Editor's Choice

Featured Post

"Let us build Pakistan" has moved.
30 November 2009

All archives and posts have been transferred to the new location, which is: http://criticalppp.com

We encourage you to visit our new site. Please don't leave your comments here because this site is obsolete. You may also like to update your RSS feeds or Google Friend Connect (Follow the Blog) to the new location. Thank you.


Monday, 26 January 2009

Taliban/Sipah-e-Sahaba attack Dera Ismail Khan once again....

5 killed in DI Khan blast
Updated at: 1120 PST, Monday, January 26, 2009 (The News)

DERA ISMAIL KHAN: Five people have been killed and several injured in Dera Ismail Khan blast on Monday.

According to reports, the blast occurred outside town hall at circular road. A car and a motorbike were parked at the spot of the blast. It is however unclear whether the bomb was planted in a car or motorbike.

Police and high officials of administration have reached the scene of the blast whereas security forces have cordoned off the area. The injured have been shifted to hospital where six reported in a critical condition.

President Asif Zardari, Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani and Adviser to the Prime on Interior Affairs Rehman Malik have denounced the attack.

Terrorist organization Sipah-e-Sahaba (alias Laskar-e-Jhangavi)has previously conducted a number of suicide attacks/bomb blasts targeting the Shia population of Dera Ismail Khan. These two organizations are part of the greater Pakistan Tehreek-e-Taliban.



Aamir Mughal said...

Pakistani neocons and UN sanctions by Khalid Hasan is Daily Times’ US-based correspondent


At a meeting with a group of journalists among whom I was present, my dear and much lamented friend Tahir Mirza, then the Dawn correspondent, asked Musharraf why he was not acting against Lashkar-e Tayba and Jaish-e Muhammad. Musharraf went red in the face and shot back, “They are not doing anything in Pakistan. They are doing jihad outside.”

Like bullfrogs out after heavy summer rains, Pakistani cyberspace and the realm of the printed word are full of the croaking of neocons who have convinced the already ignorant that the Security Council sanctions against Jama’at-ud Dawa and certain individuals only came because Pakistani officials were either sleeping at the post or had conspired with the 15-member Security Council to let the axe fall.

These people are not interested in facts. They only have opinions.

One cybercon who answers to the name Ahmed Quraishi writes on December 24, “We have a government with shady characters in key places, strongly backed by the Bush administration, acting and behaving as if they were representing a US occupation government in Pakistan.” Under “recommendation”, he proposes, “We need to start a witch-hunt in Pakistan to cleanse our academia and public life of such self-haters and defeatists who poison the minds of young Pakistanis about their homeland. Such academics and human rights activists should not be allowed to hide behind the freedom of expression.”

The two “traitors” he refers to are Pervaiz Hoodbhoy and Asma Jehangir.

Then there is the Ann Coulter of Pakistan, Shireen Mazari, who writes, “Thanks to the pusillanimity shown by our leaders ever since the Mumbai acts of terrorism, Pakistan is being squeezed by so-called friends and foe alike.” She goes on to predict, “However, let there be no doubt that India is going to carry out surgical strikes, probably beginning with AJK. After all, the extraordinary and unscheduled Envoys Conference can only have been called to contain the diplomatic fallout of such strikes.”

It is pointless to inform her that the envoys’ conference had been scheduled for some time and was not summoned because of Mumbai. Mazari also wrote that “in the Mumbai aftermath, we chose to prevent our allies from rallying around us in the UN Security Council.”

Ann Coulter, I should explain, is a neocon American figure who urged the bombing of Mecca and who wrote, “Liberals are always against America. They are either traitors or idiots, and on the matter of America’s self-preservation, the difference is irrelevant.”

She is also an ardent admirer of the late Senator Joseph McCarthy and his witch hunts.

But to return to the Security Council sanctions, a statement issued by the Foreign Office in Islamabad laying out facts was lost in the din created by our croaking neocons. So let me quote that for the record:

“Action against the JuD and certain individuals was initiated following their designation by the UN Sanctions Committee established pursuant to the UN Security Council Resolution 1267, on the Consolidated List of individuals and entities associated with Al Qaeda and the Taliban. The request for enlisting the JuD had been under consideration of the UN Sanctions Committee since 2006… Since this resolution was adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, it is obligatory on Pakistan to fully implement its provisions. Pakistan, as a responsible member of the United Nations, has fulfilled its international obligations.”

On December 9, a day before the resolution, Pakistan’s UN ambassador Abdullah Hussain Haroon said in a statement, “After the designation of Jama’at-ud Dawa (JuD) under (Security Council resolution) 1267, the Government, on receiving communication from the Security Council, shall proscribe the JuD and take other consequential actions, as required, including the freezing of assets.”

This shows that the sanctions were more than expected as was their imminence and the UN mission was not asleep as is being charged by the Ann Coulters and other neocons of Pakistan.

Those who are rising in defence of Lashkar-e Tayba and its mutation, the Jama’at-ud Dawa, perhaps neither know nor do they care to know what the Security Council’s terrorism sanctions committee is. And although these cybercons and super-patriots are beyond redemption and repair, let me nevertheless explain what this committee is and in the face of which Pakistan is accused of having acted pusillanimously.

The Security Council Committee established pursuant to Resolution 1267 (1999) on October 15, 1999, is also known as “the Al Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee”. The sanctions regime has been modified and strengthened by subsequent resolutions, including Resolutions 1333 (2000), 1390 (2002), 1455 (2003), 1526 (2004), 1617 (2005), 1735 (2006) and 1822 (2008) so that the sanctions measures now apply to designated individuals and entities associated with Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden and/or the Taliban wherever located.

The names of the targeted individuals and entities are placed on the Consolidated List. The resolutions listed above have all been adopted under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter and require all states to take a number of specified measures in connection with any individual or entity associated with Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden and/or the Taliban as designated by the Committee.

And what are those measures? Freeze without delay the funds and other financial assets or economic resources of designated individuals and entities; prevent the entry into or transit through their territories by designated individuals; and prevent the direct or indirect supply, sale and transfer from their territories or by their nationals outside their territories, or using their flag vessels or aircraft, of arms and related materiel of all types, spare parts, and technical advice, assistance, or training related to military activities, to designated individuals and entities.

The Committee is one of three subsidiary bodies established by the Security Council that deal with terrorism-related issues. The other two committees are the Counter-Terrorism Committee and the 1540 Committee. The three Committees and their expert groups coordinate their work and cooperate closely and the Committees’ chairmen also brief the Security Council on the activities of the Committees in joint meetings, when possible.

No one can prevent the action of the committee; nor is anyone invited or told about its proceedings. Normally the first signal is a note circulated to all UN member states.

And now the unvarnished truth.

Since 2006, Pakistan, against better advice and reasons that have been blown sky-high by Mumbai, had kept the sanctions from being clamped with the help of China. However, after the Mumbai attacks, China informed Pakistan that it could no longer block the terrorist group and individuals from being sanctioned. The question the neocons and the super-patriots should ask, but don’t, is: Why was Pakistan blocking sanctions against a terrorist group?

Aamir Mughal said...

1 - During Zia-ul Haq’s rule, General Pervez Musharraf, then a Brigadier, was assigned the task of suppressing the Shia revolt against the Sunni-dominated administration in the Gilgit region. Musharraf used Pathan tribesmen from NWFP and Afghanistan along with his troops to silence the Shias. In the wake of this operation, hundreds of Shias were butchered and displaced from Gilgit. The operations were widely reported in the Herald, a monthly magazine of the daily Dawn in its April and May 1990 issues. It is also said that the Wahabi Pakhtuns who raided Gilgit under Musharraf’s command were led by none other than Osama bin Laden.[1]

1 - According to a Herald report of May 1990, “In May 1988, low-intensity political rivalry and sectarian tension ignited into full-scale carnage as thousands of armed tribesmen from outside Gilgit district invaded Gilgit along the Karakoram Highway. Nobody stopped them. They destroyed crops and houses, lynched and burnt people to death in the villages around Gilgit town. The number of dead and injured was put in the hundreds. But numbers alone tell nothing of the savagery of the invading hordes and the chilling impact it has left on these peaceful valleys. [1]

2 - Another point against General Musharraf being a liberal is that most of his political support over the last eight years has come from pro-Islamist conservatives. For those that might have forgotten, the one vote that allowed the pro-Musharraf coalition to win a majority in the National Assembly came from the late Maulana Azam Tariq, leader of the sectarian Sipah-e-Sahaba. [2]

3 - Musharraf has plainly given the religious groups more free rein in the campaign than he has allowed the two big parties that were his main rivals. In Jhang city, in Punjab province, Maulana Azam Tariq, leader of an outlawed extremist group called Sipah-e-Sahaba, which has been linked to numerous sectarian killings, is being allowed to run as an independent—despite election laws that disqualify any candidate who has criminal charges pending, or even those who did not earn a college degree. [3]

4 - And while the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan and the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi stand officially disbanded, their most militant son and leader, Maulana Azam Tariq, an accused in several cases of sectarian killing, contested elections from jail - albeit as an independent candidate - won his seat, and was released on bail shortly thereafter. The fine line between an outright violation of the law and its insidious subversion by those who appoint themselves its custodians has been blurred so often in Pakistan’s chequered political history, that is has now become par for the course. The irony is when the architects of that subversion or violation are those who frame the laws themselves.[4]


References and Notes:

1 - The Problem of Kashmir and the Problem in Kashmir: Divergence Demands Convergence Strategic Analysis/Jan-Mar 2005 [1]


2 - VIEW: End of a liberal alliance? —Syed Mansoor Hussain [2]


3 - General’s Election By TIM MCGIRK / KHANA-KHEL With reporting by Syed Talat Hussain/Islamabad Dated Monday, Oct. 07, 2002 [3]


4 - For The ‘General’ Good By Sairah Irshad Khan [4]



U.S. Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the judicial dispute is “something that we believe the Pakistanis themselves are going to have to sort out.”

U.S. backs Pakistan judicial reform and mum on judges

By Paul Eckert, Asia Correspondence Reuters Thursday, February 28, 2008; 4:00 PM


During his Senate hearing on Thursday, Mr. Negroponte said, “I think we would, as a general proposition, urge that the moderate political forces work together, and of course President Musharraf is still the president of his country, and we look forward to continuing to work well with him as well.”

U.S. Embrace of Musharraf Irks Pakistanis By DAVID ROHDE Published: February 29, 2008



ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — The U.S. has a puzzle to crack in Pakistan.

The Bush administration wants to ensure military pressure is kept up on militants in the lawless tribal areas, but U.S. support for President Pervez Musharraf risks deepening anti-American sentiment among a public already fuming over Islamabad’s role in the war on terror.

US Support for Musharraf Causes Anger By JASON STRAZIUSO The Associated Press Friday, February 29, 2008; 6:12 AM



Aamir Mughal said...

Listen to the audio and listen carefully that your Favourite Aali Murtabat General Musharraf had almost ignited the Ethnic War in 2007.

Would you like to explain this???

صدر مشرف صحافی پر برس پڑے


پاکستان کے صدر جنرل ریٹائرڈ پرویز مشرف نے خود کو انسانی حقوق کا آزادی اظہار کا علمبردار قرار دینے کے بعد حاضرین کو اس وقت حیرت میں ڈال دیا جب ایک چبھتا ہوا سوال پوچھنے پر وہ ایک پاکستانی صحافی پر برس پڑے۔

ایم ضیاء الدین نے کیا سوال پوچھا تھا؟ سنیئے بی بی سی کے کاشف قمر کے ساتھ ضیاءالدین کا خصوصی انٹرویو

وقتِ اشاعت: Friday, 25 January, 2008, 20:46 GMT 01:46 PST


Listen the BBC [Urdu] Audio of General [Retd] Parvez Musharraf and then compare the present setup [no doubt the present setup is not up to the mark] but still it is elected by the government and also note as to how Mr Musharraf addressed a Senior Correspondent from Pakistan. I wonder where was that ‘courage’ [which he showed to M Ziauddin of Daily Dawn] of General Musharraf when he took the Infamous Telephone Call of Colin Powell [Former US Secretary of State] after 9/11 and bowed like slave. Listen the tape and I leave it the Forum Members to decide:


Later that same day, while addressing 800 Pakistanis at the Hilton Hotel, Musharraf took things a step further. Speaking in Urdu this time, Musharraf said that journalists who ask these kinds of questions should be hit (audio from BBC Urdu).

The Committee to Protect Journalists quickly condemned Musharraf’s tirade. The editors at the Guardian and the Telegraph expressed shock. Pakistani students in London threatened legal action. Musharraf’s thuggery is an important part of the story. But it’s not nearly as critical as the journalist’s question.


1 - Musharraf - hits out at Journalist for tough Questions

Posted by Teeth MaestroJanuary 28, 2008


2 - Pakistan’s Prisoner Problems 14 Feb 2008 by Annie Jacobsen


Shaheen Sehbai, Ansar Abbasi and Ahmed Quraishi - 4


Shaheen Sehbai, Ansar Abbasi and Ahmed Quraishi - 5


Escorts in Lahore said...

Escorts service in Pakistan giving you more and more choice to select girls in Lahore.
If you come to Lahore and want Escorts Girls in Lahore. We give you escorts Service in
Pakistan only in Hotels (Out-Call). Sorry for (In-Call ) Lover. If you select any hotel in
Lahore then you and our girls are safe also in hotel. Pearl Continental Hotel, Best Western
Lahore, The Residency Hotel, Regency Inn Hotel, Carlton Tower Hotel, Royal Elegance Hotel,
One Hotel, Herfa Inn Quick Continental Ambassador Hotel, Avari Hotel Lahore, Hotel Crown
Escorts Service in Lahore

Post a Comment

1. You are very welcome to comment, more so if you do not agree with the opinion expressed through this post.

2. If you wish to hide your identity, post with a pseudonym but don't select the 'anonymous' option.

3. Copying the text of your comment may save you the trouble of re-writing if there is an error in posting.