shared her past corruption to paint her murder as a blow to democracy and herself as the last hope for democracy in Pakistan.

Release of two new videos[1] showing the assassin of Benazir Bhutto firing shots with a hand gun just feet away from her vehicle and the impact of the bullets upon the head of Benazir Bhutto prior to the explosion corroborate the testimonies[2] of eye witnesses who saw shots being fired at the former Pakistani premier as she left the fatal election rally in Rawalpindi. In addition, testimonies from close aides[3] to Bhutto who witnessed her wounds at the time of the attack and when her body was washed for burial confirmed that her death had been caused by shots to the neck/head.

This new evidence coupled with the scenes of Pakistani security forces washing the crime scene just hours after the assassination and conflicting statements from the Interior Ministry claiming that Benazir's death was caused by shrapnel wounds to the head, later revised to "had bumped her head on the sunroof" have fuelled speculation that Musharraf's regime is involved in a cover-up!

The unfolding events are a severe indictment of the dictator Musharraf, his US sponsors of the Bush administration and the Islamaphobic media of the west who lost no time in confirming the notion that Bhutto had been targeted by "Islamic militants" linked to the Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud without a shred of physical evidence being presented to substantiate the allegation. Both Bush and Brown claimed that Benazir's killing was another chapter in the war against "Islamic extremism" and that she was a martyr for democracy and moderation in Pakistan. However, Mehsud[4] stated that his forces were not involved in any way with the assassination claiming that it was the work of Musharraf and the intelligence agencies and that his forces did not target women.

Further credibility for this view has been Bhutto's own statements via e-mail[5] to a US journalist in which she claimed that Musharraf was deliberately not supplying adequate security arrangements indicating she had received only two of the four police escort vehicles she had requested to shield all four sides of her campaign vehicle. The video released yesterday demonstrates how the assassin got within point blank range of Bhutto from the exposed side of her vehicle!

The question that remains is why would state forces undertake the assassination of Bhutto when it was Musharraf who had allowed her to return to Pakistan at the instruction of the US and Britain in order to save his ailing government? Several scenarios could explain such a high risk action by the state apparatus of the embattled dictator. Firstly, in the aftermath of the assassination Benazir's husband Asif Zardari called for a UN investigation[6] and notably, help from the British government. Such a statement excluding the Americans clearly shows that the pro-British Bhutto camp do not hold confidence in the US agencies to act transparently. It also suggests that the original plan sponsored by the US and Britain to forge a "secular democratic alliance" between Musharraf and Benazir against the "Islamic fundamentalists" may not have been going according to plan with the possibility of cooperation[7] between Benazir and Nawaz Sheriff which looked sure to remove the power base of Musharraf's PML-Q party in the Punjab[8]. The potential routing of the PML-Q in the January national elections would severely weaken Musharraf's presidency and his power, a problematic scenario for the dictator and his US sponsors whose courting of Bhutto had been merely to ensure Musharraf's survival and prosecution of the war on terror. Despite her anti-Islamist rhetoric, a powerful Bhutto government could threaten US dominance in Pakistan and hence their interests in the region.

Another possibility, is that elements in the PML-Q whose power felt threatened by Bhutto's emergence on the scene took action independently of Musharraf, although such a view seems unlikely in view of need to compromise security arrangements in order to prosecute the operation.

A third possibility is that Musharraf brought back Nawaz Sherrif after initially sending him unceremoniously back to Saudi Arabia following his recent two-day visit[9] to the Kingdom to counter the influence of Bhutto, with Bhutto gone, the PPP has been weakened and the rapid appointment of her 19 year old son as heir to the throne seems aimed to prevent fragmentation of the party through the emergence of internal power struggles in the vacuum left by her assassination. Bhutto's assassination has also left Nawaz Sheriff as the main opposition figure to Musharraf which could see him now emerge, in the coming weeks, as a rejuvenated poltical force galvanising the pro-democracy movement. This would suite the interests of the US as historically, Sheriff was a loyal ally during the Clinton administration as his treachery over the Kargil crisis demonstrated. Sheriff is also viewed by many to have stronger "Islamic credentials" that could be an important factor in forging alliances with Islamic parties to try to stop cooperation of tribal elders with al Qaeda and the Taliban militants in the tribal regions. Only time will tell over the coming weeks which way the political power will shift in Pakistan in the run up to the elections.

Thus, the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, like the killing of her father and the assassination of General Zia after him would appear to be the work of state forces embroiled in a power struggle and not the work of Islamic militants as the dictator Musharraf and his western backers would like us to believe. Such is the dirty politics of Pakistan, which like other Muslim countries such as Iraq and Afghanistan, are plaqued by the continual interference of external colonial states like the US and Britain.

The Pakistani people realises that for every Benazir like Saddam, whose services to the west are rewarded with liquidation once they outlive their usefulness, tens of thousands of innocent people must pay with suffering and death through their treachery. This is why such rulers like Musharraf, who betray Islam and the Ummah of Muhammed (saw), are despised by the vast majority of people who long for an independent, sincere Islamic leadership.

People of Pakistan now need to ask themselves what they want to be ruled over with. The present corrupt democratic system only strengthens feudal of the likes of Zardari, Lagharis, Chaudris etc who oppress their peasants to secure their votes and dictatorship of the military under the leadership of Musharraf has become a mercenary force for Washington. This is the time now to bring the new leadership and a new system. A system which takes the land away from the feudal and give it to those who deserve. A system under which the rule of law do not discriminate between rich and poor or powerful and weak. A system which brings unity amongst different ethnicities in Pakistan, a system which brings independent economic, foreign and internal policies. This system can not be anything other than the Caliphate(Khilafah)[10].

---------

[1]http://video.news.sky.com/skynews/video/?&videoSourceID=1298656&flashURL=/feeds/skynews/latest/flash/gunshot_291207_1225.flv

[2] http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/dec-2007/28/index7.php

[3] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7163754.stm

[4] http://itn.co.uk/news/1c7ff06c38f37df0718a61756f696c25.html

[5] http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/asiapcf/12/27/bhutto.security/

[6] http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7009580248

[7] http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/alliance-with-sharif-but-not-with-musharrafs-loyalists-says-benazir_1008653.html

[8] http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/07/12/25/10177219.html

[9] http://uk.reuters.com/article/mideast/idUKL1914423620071119

[10] http://www.caliphate.eu/2007/12/caliphate-for-pakistan.html

FW: Pakistan: After Emergency, Toward Elections

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf on Dec. 15 will lift the state of emergency he imposed Nov. 3. But before the restoration of Pakistan's Constitution, the charter will be amended to strengthen Musharraf's hand.

Given that he is no longer military chief, Musharraf could face challenges from the judicial and legislative branches of the Pakistani government. Meanwhile, with the exception of a handful of small political parties that have said they will boycott parliamentary elections set for Jan. 8, 2008, most of the opposition is fully engaged in the campaign process despite concerns regarding media restrictions, a pliant judiciary and fears of electoral fraud.

Musharraf, who has undertaken power-sharing with the new Pakistani military chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, is concerned about sharing power with Parliament. The presence in Pakistan of two major opposition leaders and former prime ministers with record history of courruption, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, has heightened his fears. Though both are on the campaign trail, Bhutto and Sharif each face significant hurdles to taking power. Ideally for Musharraf, his allies in the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (PML) faction would emerge as the largest party in the 342-seat legislature.

Given the unrest in Pakistan, this will be very difficult to pull off. Depending on how free and fair the elections are, Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP) could emerge as the largest or second-largest party in parliament.

Of course, the establishment, especially the intelligence agencies, will try to engage in Pakistan's now-notorious "electoral engineering" in a bid to yield Musharraf's desired outcome in the elections. But the government knows it must tread carefully, lest it prompt a massive outcry against vote-rigging -- charges that could stick. The establishment's goal is to tamper with the voting process such that charges of foul play do not stick and the ruling PML comes out on top again.

Speculations within Pakistan are rife regarding the actual breakdown of seats under such a managed vote. One version has the PML gaining 115 seats, followed by PPP taking 90, the remnants of the Islamist Mutahiddah Majlis-i-Amal alliance (whose two main component parties seem to have parted ways) getting 45, Sharif's PML faction attaining 40, the Mutahiddah Qaumi Movement securing 20 and the secular Pashtun Awami National Party winning 12. Regardless of how things actually break down, Musharraf would like former Punjab Chief Minister Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi to be prime minister.

But if the PPP does come in first place, Musharraf will have to cut a deal with Bhutto whereby she could become prime minister -- albeit devoid of much power, as was the case when she was prime minister during the 1990s. Before she could become prime minister, however, the establishment would need to get rid of the constitutional clause preventing candidates from seeking a third term as prime minister. Musharraf would want Bhutto preoccupied with a fractious coalition, which would be easier for him to hold at bay, so he can keep Kayani and the generals happy. Musharraf is all too aware of how two former presidents fell from power in the 1990s in the tug-of-war between the president and a prime minister.

As was the case in the past when there was a troika between the army chief, president and prime minister, the army will have the final word in a duel between a president and a prime minister. All things being equal, the military would like to work with Musharraf, since he will always be one of their own as a military retiree. But those ties are not absolute; their continuance depends upon Musharraf's ability to contain parliament, the judiciary, the media and civil society.
From above it is clear that Pakistan is going to remain on the path of turmoil and decline. The same faces under the same system is going to strengthen feudalism, their historic corruption, fuel ethnic strife, strengthen separatist movements in NWFP and Baluchistan due to weak centre and keep Pakistani Army involve in politics rather than in war games.
The lasting solution can only be one which represents people of Pakistan and unite them ideologically, bring economic stability, rule of law, independent foreign policy and gave the armed forces confidence to leave the political arena for  a sincere civilian leadership. This system can not be anything other than Islam or Nizam-e-Khilafat/Caliphate.

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: Reject elections in this colonialist system

Wednesday, 05 December 2007 بِسْمِ الله الرَّحمَنِ الرَحيم Reject elections in this colonialist system and establish the Khilafah O Muslims of Pakistan! You witnessed on 28 November 2007, that the ruler of Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, finally took off his uniform, which he once described as his very skin. Then on 29 November, Musharraf took oath as a civilian President of the current system, who would preside over elections in January 2008. By doing so, Musharraf humbly fulfilled the wishes of his master, US President George W Bush, when he declared before the world on, 20 November 2007, "He (Musharraf) has said he's going to take off his uniform, he's said there will be polls." America willingly sacrificed Musharraf's personal ambitions, despite his long and loyal service, because the continuation of the current system is more important for America than the fate of any of her agents. Indeed, it is the current system that allowed Musharraf to repeatedly betray you for the sake of America, for over eight years. It is the colonialist system that allowed America to establish its occupation over the Muslims of Afghanistan, strengthened the colonialist hold over your resources, emboldened the Hindu mushrikeen against the Muslims of Kashmir, diminished the nuclear program of the world's only Muslim nuclear power and incarcerated Dr. A Q Khan, allowed the savage killing of hundreds of students in Lal Masjid and ordered the largest Muslim army to fight Muslims in the tribal areas. In fact, the colonialist system has always produced traitors for over six decades. Whoever came to rule, whether by democratic elections or by military coup, always ensured that the colonialists dominated your every affair. So, you witnessed that under both democracy and dictatorship, the resources of the Muslims were subject to World Bank and IMF exploitation, the judiciary was judging according to the colonialist laws, your soldiers were sent to secure Western interests around the globe and the Muslim children were corrupted by the Western values. Indeed, t he present system will always secure the colonialists interests because both democracy and dictatorship allow the rulers to make laws according to their whims and desires. Therefore, the colonialist powers are able to easily steer law-making to their advantage. This is why to extend the life of this dying system; the colonialists again offer you elections in January 2008. The colonialists prefer that you remain trapped in the colonialist system, rather than uproot it and re-establish the Khilafah in its place. For were the Muslims to establish a single Khilafah state, the Ummah would be more than strong enough to resist the colonialists, for the Khilafah would be unmatched by any world power with respect to lands, armies, wealth and population. And the kuffar would never want that for you, O Muslims! Allah سبحانه وتعالى says, مَا يَوَدُّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا مِنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ وَلاَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ أَنْ يُنَزَّلَ عَلَيْكُمْ مِنْ خَيْرٍ مِنْ رَبِّكُمْ وَاللَّهُ يَخْتَصُّ بِرَحْمَتِهِ مَنْ يَشَاءُ وَاللَّهُ ذُو الْفَضْلِ الْعَظِيمِ "Neither those who followed earlier revelation who deny the truth, from the People of the Book and the Mushrikeen, like to see good bestowed upon you from your Sustainer; but Allah bestows grace upon who He chooses- for Allah is limitless in His great bounty." [Surah al-Baqara 2:105] O Muslims of Pakistan! How long will you continue to be witness to your humiliation at the hands of the colonialist system? How long will you participate in elections within a system that produces traitor after traitor? Changing faces in the current kufr system in January 2008 is no more than opening the door for even more years of misery. It is forbidden for any Muslim, who believes in Allah سبحانه وتعالى and RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم to help, participate in, or be a part of this system. Therefore it is not allowed for any Muslim to vote for candidates in the current kufr system, for they will make laws in the assembly whereby they will make halal into haram and the haram into halal. Hence, such voting will be a representation in a Haram action and will be an act of direct assistance in supporting the kufr system, which Islam has forbidden. Allah سبحانه وتعالى said, وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمْ الْكَافِرُونَ "And those who do not rule with that which Allah has revealed, are indeed the Kafiroon." [Surah al-Ma'ida 5:44] أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنْ اللَّهِ حُكْمًا لِقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ "Do they then seek judgment from the days of Ignorance? And who is better than Allah at making judgments, for those who have faith." [Surah al-Ma'ida 5:50] Hizb ut-Tahrir calls you, O Muslims, to reject any support for the present corrupt system and establish our Khilafah in its place, apply our law, Shari'ah, and elect a Khaleefah and members of the Ummah's Assembly under the Islamic State, instead of elections under Kufr systems. O political parties! How do you still line up one after another, falling over each other for a chance to enter the colonialist system and emerge as a traitor to your own people? How long do you accept to hoist America on your backs so that she can rule over your people? Democracy can never bring any good for your people. This man-made system always establishes oppression by a small elite that manipulates the law to secure its own interests, forsaking its people. This applies to America and Britain, the very models you aspire to, where immensely wealthy capitalist individuals and companies ensure laws that secure their benefit, as much as it applies to Pakistan, where politics is a business for securing personal desires in exchange for fulfilling Western ones. Allah سبحانه وتعالى says, أَرَأَيْتَ مَنْ اتَّخَذَ إِلَهَهُ هَوَاهُ أَفَأَنْتَ تَكُونُ عَلَيْهِ وَكِيلاً "Have you seen the one who takes his own desire as god? Would you be a wakeel over him?"[Surah Furqan 25:43] And it is not enough that you merely boycott the elections! You have chosen to engage in the noble worship of looking after the affairs of the Ummah at a time when the Muslims yearn for a sincere leadership, which will govern them by all that Allah سبحانه وتعالى has revealed. Hizb ut-Tahrir calls you to openly denounce dictatorship and democracy, the false gods manufactured for you by the colonialists, and call for the immediate re-establishment of the Khilafah in their place. O people of power! O Muslims of the armed forces! Did you not see that when the US Deputy Secretary of State and the real master of this regime, John Negroponte, arrived, he rushed to meet General Kiyani even before meeting Musharraf! This is a clear evidence for everyone, that it is the real master alone who appoints the chief of the army! Is this not a slap in the face and a severe insult to the largest Islamic army in the world? It is said that, "the wise one is the one who takes lessons from the mistakes of others." Musharraf earned the hatred of the Muslims because he sided with America and colonialism against the Muslims and Islam. So, Hizb ut-Tahrir is advising you all, and the new chief of the army in particular, to make the right choice, the choice of Salahudeen which is to unify this Ummah under the flag of the "kalimah" and to liberate the Muslims from the Western crusaders who have oppressed her for decades. You are the people of Nussrah (material support), like the noble Ansar before you who gave the material support to RasulAllah صلى الله عليه وسلم in order to establish the first rule of Islam in Madinah. It is by the grace of Allah سبحانه وتعالى that you enjoy power at a time that the Ummah has turned strongly to Islam and the Khilafah is on the horizon. It is therefore not acceptable that you merely watch as if you have nothing in your hands to save your people. Hizb ut-Tahrir calls upon you to uproot the current system and implement Islam in its place, through the Khilafah state. وَالسَّابِقُونَ الأَوَّلُونَ مِنْ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ وَالأَنصَارِ وَالَّذِينَ اتَّبَعُوهُمْ بِإِحْسَانٍ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَضُوا عَنْهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِي تَحْتَهَا الأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أَبَدًا ذَلِكَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيمُ "And the first to embrace Islam of the Muhajireen and the Ansar and those who followed them in exactly in good deeds. Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him. He has prepared for them gardens in which rivers flow, to dwell therein forever. Indeed that is the supreme success." [Surah at-Tawba 9:100] Hizb ut-Tahrir Wilayah Pakistan 29 November 2007

FW: Understanding Politics of Pakistan

Understanding Politics of Pakistan
 

It is very important that people understand the situation in Pakistan clearly and do not loose the sight to the true picture vis-à-vis who are the key players in Pakistani politics and who is pulling the strings.
 

We saw in the last few days that Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf finally pulled the trigger Saturday after many weeks of keeping the world guessing. He declared a state of emergency, essentially took control of the judiciary, arrested a group of dissidents and shut down private media outlets (including access to foreign media). The immediate issue was the role of the Supreme Court in freeing 61 individuals charged with terrorism. The deeper issue has to do with the role of the military in Pakistani society.

The Pakistani military has been the guarantor of the state from the beginning -- and therefore has been, in the long run, the arbiter of Pakistani politics. Musharraf's coup in 1999 simply made clear Pakistan's underlying reality. Pakistan is a deeply divided entity (it is not quite reasonable to call it a nation without its ideological essence i.e. Islam) presided over by a state. Whatever the formal character of the state, be it democratic, military, secular or otherwise, the greatest threat to Pakistan's territorial integrity comes from the divisions among the country's various ethnic groups due to the absence of the ideological bond.
In the present scenario, where Islam is missing as a bond, Pakistan requires a unified military to ensure cohesion. It is also not wrong to say that sometime it is in the interest of the military to keep the divisions – so to justify their hold.
Whatever demonstrations there are, whatever politicians may say, whether elections are held or not -- so long as military cohesion holds, the military will be the glue of society. Much of the rest that goes on is irrelevant.
Two things are therefore interesting and important. First, there is no visible sign of dissent within the military concerning Musharraf's move; thus far, the corps commanders or their subordinates do not appear to be resisting. Second, there is no indication of any mass resistance to the state of emergency. This is because of the carefully crafted deal between PPP and Musharraf via Washington and London.
The most intense protests are taking place in the eastern city of Lahore, where some 2,000 lawyers met at the High Court. Pakistani police stormed the building with tear gas and batons, to which the lawyers responded by throwing stones and beating police back with tree branches. Approximately 250 lawyers were arrested. Clashes between protesters and police also were reported in Multan, Rawalpindi, Peshawar and Karachi, where at least 100 more protesting lawyers were detained.
These protests were inevitable and are likely to intensify as opposition groups get more time to organize, but thus far, Pakistani security forces appear capable of containing the situation. Moreover, U.S. Embassy personnel have not been ordered to evacuate, signaling that the situation has not yet reached a crisis point.
The question is why Musharraf made this move. To a great extent it had to do with his own political survival rather than survival of the regime. There was great pressure on Musharraf to take off his uniform -- to leave the military and become a civilian leader. However, Musharraf understands what many others do not: His power and legitimacy come from his role in the military, not in spite of it. By taking off his uniform, he would be leaving the chain of command and thereby turning ultimate power over to his successor in the military. However carefully picked, that successor would command the army, and in due course would hold ultimate political power as well.
Musharraf was not going to allow that to happen. He was not prepared to leave the stage just yet; he planned to stay in uniform and put off the election. The challenge from the Supreme Court was simply the catalyst for Musharraf's deeper decision. His calculation was that, following the immediate shock to the Pakistani polity, things would settle down and he would continue to hold power. There is no indication thus far that he was wrong about this.
The United States scolded Musharraf publicly (and likely privately as well), but in truth Washington has only two interests in Pakistan. First, it wants a state that will fight Islamists along the Afghan border. Second, it wants a government that will hold Pakistan together and prevent internal collapse. In that sense, whatever the moral sentiments expressed by the administration, the United States has only one issue with Musharraf's move: that it had better not fail.
There are a number of power players in Pakistan ready and willing to use Musharraf's emergency rule declaration to launch mass protests and try to overturn the system. The main political opposition parties include Nawaz Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) party and the country's main Islamist alliance, the Mutahiddah Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) – excluding former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP) who are working on a power sharing deal. In addition, Musharraf must contend with an emboldened legal community and with growing popularity for the role of Islam in state.
However, the inclusion of two key players in these protests will determine whether Musharraf will be able to ride out this political storm. So far, the protests in the wake of the emergency ruling have been lawyer-driven and largely contained. Bhutto is in a precarious situation; she has a power-sharing deal in the works with Musharraf and must walk a tightrope between taking a stand against the president's power grab and upholding her end of the deal. If she reneges on the deal and joins the protests full-force, the tide could turn strongly against the president.
The tipping point will be in the southern port city of Karachi, the political and economic stronghold of a key Musharraf ally, the Mutahidda Qaumi Movement (MQM) party. The security situation could rapidly destabilize if public opinion turns overwhelmingly against Musharraf and the MQM decides to launch protests of its own.
If the army remains united and support Musharraf, this move is going to work. Musharraf (or someone like him) will continue to govern. But that doesn't bring us closer to answering the fundamental question: what exactly is this entity he is governing?

---

She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!

FW: Western ally Musharraf Declares Martial Law

Western ally Musharraf Declares Martial Law

Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf declared a state of emergency in Pakistan on Nov. 3. The move is being described as emergency rule, but in reality martial law is essentially in full effect. The constitution has been suspended and troops have been deployed in all major cities. All independent news channels have gone off the air, but news is trickling in through satellite stations and sources on the ground. Indian Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjee is in New Delhi meeting with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to brief him on the situation.

Since its inception in 1947, Pakistan has been plagued by corrupt civilian governments and military dictatorships that serve the interests of western governments ahead of the Muslims of Pakistan. The colonial powers of the US and the UK are desperate to save their last hope in the region, the failing dictatorship of General Musharaf, by organising an alliance with the most corrupt politician in Pakistan's history, Benazir Bhutto.
Later this evening, Musharraf will announce that the emergency has been called out of necessity to contain the rising support for the Islamic rule throughout the country. However, the move was made for political reasons. Musharraf, who finagled his way into getting re-elected as president Oct. 6, faces a hostile Supreme Court, of which the majority is in favor of nullifying his presidency, despite the government's persistent threats and bribes. According to sources in Pakistan, Musharraf caught wind of the Supreme Court's plans to dislodge him from power, leaving him with no choice but to resort to his last option: declaring martial law and holding onto power through force.
Musharraf's problems are far from over. Declaring a state of emergency raises the risk that street protests led by galvanized opposition parties will break out. Former corrupt Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, who leads the opposition Pakistan People's Party (PPP), has struck a power-sharing deal with Musharraf to secure her seat within the government when National Assembly elections take place in early January. Sources claim Bhutto was aware of Musharraf's emergency plans. It is no coincidence, then, that Bhutto left for Dubai to visit her family Nov. 2. In order to uphold her end of the bargain, Bhutto cannot be seen leading massive street protests that threaten to remove Musharraf from power. Though she risks becoming discredited even further, she has opted to stay out of the picture during this episode.
This "patchwork" politics will only push Pakistan into deeper crisis and failure. Pakistan is in need of a new type of leadership that will bring stability, that looks after the needs of the people through the Quran and Sunnah and which implements a system that is truly representative and which respects the independence of the judiciary-the Khilafat State.
If street protests get out of hand and troops are likely to fire on civilians, the stakes will be raised high enough for Pakistan's army commanders to pressure Musharraf into stepping aside and giving up his re-election scheme. Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani, Pakistan's vice chief of army staff, has been increasingly calling the shots in Pakistan and would take the lead should Musharraf be forced to step down.
The people of Pakistan have a powerful voice in the form of those who are working sincerely and peacefully for the implementation of Islam via Khilafah. It is essential that people of Pakistan sends a clear message to the dictator Musharraf and his new found ally Bhutto that it will no longer accept the destructive status quo and that a change of system must occur.

---

She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!

FW: Imran Khan - Benazir Bhutto has only herself to blame

http://www.thefrontierpost.com/News.aspx?ncat=hn&nid=2161&ad=21-10-2007
Musharraf is going to use the latest tragedy to befall on Pakistan as an excuse to curb political freedom and curtail any dissent as Frontier Post pointed "Present Government headed by General Pervez Musharraf is plotting to prohibit the rallies, processions, demonstrations, Public meetings taking advantage of bomb blasts in Karachi, said the APDM leaders Nawabzada Mansoor Ahmed Khan, Sardar Zulfikar Ali Khosa, Barrister Taj Muhammad Khan Langah Chief of Pakistan Seraiki Party" Confirming various voices who are citing government hand in the bombing as they being the only beneficiaries from this barbaric attack.
Mean while Imran Khan writing in Telegraph UK said "Benazir Bhutto has only herself to blame"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/10/21/do2101.xml
By Imran Khan
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 21/10/2007
I'm sorry to say this, but the bombing of Benazir Bhutto's cavalcade as she paraded through Karachi on Thursday night was a tragedy almost waiting to happen. You could argue it was inevitable.
Everyone here knew there was going to be a huge crowd turning up to see her return after eight years in self-imposed exile. Everyone also knows that there has been a spate of suicide bombings in Pakistan lately, especially in the frontier region where I am campaigning at the moment.
How was it ever going to be possible to monitor such a large crowd and guarantee that no suicide bombers would infiltrate it?

This may sound equally harsh, but she has only herself to blame. By making a deal with Musharraf's government — a deal brokered by the British as well as the Americans, by the way — she was hoping to get herself off the corruption charges that have been levelled against her.
What she hadn't taken into account was Musharraf's unpopularity. He is regarded in Pakistan as an American stooge. And the US war on terror, which he supports, is now perceived as a war against Islam.
That is why there is no shortage of recruits for the fundamentalist cause here. By siding with him, Benazir was making herself a target for assassination.
The sad thing is, she didn't need to do it. Musharraf was sinking and isolated. He was on the point of declaring a state of emergency. Just when it looked as if he had no lifelines left, Benazir came back and bailed him out.
Worse, by publicly siding with a dictator, she has deliberately sabotaged the democratic process. We have an election coming up in January. As leader of the Justice Party, I am running in it but it will be a free and fair election if Musharraf is still in charge.
He has dismantled state institutions, such as an independent judiciary and an election commission, and has introduced a controlled assembly, a controlled prime minister and a controlled media.
The polls show he can only win this next election if he massively rigs it. That is what he did in 2002, as confirmed by the EU monitoring team.
Given the way that she has undermined democracy by siding with Musharraf, I don't know how Benazir has the nerve to say that the 130 people killed in those bomb blasts sacrificed their lives for the sake of democracy in Pakistan.
Meanwhile, you can take your pick as to who was responsible for the two bombs that went off. At least three jihad groups linked to al-Qaeda and the Taliban were plotting suicide attacks — but one thing is for sure, there is no shortage of candidates.
The war on terror is turning everyone in the tribal border regions into potential guerrillas. Not militants necessarily but disparate groups who are becoming united by their suspicion of America. A coalition is forming, and al-Qaeda is going to be only a small part of it.
Benazir has made enemies for herself in this respect also. She alone among Pakistan's political party leaders has given public support to the massacre of women and children that Musharraf caused when he ordered his troops to attack the Red Mosque in Islamabad.
She also backed his attacks on civilians in the tribal regions. Note that Musharraf has called the civilian deaths there "collateral damage" — an American euphemism.
Benazir also gave her backing to Musharraf's plan to allow Nato troops to hunt down maybe 200 or 300 Taliban and al-Qaeda supporters in the border region, but in doing that they have merely recruited a million potential supporters for the terrorists.
No one in the West understands that the tribal regions of Pakistan have always been an independent entity. They have never been conquered. Every man is a warrior and carries a gun. Even a superpower like the British Empire could not control that terrain. It had to bribe the tribes.
I have known Benazir since we were at Oxford together, but we have drifted apart politically since then. Perhaps I could have warned her that her life would be in danger if she returned to Pakistan and had a parade, but I doubt she would have listened.
After all, there has been no shortage of warnings from other quarters. But I can tell her this: it is not going to get any easier for her. Whenever she goes out campaigning in public, her life is going to be threatened.
It is different for me campaigning in public, even in the frontier region, because I am not perceived as an America stooge, or a supporter of the war on terror.
The British do not have clean hands in this latest suicide bombing outrage. Britain is providing a safe haven for Altaf Hussain, the Musharraf-supporting MQM political party leader who currently lives in London.
He's been living in London for 15 years and from there he controls Karachi with an iron will through his mafia-like party. It was this political gangster who persuaded Benazir that he could ensure her safety if she returned.
The only positive thing that might come out of this horrific bombing is that it will force everyone in Pakistani politics to sit down together at a big table and review our strategy on terror. We have to accept that it is not working, that, in fact, it is making matters worse.
It is an idiotic policy because the Americans are pushing people who are in favour of democracy at the moment towards extremism. Pakistan is in danger of turning into Algeria, a country where you had government forces firing on their own civilians.
Once the Pakistani army started its latest operation at the behest of the US, the whole border area rose up against it. And because the US has also bombed the area, killing many tribesmen, anyone who opposes the US becomes a hero.
The tribesman's culture is a revenge culture. When one is killed another takes his place. That is where the war on terror has been so misguided. It has benefited the people who caused 9/11. And it has made Musharraf — and now his ally Benazir Bhutto — look even more like puppets of America.

---

Messenger on the move… Text MSN to 63463 now!

FW: Understanding PPP Political Theater becoming a Horror Show

Understanding PPP Political Theater becoming a Horror Show

Two blasts struck former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto's motorcade in an Oct. 18 procession marking her return to Pakistan. The attacks, in which 130 people reportedly were killed and around 500 injured, were greatly facilitated by the way Bhutto's return was handled and the sheer size of the crowds, mainly made up of the interior Sindh crowd, where her tribe rule with iron fist, that greeted her.

The motorcade was more of a political procession than a security motorcade, as Bhutto and the leadership of her Pakistani People's Party (PPP) slowly wound their way through Karachi to celebrate Bhutto's return to the country after the deal in which General Parvaiz Musharraf dropped corruption charges against her and paved the way for her to take rule with him on the backdrop of deals arranged in Washington and London.

Bhutto's return to Pakistan and the change it represents have been widely discussed and anticipated for several months now -- and those with grievances were among those waiting. The majorities of Pakistanis have a special contempt for Bhutto because of her recent deal with Gen. Pervez Musharraf, her pro Western stance, her historic corruption, her public statements to hand over Dr.AQ.Khan to US and allow the US to conduct bombing campaigns in the country

Such statements obviously are not be taken lightly in Pakistan, where anti-US feelings runs high. There have been number of statements coming out of Waziristan threatening Benazir because of her pro-US stance. However, it seems the threats against Bhutto were not taken very seriously, and the PPP leadership's desire to stage a theatrical political event to commemorate Bhutto's return trumped prudent security measures and greatly aided those responsible for the attack.

There are conflicting stories about who is responsible for the attack and even about the number of attackers and the types of devices that were used, though it is beginning to appear that the incident could have involved a single bomber who threw a grenade then detonated a small suicide device. People in Bhutto's camp also claim that before the blasts their security personnel detained another man who reportedly was wearing a suicide vest. Even though small devices were used, the high death count is not surprising, considering the nature of the densely packed crowd in which the devices were detonated.

If it is confirmed that this was a suicide attack, responsibility for it would most likely fall to jihadists . If jihadists were responsible, they can be expected to take credit for the attack soon. Bhutto claims she has given the government the names of three key individuals she believes were responsible for the blasts; this could allude to her belief that intelligence and security personnel were behind the blasts. Bhutto's husband Asif Zardari also blamed Pakistani intelligence for the attacks.

Regardless of who was responsible for the attack, the manner in which Bhutto's return was handled greatly aided the attackers. Issues of the Pakistani security forces' competence (and rumours of complicity) aside, such a procession under those conditions would be practically impossible for nearly any security service to secure. While Bhutto was given a large armoured vehicle -- reportedly equipped with electronic improvised explosive device (IED) countermeasures -- in which to ride, there is no such thing as a bombproof or bullet-proof vehicle. This is illustrated by the effectiveness that explosively formed projectile devices and very large IEDs have had against M-1 tanks and other armoured military vehicles in Iraq. At best, armoured vehicles are bullet- and blast-resistant, but the sense that they are bombproof can at times give their occupants a false sense of security. Furthermore, electronic IED countermeasures are limited in their effectiveness. They do not work against hard-wired devices such as suicide vests.

Indeed, in the attack on the Bhutto motorcade, the armoured vehicle she and the PPP leadership were riding in was disabled by the relatively small blasts directed against it -- it clearly was not bombproof. Had the device employed against them been a much larger car or truck bomb (say the size of the large device used to assassinate former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik al-Hariri in Beirut), Bhutto might well have been killed and the entire leadership of the PPP could have been taken out in one fell swoop. Armoured vehicles and countermeasures equipment are useful, but they are not solutions in and of themselves; they are only part of a larger, comprehensive security program. To be effective, security plans must still incorporate -- among other things -- unpredictability, speed and deception to prevent potential attackers from knowing where a potential target will be at a specific time.

The Bhutto attack was facilitated not only by the decision to hold a slow-moving procession with the route published in advance, but also by the tens of thousands of unscreened people who flocked to welcome Bhutto. Many well-wishers along the route broke through police lines to approach and touch the vehicle Bhutto was riding in. These crowds provided an overwhelming force for the police and security officers to contend with and a sea of humanity for the attackers to hide in. The very length of the procession was also a factor. Trying to control even friendly crowds is exhausting work for security personnel; doing so for many hours can cause extreme fatigue. Although there were thousands of police and security personnel assigned to the event, they were overwhelmed by the sheer size of the crowd. It is impossible to scan such large crowds thoroughly, and the fact that the procession was not over by nightfall made it even more difficult for security officers to spot assailants in the crowd. While there were reportedly several explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) teams assigned to the procession, the size of the crowd and the length of the route would have quickly overwhelmed their capabilities. Even highly effective EOD canine teams can only work for short periods before becoming exhausted. There is no way they could have swept the entire route and all the individuals and vehicles along it.

Thus, the very nature of the political theatre associated with the Bhutto return made it extremely difficult for common-sense security measures to be employed, and contributed to the deaths of innocent people that allowed others to usurp the stage and turn the theatre into a horror show. The only saving grace for the PPP is that a larger device was not used in the attack.
It is important that Muslims of Pakistan must not lose the sight of the bigger picture. That her return is nothing but a show, designed to strengthen the dictatorship favoured by the West and put hurdles in Pakistan's way to reach the true destiny of Khilafah.

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: Israel congratulate Musharraf as tyranny continues

Israel congratulated Pervez Musharraf on his re-election as president of Pakistan. President Shimon Peres on Monday published an open letter to Musharraf, a former general who seized power in 1999 and swept to a second term in elections over the weekend.(1)

 

"You have shown responsibility and strength in preventing the spread of violence and terrorism on many occasions, and I carry in my heart your support for peace in the Middle East," Peres wrote. "Please accept, Your Excellency, the assurances of my highest consideration."

 

No wonder Israel is happy over this tyranny that is gripping Pakistan. Musharraf being the most favored dictator by the west vis-à-vis Israel due to his efforts to recognize the Zionist state which is occupying Palestine since 1948.

 

Meanwhile Musharraf won the elections holding little suspense on 6th October due to assemblies dominated by his corrupt ruling parties from MQM to Chaudires of Punjab.

 

But the vote was just the first step in a complicated process aimed at sorting out the country's leadership in the months ahead. That process will involve a Supreme Court ruling on the legality of Musharraf's candidacy; the court threatened on the eve of elections to retroactively label it illegal if Musharraf refuses to shed his military leadership role. Also just before the voting began, Musharraf signed a "reconciliation ordinance" that drops corruption charges against former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and sets the stage for a power-sharing arrangement with her.

 

The rule of Law in Islam dictates that even if Fatima (ra) steals her hand to be cut off, but here we have a junta of corrupt leaders who are immune to any law, coming back to the land of pure like vultures fully hosted by the US backed dictator.

 

To protect his future interests, the general named a loyalist, Lt. Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kiyani, the former chief of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) spy service, to succeed him as the nation's top military officer. Musharraf's plan to shed his military role did not come easily, since he derives much of his authority from the post. But in Kiyani, Musharraf looking for skilled commander at a time of demoralization in the army, and a staunch supporter of Musharraf.

 

But a Musharraf victory, analysts warn, does not necessarily translate to stability. The army is struggling in its fight against pro Islam forces, who have aggressively expanded their influence and operations in the tribal and border areas, pushing large parts of the country beyond government control. Pakistan's army, like its population, is deeply divided over the "war on terror," and analysts see recent incidents of mass army surrenders to smaller groups of militants as a sign that the military will not fight an internal war on behalf of what many of its officers view as Washington's interests. "This is not our war; Taliban, al-Qaeda are not criminals in our country," a major from the Pakistani army told the Atlantic. Selig S. Harrison, an Asia expert at the Center for International Policy, warns of a radical "Pashtunistan" should events deteriorate further. Others, citing the nuclear-armed country's miserable educational system, its faltering financial institutions, and an economy which can't keep pace with population growth, fear worse.

 

O Muslims of Pakistan! We must learn our own lesson. It is not sufficient to change from military leaders to political leaders without changing the underlying political system. It will not work now, nor has it ever worked in the past. Having President Musharraf in uniform or without uniform does not alter the basis of the political system nor does it change the fundamental economic and foreign policies that have brought Pakistan to its knees. Indeed if one was to read the headline from October 1999, just before the last coup that brought the army into power, some of the very same editorials and opinion pieces that today complain about military rule were lambasting the records of political parties and calling for the military to intervene. The need of the hour is not secular democracy or for General Musharraf to remove his uniform, but the return of the Islamic Khilafah. A renewed effort at re-establishing the Khilafah via an elected and accountable Khalif must be vigorously sought. Some (mostly the elites) claim this is unrealistic, yet according to recent opinion poll carried out by the University of Maryland 74% of Pakistanis support the establishment of a unified Khilafah in the Muslim world.

 

Let us make it known at the critical juncture that it is unacceptable for western governments to continue plotting the future of Pakistan as if it is their chessboard. It is unacceptable for these corrupt politicians and traitors to be the only ones to continue in power in our lands. It is only the system of Allah and His Messenger that can bind our people, their hearts and minds with justice. As this debate revolves around us, let not the Muslims be the only ones who are silenced from making their view known.

"O you who believe! If you help (in the cause of) Allah, He will help you, and make your foothold firm." [Translated Meaning Surah Muhammad: 7]

 

 

 

Citations

1. http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/104516.html

 

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: Musharraf Prepares the Military for his Civilian Presidency

Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf appointed a new head of Pakistan's top intelligence agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), on Sept. 21 and promoted several two-star generals to three-star rank. Though they are part of an ongoing and routine reshuffle, these changes to the army's top brass come as Musharraf prepares to step down as military chief in an attempt to secure his re-election as president. The retirements and appointments of generals are designed to ensure Musharraf's continued control over the military. The new ISI chief, meanwhile, will have his hands full as he tries to deal with a growing desire to live under Islam in Pakistan
The shameful drama is on the march in Pakistan, where a dictator backed by western governments with his corrupt entourage is trying to form a government with one of the most corrupt civilians in Pakistan i.e. PPP Benazir while biding for the seat of the President.

According to a Sept. 21 press release from the military's media department. Maj. Gen. Nadeem Taj was promoted to lieutenant general and appointed ISI director-general, Inter-Services Public Relations said. Outgoing Director-General Lt. Gen. Ashfaq Kayani is expected to be promoted to a full general and appointed the new chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC). Taj is one of six major-generals who were promoted to three-star rank and given new posts; Maj. Gen. Mohsin Kamal was appointed to the key post of commander of the Rawalpindi-based 10th Corps, and Pakistani English daily The News reported Sept. 19 that Maj. Gen. Nasir Janjua had been promoted and appointed director-general of military operations.

These initial changes are part of the reshuffle triggered by the scheduled retirement of the current vice chief of army staff and the CJCSC on Oct. 7. Contrary to his usual style, this time around Musharraf is promoting and appointing the top generals in stages, which is understandable given that he wants to time the changes in the military leadership with his own re-election in the presidential vote slated for Oct. 6. In order to remain president, Musharraf needs to reach a political settlement with his opponents, which will require him to step down as military chief.

Musharraf's ability to secure another term depends on the Supreme Court's ruling on the petitions challenging his qualifications to seek re-election, and on whether a chunk of opposition parliament members -- including those from the Pakistan People's Party with whom he is negotiating a power-sharing deal -- resign. Regardless, he is moving along with preparations for the time when he is no longer military chief.

Since Musharraf's power is a function of his position as military chief, he needs to be able to ensure that he can maintain control over the army even after he becomes a civilian president. Formally, he will have this control; the constitution gives the president power to appoint the chiefs of the three armed services. However, since he will not hold the dual offices he has held since he came to power, Musharraf will have to share control with the next chief of army staff. It is well-known that from 1988 to 1999, when the army was not directly ruling the country, the sitting president was the one whose position was in danger during any struggle between rival political forces, because the army chief did not necessarily side with the civilian leader. To get around this problem, Musharraf is appointing and promoting people who will remain loyal to him after he takes a civilian role.

The ISI chief is a critical player in this because of the directorate's historic role in domestic politics. Taj, the new ISI director, is considered one of Musharraf's closest loyalists and could give the president vital support in his new position. Taj previously served as Musharraf's military secretary and as head of Military Intelligence (MI), the country's second-most-powerful intelligence directorate. He also was with Musharraf in the plane that former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif tried to prevent from landing in Pakistan in order to block Musharraf from mounting a coup against him. Additionally, Taj was accompanying the president in his motorcade during the second of two assassination attempts in December 2003.

And we are told Taj played an instrumental role in the 2004 release of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto's husband, Asif Zardari. Moreover, Bhutto has a favorable opinion of Taj -- an indication that his appointment as ISI director-general is part of the ongoing Musharraf-Bhutto negotiations.

Loyalty, however, is not the only criterion informing Musharraf's decisions as he appoints top generals. He also needs competent individuals to lead the military at a time when civilian institutions -- the judiciary, media and civil society -- have grown more assertive in the wake of the political crisis stemming from Musharraf's move to sack the country's chief justice. In addition, though a strong military leadership could challenge Musharraf, it is what he needs in order to further his personal and corporate interests. This is why Musharraf has thus far promoted and appointed generals who are known as very competent individuals. Taj was the commandant of the Pakistan Military Academy, and Kamal, the new commander of the 10th Corps, headed the famous Command and Staff College at Quetta and was commander of the sensitive department of Force Command Northern Area.

That said, Pakistan now faces the biggest challenge since its inception: a growing movement for Political Islam. Thus far, the military establishment has been on the defensive regarding an unprecedented wave which is transforming Pakistanis. Political parties such as Hizb ut Tahrir, Tanzeem-e-Islami who are peaceful and calling for the implementation of Sharia or the Caliphate.

The coming political transition is unlikely to foster stability because Musharraf will be sharing power with a civilian prime minister leading a coalition government, and with an army chief. This means the next army chief and the new head of the ISI could be heavily involved in politics at a time when they need to concentrate on obeying Washington orders.

The process of purging Islamic sympathizers within the ranks of the military and the intelligence apparatus has been going on since the 9/11 attacks, but the new ISI chief will not be able to deal with the growing desire for Islam before sealing the leaks in the national security network -- an objective that is not likely to be achieved any time soon. Among other problems, this could create a conflict between Washington and Islamabad over the United States' counterIslam imperatives.

---

Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!

FW: Greenspan admits Iraq was about oil, as Iraqis killed put at 1.2m

Greenspan admits Iraq was about oil, as deaths put at 1.2m

Peter Beaumont and Joanna Walters in New York
Sunday September 16, 2007
The Observer

The man once regarded as the world's most powerful banker has bluntly declared that the Iraq war was 'largely' about oil. Appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1987 and retired last year after serving four presidents, Alan Greenspan has been the leading Republican economist for a generation and his utterings instantly moved world markets.
In his long-awaited memoir - out tomorrow in the US - Greenspan, 81, who served as chairman of the US Federal Reserve for almost two decades, writes: 'I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil.'
 

In The Age of Turbulence: Adventures in a New World, he is also crystal clear on his opinion of his last two bosses, harshly criticising George W Bush for 'abandoning fiscal constraint' and praising Bill Clinton's anti-deficit policies during the Nineties as 'an act of political courage'. He also speaks of Clinton's sharp and 'curious' mind, and 'old-fashioned' caution about the dangers of debt. Greenspan's damning comments about the war come as a survey of Iraqis, which was released last week, claims that up to 1.2 million people may have died because of the conflict in Iraq - lending weight to a 2006 survey in the Lancet that reported similarly high levels.
More than one million deaths were already being suggested by anti-war campaigners, but such high counts have consistently been rejected by US and UK officials. The estimates, extrapolated from a sample of 1,461 adults around the country, were collected by a British polling agency, ORB, which asked a random selection of Iraqis how many people living in their household had died as a result of the violence rather than from natural causes.
Previous estimates gave a range between 390,000 and 940,000, the most prominent of which - collected by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and reported in the Lancet in October 2006 - suggested 654,965 deaths.
Although the household survey was carried out by a polling organisation, rather than researchers, it has again raised the spectre that the 2003 invasion has caused a far more substantial death toll than officially acknowledged.
The ORB survey follows an earlier report by the organisation which suggested that one in four Iraqi adults had lost a family member to violence. The latest survey suggests that in Baghdad that number is as high as one in two. If true, these latest figures would suggest the death toll in Iraq now exceeds that of the Rwandan genocide in which about 800,000 died.
The Lancet survey was criticised by some experts and by George Bush and British officials. In private, however, the Ministry of Defence's chief scientific adviser Sir Roy Anderson described it as 'close to best practice'.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2170237,00.html

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: Pakistan: Crisis Escalates With Sharif's Deportation

Summary

Pakistani authorities deported opposition leader Nawaz Sharif to Saudi Arabia on Sept. 10, a few hours after he arrived in Islamabad following a seven-year exile. The deportation is the Musharraf regime's attempt to counter an assertive Supreme Court, which had ruled that the government could not prevent Sharif from returning. The regime's defiance of the judiciary and the role of the Saudi government the deportation will likely trigger the decisive round in Pakistan's ongoing political crisis.

Analysis

Former Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was deported to Saudi Arabia on Sept. 10 after spending some four hours at the Islamabad airport, where he had flown from London in an attempt to end his forced exile. Meanwhile, the government cracked down on opposition parties, arresting most major leaders and thousands of activists who had planned a welcome rally for Sharif. Despite the massive lockdown in several cities in Punjab and North-West Frontier Province, police clashed with thousands of workers from Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) and other opposition groups within the Sharif-led All Parties Democratic Movement (APDM).

Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's deportation of Sharif in defiance of an Aug. 23 Supreme Court verdict ordering the government not to hinder his return is more than a desperate move to save his faltering regime. It is also an attempt to counter an increasingly assertive judiciary. Sharif and the courts are a direct threat to Musharraf's plans for survival, so allowing the former prime minister back into the country would have amounted to political suicide. But because things have reached a point of no return, Sharif's deportation will accelerate matters and push Musharraf into the final round of the six-month-old crisis of governance.

Pakistan's legal associations, which last week announced a fresh wave of protests to prevent Musharraf from seeking re-election, have said they will boycott the courts on Sept. 11 because of the government's move to defy the Supreme Court verdict. The APDM plans to stage nationwide protests Sept. 11.

Thus far, Pakistan's protests have been dominated by the legal community and other civil-society groups. From here onward, the political parties will throw in their weight. The government, which is already facing a bandwidth issue because of multiple crises, cannot be expected to focus only on containing the protests, which will pick up steam.

There is also growing anger within the country over the Musharraf regime's involvement of Saudi intelligence chief Prince Muqrin bin Abdel-Aziz and top Lebanese leader Saad al-Hariri in its efforts to keep Sharif out of the country. Both Muqrin and al-Hariri met with Musharraf on Sept. 9; afterwards, the Arab officials held a press conference calling on Sharif not to return home, citing a controversial agreement of sorts Sharif made with the Saudis in 2000 to stay away from the country. There is growing public sentiment against what is being described as blatant foreign intervention in Pakistan's internal affairs after Musharraf worked with the Saudis to defy the Supreme Court.

By deporting Sharif, Musharraf has also created problems for his negotiations with Benazir Bhutto, the leader of the largest opposition group, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP). It is now more difficult than ever for Bhutto to be seen dealing with a regime that is perceived as having no regard for the rule of law. Regardless of the PPP's efforts to restore civilian rule in Pakistan, the negotiations have already hurt Bhutto's party, which is the only opposition group not part of the APDM (and that fact is becoming more prevalent in public perception). Thus, Bhutto will be forced to drive a harder bargain, making a deal with Musharraf all the more elusive.

Elsewhere, the Supreme Court is hearing petitions challenging Musharraf's eligibility to seek a second term. Musharraf is up against a Nov. 15 deadline when the constitutional waiver allowing him to remain president and military chief expires. Therefore, Musharraf could be just a few weeks away from running out of options, which is when his generals -- who thus far have allowed Musharraf the space he needs to fix the situation -- might have to force him to exit.

It is now for Pakistani people to decide, what do they want? Do they want to keep the present status quo where the same old faces with same old corruption or they want the system to be changed from one fundamentalist secularism which has plagued the country for over half a century or return to the just Khilafah on the method of the prophet (saw).

"And those who disbelieve are allies to one another, (and) if you (Muslims of the whole world collectively) do not do so (i.e. become allies, as one united block with one Khalifah) there will be Fitnah (wars, battles, polytheism) and oppression on earth, and a great mischief and corruption." [TMQ Al-Anfal: 73]

---

She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!

FW: Britain and US broker a 'marriage' between betrayal and corruption in Pakistan

Pakistan's military dictator General Pervez Musharraf, whose position has looked increasingly weak, has been thrown a political life line in a deal brokered by London and Washington. It is expected that Musharraf will soon appoint himself as civilian President, opening the doors for elections in the coming months. Benazir Bhutto is expected to return to Pakistan to contest the elections, thereby bailing out Musharraf from a deepening crisis.
In an interview with the UK's Channel 4 news earlier this evening, when asked about the ongoing negotiations with General Musharraf, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto revealed that "the British Foreign Office has been very helpful" in brokering the deal. In July, UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband voiced strong support for Pakistan's dictator, who is seen as a key ally in the west's war on terror.

It is outrageous that Pakistan's political future is being fashioned in secret deals by governments in London and Washington, in what can only be seen as an unholy political marriage between the woman who presided over the most corrupt regime in Pakistan's history, and a man who has the greatest record of betrayal in its history.
Musharraf has sacrificed Pakistan's strategic depth and has betrayed Pakistan's nuclear command and control to America in its war on Islam in exchange for his own political survival. It is not surprising that London and Washington deem him worthy to take on the secular transformation of Pakistan.
The corruption and incompetence of the 1990's combined with the betrayal of the first decade of the 21st century should teach us a salutary lesson. It is not sufficient to change from military leaders to political leaders without changing the underlying political system that has brought Pakistan to its knees.
The need of the hour is not the secular democracy that has failed before, nor for General Musharraf to remove his uniform, but the establishment of the Islamic Khilafah. It is only the Khilafah that will redistribute wealth to the poorest in Pakistan's society. Under the Khilafah no one is above the law, not the Caliph, nor the rich and the well connected or the heads of political parties or army officers. The Khilafah will ensure that political and security decisions are never again made by foreign powers. What Pakistan needs is a comprehensive change of system, not more interference from foreign powers propping up corrupt regimes for their own interests.

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: Indonesia 100000 demanded return of Khilafah (Caliphate)

There has been series of conferences around the world pulling Muslim crowds ranging from 5000 in UK to 100000 in Indonesia calling for the return of Caliphate in the muslim world. Other conferences were organized at Palestine, Pakistan. Malaysia, Denmark, Netherlands, Lebanon and Yemen

 

What is Caliphate

http://www.caliphate.eu/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate

 

What is Hizb-ul-Tahrir

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/4127688.stm

http://www.hizb.org.uk/hizb/ht-britain.html 

 

Eighty thousand people gathered in the Indonesian capital Jakarta - Video

http://www.euronews.net/index.php?page=info&article=437561&lng=1

Hardline Muslim group draws 90,000 to Jakarta
http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=8&theme=&usrsess=1&id=166145

Jakarta crowds roar in support of Islamic state

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20236318/

 

BBC report - Islamists urge caliphate revival

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/6942688.stm

 

Stadium crowd pushes for Islamist dream

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6943070.stm

 

Al-Jazeera Video Report

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3198082248007028641&hl=en

 

BBC Video report -

http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_6940000/newsid_6943000/6943049.stm?bw=bb&mp=rm&asb=1&news=1&ms3=20

 

Reuters Video Report Calls for single Muslim government

http://www.reuters.com/news/video/videoStory?videoId=63411

 

Hard-Line Muslim Meeting Draws 90,000 Followers, Calls For Islamic State

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293016,00.html

 

Thousands attend West Bank rally of global Islamic movement

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/08/11/africa/ME-GEN-Palestinians-Islamic-Movement.php

 

Speakers Barred from Speaking

http://www.iwpr.net/?p=bkg&s=b&o=337799&apc_state=henh

---

Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!

FW: Mooting the Bhutto-Musharraf Alliance

Summary
Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf and Benazir Bhutto, could be on the verge of the much-awaited deal catapulting Bhutto out of exile and into the prime minister's chair. Contrary to expectations, the deal could end up damaging both. It also is unlikely that a power-sharing agreement between the military and Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party will be able to stop the rise of Political Islam in the country -- and even could exacerbate it.
Analysis
Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf and former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, the leader of the country's main opposition Pakistan People's Party (PPP), met July 27 in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, Pakistani presidential spokesman retired Maj. Gen. Rashid Qureshi officially confirmed July 30. Meanwhile, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Sher Afgan Niazi, himself a former PPP leader, said Musharraf can step down as military chief in order to facilitate the power-sharing agreement being worked out with Bhutto. Reports also surfaced that a number of Bhutto's bank accounts were unfrozen ahead of the meeting.
It appears back-channel negotiations between the Musharraf regime and the PPP, which have been going on for several years now, finally are headed toward the much-anticipated Musharraf-Bhutto power-sharing arrangement. Both Musharraf and Bhutto face intense opposition from within their respective camps regarding any deal. Musharraf's allies in the ruling Pakistan Muslim League are worried about their party's future in any power-sharing arrangement with the PPP, while Bhutto's party is very concerned about the fallout of doing business with a military ruler, an unthinkable deal not too long ago.
Musharraf is unlikely to emerge unscathed -- to say the least -- from the multiple crises brewing in Pakistan, especially his attempts to deal with the situation. But Musharraf might not be the only casualty from the political wheeling and dealing: Bhutto and her party also could end up being damaged. The expectations in various quarters -- such as the Pakistani government, Washington, etc. -- that Bhutto's entry into the Pakistani political system will stabilize it and will be good for representative rule ignore certain ground realities.
First, Bhutto's party does not enjoy a monopoly over the Pakistani electorate. Though in a relatively free and fair parliamentary election the PPP probably will emerge as the single-largest party in parliament, a fresh legislative vote will produce a parliament divided among five major political forces and a number of smaller parties. This means the PPP probably will head an unstable coalition government, one far more volatile than during two previous PPP governments in the 1990s.
Second, the PPP is not what is used to be in 1986, when Bhutto made her first dramatic return to her country. The PPP's reputation has been tainted due to massive corruption during her two terms. Moreover, in the last five years, the party has been weakened significantly because of the defection of some two-dozen members of parliament who joined the Musharraf government. Thus, going into the negotiations the PPP already is a weak force.
Deal-making between Bhutto and Musharraf, which has become a very public affair, is bound to cost the PPP some more votes no matter how carefully its leadership pursues the negotiations. Bhutto knows this well, and has acknowledged as much. She faces an uphill task involving doing business with a military government to stage a political comeback and avoid the cost of abandoning her party's historic image as the anti-establishment party.
PPP re-entry into the halls of power in Islamabad is thus unlikely to put Pakistan on the path of self representation, or for that matter even political stability. More disconcertingly, for a number of reasons a PPP government will be unable to deal effectively with increasing radicalisation towards political Islam in the country.
Pakistan's problems run much deeper than a simple question of representatative rule versus authoritarianism, and radicalisation and Jihadi activity are not simply byproducts of chronic political instability. The issue goes to the historical debate over the nature of the Pakistani state, which has raged since before the country's birth. The debate is over whether Pakistan should be secular or "Islamic;" and over who would define the latter using what criteria. A situation where people of Pakistan largely demanding to live under the Islamic rule (Caliphate/Khilafah) for which they created Pakistan and the elite who is implementing a western backed secular system.
Further complicating matters, the historic Jihadi-military relationship has empowered radical and militant Islamist forces. Radicalization and militancy are problems that cannot be cured alone by a elected government working with the country's military establishment. As a secular party, the PPP cannot contain extremism and radicalism without working with army backed moderate and pragmatic Islamist forces. Even the United States, with all its resources, is forced to work with political Islamists to contain the violent ones.
Historically, the PPP has faced the religious right's ire. In the current polarized atmosphere, particularly in the wake of the Red Mosque operation and Bhutto's open support for the facility's storming, such anti-PPP sentiment is likely to have grown. The PPP has gone out of its way to shun the country's main Islamist alliance, the Mutahiddah Majlis-i-Amal (MMA), fearing that by cooperating with the MMA against Musharraf could strengthen the MMA.
Even assuming the PPP would work with the MMA or its relatively moderate army backed component, the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (JUI) led by Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the incoherent nature of the MMA and/or the JUI would present a serious obstacle. Pakistani Islamic parties not only are divided, they also have a murky relationship with the jihadists, further complicating matters from an anti-extremism and counterterrorism perspective. Overall, political Islamists in Pakistan are far more radical in their agenda than their Muslim Brotherhood counterparts in the Arab World.
Regardless of whether a deal between Musharraf and Bhutto emerges and how political events unfold as elections approach, the PPP is unlikely to create a stable representative rule setup by partnering with the Musharraf government's civil-military hybrid. And the PPP not only would fail to curb radicalisation and the call for Islamic state, the situation could get worse.

---

Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!

FW: Pakistan: Musharraf Forced to Compromise

Summary

 

A suicide bombing occurred at a market in the Pakistani capital July 27, while former Red Mosque students reoccupied the nearby Red Mosque. The domestic security situation continues to deteriorate and is exacerbating political instability in the country, which would explain reports that say President Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who is on a trip to the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, will meet with top Pakistani opposition leaders in those countries. Musharraf has been weakened to the point that he is forced to seek a compromise with his opponents in an effort to salvage his regime.

 

Analysis

 

Another suicide bombing occurred July 27 in the Pakistani capital, this one targeting security forces at a restaurant in a marketplace. About a dozen people were killed and nearly 50 injured. Meanwhile, Islamabad's Red Mosque was the scene of unrest again as radical seminary students briefly occupied the mosque on the occasion of its reopening. Elsewhere, a spokesman for the provincial government in Balochistan was gunned down. All this escalating violence and unrest would explain why President Gen. Pervez Musharraf planned to meet July 27 with Pakistan People's Party leader Benazir Bhutto in Abu Dhabi and is expected to meet in Saudi Arabia with Shahbaz Sharif, brother of Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz leader and former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif who Musharraf ousted from power in October 1999.

 

Musharrfian state is in the process of unraveling. Musharraf now must seek the help of mainstream political forces to deal with the growing crisis of governance and the desire of Pakistanis to live under Islam. Moreover, the recent tensions with Washington over the U.S. threats to engage in unilateral military action against jihadists in the country's northwest -- which quickly followed the restoration of the Supreme Court's chief justice -- seem to have been the last straw.

 

There also were reports July 27 that Musharraf's corps commanders and agency heads have asked him to step down, another development we had anticipated. Stepping down does not necessarily mean that Musharraf would leave the political scene altogether. Rather he likely will be forced to relinquish the post of army chief and try to stay on as a civilian president while sharing powers with a coalition government led by Bhutto following parliamentary elections.

 

People of Pakistan are very well aware about the false promises of Musharraf that he will never let the two opposition leaders i.e. Nawaz and Bibi back in to Pakistan and work with them. At the same time Bibi and Nawaz vowed never to work with Musharraf. This all is changing now. Devoid of any ideological grounds, the corrupt Pakistani civilian parties areng to come back with old faces, new slogans and historic corruption. Nothing is going to change in Pakistan except the same old cycle to be repeated.

 

For a change to be permanent and to result in true revival, Pakistan must go back to its roots and the purpose it was created for i.e. an Ideological Islamic State. The state for which Muslims of Pakistan gave their lives in millions. Only under Khilafah system Pakistanis will be able to truly unite them selves and be able to reach a status of a leading nation.

 

At this stage it is unclear whether Musharraf will be successful in his efforts to reach a compromise -- as these efforts could be too little and too late.

 

---

Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!

FW: Pakistan puppet government reacts to U.S. Call for Action

U.S. forces on Monday moved a day closer to launching a major military operation into Pakistan -- or more accurately, the Pakistani public and government came to realize that the United States was not kidding when, last week, it broached the topic of launching major operations into Pakistan.
The U.S. government remain convinced that the apex leaders of al Qaeda, those behind the 9/11 attacks, currently are hiding out in northwest Pakistan. And with the government of Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf on the ropes largely due to its own devices, the United States no longer feels the need to go around the issue. The U.S. message is fairly simple: Take care of the problem, or we will.
The message has definitely been received. The topic of a pending U.S. invasion was all the Pakistani press could discuss Monday, and the unfortunate Pakistani foreign ministry spokeswoman who was given the task of addressing the issue stumbled trying to hit that balance between bluster and calm.
U.S. foreign policy has become hopelessly bogged down in all things Iraq of late, with precious little bandwidth left for anything else. So it is no small accomplishment that the United States has finally broken through the noise and gotten the attention of the Pakistani government. After all, Pakistan has enough crises in various states of percolation these days to outfit an entire continent.
A partial -- and by no means conclusive -- list of Pakistani problems includes the legal and political crisis that stems from Musharraf's now unsuccessful attempts to sack the country's chief justice; the debate over Musharraf's position as military chief; Musharraf's controversial re-re-election bid; competing opposition party demands for fresh parliamentary elections; fallout from the Red Mosque protests and raids; the insurgency in Balochistan; the chaos of ethnic politics in Karachi; the split within -- and Islamist-riddled nature of -- the intelligence agencies; the social divide over the very nature of the republic; the rising power of extremists in general; and the identity crisis that comes natural in a country whose name is actually an acronym.
Make no mistake. It is not as if the United States is looking forward to a Pakistan operation. Any such operation would need to secure and segment a large tract of land before additional forces could come in and scour it bit by bit. This would not be a snatch and grab, but a major sweep through a large area. The United States would not be looking for an army, but instead for a handful of individuals that would include Osama bin Laden. That sort of operation would require thousands of troops -- and is not something that could be done quickly and quietly. U.S. forces would swiftly find themselves in direct conflict with local tribes and perhaps even the Pakistani military -- not to mention that any incursion into Pakistan would also energize the Taliban in Afghanistan to attack from behind. And if the Pakistani government did start to totter, Washington would have to make a very uncomfortable decision about what to do about the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.
Getting out would be even worse. The troops that would be used are all in southeast Afghanistan as part of an operation that is logistically impossible without the go-ahead from Islamabad. So immediately after doing a tour of the wonders of northwest Pakistan, the Defense Department would then need to figure out how to get its people -- and likely the other coalition forces still in Afghanistan -- out of the landlocked South Asian state as well.
This is nothing the United States is champing at the bit to do. Actually, the United States would much rather have Pakistan take care of the issue itself. And there is nothing like the threat of invasion to slice through a list of Pakistani problems and seize people's attention.
But seize their attention the United States has done. Now the question will be whether the chaos that is Pakistani politics can solidify for an internal housecleaning that precludes the need for Washington to decide whether this was an ultimatum or a bluff.

---

Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!

FW: US to invade Pakistan

Frances Townsend, Homeland Security adviser to U.S. President George W. Bush, said on Thursday that the United States would be willing to send troops into Pakistan to root out al Qaeda, noting specifically that "no option is off the table if that is what is required." Just in case Islamabad -- or al Qaeda -- missed Townsend's statement, White House spokesman Tony Snow paraphrased it shortly afterward.

While the statements are hardly a declaration of war, one can be positive that Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf is going to need a nightcap to get to sleep. It is not every day that the global superpower ruminates that invading your country is an option "not off the table."

Townsend and Snow are hinting at an operation that has been six years in the making. There has never really been any doubt that al Qaeda sought refuge in northwest Pakistan after fleeing the United States' November 2001 assault on Afghanistan. But the absolute necessity of maintaining Pakistan as an ally has stayed Washington's hand (aside from nearly continuous small-scale border raids against targets of opportunity). Rooting out al Qaeda from the tribes that shield it would require a thousands-strong force, ideally with Pakistani cooperation. Until now, the dominant belief in Washington has been that such an operation would lead to a Pakistani rebellion and the consequent overthrow of the Musharraf government. Ergo, the attack has not happened.

But now two things have changed. First, Islamic radicals of the Red Mosque -- whom Pakistani security forces raided July 12 -- have tripped public anger. Out of a mixture of necessity and opportunism, Musharraf is now moving in force against Pakistani's long-ignored jihadist circles.

Until now, the jihadists have been quiet in Pakistan because that is where they recruit, train and fundraise. Now that the state is closing in on them, the suicide bombs have started going off in earnest, with more than 50 dead just on Thursday and more than 200 since the wave of explosions began. The conflict is going to be a bloody one no matter how it goes -- not only does Musharraf need to battle a desperate, experienced force with few places to retreat to, but many within his intelligence services actually are pro-jihadist. The purge and the fighting could well happen simultaneously. This is the situation Musharraf could also use to impose state of emergency to prolong his rule and justify his plans to further impose secular western agenda in general on public and particularly on madrassas.

The second big change is that Washington is becoming convinced Musharraf is on his last legs -- and that if his government is going to implode anyway, the United States might as well go in and get al Qaeda. From Washington's viewpoint, if statements alone are sufficient to get the good general to dispose of the jihadists on his own, fanbloodytastic. If not, then the United States has thousands of troops just across the border in Afghanistan available for the job.

Not that this would be easy, of course. As Snow noted, "You don't blithely go into another nation and conduct operations," and this is more than just an issue of politeness. NATO's Afghan operation, as it is now, would be flatly impossible without the supply lines that snake through Pakistan. And if the United States had reliable intelligence as to exactly where al Qaeda's apex leadership was, a grossly excessive tonnage of GPS-guided ordnance would have been dropped on that location ages ago. That means the United States would have to go in with ground forces, and go in big -- and immediately upon arrival, they would be hit from all sides: the Afghan Taliban, and the Pakistani jihadists, the Pakistani public, and even the military.

---

Messenger on the move. Text MSN to 63463 now!

FW: Must Read: Correctly understanding Lal Masjid: Detailed Analysis

Further to my previous email i.e. Lal Masjid Analysis the following comprehensively covers the Lal Masjid Fiasco.

 

___

 

The bloodbath unleashed by Musharraf's forces at the Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) in Islamabad has shown just how far he is prepared to go to achieve his aims. Amidst claim and counter claim from the regime in the aftermath of 'Operation Silence', it is beginning to emerge that hundreds, including women and children, may have been killed in the bloody assault. It is rumoured that Musharraf himself rejected a possible deal at the last moment that could have led to a peaceful outcome and instead ordered the assault. What is known is that Abdul Rashid Ghazi, one of the two brothers who led the Red Mosque, were killed.

It is well known that the Red Mosque had extensive links with elements of the establishment. ISI officials have in the past been closely connected with the seminary, links that were forged during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. The question that arises is how has it been possible for the Mosque students to go virtually unchallenged in the last 6 months on the streets of Islamabad? In their self styled campaign they targeted alleged prostitutes and music shops. Yet the obvious question is how has this been possible right under the noses of Musharraf's regime, an area where the National Assembly, Supreme Court and Musharraf's Presidential Palace itself is closely situated nearby? How were these students in the Red Mosque allowed to build up such an alleged large arsenal of weapons without been detected?

Musharraf has tried to justify the operation by saying that he wanted a peaceful outcome and avoid large-scale casualties, particularly with such a large number of women and children being involved. However his real intention was made evident when on 29 ^th June he said to journalists "Can you guarantee that blood of any dead or injured will not be screened on television channels during the operation?" If the regime really wanted a peaceful outcome all it had to do was wait after cutting off all gas, electricity and food supplies to the compound. The recent past shows that Musharraf has always used military force in such situations where he has been confronted by opponents, whether Islamic or Nationalistic. The lessons of Nawab Akbar Bugti, the Balochi rebels and the operations in the tribal areas of Waziristan show this to be true. Indeed in the past Musharraf has unashamedly said, "If someone happens to be very close to [the target], that somebody is an abetter and they suffer the loss. Sometimes, indeed, women and children have been killed but they have been right next to the place. It's not that the strike was inaccurate but they happen to be there, so therefore they are all supporters and abetters of terrorism - and therefore they have to suffer. It's bad luck."

The regime repeatedly alleged that there were 'hundreds' of fighters including suicide bombers inside as well being heavily armed with all sorts of light weaponry. Independent observes though estimated that at least over a thousand students were still inside the Red Mosque compound at the time of the assault, mostly women and children. Musharraf further alleged that highly wanted foreign terrorists were amongst the students. But by the regime's own admission only about 80 alleged fighters have been killed. It remains unclear how many women and children were rescued, if at all. No bodies have been produced thus far to substantiate the claim that foreign fighters were indeed amongst the dead. Moreover only 11 Pakistani commandos died in the operation. How could this be possible if the militants were so heavily armed and prepared for suicide bombings? Ghazi claimed in his final phone interview they only had 14 AK-47s to defend themselves. If Musharraf's claims were true there should have been many more deaths amongst his troops.

The other possible part of the explanation of why casualties were so low amongst the security forces is that they indiscriminately attacked everyone inside the Red Mosque to minimise their own losses. With the world's media gazing on, an air strike would have been political suicide. They had to be seen to be trying to save lives. Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz claimed that not a single woman or child died but as details emerge reports suggest otherwise. Indeed there are reports of mass graves being dug to quickly bury the dead with hundreds of students including women and children being killed with many more unaccounted for. With the media being denied access to the Mosque in the aftermath no one can believe the carefully choreographed footage shown on state television by a regime which has every motive to hide the number killed. The only question that remains is why Musharraf chose to wait so long whilst a surreal situation developed on the streets of Islamabad.

One can begin to see why and the real motives at play when one evaluates the wider picture for Musharraf's actions. The whole issue began when Musharraf's regime demolished six mosques it claimed were built illegally on government land prompting girls from the adjoined Jamia Hafsa to occupy a library at the beginning of this year. It is not hard to see how the regime easily goaded the Red Mosque. Musharraf needed a distraction as the political opposition continued to build momentum opposing his bid to be re-elected to the Presidency using the current National and Provincial assemblies as expected later this year. Musharraf is desperate to hang on to both the Presidency and the Chief of Army Staff post, his real source of power. Rather than taking the risk of relying upon new assemblies, Musharraf seeks a new 5-year term rubber stamped by the current assemblies. 

The opposition snowballed with Musharraf's clumsy attempted dismissal of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Iftikhar Chaudary, who he tried to remove unceremoniously so that a more pliant lackey would negate any legal challenges to his re-election. Chaudary's unprecedented opposition to Musharraf has created a crisis, which has sent him reeling. In recent months the opposition has cleverly exploited the issue built around Chaudary, which has seen thousands taking to the streets of Pakistan, all opposed to Musharraf. This culminated with the pro-Musharraf MQM clashing with opposition supporters on the streets of Karachi on May 12th 2007 where Chaudary was due to address a rally. Dozens of people were shot dead and many more injured. With Geo and Aaj Television studios also being attacked, Musharraf has tried to intimidate and silence the media from reporting on recent events. It is no coincidence that he deployed 12,000 security personnel around Islamabad, a grotesque overkill designed in reality to prevent any kind of political protests.

In the next few weeks the Supreme Court is due to rule on the suspension of the Chief Justice, which has thrown out evidence from Musharraf's lawyers. Together with this backdrop and his regime's abysmal response to the recent Balochistan floods, Musharraf is under severe pressure to do something to save his skin, which he literally described as his army uniform. This pressure was further amplified with the political opposition massing in London for an 'All Parties Conference' (APC) in which all the major opposition leaders from 38 parties attended, apart from Benazir Bhutto, who sent her deputy Makhdoom Amin Fahim instead for the PPP.

Musharraf has always sought to divide the opposition. It was no small achievement to see so many disparate groups come together. The APC agreed that if Musharraf tries to have himself re-elected before holding new elections they would all resign on masse from the Senate and Assemblies. All agreed apart from Bhutto's PPP, which said it will consider it's position at such a time. With the attack on the Red Mosque Musharraf has clearly hoped it will help break the momentum of the opposition, divert attention away from the APC and reinvigorate his position in the West as 'bulwark' against 'Islamic Extremism'. Musharraf's objective is clear; he wants to hold on to power at any cost.

This is not the only pressure Musharraf is facing. The recent book by Dr Ayesha Siddiqa, Military Inc, has only brought more scrutiny on the actions of his regime. The book revealed how the top tier of Musharraf's handpicked officers are more busy making money in business enterprises and sinecures rather then focusing on defending the country. Where Musharraf has deployed his troops, it has been to placate his western masters.  Musharraf has deployed more than 80,000 Pakistani troops in the tribal areas to aid America's 'War on Terror'.

Musharraf's chosen course has serious implications for Pakistan and marks a watershed in his dictatorship. His operations in Waziristan and Balochistan before were relatively out of sight; the Red Mosque attack was covered live on TV. Musharraf has clearly signalled that he is ready to spill blood and wants everyone in Pakistan, his opponents in particular, to understand this. Whether this intent is a bluff or not, Musharraf actions are only likely to provide him short-term relief. As in the case of the Chief Justice, many Pakistanis will see thorough Musharraf's scheming as the true picture emerges behind the Red Mosque massacre. Many will be understandably distraught throughout the country including the NWFP and the tribal heartlands. Inevitably there can only be more bloodshed in Pakistan, as some will choose violence to retaliate.

Musharraf's myopic policies, not withstanding their heinous nature, have set the scene for a violent backlash, raising the spectre of civil war. Already nearly 70 Pakistani troops have been killed in a suicide bomb attacks, 24 in one alone. Whilst many fear these consequences, Musharraf himself may have concluded this and may actually even be hoping that this is the case. As opposition to him reaches unprecedented levels, further violence creates the perfect pretext to postpone elections indefinitely by declaring a state of emergency, effectively martial law. At a stroke Musharraf will have secured his power.

However such a strategy is flawed. This will no doubt tempt Musharraf. But his western backers are more realistic and understand that their 'man' may not last much longer. The Carnegie Endowment for International for Peace , an American think tank, has argued for all kinds of pressure to be applied on Musharraf to ditch his position of Army Chief. This is why the West has supported Musharraf's secret negotiations with Bhutto, perhaps the worst kept secret in Pakistan. A deal with Bhutto they believe will allow Musharraf to dump the religious parties of the MMA he has relied upon and use the PPP to lend a veneer of acceptable secular legitimacy to Musharraf's dictatorship. But a deal with Bhutto would not be without cost as inevitably she would seek to increase her own power at the expense of Musharraf's, in return for her party's support. More importantly Bhutto would hold little currency with many Pakistanis because of her past corrupt rule, such is her discredited character. Musharraf is damned whatever path he chooses.

But beyond Musharraf himself there are potentially graver perils on the horizon as he has opened a Pandora's box. A serious situation is developing in the northern area of Swat as Musharraf has dispatched another 10-20,000 troops to confront pro-Taliban forces. Just before the Red Mosque raid it is reported that Musharraf had agreed to give America and NATO permission to attack any target inside Pakistan itself. This Red Mosque raid may now provide a further pretext for such an eventuality and in fact may be the raison d'etre.

NATO and American forces have struggled to contain the Pushtun led rebellion to their occupation of Afghanistan, which has only multiplied. American and NATO forces have been itching to bomb the tribal regions of Pakistan who they accuse of aiding their ethnic and tribal brethren in Afghanistan. Whilst Musharraf's Generals are occupied with crony capitalism, their cowardness has been exposed by the utter subservience to America and the West. Just two weeks before the Red Mosque siege climax NATO forces shelled and injured 6 Pakistani troops amongst others. Musharraf has shown that he is unwilling to stand up for his own people when needed but is more than ready to spill their blood at the behest of his masters in Washington.

America's discomfort over the Afghanistan resistance has been exasperated by the 'peace' deals Musharraf's regime signed with rebels in Waziristan nearly two years ago. These deals have been repeatedly denounced by western politicians as a sign of Musharraf being soft in the 'War on Terror'. Musharraf, under pressure from within the Pakistan army, had good reason to sign these deals because the army was suffering heavy losses at the time; more than 700 soldiers had been killed. As predictable, the rebels in Waziristan have now announced in the aftermath of the Red Mosque raid that these deals no longer exist. Musharraf it seems has orchestrated this whole Red Mosque drama under pressure from Washington. Days before the Red Mosque raid a story in the New York Times claimed a large American operation to target the tribal regions in Waziristan was aborted in 2005 because Musharraf would not agree to it due to the inevitable domestic political fallout. It's almost certain that America must have known in advance the Red Mosque raid would take place. The message is clear, such 'weakness' on the part of Musharraf is no longer acceptable and is designed to pave the way forward.

Musharraf may now claim that NATO and American forces are needed to fight 'Islamic extremists' and justify their entry into Pakistan. Whilst America may bomb at will, the old enemy India will be relishing events unfolding inside Pakistan. The militant groups, which have been such a thorn for India since the 1990s, will now be pitted against their previous masters, the Pakistan army. Never since the crisis of 1971, which led to East Pakistan breaking away to form Bangladesh, has Pakistan faced a graver crisis. Internally weakened Pakistan's very integrity now lies at stake.

The West has once again proven it's hypocrisy by backing a brutal dictator for it's interests. Even after the wanton spilling of so much blood they have been full of nothing but praise for their man. In Musharraf's case he is integral to the occupation of Afghanistan, the gateway to the oil and gas riches of Central Asia. With Pakistan being strategically located, it has become ever more important to deal with China and a resurgent Russia that are increasingly coordinating their opposition to the West.

The tragedy is that Pakistan is indispensable for America in her war in Afghanistan. That is why America continues to shower all kinds of aid upon Musharraf and his regime. America has given $10 billion since September 2001. Just before the Red Mosque assault, in a bid to shore up their agent, America handed over two F-16s flown in personally by a US Air force General. Emboldened by the carnage at the Red Mosque Musharraf declared t that "Extremism and terrorism will be defeated in every corner of the country".

The Red Mosque episode will go down as a decisive moment in Pakistan's turbulent history. As British military chiefs fear 'regime change', there can only be two paths for Pakistan now; gradual disintegration or honour with the restoration of the Khilafah. In the past Musharraf has abandoned the Muslims of Afghanistan, implicated and humiliated Dr A.Q Khan in alleged nuclear proliferation, abandoned Pakistan's traditional position on Kashmir and voiced strong support for the recognition of Israel. Now he is turning Pakistan's army against it own people. Musharraf is the very opposite of what ordinary Pakistanis stand for. Musharraf has shown that he has truly joined the ranks of great tyrants, like Uzbekistan's Islam Karimov and the atrocity in Andijan in 2005, with his brutal Red Mosque massacre. But Allah (SWT) is watcher over all things and surely Musharraf will face his reckoning on the Day of Judgment when he meets his creator. For as Allah (SWT) says in the Quran:

"On the Day when every soul will find itself confronted with all that it hath done of good and all that it hath done of evil (every soul) will long that there might be a mighty space of distance between it and that (evil)."  
[Surah Al-Imran 3:30]

---

Messenger on the move. Text MSN to 63463 now!

FW: Musharraf Murdered Over 1,000 Innocent Pakistanis in Islamabad, Pakistan

Publisher: INFORMATION PRESS - News Views Media - USA

Chief Editor: Journalist SYED ADEEB http://www.InformPress.com

Terrorist Musharraf Murdered Over 1,000 Innocent Pakistanis in 

Islamabad, Pakistan 

1. Evil Terrorist General Pervez Musharraf, Criminal 

Terrorist Shaukat Aziz, Corrupt Terrorist Ministers of the Terrorist

Musharraf Mafia illegally massacred, burned and slaughtered over one 

thousand (1,000) innocent Pakistani women, children, students and men

at the Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) and Islamic schools during 3 July to 11 

July 2007 in Islamabad, Pakistan. The Musharraf Tyranny dig mass

graves and buried two or three dead or burned bodies of Pakistani 

citizens in only ONE coffin in Pakistan, according to the media-press

and TV news reports of Wednesday, 11 July 2007. Musharraf set 

the Red Mosque on fire, burned Pakistanis alive and gagged the

Pakistani press-media to unlawfully hide his barbarous crimes against 

humanity.

 Bring the Musharraf-Aziz-Altaf Crime Mafia to Legal Justice

 http://www.petitiononline.com/trimafia

 3. Black Day in Pakistan

 http://www.dictatorshipwatch.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=574&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

http://www.dictatorshipwatch.com 

4. Hundreds Feared Killed in Mosque Siege

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2061995.ece?print=yes 

5. Nation Would Take Revenge From Dictatorial Rulers After My

Martyrdom: Abdul Rasheed Ghazi Shaheed

 http://www.onlinenews.com.pk/details.php?id=114879

http://www.nation.com.pk/daily/july-2007/11/index7.php

http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/indepth/cluster/2007/07/070709_lal_mosque_zs.shtml 

6. The Rules Change When Dictators Serve U.S. Interests

The mosque siege reveals Musharraf's desperation to appear tough in

the war of terror. But in truth he is a friend to MQM terrorists 

By IMRAN KHAN - Chairman - Pakistan Justice Movement

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,330171668-103677,00.html 

8. Mosque Massacre:  Washington's "War of Terror" Shakes Pakistan

 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jul2007/paki-j11.shtml

9. Surrender or Die -  Pakistan's Dictator Threatens Massacre at

Islamabad Mosque

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jul2007/paki-j09.shtml 

10. Bush Administration Rushes to Pakistani Dictator's Aid

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jun2007/mush-j22.shtml 

11. Pakistan Army Made Prisoner of Conscience After Lal Masjid

 Carnage: Qazi

 http://www.jamaat.org/news/2007/jul/10/1001.html

12. Elections in the Presence of Musahrraf Would Strengthen Military 

Dictatorship: Qazi

 http://www.jamaat.org/news/2007/jul/07/1003.html

15. Afghans Still Dying as the Bush-Cheney Junta Tries to Defeat

Popular Taliban (Students) 

http://www.muslimedia.com/afg-stilldie.htm 

 19. ICSSA: http://www.icssa.org 

20. JASARAT - Daily Urdu Newspaper of Pakistan

http://www.jasarat.com/details.php?category=nation&date=11-07-2007&newsid=08.gif 

---

Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!

FW: Red Mosque Fallout Could Derail Election Schedule

The much-anticipated Red Mosque operation in Islamabad, Pakistan, on Monday was in its final stages. Security forces were cleaning up and trying to fully secure the mosque/madrassa complex. Intense fighting between security forces and the militants lasted about four hours. At least 40 militants and roughly six security personnel reportedly were killed. Dozens were wounded on both sides, and some 50 militants were arrested. As of the writing of this piece, however, there is not much information on the fate of the women and children the militants were holding hostage.

After the dust settles and more information becomes available regarding casualties and damage to the mosque, Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf's government likely will face the wrath of radical and Islamist militant forces in the country. This likely will involve a significant wave of attacks against government, military and Western targets throughout the country. There also could be assassination attempts against Musharraf and other key government and military officials.

Meanwhile, there already are indications that the government is going to engage in anti-terrorism and counterinsurgency operations elsewhere, especially in the North-West Frontier Province and Federally Administered Tribal Areas. A militant reaction to the Red Mosque operation or a sweeping government action against jihadist forces -- or both -- is likely to lead to significant violence and unrest. The United States likely will be watching the situation closely and will be ready to act should the situation arise. In such a situation the government could move to impose some form of emergency rule.

The imposition of emergency rule could allow the government to get a handle on the militancy in the country and even lead to the capture or elimination of al Qaeda-related high-value targets -- albeit after a long and bloody campaign. But it would further complicate the political situation because the parliamentary and presidential elections slated for the fall would have to be postponed. This could create political unrest in addition to a militant insurgency.

Even if Musharraf decides against imposing emergency rule, the fallout from the Red Mosque operation could still cause a delay in the elections. At the very least, parliament could be dismissed, which would allow Musharraf to continue as a president leading a caretaker government for some time before new elections could be held. But this will only allow him a limited amount of time to conclude ongoing back-channel talks with his political opponents to secure his own political future.

In the wake of the Red Mosque operation, Musharraf will need not just the support of the Pakistan People's Party, whose secular ideology he shares, he also will need the support of some of the more pragmatic Islamist elements to help counter extremists and militants. Here is where Maulana Fazlur Rehman's Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam -- the largest component party of the Islamist coalition Mutahiddah Majlis-i-Amal -- could play a role.

But this depends on whether the president will be able to press ahead with the elections and deal with the militancy at the same time. Musharraf no longer has the luxury of dealing with them separately.

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: Pakistan among the top ten countries experiencing deteriorating press freedoms

6. PAKISTAN
Leader: President Pervez Musharraf
Indicators: Eight journalists killed in the last five years. At least 15 journalists abducted in that time. Government security agents interrogate reporters who interview Taliban figures.
Key fact: Government's own Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence is suspected in some abductions.
The Top 10 Countries where press freedom has most deteriorated

http://www.cpj.org/backsliders/

 

New York, May 2, 2007—Three nations in sub-Saharan Africa are among the places worldwide where press freedom has deteriorated the most over the last five years, a new analysis by the Committee to Protect Journalists has found. Ethiopia, where the government launched a massive crackdown on the private press by shutting newspapers and jailing editors, leads CPJ's dishonor roll. The African nations of the Gambia and the Democratic Republic of Congo join Russia and Cuba among the world's worst "backsliders" on press freedom.

"Democracy's foothold in Africa is shallow when it comes to press freedom," said CPJ Executive Director Joel Simon. "These three African nations, as diverse as they are, have won praise at times for their transition to democracy—but they are actually moving in reverse on press issues. Journalists in Ethiopia, Gambia, and DRC are being jailed, attacked, and censored, a picture far worse than what we saw only a few years ago."

In issuing its report to mark World Press Freedom Day, May 3, CPJ is calling attention this year to long-term erosion in press conditions. Rounding out CPJ's "Top 10 Backsliders" are Pakistan, Egypt, Azerbaijan, Morocco, and Thailand.

Audio Slide Show CPJ's Robert Mahoney tells the backstory of "Backsliders"

The backsliders reflect a mixture of relatively open countries that have turned increasingly repressive and traditionally restrictive nations where press conditions, remarkably, have worsened. Nations such as Thailand and Morocco have been considered press freedom leaders in their regions but have charted sharp declines over the past five years. Other countries such as Cuba have long had poor records but have ratcheted up press restrictions through widespread imprisonments, expulsions, and harassment.

"The behavior of all of these countries is deeply troubling, but the rapid retreats in nations where the media have thrived demonstrate just how easily the fundamental right to press freedom can be taken away," Simon added.

To determine trends in press conditions, CPJ analyzed case data worldwide for the years 2002 through 2007. Its staff judged conditions in seven categories: government censorship, judicial harassment, criminal libel prosecutions, journalist deaths, physical attacks on the press, journalist imprisonments, and threats against the press. CPJ staff excluded from consideration major conflict zones such as Iraq and Somalia, which lack conventional governance and newsgathering.

Patterns that emerge from CPJ's analysis include:

• Authorities in several countries are silencing critical coverage by imprisoning journalists. Cuba and Ethiopia became two of the world's leading jailers of journalists in the past five years. Morocco, often cited as a regional model for press freedom, is now tied with Tunisia for the dubious distinction of sentencing the most journalists to prison in the Arab world.

• Violent attacks are going unpunished in many of these countries. In Pakistan, eight journalists have been slain in the last five years, but arrests and convictions have been won in only one case. In Russia, 11 journalists have been murdered in the last five years, but no case has been solved.

• Judicial harassment is being used increasingly in many of these nations. In Egypt, 85 criminal cases were launched against journalists between 2004 and 2006. In DRC and Azerbaijan, criminal defamation prosecutions are rising. And in Morocco, politically motivated lawsuits have effectively sidelined a number of the country's most outspoken editors.

• Censorship orders and restrictive legislation are being used in several nations. In Thailand, the new military junta issued broad censorship orders for broadcast outlets. In the Gambia, authorities have shut down a leading independent newspaper. And in Russia, the president signed a law equating critical coverage with "extremism."

• Escalating government attacks in Morocco and Egypt have coincided with increasing assertiveness on the part of independent publications.

Here are CPJ's "Top 10 Backsliders." The figures cited are annual unless noted

---

Everything in one place… All new Windows Live!

FW: Solid overview of the political situation in Pakistan

The tragic loss of life in Karachi in May at the hands of the Pakistani government in collaboration with its MQM allies sadly epitomises Pakistan's condition as it approaches the anniversary of its sixtieth year of 'independence.' The division of Pakistan in 1971, the deteriorating standoff with the Indian backed regime in Kabul, the abandonment of Kashmir, the imprisonment of Dr A.Q. Khan, the callous slaughter of citizens in Waziristan and now the dismissal of the Chief Justice of Pakistan have all contributed to the current depression Pakistan faces. Alongside this, there is endemic corruption, the failure to distribute wealth to the poorest in society, a politicised military and judiciary and of course a subservient foreign policy that would make an American politician blush. All of this is underpinned by the absence of any kind of a rule of law throughout Pakistan's military.

The current administration remains in office but not in power. Yet the root cause of Pakistan's sad predicament is not confined to this, the worst regime in its history. The causes are systemic. What is clear is instead of following its own independent path, consecutive Pakistani administrations have outsourced their governing responsibilities to the United States and its foreign policy goals.

There is now strong and credible evidence emerging of an expected deal between Benazir Bhutto and General Musharraf, brokered by British government officials and un-named US participants. The US has realised that if Musharraf is to stay in power (and this assessment is ongoing) than an accommodation with other powerful interests in Pakistan has to be brought about. To this end the pro-British and secular Benazir Bhutto is the ideal candidate to fit into the US dominated political structure. In exchange for Benazir Bhutto and her foreign backer's support, the US is prepared to concede some influence within the civilian institutions of Pakistan, while maintaining an ever tighter grip over the army itself. While most observers may be concerned with the specific contours of the deal, the reality is that authority lies with foreign actors in London and Washington and not the Pakistani people in deciding the political destiny of Pakistan .

After witnessing the corruption of the Bhutto administration in the late 1980's, then falling for it again in the early 1990's during Ms Bhutto's second tenure, Pakistan is now bracing itself for an unprecedented third sting from the same hole in an open insult to the historical recollection of every Pakistani. This process proves without a doubt that the politics of Pakistan have been usurped by secular aristocratic elites, whether feudal or military in nature. These elites supported to the hilt by their foreign backers have a wide ranging disregard for any progress that a state such as Pakistan, with its huge agricultural and industrial potential should enjoy. Whether or not the personality of Bhutto emerges as the future Prime minister as a result of this latest deal is irrelevant. 

This time around, however, the Benazir Bhutto political face lift is more dangerous to the Muslim character of the Pakistani masses than ever. The PPP is being introduced by General Musharraf as a natural ideological ally in his quasi-intellectual assault on Islam in Pakistan and globally, through his shameful links with the worst and most brutal dictators on earth. By assembling an alliance of secular anti-Islamist political forces inspired by his hero Mustafa Kemal, General Musharraf seeks to use the institutions of Pakistan to roll back the process of Islamisation that has increased over the last two decades in Pakistan, and which has accelerated particularly over the last six years.

Only the one who severed Afghanistan from Pakistan (and who is now forced to put 90,000 troops on that border), who sacrificed Pakistan's strategic depth and who betrayed former allies and 'brothers in arms' to America in its war on Islam in exchange for a fistful of US dollars, could be expected to take this initiative against the Islamic character of Pakistan. Only the most corrupt regime in Pakistan's history, that of Benazir Bhutto, could he have found as an ally for this dishonourable initiative. The corruption of the 1990's combined with the betrayal of the first decade of the 21st century provides a perfect storm in terms of bringing about an extremely worrying and dangerous immediate future for Pakistan.

It must be understood that there are two key areas of influence in Pakistan, one is the political medium which consists of the elected representatives and the opinion formers/makers and the other is the military as an institution, and its leadership in particular. As for the political medium, the personalities of it are well known, as are their histories and loyalties. These need to be brought out into the open in a frank and sincere manner of accountability, answering to the charge of placing foreign interests above those of the Muslim masses of Pakistan. Those of sincerity in the political medium must be engaged with and invited to adopt the true liberating and independent interests of Pakistan, the Islamic interests that flow from the founding idea of Pakistan itself. As for the second area, it must be clear that despite the treachery against Islam and Pakistan that the current military leadership has perpetrated, it remains a military made up of Muslims to protect the lives and honour of the Muslims of Pakistan. Violence against the military (which some misguided have called for) will only descend Pakistan further into chaos and instability, a direction the enemies of Islam wish for Pakistan to go in.

Instead, a constructive path, not destructive, must be engaged in. A renewed effort at re-establishing the Khilafah is what the army and people must be invited to. Some claim this is unrealistic and naïve, yet according to a recent opinion poll carried out by the University of Maryland, 74% of Pakistanis support the establishment of a unified Khilafah in the Muslim world. The establishment of such an entity is therefore not a question of if but when. Only with a comprehensive elimination of the current flawed systems presided over by an unaccountable elite, and their replacement with the constitution, judiciary and systems of the Islamic Khilafah can the direction of Pakistan be comprehensively changed for the better. The Prophet (saw) firmly established this principle of rule of law in the following hadith " What destroyed the nations preceding you, was that if a noble amongst them stole, they would forgive him, and if a poor person amongst them stole, they would inflict Allah's Legal punishment on him. By Allah, if Fatima, the daughter of Muhammad stole, I would cut off her hand." The fact that no one is above the law, not the Prophet's daughter, not the Caliph, not the rich or the well connected, is integral to the Khilafah system. Yet in Pakistan like in so many western democratic states the General, the ruling party, those who are rich and powerful consider themselves to be above the law. After the failed experiments of socialism, IMF capitalism and feudalism, it is only the Khilafah that can take power away from the feudal landowners and the rich industrialists, implement a real rule of law, produce economic prosperity for the many and not the few and ensure political decisions on the future of Pakistan are made in Islamabad not London or Washington.

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: Pakistan: The Problems With Musharraf's Survival Plan

Summary

In an effort designed to help dissipate the growing political storm in the country and secure his own re-election, Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf plans, among other things, to reinstate suspended Pakistani Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry. The plan is crippled by too many moving parts, however, meaning Musharraf at best could only hold on to power as a president sharing power with a prime minister at the head of a coalition government.

Analysis

Richard Boucher, the U.S. assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asian affairs, arrived June 12 in Islamabad on a two-day official visit. Topping the agenda of discussion between Boucher and Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf is Pakistan's increasing crisis of governance. Boucher will relay Washington's interest in having Musharraf remain at the helm, but also will communicate that Musharraf needs to reach an accommodation with his opponents.

The two main reasons informing Musharraf's decision to tough it out in the face of the South Asian nation's rapidly expanding crisis are U.S. backing and the support of the senior generals within Pakistan's military hierarchy. Musharraf also knows that he must demonstrate to both Washington and his own generals that he very much controls the situation to ensure their continued support. To do so he has devised a plan to defuse the political crisis involving reinstating suspended Pakistani Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, something that also will help create conditions conducive for his own re-election.

Though Chaudhry's reinstatement might provide the embattled general with a brief respite, his bid for re-election is going to be extremely hard to pull off in part due to the increasingly assertive nature of Pakistan's judiciary and the media. Ultimately, there is just too much that can go wrong in the process of securing a second term.

The first step in defusing tensions was the government's June 9 move to withdraw restrictions on the media; this had two effects. First, it satisfied concerns within the Bush administration, which was finding it difficult to support Musharraf while his government was openly limiting free speech. Second, it prevented the anti-Musharraf movement from receiving a sudden and major boost.

In the meantime, the government produced a budget significantly increasing government employee salaries and announced that an election schedule would be released soon after parliament approved the budget. Musharraf himself said June 8 that the nation would hear the good news about the end of the ongoing political crisis. "The ongoing drama will end itself very soon and there is nothing to worry about it," he told members of parliament from the ruling coalition and Cabinet members.

The next step will be allowing Pakistan's Supreme Court to reinstate the chief justice, which will be Musharraf's way of neutralizing the legal community's protests. Once back on the job, Chaudhry will not be able to participate in rallies given his position as a nonpartisan national figure -- thus taking the chief justice and his supporters out of the limelight. The government also will try to block Chaudhry from presiding over cases involving the president on grounds that as a party to a dispute with the president, the top jurist cannot appear unbiased against Musharraf. The chief justice and his allies indeed would like to see Chaudhry's restoration and Musharraf's ouster. The government, however, hopes the restoration will forestall the latter.

The chief justice's reinstatement could provide some brief respite to Musharraf. But the president general must go through the process of re-election, which according to the government must take place between Sept. 15 and Oct. 15. The presidential election is highly controversial because Musharraf is seeking re-election from the same electoral college, composed of the current national and provincial legislatures, that elected him in the first place. His opponents have demanded fresh parliamentary elections before the presidential vote. But the main opposition group, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP) of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto might be willing to negotiate a deal whereby Musharraf can be re-elected on the condition he steps down as military chief.

Accepting a president in uniform is a redline the PPP cannot cross and sustain its position as the country's largest political party and its reputation of being anti-establishment. Musharraf's uniform constitutes the basis of his power, and assuming the role of a civilian president is a prospect fraught with perils. Even so, mounting pressure to defuse the crisis could force his hand and make him decide to retire from the military, though that would entail another set of complexities.

Ideally, Musharraf wants to remain army chief of staff until after the parliamentary elections to be held sometime in November, though even he knows that under the present conditions that is asking too much. At a bare minimum, however, he wants to remain military chief until the first week of October so he can oversee the next round of routine promotions and retirements of senior generals. That would allow him to stack the military deck with people he can theoretically work with even after becoming a civilian president.

Another hurdle to his re-election is that even if he were to have a deal with the PPP, members of parliament from the Islamist coalition, the Mutahiddah Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) -- which controls one and a half provinces and is one of the largest opposition blocs in parliament -- could see its members tender their resignations, thereby rendering the electoral college dysfunctional. And street protests would come back with a bang should Musharraf try to force his way to re-election. So any deal would have to include not just the PPP, but the MMA and the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz of former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, whom Musharraf ousted from power in 1999.

Balancing the civilian side of his government with the military side is rapidly becoming untenable for Musharraf. As a result, the resolution to the current crisis requires a very complex arrangement that under the present conditions is unlikely to hold. Thus Musharraf at best can hope to share power as a civilian with a much broader array of far more assertive civilians.

---

Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!

FW: Musharraf's Mini-Reshuffle of Corps Commanders

Three corps of the Pakistani military will get new commanders July 1, Pakistani daily The News reported in its June 29 issue. GEO TV also reported on Thursday that the commanders of the 11th Corps based at Peshawar, the 12th Corps based at Quetta and the 31st Corps based at Bahawalpur will be changed. GEO's report also mentioned that several hundred majors had been promoted to the rank of lieutenant colonel.

The promotion of the junior officers is likely a routine affair -- and, in calmer times, the reshuffling of senior generals would have been considered a normal matter as well. But given the ongoing political crisis and the pending elections -- both presidential and parliamentary in the fall, such changes cannot be glossed over as routine matters. What is more, there is already a reshuffle scheduled to take place in the first week of October, when the two other four-star generals besides President Gen. Pervez Musharraf -- Vice Chief of the Army Staff Gen. Ahsan Saleem Hayat and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee Gen. Ehsan-ul-Haq -- are due to stand down. Thursday's changes, then, constitute a mini-reshuffle designed to facilitate the coming major round of promotions triggered by the generals' retirements.
Even before his latest round of political troubles, Musharraf reshuffled the deck several times as a means to maintain his hold on power -- the most recent time was March 7, a mere two days before he suspended Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, sparking the current crisis. But, now more than ever, Musharraf feels the need to ensure that he has firm control over the military -- his core constituency -- which makes these changes of the corps commanders all the more important.
At a time when he faces increasing difficulty enforcing his decisions in the political realm, these changes are the one thing over which he does maintain control. Since March 9, a number of Musharraf's political decisions have failed to turn out the way he hoped they would. These include the decision to sack the chief justice and blocking his visit to Karachi on May 12, and the June 4 move to place curbs on the media.
Moreover, Musharraf's main political ally, the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (PML), also is buckling under the pressure of the crisis, with its leadership gravely concerned about their own political survival. As a result, the party is increasingly out of step with the president. While Musharraf is trying to reach an accommodation with the main opposition group, the Pakistani People's Party (PPP), PML chief Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain said June 27 that his party would not cooperate with the PPP because of ideological differences. Meanwhile, PML Secretary-General Mushahid Hussain Sayed criticized the government for preventing the suspended chief justice from going to Karachi -- a decision that led to violence that claimed the lives of more than 40 people and to the move to crack down on the media.
The sheer number of moving parts that constitute the civilian side of the Musharrafian political system -- along with the president's decreasing ability to steer them in a direction that will ensure his own re-election later this year -- has forced Musharraf to consider multiple complex options to get through the hurdle of the elections.
Just how he plans to proceed with the elections depends upon the outcome of a number of issues that are likely to be decided sometime early in July. PPP Chairwoman and former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto has called an important meeting of her party's central executive committee in London, where important decisions will be made regarding the party's strategy for the coming transition. There is also an All Parties Conference called by Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz leader and former Premier Nawaz Sharif -- also being held in London in the second week of July -- which could be decisive in defining a unified opposition stance on how to proceed with the coming vote and try to force Musharraf from office.
Elsewhere, the supreme council of the Islamist coalition, the Mutahiddah Majlis-i-Amal, is supposed to decide in its July 1 meeting whether it will quit its provincial government in North-West Frontier Province and withdraw from the coalition government it shares with the ruling PML in Balochistan province. Musharraf himself is expected to decide by mid-July whether he will move to dissolve the national and/or provincial assemblies and hold fresh parliamentary elections, or try to force his way through presidential elections as per the original plan. Last but not least, the Supreme Court also is expected to give its verdict on the issue of the chief justice's suspension sometime in July.
Therefore, it makes sense for Musharraf to start consolidating his position with the army now, rather than wait until October. He will need the maximum degree of certainty regarding the military in order to deal with the increasing uncertainty in the political arena.

---

She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!

FW: Washington and the Musharraf Administration's Future

Great expectations have been attached to U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Richard Boucher's visit to Islamabad, which began on Tuesday. Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf is hoping the visit will help him sustain his faltering hold on power. Musharraf's opponents hope the Bush administration will help them eventually force Musharraf from office. The day of Musharraf's departure is imminent; he has simply made too many mistakes and burned too many bridges.

Yet, despite all of his eminent and obvious weaknesses, Musharaff's (many) opponents have not been able to eject him from the scene. This is in part because of an odd belief within Pakistani structures.

Many within the Pakistani political world believe that the player with the most irons in the Pakistani fire is the United States. Understanding that mindset is not particularly difficult. One of the commonalities in Pakistani governments going back to nearly the country's creation is that the United States has ultimately played the role of security supporter, if not outright guarantor. Regardless of whether the opponent was Soviet or Indian, the United States has played a critical role in Pakistani security, leading to the cynical view among many Pakistanis that their governments have been supported by three As: Allah, the army and America. And with the war in Afghanistan almost exclusively supplied via Pakistani supply routes, that does not appear about to change.

Therefore many Pakistani political players -- particularly within the military -- are unwilling to move against Musharraf, no matter how bad things get, without a green light from Washington, for fear they could get burned.

Ultimately, however, such thinking not only misses the point, it is simply wrong. It is Pakistan that holds the balance of power in this relationship, not the United States. And though Islamabad depends on financial and military assistance from Washington, it is Washington that cannot fight the war in Afghanistan without Pakistan, not the other way around. It is the United States that is bogged down in Iraq, not Pakistan.

Strategically, Washington would much rather count India as an ally. It is bigger, richer and the political culture is more similar. Yet the United States is fighting a war that requires troops and materiel to be moved through Pakistan. That means the United States will work with whoever happens to be in Pakistan's big chair, not because Washington wants to, but because it must.

The United States, then, is not allied with Musharraf the person, or the Musharraf government, but with the state of Pakistan -- read: its military. This means should Musharraf suddenly be out of the picture, the United States, after few heartburn-filled meetings, will simply hammer out a new deal with his replacement.

Put another way, the United States does not much care who runs Pakistan as long as there is stability in Islamabad; after all, it currently is supposedly enamored with a man who rose to power via a coup in 1999. And as soon as the various power players in Pakistan recognize that little fact, Musharraf's days truly will be numbered.

---

She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!

FW: Musharraf to allow US to hunt the Taliban inside Pakistan

Clearly for this dictator words such as sovereignty and honour have no meaning.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IG03Df03.html

US to hunt the Taliban inside Pakistan
By Syed Saleem Shahzad

KARACHI - Since last September, North Atlantic Treaty Organization forces in Afghanistan have been pressing Islamabad for the right to conduct extensive hot-pursuit operations into Pakistan to target Taliban and al-Qaeda bases.

According to Asia Times Online contacts, NATO and its US backers have gotten their wish: coalition forces will start hitting targets wherever they might be.

Pakistani President General Pervez Musharraf is expected to



make an important announcement on extremism during an address to the nation in the next day or two.

The ATol contacts in Islamabad say that coalition intelligence has pinpointed at least four centers in the tribal areas of North Waziristan and South Waziristan on the border with Afghanistan from which Taliban operations inside Afghanistan are run. These bases include arms caches and the transfer and raising of money and manpower, the latter in the form of foot-soldiers to fight with the Taliban-led insurgency.

Operations inside Pakistan might be carried out independently by the United States, probably with air power, by Pakistani forces acting alone or as joint offensives. In all cases, though, the US will pull the strings, for instance by providing the Pakistanis with information on targets to hit.

Musharraf has apparently already told his military commanders, the National Security Council and decision-makers in government of the development.

Officially, both NATO and Pakistan deny any agreement on hot-pursuit activities. Major John Thomas, spokesman for NATO's International Security Assistance Force, told Asia Times Online, "The ISAF would not strike any targets across the border. That is not part of our mission. We work with the Pakistani government closely on cross-border issues. The ISAF does not have a counter-terrorism mission that I know of."

Similarly, the director general of the Inter-Services Public Relations of the Pakistani Armed Forces, Major-General Waheed Arshad, said NATO forces would not be allowed to intervene in Pakistani areas. He conceded that Pakistan is wary of growing extremism in the country, but said there is no threat of Talibanization.

"The Taliban are a problem for Afghanistan, not Pakistan. There are a few extremist groups operating in Pakistan and we have our own indigenous mechanism to counter them through law-enforcement agencies, and through paramilitary and military deployment," Waheed said.

Nevertheless, the ATol contacts are adamant that an agreement is in place for increased operations on Pakistani soil, given the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan and US fears of al-Qaeda using Pakistan as a base for planning operations in the West. There are precedents.

Last month, US Central Intelligence Agency drones targeted a madrassa in North Waziristan, and 20 people were killed. CIA drones tried to take out al-Qaeda No 2 Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri in January 2006 in Bajur Agency. Zawahiri survived, but 18 people died. In December 2005, al-Qaeda leader Hamza Rabia was killed by a CIA predator aircraft in the town of Mir Ali, North Waziristan.

However, new operations, which could begin within weeks, if not days, are expected to be much larger in scale.

A border in name only
In recent meetings at both the policy and operational levels between Washington and Islamabad, it was acknowledged that Pakistan simply cannot control its border with Afghanistan. Pakistan has established numerous military posts in the tribal areas, but with distances of as much as 20 kilometers between them they can't stop the cross-border flow, especially given the rugged nature of the terrain.

On the Afghan side of the border, NATO and the Afghan National Army have also established posts, but they are even less numerous than on the Pakistani side and, given their isolation, are open to enemy fire.

While most of the Taliban's cross-border activity takes place from the Waziristans, it extends to Chaman, Zhob and Noshki in the southwest and Bajaur and Mohmand in the northwest.

In North West Frontier Province, the settled towns of Tank, Laki Marwat, Bannu and Dera Ismail Khan have all but been taken over by the Pakistani Taliban and they recruit from these areas. The circle is expanding up to the Valley of Peshawar, which includes Peshawar city and Mardan. However, the Taliban's influence in the Valley of Peshawar is still basic.

On the other hand, a pro-Taliban force named Tehrik-i-Nifaz-i-Shariat-i-Mohammadi (TNSM) has spread rapidly, and its influence ranges from Bajaur, Malakand, Swat Valley and Mingora. The TNSM sent 10,000 men to Afghanistan in 2001 to fight against the US-led invasion. The organization is dedicated to the enforcement of Islamic laws. Like the Pakistan Taliban, the TNSM uses scores of illegal FM radio stations as a propaganda tool, and its popularity increases with every passing day.

All roads lead to the mosque
All these pro-Taliban/al-Qaeda zones on the Afghan border have connections with the Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) in Islamabad, run by outspoken brothers Maulana Abdul Aziz and Ghazi Abdul Rasheed. The brothers are openly pro-Taliban and also run large Islamic seminaries for boys and girls.

The Pakistani establishment believes Aziz is in fact the new leader of all the Taliban and al-Qaeda assets spreading through northwestern Pakistan, especially the zone commanded by the TNSM. Aziz delivers lectures by telephone every evening to TNSM members.

Lal Masjid has had numerous high-profile run-ins and standoffs with the government, but Islamabad has never risked an outright confrontation, given the power and influence of the brothers and their standing in the jihadist world.

They can be expected to organize sustained resistance should NATO/US forces launch attacks into Pakistan. Some reports claim that about 70 suicide bombers are waiting to be unleashed from the mosque. But any attack on the mosque could set off a chain reaction all the way from Islamabad to the Afghan border and beyond, in the process throwing Pakistan further into turmoil.

At this point in the "war on terror", this is something the US does not want, at least not until it has had one more crack at rooting out the Taliban and al-Qaeda from Pakistan. Washington has paid Pakistan about $1 billion a year for the past five years for its efforts in tackling terrorism. Now the US administration wants more return on that money.

Musharraf already faces intense opposition over his suspension of his chief justice on charges of malfeasance. Both political and religious opponents are riding the bandwagon with a vengeance, especially as the country faces presidential elections this year.

Senior US officials, including John Negroponte, the deputy secretary of state, and Richard Boucher, the assistant secretary of state, recently visited Pakistan to spell out to opposition leaders that the US is still behind Musharraf, although it will support the participation of secular, democratic political parties in government.

This development occurred even as Washington voiced its dissatisfaction over Musharraf's performance with regard to the Taliban: it pointed to Pakistan's clear involvement in supporting the insurgency in Helmand province since last year.

Indeed, the US was even prepared to withdraw its support of Musharraf, who seized power in 1999, but after a visit by Vice President Dick Cheney to Pakistan, the general remains in favor. Cheney's office is believed to run the United States' Pakistan policy.

The reasons are probably twofold: the US needs Pakistan's support should it attack Iran (covert operations into Iran are reportedly already taking place from Pakistan), and the US is concerned over the revival of the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Pakistan.

With regard to the latter, the head of the US Central Command, Admiral William Fallon, followed up Cheney's visit, warning Islamabad that the US needs Pakistan's assistance and approval to confront the bases. He also made it clear that any delay on the part of Pakistan to allow NATO operations could result in another major terror operation in the West. And if that happens, Pakistan will face the music.

Musharraf has already agreed to take some prisoners from the US detention facility at Guantanamo Bay (see Pakistan to help as the US's jailer, Asia Times Online, June 29). Now he's opening his doors to the United States' soldiers. It's a move fraught with danger for Musharraf and Pakistan, and one that could influence the direction of both the war in Afghanistan and the "war on terror".

Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com .

(Copyright 2007 Asia Times Online Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

---

She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!

FW: Lal Masjid quick analysis

Lal Masjid Analysis

 

Mad mullas in the capital of Pakistan. Trying to impose strict form of Islam. They have banned music, told the brothels to shut down, burning western dvds and their zealous activist are marching through Islamabad.

Compare this with women marathon incident few months ago or the hadood ordinance issue all are concluded with similarity that there exist a kind of talibanisation which is going to sweep Pakistan if Musharraf is made to leave the government. This is the hype which is created by the Musharraf government or context under which current situation of Lal masjid need to be looked in.

 

This is the mosque favoured by the elite and army top brass including generals etc regularly prayed there. Pakistani army or the ISI have historic links with jihadis earlier during Afghan war and later during Kashmir resistance movement. When September 11 happened and Musharraf decided to change his status from Chief of Army to Chief of American agents, this did not mean an immediate U-turn on all support to militant groups in Pakistan. As the White House correctly recognized, even if Musharraf was personally committed to this decision, he faced hard-line skeptics within his own army. The skeptics doubted the United States' staying power, lamented the costs of turning against long-time jihadi associates, and questioned the wisdom of picking fights with global terrorist outfits.

 

Musharraf desire to cling to power is such that he is willing to use any measure. He has time and time again told his western masters that "I am the last man standing". If I am not there then there are the Islamists with the finger on the button and time and time again this has restrained the west from calling to the return to the free elections

 

Only ISI manipulation of the 2002 elections permitted the Muttahida Majilis-e-Amal, or MMA -- Pakistan's major Islamist coalition -- to win the votes it needed to become a significant factor in national politics. No Islamist group or political party currently possesses the organizational capacity or popular support necessary to seize power in Islamabad, and in legitimate elections the MMA would likely win only a small percentage of the vote (probably around five percent, the historical norm). A truly free and fair vote would more likely return power to the mainstream civilian parties -- with power being held by some combination of Bhutto's PPP and Nawaz Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League.

 

Musharraf has worked on a two point formula, first to malign Islam as something to do with backwardness and second to use the islamist card to hang on to power.   The earlier is achieved by exhausting MMA politics by engaging them in petty issues such as woman marathon, hadood ordinance and now again through the Lal masjid fiasco the latter is as follow.

 

Islamabad is a place where six intelligence agencies of Pakistan operate and sniff every corner of it. It is impossible to imagine that thousands of people are able to gather in a mosque with weapons without ISI knowing them. That they are able to move on to actively operate in Islamabad such as kidnapping of police or individuals. This was all done under the nose of the ISI. This was also the time of the 12th may when Musharraf sacked the chief justice of Pakistan and this resulted in broad calls from around the world for democratic reforms and growing calls for Musharraf to resign and handover the power to the civilians.

 

This time again Musharraf by promoting Lal Masjid able to manipulate the whole situation. He allowed this drama to go on for months and took no actions. It indeed became clear when Molana Abdul Rashid was arrested, he immediately called for his cohort in the masjid to lay the weapons and surrender, and indeed thousands has. Compare this situation when these same jihadis who were so enthusiastically fighting the Kashmir jihad when ISI told them to stop they did.

 

The fact of the matter is that ISI exercise controlling influence in the jihadi groups. These are used by the Musharraf government as the card to defuse the pressure for any free elections and malign islam.

 

The clerics at the mosque knew very well about the strength of the Pakistan army and the big shift from "we will never surrender until the Sharia is implemented" to "we need to surrender" is an example lack of ideological agreement or sincerity with their own policy.

 

However Musharraf can not allow this situation to continue so as soon as the SC Judge case got stuck in the legal system of Pakistan and the tensions started to ease up, to show to his own army and the world that he is still in-charge using a well planned strategy he launched the operation on the Masjid. This was done by provoking some of the hardliners.

 

Regardless of whether the standoff ends with a surrender, with security forces storming the complex or with a combination of the two, the defeat of the Red Mosque cult will give Pakistani President Gen. Pervez Musharraf some relief from his larger legal and political crisis. But this reprieve likely will be temporary, because the case of suspended Pakistani Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry and Pakistan's coming elections will once again take center stage.

 

For now, Musharraf will be able to use the Red Mosque operation to impress upon the United States and the West that he must stay in power if the fight against Islamist radicalism and militancy is to continue. This could help counter any slide in Washington's support for his government. However, this support will not take care of the domestic situation, in which -- now more than ever -- Musharraf needs support from the main opposition party, former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP). This situation could give Bhutto a certain element of leverage in her back-channel communications with Musharraf, allowing her to drive a harder bargain and potentially forcing Musharraf to make concessions.

 

Additionally, this unprecedented operation against a mosque likely will create more resentment among conservative and extremist circles, which could lead the mainstream Islamist coalition, the Muttahida Majilis-i-Amal (MMA), to lose some of its influence to more extremist elements.

 

Musharraf, who already is in negotiations with the PPP and the largest component party of the MMA -- the Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam, led by Maulana Fazlur Rehman (Diesel) -- to help him get over the hurdle of his own re-election and the parliamentary polls, will now need the opposition parties' support not only to secure a second term but also to deal with the fallout from the Red Mosque operation, which could see increased militancy in the country.

 

Prior to the Red Mosque operation, Musharraf was already headed toward a situation in which he would at least be forced to share power. The operation could prevent him from losing power altogether -- which has been a prospect since early March, given the brewing crisis. That said, the continuing crisis and upcoming elections will put him in a position in which he cannot avoid giving up some of his power to the next civilian administration.

 

In conclusion two things need to be realized. Firstly that we must be careful in playing in the hands of the agent rulers who want to portray Islam as something backward and secondly the influence of the ISI amongst the Jihadis and use of this as a card by Musharraf to cling on to power. Muslims of Pakistan are well aware about the nature of Islam and Khilafah. It is the ruling system upon which all the other pillars of Islam rest and its implementation will result in true revival of Pakistan.

 

http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-07-04-voa9.cfm?rss=politics

http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?id=19d375fd-7885-4868-b1f7-7de65b866a35&MatchID1=4487&TeamID1=8&TeamID2=10&MatchType1=1&SeriesID1=1120&MatchID2=4471&TeamID3=2&TeamID4=4&MatchType2=2&SeriesID2=1111&PrimaryID=4487&Headline=Five+Pakistan+soldiers+killed+in+suicide+attack

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PAKISTAN_RADICAL_MOSQUE?SITE=OKTUL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PAKISTAN_BOMBING?SITE=OKTUL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/04/rss.htm#20

http://www.dawn.com/2007/07/04/rss.htm#16

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/6F5E0F65-53B8-4F4D-97E7-CC182D0D4854.htm

http://archive.gulfnews.com/world/Pakistan/10136810.html

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/07/04/asia/web.0704pakistan.php

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSISL18833720070704?feedType=RSS

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/04/wpak104.xml

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BRITAIN_BHUTTO?SITE=IADES&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

http://www.rand.org/commentary/031807SDUT.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6269140.stm

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/country_profiles/1156716.stm

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007%5C06%5C30%5Cstory_30-6-2007_pg7_39

http://jamestown.org/news_details.php?news_id=209

http://jamestown.org/news_details.php?news_id=202

http://www.iiss.org/index.asp?pgid=13370

http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news/article.php?articleid=2373418

http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed062507c.cfm

http://www.heritage.org/Research/AsiaandthePacific/hl1029.cfm

http://www.heritage.org/Research/AsiaandthePacific/wm1497.cfm

http://www.cfr.org/publication/13703/conversation_with_john_m_mcconnell_rush_transcript_federal_news_service.html

http://www.cfr.org/publication/13686/

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/research/asia/current_projects/pakistan/

http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/about/council/lyse_doucet/

http://www.brookings.edu/views/interviews/cohens/20070511.htm

http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/khan/20070319.htm

 

--
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify me, Any views or opinions presented in this email/Articles are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent me unless otherwise stated. If you no longer want to be part of this mailing list reply with No in the subject line. Thanks
________

---

She said what? About who? Shameful celebrity quotes on Search Star!

FW: Crisis in Pakistan: The suspension of the Chief Justice

On the 9th March 2007, only nine days after US vice president Dick Cheney visited Pakistan, General Musharraf suspended the chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Chaudhury. When news spread across the country, lawyers, judges and the general people spontaneously protested at his dismissal over trumped up charges of 'corruption'.

Why was the chief justice removed?

With the Pakistani elections scheduled for the end of the year, General Musharraf is desperate to stay in power. in order to do this he needs to postpone the elections and extend the tenure of the current assemblies and thus use their votes to prolong his term in office, a pliable supreme court is required to do this successfully.

This is where the problem lies. The chief justice was known for his 'independence of mind'. Even when other institutions in Pakistan rubber stamped government decisions, he had taken opposing views on some crucial issues. The judge took a strong line against the extra judicial arrests made by General Musharraf's secret services at the behest of the US. It was also reported that Iftikhar Chaudhry told trainee military officers in February that, in his opinion, General Musharraf could not continue as army chief beyond his present term as president. These incidents and others seemed to incense the dictator and he decided to remove the Judge as he was seen as an obstacle to his plans to stay in uniform and in power.

What was the reaction?

The response of the people and lawyers came as a great surprise to Musharraf. Demonstrations were brutally crushed by the security forces[1]. Even media channels which showed the demonstrations were taken off air for a short period.

On Friday 16th February another series of demonstrations occurred and were similarly crushed. Opposition leaders were arrested, even the former President, Rafique Tarar, was detained. Geo TV's news station was smashed up by the security forces. All this resulted in a great swathe of resentment against the government, where it was forced to apologise for the 'misdeeds of a few zealous' policemen.

What can we learn?

Musharraf's manipulation of the judiciary is in a long line of ploys aimed at extending his rule. However, these tactics are not only confined to military governments, previous civilian rulers have also undermined and dismissed chief justices of the supreme court. What stands out most clearly is that the rhetoric about Western values which Musharraf continually espouses has no credibility and can be sacrificed at the alter of Western interests. Pakistan is a land where democratic elections are held after military coups, where freedom of the press results in its restriction and judicial independence is subject to dictatorial suppression. This is supported directly or covertly by Western institutions and powers. Indeed talk of change is limited, even in the Western media, to which General might replace Musharraf 'now that he's served his purpose', and which politician can be annointed as Prime Minister to ensure a smooth pro-western succession.

The Muslims of Pakistan, both its masses and its intelligensia are now waking up to a political realisation that secular values are incapable of providing either economical progress or enlightenment. Values need to be permanent, independent and rugged, able to withstand criticism from analysts or onslaughts from opponents. The Khilafah is the system which provides representative rule, an independent judiciary and a constitution which provides stability. This is what the people of Pakistan are desperately seeking and indeed what they deserve. The official photo of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry is taken with a flag declaring the Quranic principle, "Rule over the people with Justice". Is it not time that that Quranic flag triumph over secular rule that has brought injusctice in Pakistan for so long?

Our responsibility is not to see Pakistan fall into a vicious circle of civilian and military rule, where either way the nations assets are sold to modern 'East India Companies', where the US can establish military bases and the water supply is negotiated away.

What can we do here in the UK?

1. Show our anger at the events of the Pakistani government, by contacting its representatives in the UK
2. Contact the media, urdu and english, and give our views that it is unacceptable for the government to continue in its current way.
3. Show the contrast in the approach that the British government and media has had with the Zimbabwean regime, when they condemned the brutal treatment of its opposition yet have remained silent over the excesses of its ally General Musharraf.
4. Tell as many relatives in Pakistan that Muslims here see what is happening - that these are all part of efforts of the US - through its proxy ruler in the region - to prevent the rise of an independent Islamic state in the region that governs with the justice of Islam to look after the affairs of its citizens. The Khilafah will prevent the US from exploiting the region and it is the only hope to end the cycle of corrupt rule that has plagued the people for decades.

FW: Musharraf's covert to overt dictatorship - Record of the conflict between the Government and Daw

Record of the conflict between the Government and Dawn 2004-2007

http://www.dawn.com/events/appendix/appendix.htm

Dear Madam / Sir,
I am writing to draw your attention to an important matter that indicates the rapidly worsening environment for the freedom of press in Pakistan.
It has always been difficult for governments to coexist with a free and independent press in Pakistan. Of late, however, the government headed by President Musharraf has become increasingly intolerant towards criticism in the press and towards the publishing of news that reflects poorly on the performance of his government on security matters.
One of the intended casualties of this swelling hostility between government and press in Pakistan is the DAWN Group of Newspapers, the country's largest independent English language newspaper and magazines publishing house .
Since December 2006, the DAWN Group is facing massive advertising cuts equivalent to two thirds of total government advertising. This has occurred primarily as a consequence of a decision ostensibly taken by Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz's government, but in reality ordered by General Musharraf and engineered by several of his advisors that constitute the government's inner cabinet.
It is clear that objections to the propriety of the DAWN Group's editorial policies emanate mainly from President Musharraf's office and his stance is heavily influenced by key advisors who have been entrusted with responsibility for implementing crisis management and conflict control in flashpoint areas. Particularly sensitive for the agreement are the escalating developments in Pakistan's western province of Baluchistan, and in the tribal agencies of North & South Wazirstan on the Afghan border. Also irksome have been the DAWN Group's related attempts to monitor a recurring tendency toward covert militancy among responsible decision-makers in government.
While preparing this dossier, I have attempted to include details and supporting documentation wherever possible, to facilitate your assessment as a key practitioner in the press rights movement internationally. Recent events in Pakistan indicate that attempts by the government to curtail the autonomy of the judiciary have been on the increase. This may have facilitated a temporary unintended pause in the government's relentless campaign to muzzle the press. But such pauses presage a return to more coercive methods by government against the press, once the messy business of the executive - judicial conflict is brought to a successful halt.
If you peruse the documents accompanying this letter, you will find a chronology of events that cover the continuing conflict between the DAWN Group and the Government of Pakistan in the critical years 2004 to 2007. ( Refer Appendix A 1.0) and that reflects some of the main causes of the present breakdown of communication between the government and the DAWN Group.
In the first phase, approximating with the years 2004 to 2005, the Government of Pakistan essentially worked by attempting to exert pressure on the Dawn Group by proxy - the proxy in this case being the Provincial Government of Sindh. It is in Sindh'southern metropolis of Karachi, that the headquarters of the DAWN Group of Newspapers are located.
This period first witnessed the government's exerting of harsh pressures on our daily evening newspaper - The STAR - by attempting to intimidate and harass journalists with false cases and concocted charges, and by a failed attempt to implicate the writer of this letter, as CEO of the Group, in a totally fabricated incident of terrorism and illegal weapons possession. ( Refer Appendix A 1.1.1, to, 1.1.4 and 2.1.2 )
This attempt culminated with a complete ban on advertising on DAWN Group newspapers and magazines by the Government of Sindh. However, in response to a petition filed by DAWN's lawyers, the Sindh High Court ruled in DAWN's favour . The Sindh Government sensing an impeding debacle withdrew the advertising ban in advance of the Court's final verdict.
The second stage involved the direct exerting of pressure by the Federal Government itself. After a series of fumbling measures and half-hearted advertisement bans by the Federal Government with respect to DAWN in 2005, a turning point was reached when one of our influential current affairs magazines, the HERALD, published a series of controversial stories and articles from June 2005 onwards on topics such as the Pakistan Government's war against Al-Qaeda and the Taliban in North and South Wazirstan; a possible resurgence of covert government support to Kashmiri militants; and also on the mushrooming policy debacle for government with respect to the Bugti insurgency in Baluchistan. (Refer Appendix A 1.2.1, to, 1.2.4 and 2.2.2 )
In September 2006 when the government approached DAWN in its attempt to seek a news blackout regarding Baluchistan and the troubled FATA agencies of North and South Wazirstan, the editor of DAWN, Mr. Abbas Nasir, and the Directors of the Board of the DAWN Group, concluded that the government's 'request' was unreasonable and needed to be firmly turned down. (Refer Appendix A 2.2.2 September – December 2006)
As a consequence, the government imposed an almost comprehensive ban on Federal Government advertising. (Refer Appendix A 2.2.2t) with an intent to provoke the financial collapse of the DAWN Group.
The DAWN Group had somewhat anticipated events from the increasingly strident tone of government criticism of its news policies and from the subsequent escalation in unreasonable informational demands from the government. As a precautionary measure aimed at reducing large financial deficits, we were forced to suspend the publication of our newspaper, the STAR, an important, but financial deficit generating newspaper, which has existed for over half a century and had been founded by working journalists of the DAWN Group.

Financial conditions within DAWN now became even more vulnerable to outside pressures as a consequence of our decision to commence work on a new TV channel – DAWN News. The grant of television broadcasting licences by the government towards such end is farmed out to a government organisation - the Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA) set up courtesy of an Ordinance passed in 2002. The President of Pakistan had on three different occasions in the last three years publicly announced that the controversial cross-media ownership rule ( illegally tagged onto the PEMRA Ordinance as a subsequent rule/regulation by the authority) would be withdrawn and the large resource of talent available in the print media would be allowed to participate in the burgeoning electronic media revolution in Pakistan. Public opinion expressed itself in the widely held conviction that with the entry of the mainstream print media in the electronic media profession, discriminatory attitudes and the repressive stance of PEMRA with respect to press freedoms in the electronic media ( Refer Appendix B & Appendix C) would be rolled back. However, the government's current position in the courts with respect to DAWN's application for a television broadcast licence . ( Refer Appendix A 2.3.2) has forced a rapid reassessment of public opinion with respect to the bonafides of government intention and clearly demonstrates that President Musharraf's government is bent on pursuing a policy of blatant cronyism vis a vis the inclusion of selected and preferred print media houses in the electronic media revolution , and the rejection of others considered as hostile or non-compliant to government needs.
The government also appears determined to continue the domination of all news content on TV channels and on FM radio through harsh and repressive regulatory directives from PEMRA, evidenced in the grant of temporary uplink permissions in place of valid broadcasting licenses to selected channels of PEMRA's preference.
The recent spate of programmes banned on television by PEMRA and a physical attack engineered by government on the offices of a prominent TV news channel-cum-newspaper office, clearly demonstrate the prevalence of government's excesses in this matter.
In early December 2005 when the Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr Shaukat Aziz summoned the undersigned to a meeting at Governor House (Sindh) to announce the Sindh Government's decision to withdraw its advertising ban on the DAWN Group, he clearly informed me that the government was keen that DAWN should go ahead and set up a TV channel for the broadcast of English language news. The President's constant public declarations regarding the withdrawal of the notoriously exclusionary cross-media ownership clause in the PEMRA rules and regulations and Parliament's decision to finally withdraw this rule have not resulted in the licenses promised to newspaper publishing houses outside of government favour- this despite the passing of the legislation by both houses of Parliament . Such permissions have only been granted arbitrarily to selected groups by the government. This has led to a situation where we, at DAWN, in anticipation of the government decision to implement the new law have set up an entire organisation in Pakistan, employing over 350 journalists, technicians and managerial personnel and are anxiously awaiting the promised government license, all the while being forced to squander large financial outlays in anticipation of this.
The government's refusal to give us a license mainly stems from our refusal to submit to its unethical pressures while reporting events in Baluchistan and North & South Waziristan. This refusal has become an acute cause of concern for the future financial viability of our publishing group.
Clearly the government would dearly like to see us lay off our journalists as they are viewed as a potential source of unwelcome criticism of government policies, rather than as compliant sheep to be hurriedly shepherded by PEMRA according to government whim.
Our colleagues in organisations devoted to protecting the freedom of the press throughout the world have always been a source of moral inspiration and help to us in our struggle for press freedoms in Pakistan .
We therefore urge you to extend your help in this matter and would appreciate if you address your concerns to the authorities in Pakistan regarding the following areas:
1. That the advertising ban by the Federal Government on the DAWN Group's advertising is both unwarranted and unethical and a transparent mechanism to exert pressure on the newspaper group's policies in contravention of the internationally accepted norms of objective news reporting.
2. That the decision to withhold a television broadcast license to the DAWN Group by the government is in violation of the judgments of the High Court of Sindh and the consent declarations made by PEMRA and the Federal Minister of Information in the Sindh High Court. Such right should be granted to other applying media groups as well on the same terms .
3. That the Government of Pakistan continue to submit its policies in Baluchistan and its agreements with the pro Taliban tribesmen of North & South Waziristan to the rigorous assessment of public and media scrutiny.
4. That the Government of Pakistan desist from abducting and arresting journalists in the judicious performance of their duties, and desist from physically attacking newspaper offices as has occurred last week in Islamabad.

Your concerns in this respect may be addressed to:
The President of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf,
The Prime Minister of Pakistan, Mr Shaukat Aziz,
The Acting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, Justice Rana Bhagwandas,
The Federal Minister for Information Development, Government of Pakistan, Mr Mohammed Ali Durrani.
In addition your concerns should also be expressed to other key decision makers in the Government of Pakistan, urging all of them to desist from repressive, illegal and unethical practices deployed in their effort to subvert press freedoms.
For your ease of communication, I am including relevant fax contact details:
General Pervez Musharraf, President of Pakistan ++9251-9221388
Mr Shaukat Aziz, Prime Minister of Pakistan ++9251-9212866
Justice Rana Bhagwandas, Acting Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan++9251-9213452
Mr Mohammed Ali Durrani, Federal Minister for Information Development, Government of Pakistan ++9251- 9203740
Thank you in anticipation for your much needed support in this matter.
Yours sincerely,
Hameed Haroon.
CEO & Publisher,
DAWN Group of Newspapers
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D

FW: Uproot Musharraf and this corrupt system, re-establish Khilafah

Uproot Musharraf and this corrupt system, re-establish Khilafah

Open letter from Hizb ut-Tahrir to the People of Power in Pakistan O people of power and influence! The present crisis that has gripped Pakistan has escalated from a collision between President General Pervez Musharraf and the Chief Justice to a golden opportunity to bring a genuine and substantial change within the country.The crisis was only sustainable because of the extreme frustration of the people with the current regimes policies. This opposition to Musharraf's policies is clear during the demonstrations by the lawyers when they raised slogans against US President George W. Bush, his War on the Muslim World and his key agent within the region, President Musharraf. This opposition is also clear from widespread discussions within all circles of society criticizing policies that have favoured the colonialists over the Muslims in almost every sphere of governing, from education to economy and from law and order to foreign policy. At this critical time, it is important that the momentum for change is not wasted in a petty, trivial deal for a share in power but is used to end all possibility of future oppressors implementing policies that are against Islam and Muslims. O people of power and influence! Over the last seven years, President Musharraf was able to implement such unjust policies for one reason and for one reason only. It is the very system that is implemented in Pakistan. The current system has failed to restrict the hands of the oppressor because it allows man to decide what is halal and what is haram. That is why matters that are clearly prohibited by Islam are implemented over the people's heads. So, even though Islam forbade the privatization of public properties, such as gas, electricity and steel, Musharraf's regime was able to do so because the current system gives the oppressor the power to allow what Islam has forbidden. Even though Islam ordered that the children are raised according the example of RasulAllah (SAW) the current system has allowed the transformation of the education and schooling into a campaign to destroy the Islamic family values. And even though Islam has ordered the Muslim armies to rescue the Muslims and liberate the Muslim Lands, the current system has sent Pakistan's soldiers to defend American soldiers from the Muslims of the tribal areas. Moreover, the current system has not just failed over the last seven years, it has stung Muslims again and again for over six decades. This is why even though faces change, sometimes civilian and sometimes military, their policies are always working against the country. So, whether the rulers come through a coup or election, initially Muslims welcome the new rulers but then within a few years the Muslims are cursing the rulers and praying for an end to their rule. It is high time that the people of power and influence turned away from petty struggle over positions in a system that has only brought ever greater harm to the affairs of the Muslims. RasulAllah (SAW) warned the Muslims,   "The believer is not stung from the same hole twice." (Bukhari) O people of power and influence! There is only one system that can prevent the repeated oppression of the people and end the domination of the colonialists. That is Islam's ruling system, the Khilafah. In the Khilafah neither the elected Khaleefah nor the elected members of the Majlis-e-Ummah can decide what is halal and haram. Only laws that are rooted in evidences from the Quran and the Sunnah are implemented, ensuring that the entire society works for the interests of Islam and Muslims alone. It is only the Khilafah that can prevent the oppressor from implementing laws and policies that serve his desires or those of his colonialist masters. Allah (swt) ordered the Muslims decisively, "And rule between them by all that which Allah revealed to you, and do not follow their vain desires away from the truth which came to you." [Surah Al-Mai'dah 5:48] "Whosoever does not judge by all that which Allah has revealed, such are oppressors." [Surah Al-Ma'idah 5: 45] Only the Khilafah will bring you out of this situation of decline and humiliation, grant you political and economic stability and safeguard you from the intellectual and political attacks of enemy states. For the Khilafah is that system which emanates from your aqeeda, made part of your deen by Allah (swt) and solved your problems practically from the time of the Khulafa-ar-Rashideen until 1924. And Allah (swt) has promised the believers peace and security through this very system. Allah (swt) says "Allah has promised, to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He will, of a surety, grant them succession to the present rulers, as He granted it to those before them; that He will establish in authority their deen - the one which He has chosen for them - and that He will change (their state), after the fear in which they (lived), to one of security and peace" [Surah An-Noor 55] O People of Power! The people are ready for a real change. A change in faces will not be enough. Matters are now in your hands. You are capable of removing this despicable ruler and the system that allowed him to reak havoc upon the people for so long. We in Hizb ut-Tahrir call upon you to re-establish the Khilafah in place of the current corrupt system and ensure that the interests of Islam and Muslims are secure for generations to come. So, who amongst you will respond to the promise of Allah and support His cause?  "Allah will certainly support those who support His cause, for indeed Allah is full of strength, exalted in might and able to enforce His will." [Surah Al-Hajj 22: 40]   Hizb ut-Tahrir Wilayah Pakistan 18th March 2007

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: Pakistan is under progression...Musharraff

President of Pakistan is repeatedly stating the progression of country; even yesterday he blamed the recent incidents in Pakistan to the people against the country progression. THE NEWS, Pakistan have recently collected some facts that reflect the progression of Pakistan.

The Facts are collected only from one part of the country (i.e. Karachi), is that progression our President talking about?

The News Correspondent ( http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=47513) KARACHI: Some 74 people lost their lives during the last week, of whom seven were shot dead, 14 murdered by other means, six were burnt to death, two committed suicide, six drowned, 17 were killed in accidents, while 22 bodies were recovered. At least 1,294 robberies were committed during the last week, out of which 1,093 mobile phones were snatched or stolen, 22 cars and 47 motorcycles were snatched. People were deprived of valuables in 132 other incidents of robberies. 236 cases of thefts were also reported during the last week, in which 80 cars, 75 motorcycles were taken away. According to the police data, 149 culprits were arrested and 171 stolen things were recovered. Previous Week: Some 50 people lost their lives, of whom nine were shot dead, five murdered, five were burnt to death, 19 killed in accidents, while 12 bodies were recovered. At least 1,512 robberies were committed in the previous week, of which 1,281 mobile phones were snatched or stolen, 44 cars and 51 motorcycles were snatched. People were deprived of valuables in 136 other incidents of robberies. 269 cases of thefts were reported, out of which 98 cars, 79 motorcycles were taken away. According to the police data, 14 culprits were arrested and 106 stolen things were recovered. Reports of robberies, thefts, vehicle and mobile phone snatching were received from police sources. march SUN MON TUE WED THU FRI SAT TOTAL 11 to 17 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 SINDH POLICE KILLED IN BLAST X X X X X X X =0 INJURED IN BLAST X X X X X X X =0 MURDERS 1 2 3 3 3 1 1= 14 POLICE ENCOUNTERS X 1 X X X X X= 1 CAR THEFTS 10 8 9 19 12 14 17= 80 CAR SNATCHING 5 1 4 1 4 5 2 =22 BIKE THEFTS 17 6 8 16 9 11 8 =75 BIKE SNATCHING 10 4 9 7 6 8 3= 47 THEFTS 12 10 8 15 14 7 15 =81 ROBBERIES 15 12 18 25 20 20 22 =132 MOBILE SNATCH/STOLE 135 198 152 154 155 150 149 =1093 KIDNAPPINGS X X 1 X X X 1 =2 ARRESTED X 20 17 52 21 16 23 =149 RECOVERIES 13 15 24 33 38 18 30= 171 ACCIDENTS 3 4 2 2 2 2 2 =17 ACC/INJURED 8 3 8 5 3 3 2= 32 SUICIDES X X X 1 1 X X= 2 BURNS 1 X 1 2 1 X 1= 6 DROWNING 1 X 3 X X 2 X =6 BODIES RECOVERED 4 5 2 3 4 2 2 =22 KILLED IN FIRING 1 2 1 1 1 X 1 =7 INJURED IN FIRING 3 3 3 2 3 2 3 =19 TRAFFIC POLICE CHALLAN ISSUED 920 1071 3144 3702 3936 4206 3764 =20743 VEHICLE SEIZED 7 12 31 36 74 45 61 =266 EXCISE & TAXATION ARRESTED X X X X X X X =0 RECOVERIES X X X X X X X =0 RANGERS ARRESTED X X X X X X X= 0 RECOVERIES X X X X X X X =0 COAST GUARD ARRESTED X X X X X X X= 0 RECOVERIES X X X X X X X= 0 ANF ARRESTED X X X X X X X= 0 RECOVERIES X X X X X X X =0 FIA ARRESTED X X X X X X X =0 RECOVERIES X X X X X X X =0 CUSTOM ARRESTED X X X 3 X X X =3 RECOVERIES X X X 8 kg heroin X X X= 0 INDIAN FISHERMEN ARRESTED X X X X 18 X X =18 BOAT SEIZED X X X X 3 X X= 3

---

Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!

FW: Poll: Show strong desire by Muslims & Pakistanis to live under the Caliphate

Read the full poll review here

http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0425/p01s04-wome.html?page=1

Anecdotal evidence in Morocco, Pakistan, and Egypt also point to a similar dynamic. While in Pakistan, large majorities said they supported sharia and the establishment of a caliphate , that's seen by analysts as stemming from two sources: disgust at corruption and lack of accountability in their own government, and an inclination to associate what is Islamic with what is good.

FW: By scaring the masses Musharraf once again wishes to assist America in slaughtering the Muslims

Recently newspapers published Musharraf's statement that if Iran is attacked Pakistan will save itself first . The purpose of this statement was to frighten the people, once again, from the overweight and terrified white elephant, which is already suffocating under its own weight. The myth of American power has already been exposed in Afghanistan and Iraq. But the Musharraf government, instead of giving this falling wall a final push is providing a strong shoulder of support in the form of Pakistan. The sending of an American Aircraft Carrier to the Indian Ocean is not aimed at attacking Iran but only to provide a justification to the treacherous rulers like Musharraf to frighten their peoples. The fact is that America is not ready to involve itself militarily in a new war zone as she is up to her neck in Afghanistan and Iraq – let alone engage an atomic power like Pakistan in a military conflict. The reason of success of these treacherous rulers so far has been that they were able to portray Israel, India, America and Britain as invincible powers. In the same context Musharraf government is once again presenting America as a clear and present danger and giving the impression that America wishes to engage Iran and Pakistan in a military conflict.

America has learnt that without the active support of the Pakistan army and intelligence agencies she doesn't have any hope of success in countering the imminent spring resistance in Afghanistan. The same is the case in Iraq. America is fully aware that she cannot get out of the Iraq quagmire without using Iran and Syria. The Baker-Hamilton report has already advised the American administration to seek the support of Iran and Syria to exit the killing fields of Iraq. In this scenario there is no chance of an attack on Iran and Pakistan. In fact these fake military posturing are aimed at providing justification to all three governments in order to scare their masses and put a cover of "compulsion" to their treacheries and American subservience. Hence America wishes to achieve two goals from these fake manoeuvres. Firstly; normalizing relations with Iran so that it could openly serve America in Iraq; and secondly, providing Musharraf with the garb of "fear" and "compulsion" as a justification for his active support to America in slaughtering the Muslims in the tribal areas and Afghanistan. O Muslims! Alas, all this is only possible because your rulers are not sincere with you but with your enemies. What you need to do is to make yourselves a part of a political movement to establish the Khilafah and get rid of these rulers so that the Muslims can liberate themselves from the colonial slavery they currently endure.

Source: http://www.khilafat.pk/

FW: The actual cause of the current judicial crises is the non-Islamic constitution and the lack of

Pakistan's secular constitution is full of un-Islamic articles. One such example is the article 209 of the constitution under which Musharraf has filed the reference against Chief Justice. The source of this current judicial crisis is also this prevailing system and the constitution, which sidelines the divine Ahkam of Allah (swt) and declares the limited human wisdom to be the source and origin of legislation. Had the Islamic laws relating to judiciary been implemented, no such crises would have erupted. According to the current constitution, a common man has to depend on the consent of the President or the Chief Justice to be able to account and start a judicial proceedings against the judges of Supreme Court and High Courts, who then by their own wishes may or may not send a reference to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) for inquiry. Moreover, the proceedings are held in-camera (closed doors) and the masses cannot witness it. Whereas, in the Khilafah's judicial system; the process of accountability is very simple, quick and transparent. In Islam there are no sacred cows and absolutely no one is above the law. In Islam, accountability process is same for a ruler, a judge or a government functionary. Hence a person does not need any specific permission or ruler's reference to legally account them or initiate a legal hearing. Rather a person can go to any Qadi Madhalim directly and file a case against another Judge, a government functionary or a ruler and thereby account him. Consequently, the ruler does not become a party to the case nor fingers are pointed towards them. As for the issue of in-camera (closed door) proceedings, it is also against the Islamic laws.  Since the proceedings in issues related to unwarranted use of authority and corruption are held in open court and the masses and the media are free to witness it. As the people do not trust the government, there is allot of anxiety and scepticism regarding the proceedings.   Another idiocy of the current system is that the Supreme Judicial Council does not have the mandate of a court nor its decision is binding on the President. What more of a mockery can there be of a judicial process. In Islam the courts are completely independent in their decision and even the Khaleefah can not change their decisions nor does any other court has the authority to change the judgments based on its interpretations.  Moreover, according to the current Pakistani law, if an FIR (First Information Report) is registered against any accused he is to be thrown in jail under the guise of judicial remand and if he does not possess the means to arrange for the bail-bond he has to spend years after years behind bars irrespective of the fact whether the FIR was factual or based on a lie. In Islam, an accused cannot be sent behind bars merely on suspicion. Consequently, the mistreatment of Chief Justice was in fact due to the same corrupted mindset where an accused is almost a guilty person and mistreating him is not a big deal. During the current crises the Chief Justice must also have fully realised by his personal experience how barbaric and cruel Kufr law he had been implementing over the people for years!  People have full cognises of the fact that even if the Chief Justice is made functional once again, no relief for the oppressed masses can be expected.   This can be said with conviction because the same oppressive system was implemented in the past and the Chief Justice never declared it un-Islamic or unconstitutional. Musharraf government wishes to crush every dissenting voice and even the weakest opposition through brutal commando action. Our problems will never be solved and the Ummah will continue to face one crisis after another until Islam is implemented comprehensively. The need of the hour is that we establish a Khilafah, which would implement Islam in totality.  Only in this scenario, the problems of the masses will be solved and the Ummah will rise again with strength and power.

Source: http://www.khilafat.pk/

 

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

K.E.S.C. Crisis: Dishonest government policies and corrupt Capitalist system are responsible for K.E

The current K.E.S.C. crisis is not because of inadequate supply of electricity, as people were facing similar crises even when our rulers were claming that we can export electricity. The electricity crisis exists because of the dishonest policies of our rulers who do not utilize the enormous resources of water, coal, uranium and gas in Pakistan to produce electricity. Instead of utilizing resources available in Pakistan oil is used to produce costly electricity. China and America produce 60 percent and 25 percent of electricity through coal respectively. Pakistan does not have any big project to produce electricity through coal even though Pakistan has one of the largest coal reserves in the world estimated around 1845 billion ton. Because of these corrupt policies government organizations like K.E.S.C. cannot provide basic necessities to the people and the government starts the process of privatization in the name of getting better results which is just another smokescreen to deceive the masses. Latin America's experience has confirmed that the privatization of water, electricity, oil and gas helps some capitalist to increase their wealth manifold but produces severe negative effects on the people. The K.E.S.C. crisis is because of the Capitalist concept which encourages governments to privatize such organizations which provide basic facilities to public at low cost; furthermore, the government's refusal to provide subsidies to these organizations in the name of free market economy is also a Capitalist solution. By just increasing the power generation capacity, the present crisis can not be addressed permanently. The only permanent solution to this crisis is the destruction of Capitalist system and the re-establishment of Khilafah state. Islam makes it mandatory upon the State that it provide at cost price electricity as well as other basic necessities to its citizens, regardless of their creed, how far they live, or what ethnic community they belong to. The Shariah has designated electricity (including other energy resources) as a public property collectively owned by the masses, and specifically prohibited it's ownership by companies, individuals and even the government.  The role of the government is in fact to administer its production and then distribution to the people tax and profit free!!!  The prophet of Allah, Muhammad (saw) said:    
"Three things can not be prevented (from people): Water, grass and fire" [Narrated by Ibn Maja].
And said:  "The Muslims are partners in three, water, grass, and fire, and its price is forbidden" [Narrated by Ibn Maja].
   Here fire is used in the meaning of energy resources. The Ummah now knows the treacheries of their rulers and the terrorism of capitalism. The need of the time is to re-establish the Khilafah as this is the only solution that will eradicate the Ummah,s problems.

---

Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!

FW: Karachi Massacre: Pakistan State Terrorism News Roundup.

Pakistan State Massacre/Terrorism News Roundup.


The Economist

General disarray
http://www.economist.com/displayStory.cfm?story_id=9177073&fsrc=RSS

International Herald

Musharraf urged to change course or risk losing power
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/22/asia/22pakistan.php

Open Democracy

Rising, uprising Pakistan
http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article.jsp?id=2&debateId=43&articleId=4615

Pakistan's permanent crisis
http://www.opendemocracy.net/debates/article.jsp?id=2&debateId=43&articleId=4622

Voice of America

Pakistan Officials Try to Stem Violence
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-05-14-voa24.cfm

Violence Leaves 27 Dead in Pakistan as Political Crises Worsens
http://www.voanews.com/english/2007-05-12-voa20.cfm

Washington Post

Toll Mounts in Pakistan On Second Day of Clashes
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/13/AR2007051300499.html?nav=rss_world

Council on Foreign Relations

Abbas: Musharraf's Sinking Credibility
http://www.cfr.org/publication/13346/abbas.html

Supreme Problems in Pakistan
http://www.cfr.org/publication/13344/supreme_problems_in_pakistan.html

Hudson Institute

Pakistan Has a Basic Flaw
http://www.hudson.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=publication_details&id=4923

The News

'Save Karachi' seminar calls for ban on MQM
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=57270

The rule of law and the writ of government remained under question
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=57392

Ex-speaker demands dismissal of Sindh govt
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=57276

17th Amendment: Fazl terms Qazi's apology his personal decision
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=57278

AT to publish white paper on MQM 'atrocities'
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=57042

JSQM to organise peace conference in Karachi
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=56917

MMA leaders accuse govt of creating ethnic divide in Karachi
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=56918

Seraiki Party to file petition against Altaf in UK
http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=56923

The Dawn

All Karachiites should struggle against ethnic extremism
http://www.dawn.com/2007/05/22/rss.htm#42

Asia Times

Pakistan opposition tastes blood
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IE15Df05.html

Pakistan running out of options
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/IE12Df01.html

BBC

Pakistan's political battleground
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/6670561.stm

Many killed in Pakistan bombing
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6656933.stm

Pakistan city shut down by strike
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6652765.stm

Pakistan's president says not Emergency
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/6650603.stm

---

Everything in one place. All new Windows Live!

FW: Karachi Massacre: Protest outside High Commission for Pakistan

Rally for Pakistan. Rally against Musharraf's Dictatorship.


Saturday 26th May 2007. All welcome.

Marble Arch, London. 12noon Assembly and Speeches.
Marching to the High Commission for Pakistan at 2pm.

Pakistan is in the midst of turmoil as a result of  the policies of the Musharraf government. The current crisis in the Sindh Baluchistan and NWFP; the sacking of the Chief Justice; foreign interference within Pakistan; the attacks on the media; the intolerance to any political opposition - has all led to this current crisis.

Is this what the sacrifices were for when Pakistan was established 60 years ago?

Speakers from Pakistan, various political parties, lawyers, judges, thinkers, journalists, will address this rally.  Come and show your support.

---

Think you know your TV, music and film? Try Search Charades!

FW: Karachi Massacre rally unified: Musharraf must go now - Photos attached

London, Saturday 26th May 2007 - All opposition parties from Pakistan, including the main political parties and key civil society figures unanimously sent a message to Musharraf that he must leave office immediately and make way for a new chapter in the future of Pakistan. The demonstration came about after a culmination of key discussions in the past week between opposition parties where it was agreed that a public demonstration of disapproval against Pakistan's Western dictator was urgently needed. Amongst the resolutions is an agreement that to co-operate with Musharraf in any way is treachery and a crime against the people. The demonstration was attended by the leadership of PML (N), PPP, JI, Hizb-ut-Tahrir, Tehreeq Insaaf, ANP, MMA, PML-AJK, Pakistan Lawyers Association, Muslim Lawyers Association as well as journalists and rights activists from Pakistan . Member of Hizb-ut-Tahrir, Nadeem Ajaib while delivering his speech said "What you saw two weeks ago was the true face of Musharraf, a dictator willing to sacrifice the Muslims of Pakistan for the sake of his dictatorship". Dr Abdul Wahid, also spoke at this event, and stated the "aspirations of those who sacrificed their lives for the creation of Pakistan was to see the establishment of a State built upon their belief. This aspiration today has been betrayed and the dictator Musharraf has sold Pakistan to America. The only way to liberate Pakistan from foreign interference is to establish the Khilafah Rashida, whose meaning is 'Lailaaha Illallah'". The demonstration was met with enthusiasm and a small delegation including Hizb ut-Tahrir members was sent to the Pakistan High Commission. Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain also reminded the leaders of the other opposition movements to unify behind the message of Khilafah, which did not discriminate against Muslims nor believe in sectarian division as a means to political power. The other leaderships were appreciative of the gesture for sincere and open dialogue and warmly greeted the Hizb's central role in making the demonstration successful and for the first time bringing all of the Pakistani opposition together.

---

Messenger on the move. Text MSN to 63463 now!

FW: Pakistan’s food security under threat

Pakistan's food security under threat
Price hike of surplus commodities questions veracity of government's economic management

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=58196


By Sajid Aziz

KARACHI: The economic experts have warned that the country's food security is under threat due to the present government's pathetic attitude.

The prevailing situation of the food security seems extremely chaotic as our farmers are producing more and more and country is enjoying surplus crops yet people are suffering shortage and price hikes.

It is all due to the government's apathy. All indicators are showing that the government is being run without any wisdom or even any responsibility.

It happened first time in the history of the country or perhaps in the history of world that despite food surplus shortage and price hike has been created across the country.

It is ironic that farmer is producing more and more but not getting any benefit, the miller is making hue and cry due to shortage of wheat, the wholesaler and retailers are complaining eroding margins and the end consumer is suffering as price of atta and bread have increased overnight sans any justification.

Wheat is not an example in isolation as similar situation prevails in rice which is neither a staple food nor it is a major part of diet of Pakistani nation and consumed as secondary grain food but the country faces acute shortage of basmati rice and the prices of various quality basmati kernel have shot up by Rs20 to Rs25 per kg and the trend is still continuing as government has not taken any step in this regard as well.

As we had mentioned previously that if the situation prevails the country would have to import rice first time since its inception and the government has given an indication of importing rice from abroad. If it happens then it will be a black day in the history of a country, which is exporting rice for the past 59 years.

The grim situation in rice sector had been pointed out by some genuine exporters and asked the government to curb the ever increasing smuggling of the commodity but no step has been taken so far and now the situation has forced some big exporters to indulge in unfair practices as they are obtaining huge export refinance from banks and indulging in tax free local buying and selling of rice without paying a penny as income tax.

Several rice exporters have declared themselves as total export companies and are merely paying withholding tax of 0.75 per cent only and evading tax on local sales of rice.

They are not issuing any invoice and huge trading is done on ordinary paper slips or simple delivery challans not supported by bills or invoices.

This practice is going on in New Chali and Jodia Bazaar areas and the rice brokers are acting as intermediaries and lift the rice bags from the sellers' warehouses. The sources said that they arrange deliveries to the buyers and collect payments on due dates. The recovery of the value of the goods is guaranteed by the brokers, as in the absence of invoices the transaction does not have a legal cover.

This practice has led to the increase in prices and the hoarders are very comfortable as they buy and sell without any fear.

The pries of edible oils and ghee too are skyrocketing on daily basis and there is no authority to take the notice. The edible oil price has become almost double in a period of few months as a tin of four litres is selling for Rs425 to Rs440 as against the previous price of Rs235 and according to the traders, the ratio of price increase in a few months was more than what they have seen in almost over a decade.

As against Pakistan's surplus production of wheat, rice and other commodities, India is facing shortage of various commodities particularly wheat and rice due to lower yield during current season but no price escalation has been recorded in India in all such food items or insignificant price increase were seen.

It was all due to the proper policies better management of sense of responsibility on the part of Indian government.

Though government has removed Secretary, Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Ismail Qureshi for his ignorance and irresponsible attitude in handling the wheat situation but simply removal of some official will have no impact.

It is the high time that government should properly maintain food security as without stablising the food prices and supplies no government could be stabilized politically and administratively.

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: AP: Musharraf tightens controls on media

By STEPHEN GRAHAM
Associated Press Writer

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/P/PAKISTAN_MEDIA_CRACKDOWN?SITE=ORAST&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) -- President Gen. Pervez Musharraf tightened controls on Pakistan's media Monday, the latest move against dissent in a growing political crisis over his suspension of the chief justice.

Under an emergency ordinance that takes effective immediately, Musharraf made a raft of amendments to regulations governing the electronic media, including private television channels that the general has accused of anti-government bias.

The ordinance says authorities can seal the premises of broadcasters or distributors breaking the law, and raises possible fines for violations from $16,665 to $166,650.

The Pakistan Media Regulatory Authority (PEMRA), which supervises radio and TV stations, can also suspend the license of an offender.

Mohsin Raza, director of news for the ARY One World channel, said suspension was a serious threat because it would disrupt vital advertising revenue.

"This will let the budding electronic media starve and thousands of people's jobs will be at risk," Raza told The Associated Press. "This is the worst tool the government is preparing."

Musharraf had fostered unprecedented media freedom since he seized power in a 1999 coup. However, he has grown exasperated with extensive coverage of the crisis triggered by his March 9 ouster of Chief Justice Iftikhar Mohammed Chaudhry. The turnaround has been accompanied by a spate of threats and beatings against prominent journalists for which authorities have denied responsibility.

Government officials have accused TV stations of sensationalizing the crisis in talk shows and with live coverage of rallies around the country attended by Chaudhry. The rallies have drawn large crowds of lawyers and opposition activists calling for Musharraf to step down or at least give up his role as army chief before he seeks another five-year term as president later this year.

Analysts and opposition parties claim Musharraf wanted to sideline the independent-minded Chaudhry, fearing he would pose legal challenges of the president's quest for a new term. The government, however, has denied any political motive and Musharraf says he suspended the chief justice after receiving evidence he had abused his office.

PEMRA spokesman Mohammed Salim said he was unable to provide a copy of the legislation being amended to specifically determine what other changes had been made. A version posted on the authority's Web site appeared out of date.

However, a senior PEMRA official said the power to seal a broadcasters' premises was a significant change. The official, who asked for anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, also forecast legal challenges to the stiffened regulations.

Officials at the Information Ministry could not immediately be reached for comment.

About 100 journalists, opposition party members and pro-democracy activists demonstrated against the tougher rules, marching from the Islamabad office of the Geo channel to the nearby federal parliament building on Monday evening.

"They want to suppress our voice, but this will not happen," Shamim-ur-Rehman, president of the Karachi Union of Journalists, said in a speech.

The protesters chanted "Musharraf: we don't accept your laws!" and "Go, army, go!" - despite warnings from government officials that badmouthing the army would not be tolerated. They were also defying a ban on demonstrations in the capital announced last week.

Two dozen police with shields and sticks diverted traffic away from the intersection but did not intervene.

PEMRA issued letters to TV channels on Saturday, urging them not to air programs that "encourage" violence, or promote an "anti-state attitude." The channels were also asked not to air programs that contain "aspersions against the judiciary and the integrity of the armed forces of Pakistan" or malign or slander anyone in public life.

Broadcasters say verbal messages they received privately were even more blunt: Stop live coverage of Chaudhry rallies. TV stations scaled back coverage during Chaudhry's rally on Saturday in Abbotabad, north of the capital, which drew tens of thousands of supporters.

© 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!

FW: This Spring America's Target Is Not Iran But Pakistan

http://www.countercurrents.org/mustafa010307.htm

 

This Spring America's Target Is Not Iran But Pakistan

By Abid Mustafa
01 March, 2007
Countercurrents.org
On February 27 2007, US Vice President Dick Cheney paid a surprised visit to Pakistan and held private talks with General Musharraf. After the meeting, Cheney refused to comment on the nature of his visit and left for Afghanistan. The New York Times stated that Cheney was sent to remind Musharraf that he must take stiffer action against the Taleban; otherwise US aid will be in jeopardy. The Pakistani government issued the following statement: "Cheney expressed US apprehensions of regrouping of Al Qaeda in the tribal areas and called for concerted efforts in countering the threat", and also talked of "serious US concerns on the intelligence being picked up of an impending Taliban 'spring offensive' against allied forces in Afghanistan." Cheney's trip coincided with Britain's Foreign Secretary, Margaret Becket's visit to Pakistan. Becket also pressed the Pakistani government to take more action against Al Qaeda and the Taleban, but struck more reconciliatory tone. Speaking at the Foreign Services Academy on a lecture entitled 'The UK and Pakistan: partners in diplomacy', she stated that the UK would not link its aid to Pakistan over its performance on counter-terrorism measures. So what was the purpose of Cheney's visit to Pakistan? Does the British stance suggest cracks in the Anglo-American alliance over Afghanistan?
Cheney's visit comes nearly two weeks after Bush gave his speech on Afghanistan at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), where he set out US goals to stabilise Afghanistan and warned about the Taleban spring offensive. Bush said," The snow is going to melt in the Hindu Kush Mountains, and when it does we can expect fierce fighting to continue. The Taliban and al Qaeda are preparing to launch new attacks.This spring there is going to be a new offensive in Afghanistan, and it's going to be a NATO offensive." Other US officials most notably US Secretary of Defence, Robert Gates and US Assistant Secretary of State, Richard Boucher have also visited Pakistan in the past month. Gates's visit focussed on how to secure greater freedom for US and NATO forces to launch strikes against Taleban sanctuaries and conduct military forays deep inside the Pakistani tribal areas, whilst Boucher reviewed Musharraf's progress on the peace deals signed with tribal elders.
The visits by senior officials of the Bush administration to Pakistan demonstrate that the carrot and stick policy adopted against the Pushtun resistance and their supporters, since 2003 has started to unravel. The carrot disguised as Afghan national reconciliation drive was meant to entice moderate elements of the Taleban, Al-Qaeda, Afghan Mujihideen and ordinary Pushtoons radicalised by the war-together they constitute the Pushtun resistance-into a political process to bolster Karzai's fledging government. The US is still encouraging Karzai's government to explore ways of accommodating moderate elements of the resistance. On January 27 2007, Karzai renewed the offer of peace talks. He said, "While we are fighting for our honour, we still open the door for talks and negotiations with our enemy who is after our annihilation and is shedding our blood." Karzai's gestures of peace comes amid the passing of a bill on National Stability And Reconciliation by both the Meshrano Jirga (Council of Elders) and the Wolesi Jirga (People's Council). The bill offers blanket amnesty to all parties, and after demonstrations in Kabul demanding its implementation, awaits Karzai's signature. Nevertheless, the US has ruled out the inclusion of hardened Taliban fighters such as Daud Ullah.
To curb the tribal support enjoyed by the Pushtun resistance, peace-pacts were introduced by the Musharraf government. These were designed to achieve two objectives. Firstly to entice tribal elders in laying down their arms, dismantling the jihadi infrastructure and surrendering elements of the Pushtun resistance hostile to America in exchange for economic aid. Secondly, to use the lull in fighting to assemble a moderate faction of the Taleban, take helm of the Pushtun resistance and invest it in a political process. The stick comprised of punitive measures to isolate and destroy hardcore Pushtun resistance leaders vehemently opposed to the NATO's occupation of Afghanistan, and Pakistan's collaboration with the US.
The peace deals struck by Pakistan had tacit approval from the Bush administration. However, the callous killing of civilians by NATO forces and Pakistani troops on both sides of the border combined with the endemic corruption and injustices of the Karzai government, have transformed the parochial Pushtoon resistance into a mass movement. When the European Union (EU) took command of NATO they were shocked by the ferocity of the resistance and laboured hard to contain its growing influence in the Southern Afghanistan. The rising NATO causalities spurred the EU, especially Britain to expose Taliban sanctuaries in Pakistan. This forced the Bush administration to gradually withdraw its support for the peace deals. By now Pakistan was also struggling to gain control of the Pushtoon resistance. British influence in the religious seminaries, amongst the scholars and in the tribal areas, foiled Pakistan's attempt to create a monolithic Taleban army that Pakistan could use effectively. Beyond Quetta and some parts of tribal areas the new Taliban failed to make impact.
It is not the first time the EU has been at odds with the US over Afghanistan. European countries have consistently refused to deploy a significant numbers of troops assist NATO efforts in Afghanistan. In his speech at the AEI, President Bush lamented at European countries for their failings. He said, "For NATO to succeed, member nations must provide commanders on the ground with the troops and the equipment they need to do their jobs.As well, allies must lift restrictions on the forces they do provide so NATO commanders have the flexibility they need to defeat the enemy wherever the enemy may make a stand." The EU's reluctance to contribute to NATO's mission in war torn Afghanistan can only be explained by its desire to see America fail in Afghanistan. But at the same time the EU does not want to see Islam returning to Afghanistan-a political conundrum it has been unable to solve.
The additional US and UK soldiers sent to be bolster NATO troops in Afghanistan fall way short of the numbers required to confront the Pushtoon resistance. The troop numbers have been further exacerbated by America's distrust of the Afghan army- the army has been intentionally deprived of heavy weaponry-rendering almost useless in any upcoming battle. All of this means that the US will have to bear the brunt of the fighting. This comes as a huge blow- US forces are over stretched in Iraq and there are not enough troops to send to Afghanistan. The situation is rapidly deteriorating in Afghanistan. The assassination attempt on Dick Cheney clearly highlights America's predicament.
To redress this situation America has again turned to Musharraf to prepare for a mini war in the tribal belt and Southern Afghanistan. Negroponte's remarks about Al Qaeda regrouping in Pakistan and the recent US intelligence assessments echoing similar findings are intended to prepare opinion both at home and abroad for this war. It is expected that Pakistan will provide the bulk of the troops for this offensive, while NATO will utilise the American build up in the Gulf to conduct air strikes and limited ground operations.
America knows full well that she will not be able to crush the Pushtun resistance and that Musharraf may not survive. But the US has no choice-it is make or break for the US in Afghanistan and the calculus of Musharraf survival is irrelevant. America's tactical goal is to degrade the resistance in Afghanistan and confine it to a small area until next spring. By then the Bush administration hopes that situation in Iraq would have stabilised and there would be more US troops to confront the Pushtun resistance in Afghanistan 2008. But the reality may turn out to be entirely different- instead of the Pushtun resistance the Caliphate could be waiting for America.
Abid Mustafa is a political commentator who specialises in Muslim affairs

---

Sounds like? How many syllables? Guess and win prizes with Search Charades!