Jay

Inability to reason?? Oh, my!! Lets see that,
I think you repeatedly are masqeurading my post. On the issue of France and De Gaulle, this is what I said.

Now read the bold parts again, does it say that the analogy is irrelevant bcoz I wasnt alive? eh, Tarek??

And that is?? I'm perfectly capable of defending my position, I gave you the reasons why Military in particular Musharaff's ruling of Pakistan is un-democratic, illegal and authoratorian.

I (we) may be a victim after all Indian soldiers died in Kargil bcoz of Musharaff. Why did I say that I'm an outsider??

This is Asim's post,
--

Yes,I'm an outsider but I do have a right to have an opinion (and dismiss others)- its bcoz of Musharaff our soldiers died in Kargil. I dont have any trust on Musharaff - the military general, who invaded Kargil when we had peace talks with a democratically elected civilian Pakistani govt. He already broke the promise he made to MMA (a political party in Pakistan that rules a province), so I dont believe in Musharaff- The President.

The Presdient is the supreme ruler in Pakistan, and Musharaff is the Presient and Musharaffis still an army general and Mushraff become President by a coup and invoking martial law. Cetainly this is not what we call democracy. To strengthen my arguement that he certainly is a authorotarian , Musharaff gave a private pardon to AQKhan who was accused and proved (by USA) for nuclear proliferation, cut a deal and banned Benazir and Shariff (former PM's) from entering in to Pakistan.

So Nawaz Sheriff came to power by dismissing Benazir Bhutto, changing the constitution and by invking martial law??

And only Musharaff claims that. Even that doesnt make a case for Musharaff to overthrow an ELECTED governement. Modi? eh? Actually Musharaff did murdered innocent tribesmen, if you want I can post news articles from Dawn that said 25 innocent civilians incld school going children during the operations in WANA.

So you didnt have a better way to counter the point?? A military general in his army fatigues is the least we (I and the other democratic country people) would want to see as our President. Now do you see any self-righteousness in that simple fact??

An army general in his battle fatigues stole the power by a coup, changed the constitution and rules as an authoratorian. If thats called democrcy, I thank thee lord for not subjecting me to the foresaid country/Govt/rule.

__________________
A grain of wheat eclipsed the sun of Adam !!

tarek

Jay

Touche - All yours - spare me.

Ray

Pakistan's Worst Recent Sunni-Shiite Muslim Violence

Quote:

Pakistan has been wracked by a series of clashes between Sunni Muslims, who make up 80% of the country's population, and minority Shiites. Here is a look at some of the worst recent violence.

Thursday: Two explosions at a gathering of radical Sunni Muslims in the city of Multan kills about 40 people and injure 100.

Oct. 1, 2004: A suicide bombing at a Shiite mosque during Friday prayers in Sialkot city kills 31 and wounds 50.

Sept. 10, 2004: Gunmen kill a Shiite professor in Quetta city.

May 7, 2004: A suicide bombing during Friday prayers at a Shiite mosque in Karachi city kills 14 people and wounds 200, and sparks clashes between members of the rival sects that leave another one dead and three injured.

May 30, 2004: Senior, pro-Taliban Sunni cleric Mufti Nizamuddin Shamzai is shot dead in Karachi.

March 2, 2004: Suspected Sunni militants fire at a Shiite procession in Quetta, killing 44 people and wounding 150.

June 8, 2003: Gunmen kill 11 police recruits, mostly Shiites, in Quetta.

July 4, 2003: Attackers armed with machine guns and grenades storm a Shiite mosque in Quetta, killing 50 people praying inside. Two of the attackers are killed by guards.

Oct. 3, 2003: Gunmen fire on a bus carrying Shiite Muslim employees of Pakistan's space agency in Karachi, killing six people.

Oct. 6, 2003: Sunni lawmaker Maulana Azam Tariq, the former chief of banned extremist group Sipah-e-Sahaba, is shot dead in Islamabad, along with his three bodyguards and driver. Tariq's group was suspected of involvement in the killings of hundreds of Shiite Muslims.


URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,BT_...000194,00.html

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

Ray

MULTAN, Pakistan (AP)--Pakistan deployed army troops and closed schools and colleges to restore the peace after two bombs planted in a car and motorcycle exploded at a gathering of Sunni Muslim radicals in a central city before dawn Thursday, killing at least 39 people and wounding about 100 others in what police suspected was a sectarian attack.

Schools and colleges in Multan also were closed for two days to stop potential student protests over the bombing, said Ijaz Chaudhry, a senior government administrator.

About 2,000 angry Sunnis gathered outside a hospital where victims of the explosions in the city of Multan were taken, shouting "Shiites are infidels!" and slogans against the government, witnesses said.

Interior Minister Aftab Khan Sherpao said it was a remote-controlled bomb planted inside a Suzuki car. Police estimated it weighed about 15 pounds, and said most injuries were caused by flying metal from the vehicle.

It didn't appear to be a suicide attack, Multan police chief Sikander Hayyat told the private Geo television network.

A leader of the Sipah-e-Sahaba group blamed Thursday's bombings on radical Shiite Muslims.

"This is the worst kind of terrorism, and everybody knows who is behind it," said Ahmad Ludhianvi, the head of Sipah-e-Sahaba.
He urged calm among supporters, but he accused the government of negligence and demanded the arrests of the attackers within a week.


URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/0,,BT_...003208,00.html

nzkiwi

I don't think anything will improve Pakistan, nothing seems to work for them wether it's democracy or military rule. I doubt that a Theocratic Islamic state like Iran's would work since even Islam seems to be a devisive force, Sunnis killing shiites etc.

Ray

Call me an optimist if you will. I don't think that everything in Pakistan's history is negative.

After the death of Jinnah and Liaqat Ali's assassination, there was great turmoil and failure in the democratic system till Gen Ayub Khan came on the scene.

Pakistan cleared much of the mess under his regime. He brought some stability and tried to clear the fiscal mess.

He went and again the reign of feudal satraps in the guise of politicians looted Pakistan and created havoc.

Gen Yahyah Khan came on the scene and there was no Yeah Yeah about it since he was an alcoholic and a womaniser. He presided over the break up of Pakistan.

Bhutto came. Did something, but was removed and murdered by his protege Zia [who thus was a traitor being a namakharam (disloyal to the salt)].

Zia came on the scene. Of all the military rulers of Pakistan, he was the worst. He Islamised Pakistan to suit his purpose.

When Zia died in the air accident, more corrupt govts came on the scene.

Musharraf has come. Like him or not, he has a HUGE Mess on his hands. To be frank, he has not done badly. I am sure that should he last out, things will surely improve for Pakistan. It is not easy to clear the God forsaken mess of Islamisation and sectarian violence promoted by Zia and also stabilise the fiscal quagmire that the rampant corrupt govts of Benazir and Sharif left as their legacies on Pakistan.

Remember, Rome was not built in a day.

Have Faith. Have Patience and pray to God.

I am sure Pakistan will survive and will do well in future.

tarek

Can we change our image?
Khaled Ahmed’s TV Review


The image we project abroad comes through negative news. Foreign channels, like all news media, will report negative happenings. Pakistan gets projected mostly through religious violence. People who do violence do it in the name of Islam and link it to the West’s enmity towards Islam. When Sunnis kill Shias the Shias end up blaming it on the United States. When the Shias kill Sunnis in retaliation, the Sunnis blame it on the United States. Pakistan’s image suffers as a result. Our nationalism is expressed through Islam and what we think is happening to it. We had a nationalism based on hatred of India, but that too is now tied up with Islam through state-sponsored jihad. What should we now do with our nationalism?

GEO (August 24, 2004) had Fahd Hussain discussing New Images of Pakistani Patriotism with Prof Ansari, ex-ISI DG, General (Retd) Asad Durrani, artiste Faryal Gauhar, PPP leader Navid Qamar etc, and an audience of young people. Mr Asad Durrani agreed that a patriot would be a person who did service for society beyond the call of his normal duty. He supported the view which was initiated by Mr Navid Qamar. Fahd suggested that the old images included armymen and sportsmen but perhaps one should look for new images. Prof Ansari said that there was need to coin new images but he pleaded guilty to becoming emotional when watching cricket matches. He said he was greatly agitated when Pakistani team won the World Cup in 1992. He agreed that less flamboyant images of patriotism were needed now from among workers, bankers and ordinary people from all walks of life. Ms Faryal Gauhar said that Pakistan was still in the era of old images. The discussion should not present nationalism under the new label of patriotism. She said nationalistic images came from the leaders but the nation had no leaders now. She said patriotism had to be selfless public service. A boy and a girl presented an MBA version of patriotism. The boy said that Pakistan needed better marketing abroad and a new ministry should be established to sell Pakistan’s new image. Ms Gauhar objected to the MBA approach but the girl who spoke after her insisted that Pakistan be sold as a brand. Mr Durrani stated that the new image had to be based on reality. If the image was concocted without a basis in reality it would be empty propaganda. Mr Qamar said that the Constitution of Pakistan should become the collective basis of patriotism for all Pakistanis. He said Pakistan had failed to make the Constitution the symbol of Pakistan’s patriotism. Fahd asked if a new heroic image could be found and then shown abroad to improve the standing of the country. One person in the audience suggested the name of Abdus Sattar Edhi. The audience clapped to indicate assent.

Patriotism was the big fudge in the discussion. Faryal Gauhar was right in pointing this out. Mr Navid Qamar got it right by linking nationalism to the Constitution; but since the Constitution has been poisoned by ideology this may not be quite the solution. Edward Mortimor edited a book titled People, Nation & State: The Meaning of Ethnicity and Nationalism, in which the dilemma of nationalism was discussed. Nationalism doesn’t give the state a good international image. The book plumped for ‘civic’ nationalism, based not on ethnicity but on a common adherence to the constitution and universal human rights within a state that protects everyone. This seems to be the model that has arrived in Europe through the European Court of Human Rights. The European Union itself seeks to reduce ethnic nationalism to a ‘civic’ one. The Third World is subject to different forces of nationalism. It is of the 19th century variety, which created fascist states in Europe right into the 20th. Europe has been jolted by this Third World phenomenon in its own backyard, the Balkans, where the multicultural experiment in Bosnia under the UN has steadily failed. This nationalism doesn’t make sense except in an emotional, irrational context. States created under it begin falling apart under the pressure of majority nationalism. Blacks are not blacks but Hutus and Tutsis, Muslims are not all Muslims but Shias and Sunnis, Slavs are not all Slavs but Croats and Serbs. The modern state must learn to allow pluralism to prevent its own break-up through movements of separatism. And pluralism can take root only if nationalism can be tempered with universal values that bind entire humanity, not just an ambiguously defined nation.

PTV (August 23, 2004) had a lecture from Pakistan’s well-known American scholar of Islam, Dr Rifaat Hassan. She said that war in the West was of two kinds. First the just war, which took into account the matter of victory and defeat. The second was the Holy War, which was fought in the way of God and was in the category of Crusade. She said Islam did not believe in crusades. It believed in jihad, which could only be a defensive war. Islam did not allow a war of aggression. It did not allow an undeclared covert war. It also did not allow war through terrorism. She said it was also a moot point as to who could wage jihad. She said Muslims were also enjoined to think whether a war would bring more disadvantage in place of advantage and freedom from injustice. She said media in Pakistan must think about the dominance of Western media and its bias. She spoke well of Al Jazira TV and said it was doing a good job by just reporting.

By allowing the privatisation of jihad for 20 years the state of Pakistan lost one exclusive right it had: the right to wage war. The jihadi organisations that now stand abolished reject the traditional Islamic view that only the state should declare jihad and that covert war was not allowed by Islam. The jihadi militias now reject the state before arrogating to themselves the right to wage war. The state is rejected because it is aligned with the enemies of Islam. This is normal. In a state ruled by Muslims the rulers are never really legitimate. If they don’t go away, it is time to reject the state

tarek

Mr. Musharraf has said that his mission includes changing the psyche of the people -- how can he do this without tackling the marxist Islamist ideology that continues to grow -- it is now "dulce et decorum est" to threaten life and property, indeed it is "islamic" to do so, every village idiot, from the local taliban on the spot to the political opposition, is inclined towards such.

As Pakistan inches toward islamist insurrection(s), who will argue that "nipping it in the bud" is an inappropriate method of dealing with this ideology and it's adherents?


Work on Karak oilfield stopped


By Abdul Sami Paracha

KOHAT, Oct 13: Work on the Gurguri oilfield in Banda Daud Shah tehsil of Karak district and the laying of a pipeline in Aman Kot was stopped on Tuesday following a warning by a grand jirga of 50 villages held under the auspices of the Khattak Grand Ittehad and Action Committee to attack and destroy the site if their demands were not met.

All the 250 staff members of the Descon Engineering and MOLE, a foreign drilling company, were pulled out of the area under the protection of frontier constabulary and police, reports reaching here on Tuesday night said.

A large number of FC personnel and police took control of the entire area to protect the site from the attackers. The project manager of Descon, Iqrar Pervez, told journalists that he had sent the whole staff on leave till further orders. The staff included the Kohat chief manager of MOLE company, Cgyula Vegh, 50 officers and 200 workers.

Mr Pervez said that in an attack on Sunday one of their drivers Shahnawaz was injured and property worth Rs5 million was damaged by hundreds of armed protesters.

The attack was led by local chief of Taliban Tehrik Nasrullah Jan. Mr Vegh was forced to hide in a container and later taken to a safe place via Hangu when some miscreants spread the news that the Taliban leader wanted to kill him"

Hari_Om

In a perverse way there appears to be strand of logic behind that belief that may proceed in this fashion :

1. Pakistan is a haven for Islam in South Asia.
2. Islam is a religion of peace.
3. Ergo, any act of violence must be committed by those who are not followers of Islam as those other religions are wanting on the espousing of peace front.

Perhaps that is why we have Visioninthedark proclaim in his post number 18 on the "Carblast kills 37 in Pakistan" thread that :

Ray

Hari Om,

Please read this:

I am sure Pakistan is peaceful. It is not Islam. It is the Wahabis no matter what Khalid writes in that article Tarek posted.

You all are mistaken.

It is All Quiet on India's Western Front.

It is all Wahabis who are doing it.

All the hassles around the world in the name of Islam and Islmic terrorists are not by them. It is all Wahabis. Al Sadr, the Iranian theologists, what's that guy's name Zaqarwqi or something are all Wahabis. Those brutal beheadings are all Wahabis. Osama bin Nut are all wahabis.

Read this:

http://www.telegraphindia.com/104101...ry_3885684.asp

Though I espoused here that the US must ensure justice to the Gitmo Bay detainees and give a fair trial, I am now a wee bit embarrassed since US may be right that they don't deserve any trial.

In short, it is utter smokescreen to call scoundrels all as Wahabis and shove the issue under the carpet. One must face up to the turth. However, that requires courage. One must sort out his own. One can't go running to the International Court of Justice or the UN against one's own, can one?

If the attitude is of shoving truth under the carpet, the terrorists will run amok.

It is obsfuscating the issue that the terrorists are not either Shia or Sunnis but Wahabis. How come suddenly every pig becomes a Wahabi?

That is why I support Musharraf. He will sort these pigs out.

Ray

While it is an interesting article and rather truthful in this world where Darkness and Obfuscation is the rule, I fail to understand why the US is being blamed for their own stupidity?

It seems to be the favourite ploy of blaming others for sin and stupidity done by themselves.

Now, I understand (to some extent) why American say
'Do it and you are damned and don't do it, you are still damned'

How is the US involved in Shias killing Sunnis and Sunnis killing Shias? If they feel that Musharraf is wrong in supporting the USA in the war on terror and it is gainst Islam, take on Musharraf and don't blame the US.

If someone 'casts pearls before swine' (Englsih saying) and it is picked up, then why blame the US?

And anyway, Musharraf has 'picked up the gauntlet' (English saying) and may he succeed!

visioninthedark

I suggest you read about who and what the wahabbis are ...

the Al Qaeda and the saudi royalty share the wahabbi ideology ....

they regard all other muslims .... sunnis of other schools included as being "deviant" in their "Islam" ....

Zarqawi has clearly stated again and again that Shias are enemies of Islam ....

OBL is a Wahabbi too ... as are those of lashkar-e-jhangvi ....

these are facts ...

Mullah Sadr is an extremist but not a wahabbi ...

don't mix everything ....

__________________

Please visit http://www.visiongwadar.com/platinum/index.html

Jay

What makes a wahabbi being resented by rest of the world?? his/her extremism. Mullah Sadr, though not a wahabbi, is still an extremist, it really doesnt make any difference. Wahabbi or not.

Ray

Am I to understand that all bombings and killings done in Pakistan, are Wahabis?

And this is a wrong report

And the article posted by Tarek written by Mr Khaled is bogus?

In view of the above which contradicts totally each other, how can one know what is correct?

I am yet to hear any authority from Pakistan blaming the killings and bombings on Wahabis. Therefore, it would be immensely gullible for anyone to accept without proof from some authorative source that it is Wahabis all. And rather naive to suggest too. Prima facie, it appears to be misrepresentation. PROOF is what is the key to what is being asserted.

Hence, self assertive statements that they are all Wahabis does not wash, if one wants to know as to what's up and Mushraf's plan to sort these terrorists out.

tarek

Is the idea of Pakistan dead?
Khaled Ahmed’s Urdu Press Review

It is a sign of the crisis of the state that fewer and fewer people agree on the ‘idea of Pakistan’. No one is willing to recognise and accept what Pakistan has become, not even those who are responsible for this evolution of the state. Those who have Islamised it are not happy because they think Islamisation has not happened to the full. Those who had not agreed with the kind of ideology imposed on the country think that the purpose of Pakistan has not been realised. No one believes that states make mistakes and that, by learning from them, arrive at ‘the idea of the state’.

Famous cleric of Lahore Dr Israr Ahmad stated in Khabrain (August 5, 2004) that the idea of Pakistan was dead and that after two and a half years Pakistan would be no more. He said there was no Islamic jihad in Kashmir and there was no such thing as Muslim ummah. He said Pakistan would break up into eight pieces and Balochistan would be the only piece that would be economically viable. He said Pakistan was not made by Punjabis but by Sindhis. In the NWFP, there was Sarhadi Gandhi and the Baloch wanted no part of Pakistan.

No state in the world was made by total consensus. Some elements remain opposed to it and will be assimilated into the larger consensus only gradually. Not having an ummah does not harm the nation-state. Jihad was wrong because it was privatised and has come to an end. That will not harm the state either. Why should Pakistan come to an end in 2007? Dr Israr Ahmad speaks like a prophet but may not be proved right like a prophet. He said the Taliban were the army of the Mehdi and he was proved wrong when Muqtada Al Sadr produced his Mehdi army in Iraq. Nothing happened. No one holds him to his flights of fancy.

Quoted in Nawa-e-Waqt (August 6, 2004) Justice (Retd) Javid Iqbal said that the objectives of Pakistan had been lost and new generations were given nothing. Periodically army took over the country, created new political elements then destroyed them. The media was gagged and those who gave Pakistan its nuclear programme were persecuted. He said the clergy was not interpreting Islam right and was obsessed with usury while the economic order in modern times had become highly developed. There was a need to convert Pakistan into an Islamic welfare modern state but there was nothing but despair in Pakistan. He said national language Urdu was being ignored in English-medium schools.

Dr Javid Iqbal may be put off by misdirection quite common in the Third World. That Pakistan fell into the Third World category is no surprise. Muslims could have converted a much better endowed state into this category. What was the purpose of Pakistan? It is folly to try and make that too clear. The cleric will plump for Khilafat-e-Rashida and the socialist will fall for a welfare state. Dr Javid Iqbal’s idea of the welfare state is passé. Army’s paramountcy cannot be removed without altering the nature of Pakistan’s anti-India nationalism. The purpose of Pakistan will be determined by a number of factors outside Pakistan’s control, but will depend on how Pakistan adapts to these factors. The purpose of the Third World state is to survive. It is only when it comes to the quality of this survival that the Third World’s paucity of intellectual resource becomes apparent.

Columnist Hamid Mir wrote in Jang (August 3, 2004) that the attack on [then] finance minister Shaukat Aziz was owned up by Egyptian terrorist organisation Khaled Islambouli Brigade on behalf of Al Qaeda but the latter had not announced that it was indeed connected with the Brigade. Similarly Hafz al-Misri Brigade in Spain had claimed that its attack on the trains in Spain was linked to Al Qaeda but Al Qaeda had not dissociated from the attack. Thus both Khaled Islambouli Brigade and Hafs al-Misri Brigade will be considered parts of Al Qaeda as long as the latter did not publicly dissociate itself from them.

In connection with the attempt on the prime minister’s life, the ISI caught Qari Saifullah Akhtar of Harkat Jihad Islami from Dubai. He was an old graduate of Banuri Masjid. He was also close to Al Qaeda. The Egyptian connection links him to Aiman al-Zawahiri who is now in charge.

According to daily Pakistan (August 3, 2004) nine Arab princes were to start their hunting season in Pakistan from November and that special areas had been allotted to them by the government so that they can hunt freely without interruption till January next year. Sheikh Hammad was given Bahawalnagar, Shaikh Hamdan Bahawalpur, the Abu Dhabi crown prince Rajanpur, Sheikh Ziyad Jhang, Sheikh Zayd Rahimyar Khan, Prince Naif Layyah. According to the authorities the areas were set aside because they needed the economic uplift that will be provided by the Arab royalty.

The rise of Sipah Sahaba was owed to the money that seeped into its seminaries in South Punjab from the Arab guests. Once the money appeared, the seminaries opened like mushrooms.

Writing in Jang (August 5, 2004) columnist Nazir Naji stated that Al Qaeda’s biggest asset were the people of Pakistan who hated America to the man. In these circumstances if President Musharraf takes off the uniform it would lead to chaos which will further favour Al Qaeda. If he does not the country will become unstable which again will go in favour of Al Qaeda.

This is an insight that the mainstream political parties must take to heart if they think that after Musharraf they will inherit the mantle of power.

Ex-ISI chief Hameed Gul stated in Nawa-e-Waqt (August 5, 2004) that America, India and Israel were dead set against the deep-sea port of Gwadar. He said in Balochistan people who asked for their rights were dubbed traitors. He said army should at once be taken out of Balochistan. He feared that RAW and Mossad could benefit from the situation there.

If that angle is accepted it must embarrass the anti-American Baloch nationalists who oppose the Gwadar Port as a cat’s paw of American imperialism.

Writing in Jang (August 6, 2004) Irshad Haqqani stated that General Musharraf had told editors after 9/11 that the Americans had asked for three things from Pakistan which it was willing to give, but there was a line drawn on how far Pakistan could go in doing what America wanted. Irshad Haqqani, without saying what was too much, complained that Musharraf had gone too far in doing what the Americans wanted. He said it was the public impression that he had gone too far.

The American press thinks Musharraf is not sincere and is secretly going against the American policy. Mr Haqqani’s advice will impose on him the obligation of finding ways and means of opposing the American policy in the region. That will remove one pillar of the strategy of staying in power in Pakistan. After him will come a ruler whom we will advise not to go too much against the policy of the United States! And so it goes on.

According to Khabrain (August 6, 2004) a former staff officer to ex-NAB chief General Amjad, Hassan Abbas had written a book titled Allah, Army and America. He was currently teaching at Harvard Law School, Boston. He revealed that air chief Hakimullah was involved in the conspiracy that killed General Zia in 1988.

This is uncanny but should be read together with a recent statement, also made from the US, by a daughter of General Zia, that some air force officers killed him. One should read this together with reports that Zia’s pilots had acted suspiciously. One of them had asked his mother to pray for him because it was his last flight!