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 Please don't leave your comments here because this site is obsolete.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.


Friday, 31 July 2009

Christians burnt to death; Lawyers go unbridled. One day in Shahbaz Sharif's rule in Punjab

Christian children, women burnt to death in Pakistan

TCM News Desk
July 31, 2009 | 00:47:23

SEVERAL Christian children and women were reportedly burnt to death when a Muslim mob set on fire 40 homes of Christians in Korian village in Toba Tek district of Punjab province inPakistan on July 30.

According to Pakistan Christian Post, the Faisalabad-Gojra Road has been blocked by a Muslim mob that is preventing any help to reach village Korian where homes of Christians are burning.

The trigger to the violence, it was reported, was that Christians had given shelter to a boy who was accused to have torn down pages of Koran.

On Sunday night Muslims were searching for one boy in a large gathering of a Christian wedding ceremony; they accused that the boy accused had burnt down pages of the Koran, the Pakistan newspaper reported.

Though the Christian and Muslim elders in the village defused the tension on clarification of the Christian youth that he had not burnt pages of the Quran, the mob came back on Thursday night at 9:00 pm (Pakistan time). The Muslim mob is said to have given a call to the locals from a mosque’s loudspeakers asking them to gather and teach a lesson to ‘infidel Christians.’

Police forces have left Lahore for Toba Tek after call from Christians in Gojra who are also hiding in homes on fear of attack by Muslims.

The nearby villages also made same announcements from mosque and Muslims gathered before homes of Christians in large numbers. Women and men with fear locked their doors to hide inside.

It is second incident of burning homes of Christian in Punjab province when Muslim mob on accusation of blasphemy attacked village Bahamin Wala in district Kasur on July 1, 2009.

There is widespread fear among Christians in Punjab province on safety and security of life from attacks of extremist Muslims and misuse of blasphemy laws, Pakistan Christian Postadded.



Lawyers go unbridled, breaking rules in routine

By Rana Tanveer

LAHORE: The lawyers’ ruthless attitude towards media in the city on Thursday is not the first such instance.

Daily Times learnt that the lawyers are never brought to the book for committing numerous illegalities against the media, police or even judges. Most lawyers do not even abide with traffic rules.

A few months ago, a group of lawyers led by advocate Moazzam Iqbal Gill attacked and injured three reporters in the compound of the Lahore High Court Bar Association (LHCBA) for not writing in favour of Gill’s campaign for the LHCBA presidency. The journalists were severely injured after being hit by chairs but the police refused to register a first information report (FIR) against the lawyers, saying they had no jurisdiction to book people for incidents in the premises of the courts.

Moreover, during the lawyers’ movement for the restoration of judiciary, lawyers thrashed media teams and abused journalists.

Last year in April, lawyers beat former federal minister Dr Sher Afgan Niazi in front of the LHC. The LHCBA office-bearers called lawyers and media saying they had trapped Niazi and would teach him a lesson for supporting former president Pervez Musharraf and giving statements against their movement. Lawyers even barred the entry of journalists to the Lahore Bar Association (LBA) bar room.

A few days ago, a traffic warden was beaten by a group of lawyers for stopping a lawyer’s motorcycle for a traffic violation on The Mall. The Civil Lines Police not only refused to register an FIR against the lawyers but also returned the confiscated motorcycle without charging the lawyer the fee of the ticket.

The LBA held a series of protests against Deputy District Officer (Revenue) (DDOR) Kalsoom Haye demanding her transfer. Even the LHC chief justice issued orders to the chief secretary to transfer the DDOR in order to meet the lawyers’ demand.

Former LHC chief justice Iftikhar Hussain Chaudhry was the only official who took action against the lawyers and succeeded in stopping them from committing illegal actions in the courts.




Thursday, 30 July 2009

Go Zardari Go!


Wednesday, 29 July 2009

Sharifs' burning tiger gets frosty reception in boiling Pakistan

Sharifs' burning tiger gets frosty reception in boiling Pakistan

Biting sarcasm tears into political family's plan to keep imported Siberian cat in chilled pen as Pakistanis roast amid power cuts

Declan Walsh, Islamabad
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 28 July 200

Siberian tiger Sasha sits in the snow at the Bronx Zoo

Sufficiently chilly: a captive Siberian tiger in a cold climate.

When a Siberian tiger landed in the Pakistani city of Lahore last week, at the height of a sweltering summer, some worried that the blistering temperatures might prove too much for the rare animal.

But in the end the heat proved too much for its owners, the politically dominant Sharif family, who, after a round of lacerating media criticism, have offered to give the hapless tiger up.

The animal was flown in from Canada by Suleiman Sharif, a nephew of the opposition leader, Nawaz Sharif, who is known as the "Lion of Punjab". The Pakistani government banned the import of big cats last February.

However, Sharif junior has got powerful connections: his father, Shahbaz, is chief minister of Punjab. So when the tiger landed at Lahore airport, it was welcomed by the chief minister's private secretary, who whisked it through customs.

According to press reports, Suleiman planned to house the tiger in a chilled enclosure at the family's private zoo on the Raiwind estate, on the outskirts of the city. A second tiger had been ordered from Canada.

The matter, when it hit the newspapers, prompted outrage, not so much because it highlighted the powerful dodging the law, which is nothing unusual in Pakistan, but due to the insensitivity of building a refrigerated room at a time when most Pakistanis are labouring under extensive electricity outages in roasting weather.

"It is hard to see the inhabitants of Siberia faring well in the heat and humidity of Lahore," noted an acerbic editorial in The News, which demanded an official investigation. Its competitor, Dawn, queried: "Wouldn't millions of Pakistanis … be outraged?"

And so the tiger had to go. Today, the World Wildlife Fund office said the Sharif family had offered to donate the politically problematic animal to charity. "They contacted our office to say they are ready to hand over the animal. It's in their interest to give it up," said the charity's director for Pakistan, Ali Hassan Habib. "And so it should be. We want to use this opportunity to educate them."

Habib said he would try to place the tiger with a suitable zoo in Lahore, otherwise the animal would be sent abroad. He said the affair raised questions about why the Canadian exporter agreed to deal with a private individual instead of a zoo.

Suleiman Sharif has not publicly commented. His uncle Nawaz, the most popular politician in Pakistan, according to polls, is in London, where his wife is receiving medical treatment.

A Sharif spokesman in Lahore said it was "entirely incorrect" that a chilled cage had been built, and added: "There is no tiger at the Raiwind farmhouse, I can guarantee you that."


PPP and PML-N are united to safeguard democracy in Pakistan:Ataul Haq Qasmi


Tuesday, 28 July 2009

Beware the machinations of the establishment, Prime Minister Gilani.

What the devil…?
By Kamran Shafi
Tuesday, 28 Jul, 2009 (Dawn)

—APP/File photo
As for Mr Gilani, whose heart seems to be in the right place, one day he says ‘enough is enough’ as if he were about to look President Zardari in the eye and defy him on a host of matters, not least sacking certain Zardari loyalists from the cabinet. —APP/File photo
THERE is so much to talk about this week: the grave danger the IDPs face from the murdering, terrorist yahoos not a single one of whose leaders has been captured or killed; the Commando’s increasingly unbelievable absurdities; the attempt to drive a wedge between Zardari and Gilani; the Supreme Court hearing on the Nov 3 martial law against his own government by the Commando; and last but not least the Kargil fiasco, which the Commando is increasingly calling a great victory.

Kargil first then, and I have to report that it was extremely gratifying to see an Indian TV channel broadcast a programme in which there was an audience listening to, and questioning, Gen V.P. Malik the then chief of staff of the Indian army; a retired colonel who had lost a son in Kargil; the widow of a havildar; a retired young officer who was wounded in Kargil and was down categorised, and who therefore went back to college and joined the corporate world.

The person who impressed me the most was the general, who sat there and took harsh criticism from the audience which was again made up of some who had lost their near and dear ones in Kargil and retired soldiers. A bereaved mother of a captain actually shouted at Malik for not even providing proper boots for the army in Kargil. Indeed, some retired officers blamed the army (and therefore Gen Malik directly) for not standing up to the government and ‘lobbying’ for better service conditions.

The ISPR should collect all our Rommels and Guderians, sit them down in the GHQ auditorium, and show them a recording of this TV programme (aired on CNN-IBN, incidentally). They will see the humility, but also the gentle firmness with which Gen Malik answered the questions and the criticism; they will see how a former COAS of the Indian army spoke with respect when he referred to the Indian government as the preponderant power in the country.

Why pray, may one ask our army brass hats, can’t we have open discussions on what happened in Kargil? With the Commando absconding, the next senior generals involved with the operation could attend and answer people’s questions. Mayhap some mothers of those poor souls killed on our side should like to ask questions too. For example, why did we not, for weeks on end, accept that the dead being shown by the Indians to the world were our dead?

And here we have the Commando actually insisting that Kargil resulted in forcing the Indians to the negotiating table, blithely dancing around the Lahore Declaration signed by prime ministers Nawaz Sharif and Atal Behari Vajpayee which Jawed Naqvi has so well written about in yesterday’s edition of this paper. The Commando is obviously not facing up to the truth, as he is wont to do most times.

Which is not all when it comes to Kargil. He now wants us to believe that Kargil which brought nuclear-armed India and nuclear-armed Pakistan dangerously close to an all-out war and made Pakistan an international pariah was a great victory for Pakistan! Beggars belief, this Commando, especially when, as mentioned in this space earlier, his best buddy Gen Anthony Zinni tells us otherwise.

Yes, what the devil is going on in Swat/Buner, even in Peshawar, let alone in Waziristan and the rest of Fata, where every indication seems to spell out only one simple fact: that the murdering terrorists still hold sway in vast areas of the northwest of our country. If Nato tankers are blown up in the upscale locality of Hayatabad, how in heaven’s name can the IDPs feel safe in Swat and Buner?

If, as evidenced by friends I can trust, the terrorist Mangal Bagh can shake down businesses in Peshawar itself by asking for protection money, how can anyone say the situation is anywhere near ‘under control’ in Swat? How underground could this terrorist be anyway, considering the blatant manner in which he is running his protection rackets?

Will no one wake up and do the right thing even now, and finish off these terrorists? Do our Rommels and Guderians not realise that we are running out of time?

As for Mr Gilani, whose heart seems to be in the right place, one day he says ‘enough is enough’ as if he were about to look President Zardari in the eye and defy him on a host of matters, not least sacking certain Zardari loyalists from the cabinet. And then to go on and repeal the dictatorial aspects of the 17th Amendment, i.e. to emasculate the presidency. Less than a week later his daughter writes a piece in the same newspaper, eulogising the young Bilawal Bhutto Zardari as a leader with vision. Why bite off more than you can chew, Mr Gilani?

Whilst one empathises with Mr Gilani completely, and while one wishes the 17th Amendment were repaired yesterday, one must caution both the president and the prime minister. Democracy is too new after the nine rollicking years that the Commando had, kicking this country about; the problems he has left behind, not least of which is the power crisis, are immense; law and order is non-existent, and baddies roam the land. This is no time for infighting.

To the president one can say that he has been misguided enough by the likes of Fauzia Wahab and Khosa and Awan, in whose acts one can see neither sagacity nor sense. The president should have, and I have said this before, held tightly to the friendly hand offered by Nawaz Sharif and both of them together could have long hence put the country firmly on the road to parliamentary democracy after ridding us of the awful legacy left behind by the Commando. It is not too late even now.

To the prime minister, this: please ask yourself how many people you can bring on to the streets of Multan on your own? You are a member of a political party which has a recognised and established leadership, by virtue of which you are where you are. Likewise for members of the PML-N and the MQM and the ANP: where would any one of them be without their parties and their leaders? Beware the machinations of the establishment, Mr Gilani.



Thursday, 23 July 2009

The pro-Taliban terrorists of PML-N riot in Punjab...

Rioting against loadshedding

The country experienced widespread rioting against loadshedding on Tuesday, led by Punjab where mobs with urchins in front broke everything in sight. There was similar violence in the NWFP, and Karachi revealed its raging face once again in the aftermath of monsoon flooding and consequent power outages. The mobs were saying more or less the same thing: the government was inactive and blameworthy.

In Jhang in Punjab, the mob damaged public property with a vengeance: a standing train was filled with combustible matter and set on fire. Mob frenzy was the same as seen anywhere in the world. It was flecked with a kind of triumphalism over the youth’s ability to cause harm. Wherever the rioting took place, private property was damaged too and the mobs stopped anyone going in a car or a taxi and broke the vehicle’s glass and dented its body with sticks.

The target of the “protest” was the PPP government. Those who came out on business or in emergency were punished for not observing the strike. What were the vandals saying? The message was typified in the words of the PMLN’s Haji Maqsood Butt, who leads the market committees in Lahore. He told a TV channel: “The PPP government should resign or talk to us through the Punjab PMLN government and convince us that it will restore the normal supply of electricity”. He kept boasting of the “total” observance of strike at his call, but the TV channel did not ask him what he thought of the damage to public and private property.

In Lahore, shopkeepers who did not shut shop had to come out with sticks to defy the thugs sent out by the planners of the strike. Photographs of these “encounters” were published in Wednesday’s newspapers. The strike of which Mr Butt boasted was still partial, making it clear that the riots were not a result of all the people feeling the same way about loadshedding. Some TV channels were belatedly seen bringing some balance to their coverage by interviewing citizens who thought that violence against loadshedding was wrong and self-damaging. In many cases, the mobs attacked grid stations, perhaps unaware that damage to grid stations would mean not less loadshedding but more of it.

Comment in the media on loadshedding has been polarised and “political” rather than objective. The TV channels, pursuing their general rule-of-the-thumb policy of being on “the side of the people”, have been reporting human suffering due to loadshedding as an act of cruelty on the part of the government. Thugs leading the mobs said the President, Prime Minister and Chief Minister should also subject themselves to this suffering. The conviction was that loadshedding could be ended in short order but the government was paralysed and busy in its spendthrift ways (alalla-talalla) instead of caring for the people.

The TV channels are waking up late about their past coverage of loadshedding as a kind of backsliding of the present government. They have aired discussions that criticise the policy of privatisation of the Karachi Electric Supply Corporation under the presumption that somehow the government would have prevented the shortfall in the supply of electricity if the authority had been in its charge. The Steel Mill in Karachi, whose privatisation was set aside in 2007, is back again with its new record of loss-making, notching up Rs 20 billion in one year. This means that the government has to shell out this money in addition to the Rs 60 billion it owes to the electricity producers, called the IPPs.

The rioting and damage to property is not going to restore normal supply of electricity. In India, the common man patiently suffers long hours of loadshedding in scorching heat without asking for the overthrow of the government, mainly because India is not used to a premature ending of government tenures. But the rioters in Pakistan on Tuesday “hoped” the government would pack up and go if they kept up the violence long enough. Therefore the TV channels must introduce some balance in the comment their anchors offer on a daily basis. They must also balance the vituperation of those guests who adopt castigation as the only style of analysis of the energy sector in Pakistan. The media went wrong with its coverage of the 2005 earthquake; it went wrong in its analysis of the Taliban and it may be going wrong again in its coverage of the power crisis. (Daily Times)


Asadullah Ghalib, Express.


Wednesday, 22 July 2009

Whether and how should the EU deal with the growing instability of the Pakistani state? Survey and discussion

Dear Mr. Nishapuri

I am writing to you in my capacity as editor of Atlantic-Community.org, an online think tank with over 3000 international members; primarily young professionals from NGOs, academia, think tanks, politics, and media.

Recently, we conducted a survey amongst 30 international experts to find out whether and how the EU should deal with the growing instability of the Pakistani state. You can find the survey here:

As you are running a blog dealing with recent political questions and development in Pakistan, I believe it would be of interest for you and your readers to get involved in the discussion on EU engagement in Pakistan. We would be delighted if you could feature our survey on your blog, together with your comments and ideas.

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have any questions or suggestions.

With best regards,

Urs Schrade

Atlantische Initiative e.V.
Wilhelmstrasse 67
10117 Berlin
Tel: +49 - 30 - 206 337 88
Fax: +49 - 30 - 206 337 90


Sunday, 19 July 2009

India-Pakistan rivalry

Sunday, July 19, 2009
Dr Farrukh Saleem

India and Pakistan are in a state of active hostility — if not war or at least two proxy wars. At least six of the Pakistan army’s nine corps are on the border with India. Of the six, I Corps and II Corps are heavy armour strike corps. At least seven of the Indian army’s 13 corps are on the border with Pakistan. Of the seven, X Corps and II Corps are powerful strike corps (strike corps is an offensive formation). Additionally, all of India’s holding crops that are directly facing Pakistan also have significant offensive capabilities. In effect, 66 per cent of the Pakistan army’s holding and strike formations are directly facing India. In effect, more than 53 per cent of the Indian army’s holding and strike formations are directly facing Pakistan.

Pakistan maintains — and sustains — critical assets in the northeast that have managed to pin down India’s XV Corps, IX Corps, XVI Corps, XIV Corps, XI Corps, X Corps and II Corps. India’s 4 Armoured Brigade, 340 Mechanised Brigade, 11 and 12 Infantry Divisions, Jaisalmer Air Force Base, Utarlai Air Force Base and Bhuj Air Force Base maintain a threatening-offensive posture. India is actively supporting anti-Pakistan Baloch elements as well as anti-Pakistan Taliban factions. India is bent upon projecting power into Afghanistan thus encircling Pakistan. And, India – post-Operation Parakram — has been investing into a "Cold Start War Doctrine" involving joint operations by the Indian army, air force and navy; eight integrated battle groups with armour, artillery, infantry and combat air support.

For FY 2009, India’s defence spending will rise by close to 50 per cent to a colossal $32.7 billion (according to Jane’s Information Group). India is planning its biggest-ever arms purchases; $11 billion fighter jets, T-90S tanks, Scorpion submarines, Phalcon airborne warning and control system, multi-barrel rocket-launchers and an aircraft carrier. At $32.7 billion India’s defence spending translates into 2.7 per cent of GDP.

For FY 2009, Pakistan’s official defence spending is set at $4.3 billion while unofficial estimates go as high as $7.8 billion. If Pakistan were to match India’s rise we would have to spend more than five per cent of our GDP on defence. For the record, Iraq, Somalia and Sudan spend an overwhelmingly large percentage of their GDP on defence. Iraq, Somalia and Sudan are all — or have been — in a state of civil war. For the record, the Soviet Union and Czechoslovakia use to spend an overwhelmingly large percentage of their GDP on defence. Soviet Union is no more. Czechoslovakia is no more.

The US and the Soviet Union fought a 50-year Cold War during which the Soviet Union stockpiled some 13,000 active nuclear warheads. In 1991, the US won without even firing a shot. The Soviet Union raced a race that it couldn’t win. The Soviet Union split into 15.

Over the past century, economic development has been all about intense trading. Pakistan has two population centres; central Punjab and Karachi. Central Punjab is a thousand kilometres from the nearest port. Between Karachi and central Punjab is a desert in the east and on west is an area that does not — and cannot — support population concentrations. To develop economically, we must trade. Trade we must. And, the only population concentration to trade with is on our east.

Time — and money — is on India’s side. Composite dialogue among civilians means little — if anything at all. What is needed is a strategic dialogue. How can India be persuaded to pull back its offensive formations? In return for what? How can we use our America leverage in our longer-term interest? We cannot win an arms’ race with India. We ought to race a race that we can win. We can continue to race a race that we are bound to lose. Or, begin a new race that we may be able to win — or at least not lose. (The News)

The writer is the executive director of the Centre for Research and Security Studies (CRSS). Email: farrukh15@hotmail.com

Friday, 10 July 2009

Ayaz Amir: The road to hell is indeed paved with the best intentions !

Their lordships overstep the mark

By Ayaz Amir

The Pakistani disease, if we have to choose one and place it above all others, is not to do what one is qualified to do but to do that which one is not meant to do. The political class has forgotten the art of leading (it dances to the tunes of others). The administrative class is no longer any good at administration. The military have a mixed record in defending the country. But when it comes to seizing power--in other words, stepping out of their lawful domain--their record is unrivalled.
As for their lordships of the higher judiciary, far from being bulwarks of the constitutional order they have been abettors of dictatorship. Mercifully, after Chief Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry's defiance of Musharraf, and after the lawyers' movement which was spawned by Justice Chaudhry's defiance, this charge is no longer relevant. The higher judiciary has redeemed its past sins and is now set on a different course. But now another danger looms. From one extreme--abetting dictatorship--the higher judiciary is swinging to another extreme--intruding more and more into the spheres of the executive and the legislature.
For their own good their lordships should restrain themselves on this count. Justice Chaudhry and the other judges who stood up to Musharraf have earned great public respect because of their stand on principles. It would be a pity if this respect were in any way to be eroded if the public at large and other institutions of government came to see their lordships as doing things they were not meant to do.
In passing, may it be said that ridiculing the judiciary and maligning it in any way, or casting aspersions on the integrity of judges, constitutes contempt of court. Commenting on a judgment or any other decision of the courts is not the same thing. We should get this straight before proceeding any further.
A tax may be reasonable, bad or downright perverse. But the levying of it or the withdrawing of it is the prerogative of parliament and the executive authority. There can be a hundred opinions about the so-called carbon tax levied by the government in the present budget. But this was a tax approved by the National Assembly (unanimously or not is beside the point). Government and National Assembly can be pilloried for it. It can be denounced a hundred times over. But how does it become the business of the SC to pass any orders--interim or permanent--against it?
We must do what lies within our competence and not overshoot the mark of our constitutional responsibilities. And if we insist on overstepping our limits mark then we can have precious few objections to the 'constitutional' role 111 Brigade of 10 Corps arrogates to itself every now and then when its truck-mounted columns stream out of Westridge Cantonment in the direction of Islamabad, to unseat lawfully elected governments in the name of saving the country. The road to hell is indeed paved with the best intentions.
In its short order on the carbon tax issue the SC has allowed itself to be dragged into the complications of petroleum pricing. Whether the price of petrol, diesel and kerosene oil is reasonable or a burden on the public, this is for the government and the elected representatives of the people to decide. The elected representatives of the people may not be doing their job. The government may be shirking its responsibility to look after the interests of the public. But these are separate issues. The SC's business is to interpret the law and to stand guard over it. Petroleum pricing and taxation policy do not lie in its domain.
"…prima facie," says the SC, "we are of the view that there was no justification for imposition of carbon surcharge in place of PDL (Petroleum Development Levy) because such a tax could be imposed subject to certain conditions, such as provision of petroleum products free of lead or carbon dioxide and consequential pollution free atmosphere to all citizens." This is dangerous ground the SC is treading on for it implies the judicial laying down of conditions for the imposition of taxes. This is an infringement of parliamentary responsibility.
In its order the SC refers to the Preamble of the Constitution and the reference in it to "social justice". The implication is that this provision allows the SC to examine whether any act of government passes the test of social justice. To accept this interpretation is to make the SC's purview virtually limitless.
Power is best exercised when applied sparingly. Speech is most effective when brief and to the point. Similarly, the apex court is most effective when its interventions into public policy, under the cover of social justice, are few and far between.
Along the same lines, when the SC takes suo moto notice of anything it should cause a country-wide stir. People should sit up and take notice. But if their lordships start exercising their suo moto powers every day and in matters of relatively trivial importance, public interest will be lost and the SC's own authority in the public eye will be undermined. The over-use of anything may not in all cases breed contempt. But it does nurture indifference, the last thing most of us would want as far as the Iftikhar Chaudhry Supreme Court is concerned.
In Bacon's Essays (I can't help boasting I have an old, second-hand 1916 edition), in the one "Of Judicature" the very first words are, "Judges ought to remember that their Office is to Interpret Law, and not to Make Law or Give Law : else will it be like the authority claimed by the Church of Rome…"
We have had Supreme Courts in the past which have been like lambs before military shepherds. But now that we have a democracy in place--maybe an imperfect democracy and maybe a government with a thousand defects, but a constitutional government all the same--it would be a sad day if the SC were to assume the airs of a new Church of Rome.
There is so much for the courts to do. There is so much for the Supreme Court to do. The lower courts are riddled with inefficiency and corruption. The SC is already seized with the question of reducing the huge backlog of undecided cases. While Justice Chaudhry has set things in the right direction by stressing the need for the lower courts to improve their performance and be more active in disposing off cases, this task will not be achieved by mere pronouncements alone. It will need all of Justice Chaudhry's efforts before tangible improvements are felt in the lower courts. We are at a delicate moment in our history, facing internal strife and extraordinary external pressures. The fight against extremist elements, schooled in the ideology of misguided jihad, are straining our utmost capabilities. The American presence in Afghanistan imposes its own compulsions. Such a situation demands a higher degree of leadership on the part of all those in a position of authority and responsibility. This includes the government, the political class, the armed forces and the higher judiciary.
Ineffective and inept the higher workings of government may be, but let no one say that this is a continuation of the Musharraf order. This is one cliché we should now transcend. Musharraf and all he stood for are things of the past. We now have to pick up the pieces and reinvent a new Pakistan. Things went drastically wrong for Pakistan when General Zia seized power in the summer of 1977. Dismantling the legacy of the last 32 years is not an uneasy undertaking. But if we are at all to ensure that our future is better than the missteps of the past, this task has to be taken in hand.
The first thing we need is stability and the preservation of the present democratic order. If there is to be reform and change and better governance these must come from within the crucible of this order, not through another march of 111 Brigade. Rocking the boat is a luxury we can ill-afford at this juncture. As for social justice, that is a subject best left to the representatives of the people. They may not be up to this task but then it should be up to our democratic system, and the turning of the democratic wheel, to give us a better choice of leaders.

The News --- 10th July, 09
Email: winlust@yahoo.com


Good Taliban... Where are they?

A Formidable Enemy

The Pakistan Army faces a tough battle ahead as the ‘good’ Taliban join forces with the ‘bad’ Taliban and scrap peace deals.

By Rahimullah Yusufzai

The two-month old military campaign against the militants in the NWFP has now expanded to newer and more dangerous places, such as South Waziristan. This has created a real risk that neighbouring North Waziristan could become the new battlefield, and the conflict could then spill over into adjoining districts in the southern part of the province. Indications of such an eventuality are already visible.

The military operations could unwittingly engulf a much wider area than anticipated. Such a move would not only over-stretch Pakistan’s armed forces, but also prompt the Taliban groups to set aside their differences and join forces to face the challenge.

In fact, in their battle for survival, some of the Pakistani Taliban commanders, such as Hafiz Gul Bahadur in North Waziristan and Maulvi Nazeer in South Waziristan’s Wana area, have already taken the first steps towards extending cooperation to Baitullah Mehsud in resisting the latest Pakistan Army onslaught against him. Their alliance, Shura Ittehad-ul-Mujahideen, or the Council of the Alliance of Mujahideen, which was dormant since its launch in February 2009, is now active and is coordinating the military activities of the three militant groups to fight their common enemy – primarily the US-led coalition forces across the border in Afghanistan, and now increasingly, the Pakistani military within the country’s borders. Attacks in the last week of June by the militants led by Hafiz Gul Bahadur on military convoys on the Miramshah-Mir Ali road and in the Madakhel area in North Waziristan – which killed over 40 soldiers and left scores injured – and the rocketing of the FC camp in Wana by fighters loyal to Maulvi Nazeer, were clear signs that the Taliban in the three different war theatres were coming together to tackle Pakistan’s security forces.

One by one, the peace deals painstakingly negotiated by tribal jirgas are unravelling. The two peace treaties that the government concluded with Baitullah Mehsud, one in February 2005 and the other subsequently in 2008, no longer exist. In fact, these agreements have been invalid since Baitullah Mehsud first unleashed his suicide bombers to spread death and destruction in the country’s urban centres and for the first time claimed responsibility for all such attacks. The peace accords are now simply a scrap of paper, as Baitullah Mehsud was accused of assassinating Benazir Bhutto and became the most wanted man in Pakistan, with head-money placed on him by both Islamabad – offering Rs 50 million, or about $600,000 – and Washington, willing to pay a huge reward of $5 million, or Rs 410 million. The two peace deals in Swat, one directly with the Taliban, headed by Maulana Fazlullah, and the other with his father-in-law Maulana Sufi Mohammad, also predictably collapsed and, on both occasions, triggered more death and destruction than previously seen.

Only one peace treaty is still in place – in Wana, capital of South Waziristan – between Maulvi Nazeer and the government. But it is coming under strain due to the rising tension between the militants and the government elsewhere in the tribal areas. On paper, a peace accord also currently exists in Bajaur. But the militants in the region, led by Maulana Faqir Mohammad, deputy leader of the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), have been openly violating the deal, by refusing to surrender or even curb their activities.

On June 29, the Taliban militants in North Waziristan unilaterally scrapped their February 18, 2008, peace agreement with the government, after accusing the armed forces of cooperating with the US in carrying out drone attacks against them. Through their spokesman, Ahmadullah Ahmadi, they warned that there could be no peace with the government unless the missile strikes by the pilotless US planes in North Waziristan were halted. Ahmadi also asserted that there had been over 50 US drone strikes in North Waziristan since the signing of the peace agreement that have killed hundreds of people, including women and children.

Their second complaint concerned the recent military operation in the Frontier Region (FR) Bannu, which Hafiz Gul Bahadur considers part of his fiefdom. The military action in the Janikhel and Bakkakhel areas of FR Bannu was launched to punish the militants and the local tribes, under the collective responsibility clause of the infamous Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR), for failing to prevent the kidnapping of around 100 students of Cadet College, Razmak, and some of their teachers. It was suspected that militants loyal to Hafiz Gul Bahadur may have cooperated with Baitullah Mehsud’s men in kidnapping the (mostly teenaged) cadets in the FR Bannu area. The cadets were eventually freed unharmed due to the intervention of the strong Torikhel Wazir tribal jirga, which had threatened to take action against the kidnappers as they had guaranteed the security of the college and its students because it was located in their area.

This marked the second time that the North Waziristan militants unilaterally trashed their peace accord with the government. The first such peace deal was concluded on September 5, 2006, and scrapped 10 months later, when the militants accused the security forces of re-erecting roadside checkpoints that had been dismantled under the terms of the accord. The government, on its part, charged the militants with violating the peace agreement with impunity by setting up a parallel administration, harbouring foreign fighters and carrying out the targeted killings of pro-establishment tribal elders.

The September 2006 peace deal in North Waziristan was roundly criticised by the US and its allies, including other western nations and the Afghan government. It was blamed for an increase in the cross-border infiltration of Afghan and Pakistani Taliban to attack the coalition forces in Afghanistan. In fact, this prompted the US to put its foot down and oppose any future peace arrangements by the Pakistan government with its home-grown militants. This was evident when it opposed the peace deals in Swat, Bajaur and elsewhere. The US had, by then, made it clear that the Pakistan Armed Forces – as a recipient of American aid in the shape of weapons and money – were required to undertake sustained military action against the irreconcilable militants, instead of making peace with them.

The collapse of the latest North Waziristan peace agreement, which was incidentally signed one day before the February 18, 2008, general elections and thus enabled the government to hold polls for the lone National Assembly seat from the area with the help of the militants, could have serious implications. Hafiz Gul Bahadur has reportedly linked the revival of the peace treaty to an end not only to the US drone attacks and the military operation in FR Bannu, but also to the ongoing action against Baitullah Mehsud in neighbouring South Waziristan. For the government, however, this would mean conceding too much to the militants, as the armed forces have already initiated action against Mehsud, while intelligence agencies have created divisions in his ranks by strengthening a rival faction of militants led by Misbahuddin Mehsud, who took over after the recent assassination of his brother Qari Zainuddin by a Baitullah man who had infiltrated the group. Besides, the Pakistan government may be unable or unwilling to stop the Americans from using their missile-fitted drones to target the militants.

There have been no US drone attacks in North Waziristan for two months now, a point that was raised by a jirga of tribal elders that met Hafiz Gul Bahadur to persuade him not to scrap his peace deal with the government. But the enigmatic Hafiz, who operates with utmost secrecy and hasn’t given an interview or interacted with the media, was unmoved. It seems he remains convinced that the security forces would go after him once they have dealt with Baitullah Mehsud, and is therefore ready to enter the battle now with Baitullah and Maulvi Nazeer.

Were the military to take action against Hafiz Gul Bahadur in North Waziristan and, in response to a provocation, start fighting Maulvi Nazeer in Wana and Shakai in South Waziristan as well, the concept of ‘good Taliban’ and ‘bad Taliban’ would be consigned to the dustbin, at least for the time-being. These two Pakistani Taliban commanders were, until now, regarded as the ‘good Taliban’ because they were reluctant to fight the Pakistani security forces or sponsor suicide bombings and were, instead, focusing more on assisting the Afghan Taliban in resisting the US-led foreign forces in Afghanistan. In contrast, Baitullah Mehsud and his allies in the tribal areas, Swat and elsewhere, and those affiliated to the TTP, were referred to as the ‘bad Taliban.’ Once this distinction ends, the military will be free to target all militants, wherever they exist. The battlelines will then be clearly drawn. However, this would also unify all the militants and the disparate jihadi groups, turning them into a formidable enemy.

One strong argument against taking on all the Taliban militants at one time is that this would over-stretch the security forces, threaten their supply lines and increase the risk of retaliatory bomb explosions, including suicide attacks in the country’s towns and cities. The destabilisation resulting from such a massive military action could be much greater than hitherto experienced. This would signal the failure of the classic ‘divide and rule’ tactic, that has routinely been the method of choice for the secret services to weaken and demoralise the militants.

An equally powerful counter-argument, on the other hand, points out that military action against militants operating in different tribal areas and districts would force powerful commanders like Baitullah Mehsud to commit their fighters to stay put in their native areas, to defend their own strongholds. In such a scenario, he and the other strong Taliban commanders would not be able to send their fighters to other fronts to reinforce their allies.

Whatever strategy is adopted by the army high command, it is obvious that this is going to be a long and difficult battle. Counter-insurgency operations are also different and far more comprehensive than conventional ones with political and development segments designed to isolate the militants and win hearts and minds. In addition, while using traditional military force to destroy the militants’ positions, aerial strikes and artillery shelling may help the armed forces to achieve certain objectives. These invariably cause civilian deaths and large-scale displacement, as we saw in Bajaur, Mohmand, Swat, Buner and Dir, and are now likely to witness in South Waziristan, North Waziristan, Orakzai and other districts. Some battles would be won, but far more important is winning the war. And that cannot happen without winning and retaining the support of the people, particularly those in the battlezones.



Monday, 6 July 2009

Nadeem Paracha: Secular Blunders

Secular blunders
Nadeem F. Paracha
Sunday, 05 Jul, 2009 | 01:44 AM PST

Instead of containing the Islamist parties, ZABs constitutional concessions only emboldened them. — File Photo
Instead of containing the Islamist parties, ZABs constitutional concessions only emboldened them. — File Photo

The late President Anwar El-Sadat of Egypt was assassinated in 1981 by a faction of Egypt’s leading Islamist organisation, the Muslim Brotherhood. The irony is that this was the same organisation that Sadat had purposefully patronised.

He had replaced the charismatic Egyptian leader, Gamal Abdul Nasser as the President of Egypt after Nasser died in 1970. Nasser had ruled the country as a popular president between 1952 and 1970, leaving behind a legacy of staunch secular/socialist Arab nationalism.

Though Nasser remained popular till his death, the glow of his influence across assorted Muslim and Third World countries was somewhat dimmed when Egyptian and Syrian armed forces backed by the Soviet Union were decimated in the 1967 war against Israel. Though Sadat had helped Nasser in toppling the Egyptian monarchy in 1952, and was also an integral part of Nasser’s socialist/secular policies, he initiated a shift. In Sadat’s view, Nasser’s socialist model could not sustain the new sombre realities that had surfaced after the 1967 war.

Sadat’s move towards the western economic model was welcomed by the country’s urban bourgeoisie, but it was vehemently challenged by the pro-Nasser and left-wing student groups and the Arab media. To neutralise the pro-Nasser and left-wing challenge to his shifting policies on campuses and in the print media, Sadat brought back to life one of the staunchest anti-Nasser and anti-left forces in Egypt: the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Brotherhood had been greatly radicalised by its second generation leadership led by the teachings of Syed Qutb. He had posed the biggest challenge to Nasser’s socialism and the regime’s pro-Soviet and secular make-up. However, after Nasser’s death, Sadat tactfully let loose the Brotherhood, using state power to help the organisation infiltrate campuses and the media.

To appease the organisation, Sadat instructed the state-owned radio and TV channels to not only start regular religious programmes, but to also show as many images as possible of him saying his prayers at a mosque. Sadat also lifted the ban on various Muslim Brotherhood magazines and newspapers. All this was done to soften Egypt’s pro-Soviet and Nasserite image and to mollify concerns of the West and Egypt’s new allies such as the oil-rich Saudi Arabia.

Immediately after Egypt’s 1973 war with Israel — in which Sadat (falsely) claimed to have defeated the enemy — he completely pulled Egypt out from the Soviet camp. However, in 1977 when Sadat, in an unprecedented move, agreed to make formal peace with Israel, the Brotherhood became Sadat’s biggest enemy. Eventually, in 1981, he was assassinated by members of the Brotherhood — ironically the very organisation he had encouraged to nullify the perceived communist threat to his regime.

Something similar happened in Pakistan as well. In the 1970 elections, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s Pakistan People’s Party had routed the Islamic parties. But by 1973 Bhutto was under pressure from the PPP’s leading ideologues, asking him to hasten the regime’s socialist agenda. In response, Bhutto purged the PPP of its radical founding members. He then came under the influence of the party’s ‘conservative wing’ that encouraged him to appease his staunchest opponents, the Islamists, (especially the Jamat-i-Islami), which had declared the PPP’s socialism as 'un-Islamic.'

Though in private, Bhutto accused the Islamic parties of being 'anti-socialist American stooges,' in public he went along with some of his advisers’ counsel and declared the Ahmaddiyya community non-Muslim, naively believing this concession would appease and contain his Islamist opponents. The truth is, the Islamists were only emboldened by this gesture.

Also, while purging the left-wing radicals in the PPP (from 1974 onwards), Bhutto is also said to have ‘allowed’ the student-wing of the Jamat, the IJT, to establish a strong foothold on campuses which, till then, were mostly dominated by radical left-wing student groups such as the NSF.

Bhutto, like Sadat, had ignored the Islamist challenge to his regime, and seemed more concerned about imaginary 'Soviet/ Indian-backed groups.' His pragmatic indulgence in this regard had the reverse effect. Instead of containing the Islamist parties, his constitutional concessions only emboldened them. Not surprisingly, he was toppled by a reactionary general whom he had handpicked himself, shortly after the Islamist parties unleashed a countrywide movement against the PPP regime in 1976, calling for Sharia rule.

These are just two brief examples of the blunders committed by certain leading secular Muslim leaders that annihilated the over-blown left-wing and secular challenges by regenerating and using Islamist forces against them. This created daunting political and ideological vacuums in societies that were eventually filled by reactionary military regimes, rejuvenated Islamist forces and, eventually, a new breed of extremism — the sort that now worked towards grabbing state power and carving out a theological hegemony, based on mythical and Utopian illusions about an eternal ‘Islamic State.’

Pakistan and Egypt are prime examples; two of the many Muslim republics now desperately trying to reinvigorate moderate and secular forces to open a consensual front against extremism that was once state-sanctioned, to bludgeon opposing secular forces.

One wonders if it is already too late to do that; or if there are any worthwhile progressive sections in society today, in these countries, who can once again demonstrate the same boldness and imagination that they exhibited in the construction of their respective countries’ nationalism before their downfall. (Dawn, 5 July 2009)


Friday, 3 July 2009

A tribute to Shaheed Colonel Tahir Iqbal

Sunday, 28 June 2009: In North Waziristan agency, three army officers among 16 soldiers were killed in an attack by the Taliban terrorists on the Wucha Bibi-bound convoy of security forces at Inzar Kas area. Officers who embraced shahadat include Lieutenant Colonel Tahir, Captain Abid and Lieutenant Zishan. Forces effectively responded the attack and killed 10 terrorists. 12 Soldiers embraced shahadat yesterday while 4 succumbed to injuries later in the Combined Military Hospital, taking the toll to 16.

Some comments:

source: pkpolitics

Blast reported in Islamabad/Rawalpindi - Source Geo TV

Express TV News reports: The explosion occurred when a suicide bomber hit his motorcycle with a bus near Chuhrr Chowk in the area of Rawalpindi Garrison. The bus was carrying persons of Heavy Mechanical Complex (HMC). Five persons are reported killed on the spot while twenty injured. About ten private vehicles were also affected by the blast.

According to Sheik Rashid, offices of sensitive institutions are in the vicinity of the incident. The timing and place of the explosion may point to an original target other than the HMC bus.

2 July 2009 at 11:33 am
rafay79 said:
Not again!!!!!!!

2 July 2009 at 11:38 am
Mullah Omar said:

Damn ! this must be the work of RAW+CIA+MOSSAD agents working on Zionists’ agenda to destabilise Pakistan so that Islamic Atom Bomb can be destroyed !

2 July 2009 at 1:21 pm
Adnan Arshad Mansoori said:
rafay79 said:Not again!!!!!!!

As the following fear of the West plus their Existence in South Asia we must be ready over & over again because this is a battle of Nerves & yet not has been finally decided who has been declared defeated clearly & whose nerves are more stronger to another one, whether Taliban/Alqaida or the West. The time is most appropriate Judge. Therefore be prepare for such news.


2 July 2009 at 1:27 pm
Ibn Muwaiya said:
@ Mulla Omar

Dear brother, I can understand that you are a true muslim and a sincere follower of Ulema I Haq and Talibans, but I must say that you should stop posting comments here or should learn some basics and implement the guidelines before posting comments.

Otherwise you are proving to be a ‘naadan dost’ who is damaging the mission of ulema I haq and Talibans.

1- stop using this ID of mulla Omar. Brother, if you openly use this ID, liberal fascist and other sect people like brelvis and shia will make you target and result will be against the mujahidin in this propaganda war. You must realise that ‘disguise’ is the key to success in such hostile environment. Please think over it with a cool head.

2- You should not use words like deobandi openly, don’t say that you are deobandi, you should use the word ‘Sunni’ instead. Remember disguise is the key word. If you use word deobandi, it will again damage the cause of mujahidin. Also this wahabi term is used by our enemies, avoid it. Before zia shaheed (R.A) regime, in Pakistan we all were labelled as wahabi by shias and brelvis who used to be called as Sunnis. But since that time and with efforts of ulemai Haq, brelvis are no more termed as Sunnis and we are no more termed as wahabis. Take example of Kurram Agency, everyone in media uses the terms Sunni-Shia conflict and no one says it is Deobandi Shia conflict where as brelivs (previously known as Sunnis) has nothing to do with that. Now you understand the importance of disguise?. So in future, be careful in using these terms.

3- Don’t openly say that Imran is supporting talibans. It will create difficulties for him and other leaders who are supporting us. Please be sensible and use your brain my brother. His support for Talibans without accepting it openly is much more important for us. Similarly, don’t name gen hameed gul and other people who are not know to be in some religious party of Ulemai Haq.

4- Don’t claim responsibility of attacks on civilians. This way you are creating trouble for mujahideen brothers, Better put blame on America or India and say that how can a muslim do that etc. Remember , winning hearts and minds is the most important part of this War.

5- Don’t name SSP, Lashkar e jhangvi with talibans, it creates negative image of Talibans and also you help this way our enemies to make links of these organisations with Talibans. Remember this way we lose our main logic that Talibans were only created after 2004 (Imran Khan often uses this very successfully). Please be sensible.

6- Don’t try to ridicule other brothers who are supporting our casue (Janu jerman, AAM, Haris Khan, javed Khan etc), United we stand, divided we fall. Unity is very important. Don’t create rifts within our ranks.

I hope, you will take my comments positively and re-design your strategy to counter propaganda of these ,Liberal fascists and mushrikeen.

2 July 2009 at 2:17 pm
Gul said:
All us muslims should really live in muslim lands, and quit infidel countries like France etc. What do you think brothers and sisters? We should practice the freedoms we cherish either in our own countries or other muslim countries.

2 July 2009 at 2:53 pm
bhola said:
I say kill all the animals, little ones and the big ones, the one legged and the two legged, kill them all. Let only humans live in Pakistan

2 July 2009 at 3:32 pm
Adnan Arshad Mansoori said:
Ibn Muwaiya said to Mullah Omar: ……………..Don’t try to ridicule other brothers who are supporting our cause (Janu Jerman, AAM, Haris Khan, Javed Khan etc), United we stand, divided we fall. Unity is very important. Don’t create rifts within our ranks…………………

Thanks for the compliments, your comments regarding Divide & Unity quiet impressive wordings which is indicating your Far Sightedness!

2 July 2009 at 4:30 pm
iEscape said:
@MU, @IM, @AAM(آم) & Others,

Sarcasm is the evolution of survival skill. Pkp members and their future generations are going to outlast humanity and many animals.

2 July 2009 at 4:35 pm
Gul said:

Hats off! You belong to the rare minority at pkp that picks up on, and understands, sarcasm.

2 July 2009 at 5:47 pm
Mullah Omar said:
@Brother Yazid (Ibn Muwaiya)

I respect your concerns and am thankful to you for sparing your precious time in giving me some very Islamic advices !
You have called me ‘nadaan dost’ which is not correct I can’t do hypocrisy and can’t disguise myself !
I’m a Taliban supporter and believe in true ideology of Deoband !
I’m sorry if you think my openness will harm cause of Talibans and deoband/wahabiism !

1- Ameer-ul-Momineen Hazarat Mullah Umer is my leader and I don’t feel ashamed of choosing Mullah Omar as my ID !
2- In order to differentiate true ideology from heretic ideologies it’s need of time to call a spade a spade i.e. we need to openly propagate that Deobandiism is in fact the only true Islam all others are misguided ideologies !
3- Imran Khan is proud deobandi and he himself openly support Talibans then what’s your problem if I support him ??
4- Talibans never killed any innocent, they only kill heretics and Kafirs !
5- SSP & Lashkar-e-Jhangvi have been doing great service for the cause of true ideology of deoband and they have been supporting our Taliban Mujahaideen relentlessly !
We should praise and acknowledge their services !
6- I don’t ridicule any muslim (read deobandi/wahabi) brother !
I just want my brothers to stop doing hypocrisy and be straight forward !

May Allah give courage to us All to fight the heretics and Kufaar !

3 July 2009 at 6:57 am
Adnan Arshad Mansoori said:
Bro.Mullah Omar:

If You know the difference between BOLDNESS/JAWAN-MARDI & STUPIDITY/BAIQUOFI i.e. more than enough for you, me & others who are like-minded us.

As above the sincere brother =Ibn Muwaiya= tried to elaborate before you, this is an established fact of the matter who are extra ordinary brave/out spoken they die usually in young or maximum at middle age e.g. Tipu Sultan King Alexander age.

No one can teach you as a vth/vith class student.

3 July 2009 at 8:28 am
Mullah Omar said:
@Bro AAM

Thanks for your comments !

However, it’s my belief that it’s better to live like a Lion for a Day than to live like a jackal for Hundred Years !

Sarfarooshi Ki Taman’na Ab Hamaray Sar May Hay
Dekhna Hay Zor Kitna Baz’oyay Qatil May Hay !

Imran Khan Zinda Ba’ad
Taliban Pa’inda Ba’ad !

3 July 2009 at 10:24 am
naughtypakistani said:
@Mullah Omar- You are the only Mullah I have seen who is not hiding his real intentions. This makes world simple, avoiding Munafiqat which your other “brothers” are doing (e.g. Janu Jerman, AAM, Haris Khan, Javed Khan) and teaching (Ibn Muwaiya etc.).

You guys use name of Deoband to propagate your agenda of grabbing power. Check the following link and and listen what Ulema-e-Deoband say about you people (Taliban- Jihalat zyada, Islam kam):


3 July 2009 at 10:49 am
Mullah Omar said:

It seems Ulema-e-Deoband in India are doing some hypocrisy !
Let me tell you leaders of JUI-F, JUI-S, JI, PTI, SSP, Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Jaish-e-Mohammad, and renowned Deobandi scholars like Mufti-e-Azam Pakistan Mufti Rafi Usmani, Mufti Taqui Usmani, Sheikh-ul-Hadees Moulana Saleem ullah Khan, Sheikh-ul-Hadees Moulana Asfandyar Khan, Mufti Haneef Jalandhri and others have never condemned and issued Fatwas against Mujahadeen-e- Taliban !
Moreover, after the signing of NAR in Swat leading Deobandi scholors went to Swat and congratulated Talibans there !

zainengineer said:

@Mullah Omar

I am a practicing deobandi. I favour operation against taliban. Who was the first Alim killed by Taliban? They first killed Maulana Hassan Jan who was a deobandi scholar. They killed him because he was against suicide bombing against muslims.

Here is an ‘eye opener’ for you. Lets see what ‘ACTUAL DEOBANDI’ say. What can be more original deobandi that deobandi madrassah itself. Read following


This is deoband madrassah website http://www.darululoom-deoband.com/

And this is deobandi participating in elections in india http://www.darululoom-deoband.com/urdu/news/shownews.php?id=34

So much for that ‘kafir democracy’ concepts of idiot ’sufi muhammad’.

Don’t potray deobandi negatively. Talibans are Jahil. They are more like ‘Kharijites and less like ‘deobandi’ .

I hope after reading this information you will become a ‘true’ deobandi.



Wednesday, 1 July 2009

Are Pakistani Taliban and jihadis agents of CIA, RAW etc?