She is sure dead, but are we alive?

It's the question that is haunting me. Can we really call ourselves alive if "we can't do anything". Do we have the right to call ourselves alive? Do we know what this word "life" means? Amidst all this chaos and confusing news of Benazir's death, numerous other news were in circulation. Whether there's going to be another emergency declared is a waiting game now. Would elections make any sense now, even though US has given stern statement that elections should go ahead as planned. There's a set of burning questions, but as I watched different news channels (as i really didn't know what else to do) constantly showing the same footage everywhere, there was an unmistakably distinct pattern i saw even though i was passively watching everything. Four different people said something live on tv, within a time window of 10-15 minutes. These four people are geographically and mentally well apart apparently. US president George Bush, UK Prime minister, Brown, Afghanistan's Karzai, and finally Pakistan's Musharraf. They all said exactly the same words about the incidence. Now this could have been a coincidence for sure, but I dont' know. Each one of them used two keywords "cowardly act" and their favorite term "terrorists". There was an unmistakable correlation between the short statements issued by the "gentlemen".

There's another incidence that happened. I had an argument with my dad. I wouldn't like to quote the naivety of my dad's philosophy, but in short his philosophy stinks of helplessness. It promotes an absolute submission to the global tyrants of this world. I say if we are just waiting for the bullets to come into our own homes one by one and rid us of our lives, we are absolutely dead already!!! If helplessness is all we as humans can achieve in the absence of a gun in our hand, then everything Iqbal has said in his poetry, everything Allah has said in the Quran is false. It is absolutely false, if it is only God that can change things now!!

Racism and Benazir Bhutto ???

If somebody says that education from Oxford and Harvard plus two tenures of premiership and being a popular leader can change the racist attitude of 'someone' on the basis of color, then atleast in case of former chief minister Sindh Arbab Ghulam Rahim, Benazir Bhutto isn't changed much.

It was heard during her (Benazir Bhutto) visit to the interior Sindh, Mir Pur Khas, when she called her competitor, on the basis of his body color, as a 'Black Crow'.

Source: BBCUrdu

Blogged with Flock

Worth Watching, Selected Clips from the Last 5 years

Blogged with Flock

Successor of Chaudharies with his Cycle

(courtesy http://revolutionariesanonymouslahore.blogspot.com)


















Although the whole Govt. machinery is taking care of the cycle but it is always good to look after for their own "mess".

Ppl sacrificed animals, caretakers sacrificed decency on eid

Every muslim sacrificed to his/her potential on this eid-ul-azha... a few sacrificed camels, many did cows, some sacrificed bakras and dumbaas... the officials in caretaker govt. of Pakistan sacrificed something we don't usually see being sacrificed on holy events like eid... Decency is what they sacrificed... they did not let the judges and their families leave the colony for eid prayers. They had to offer eid prayers inside the colony which was locked and was surrounded by riot police so that the 'free to move' judges cannot move freely. The govt. also violated its own orders by re-arresting aitzaz early morning on eid. I wonder where has the sharam and ghairat gone??? The govt. officials keep claiming that there r no restrictions on judges, they r free to offer prayers... but a fotograph on dawn website shows a 4 row eid prayer, with approx. 16 ppl in each row... is it what eid prayers are meant for?... mush u r introducin a new islam, a new concept of 'ijtimaaiat'... u might get an award for peace but u'll win the hatred of muslim in return, the bad-duas of the besieged, the curse of ur evil doings and ghazab of Allah in return inshaAllah... man usually a jama'at for juma prayers is larger than this jama'at for eid :(... see the foto and the story on Dawn website

Prices of essential items soar by 9.51%

"Har Qadam Khosh hali ki Janib"
(Every Step towards the prosperity)

ISLAMABAD: The prices of daily use items rose by 9.51 per cent in the third week of December.According to Federal Bureau of Statistics the rate of inflation for low income group rose by 12.24 per cent as compared to the previous year. It said out of 53 essential items prices of 17 registered advance while those of 11 declined and rates of 25 remained stable.Increase was seen in the prices of tomatoes, ginger, LPG, Kerosine oil, eggs, wheat, edibl .... Full Story

Blogged with Flock

Civil versus Uncivil

By: Naeem Sadiq (naeemsadiq@gmail.com)

2007 will be remembered as a year of extremism. It was in this year that 'the extremists became very extreme', to quote from the president of the PCO Republic. It was in this year that the extremists on the mountains of Waziristan killed and captured more soldiers than at any other time in the history of Pakistan.  It was in this year that the extremists in Islamabad fired a long-distance, high-speed PCO missile that knocked out one's own strategic assets such as the Constitution and the judiciary.  It was in 2007 that we became the only country in the world that suspended and 'house-arrested' its own chief justice twice in the same calendar year. It was in this year that a militant legislation transferred all state powers to a single individual — perhaps the only person in the world who has a nuclear button in his pocket and whose constitutional amendments cannot be challenged.
Also in this year the political parties displayed unparalleled greed and spinelessness by legitimising extremely substandard PCO products like the PCO president, PCO judges, PCO PM and PCO Election Commission.  No wonder the Chinese calendar calls 2007 the year of the animal we do not like to talk about.

But there was also a new sense of energy and resistance in the air that began to give hope to the dark despondency of 2007. It was for the first time that Pakistanis, forgetting their many differences, closed ranks and began to take positions around a single dividing line. The line that separates the civil and the uncivil society. A divide along the lines of conscience on the one hand and compromise on the other.

What are the dynamics of this new development? While the traumatic events of 2007 may have been a triggering factor, this new wave reflects an accumulated disillusionment of people from 60 years of uninterrupted deceit, corruption and lawlessness. Gradually but firmly, people have come to perceive their leaders (both civil and military) as corrupt, self-serving and power-hungry whose only interest is to use the placebo of clichés, deceptive manifestos and hollow slogans to dupe the masses.

The educated middle class — lawyers, teachers, students, doctors, professionals, individual citizens and groups — which has traditionally kept itself at a distance from mainstream politics is awakening to a realisation that it has stayed on the sidelines for too long.

There is a growing realisation that years of inaction, silence and cynicism have only resulted in people being taken for a long ride. In a classic replay of Pastor Niemöller's famous lines, the home-made Nazis have already come for the judges, the lawyers and the media. A scary realisation that people must stand up and speak for themselves as there is no one left to speak for them.

What separates the civil from the uncivil society of Pakistan? One simplistic understanding would be that anyone who directly or indirectly was a party to the mutilation of the Constitution and launch of the draconian PCO, who took oath as a PCO judge, cut power deals with the US, tried to seek indemnity against past crimes, supported the military regime, accepted a position under this unconstitutional arrangement or granted legitimacy to these actions by taking part in elections is a part of the Uncivil Society. All others may prima facie be assumed to be part of the civil society.

One does not, however, become a part of the civil society by merely suffering in silence. Even a weekend vigil or periodic public protests are not good enough. A society is called civil when its members individually and collectively follow ethical principles and practices in their working lives.

They relate their work to larger social and political causes. They support ethical and principled stands. They protest peacefully and lawfully against tyranny and injustice.

They are willing to contribute their time, effort, money or expertise for a cause or community. They are willing to rise above their party positions and cushy jobs, to raise their voice when the rulers indulge in unethical practices, and finally they care and work for the betterment of a larger society instead of a privileged few. While it may still be many miles to the land of the civil society, there are clear signs and symptoms that people in Pakistan are already taking the most difficult first steps. May 2008 be the year of the civil society.

Blogged with Flock

Amnesty USA Letter To Secretary Rice, On Pakistan

Tuesday, 25 December 2007, 6:48 am
Press Release: Amnesty International

Amnesty USA Letter To Secretary Condoleezza Rice

The Honorable Condoleezza Rice
Secretary of State
Department of State
2201 C Street, NW
Washington, DC 20520
Dear Secretary Rice:

Thank you for meeting with the Human Rights Leadership Coalition on December 10. We would like to follow up on the conversation we had on Pakistan and respond to Assistant Secretary Richard Boucher's recent reply to our November 13 letter.

We remain deeply concerned that you and President Bush have not yet called unequivocally for the restoration of an independent judiciary and the lifting of restrictions on the media, particularly television. Pakistan's judiciary supervises the nomination and polling process at every level, while High Court and Supreme Court judges hear appeals regarding qualifications and fraud. The Election Commission is composed of retired and serving judges. The removal of independent-minded judges has rendered free and fair elections impossible, while strict curbs on media further impede accurate reporting on the political and electoral processes. It does not make sense to call for free and fair elections without addressing these concerns.

Assistant Secretary Boucher's letter notes that the U.S. government has called for the end of martial law and the release of detainees. But the letter's language lacks urgency when discussing judicial independence, stating only that the U.S. "encourages an independent judiciary as a significant part of any democracy." Our organizations have heard consistently from colleagues in Pakistan that they cannot understand the silence of the U.S. government on the necessity of an independent judiciary and an unwavering commitment to the rule of law.

Since our meeting, President Musharraf has formally lifted martial law, as the United States had called on him to do. However, in his revocation order and another order issued the day before, President Musharraf renewed his attacks on the judicial system, permanently replacing the dismissed judges and barring judicial review of his actions. Orders and amendments imposed during martial law, fundamentally changing the constitution and people's access to basic rights, remain in place and outside judicial review. Such provisions allow for military trials of civilians and suppression of the media by imposing harsh prison sentences and fines for "anything which...brings into ridicule" the head of state or other government officials.

We urge the United States government to call on the Government of Pakistan to restore the judges to their positions and to lift media restrictions prior to the January 8 elections. Furthermore, the Pakistani government must return the power to license or disbar lawyers to the independent Bar Council. Without such steps, some of the most dangerous aspects of martial law will become enshrined in the Pakistani legal and political system, and neither free elections nor long term stability will be possible.

Sincerely,
Mr. Larry Cox, Executive Director
Amnesty International USA

Ms. Karin Ryan, Director
Human Rights Program
The Carter Center

Ms. Jennifer Windsor, Executive Director
Freedom House

Mr. Salih Booker, Executive Director
Global Rights

Ms. Maureen Byrnes, Executive Director
Human Rights First

Mr. Kenneth Roth, Executive Director
Human Rights Watch

Mr. Gary Haugen, President
International Justice Mission

Mr. Robert Arsenault, President
International League for Human Rights

Ms. Felice D. Gaer, Director
Jacob Blaustein Institute for the Advancement of Human Rights

Ms. Robin Phillips, Executive Director
Minnesota Advocates for Human Rights

Mr. Frank Donaghue, Chief Executive Officer
Physicians for Human Rights

Ms. Monika Kalra Varma, Director
Robert F Kennedy Memorial Center for Human Rights

Blogged with Flock

PML-N will try its best to restore judges: Nawaz

Source: Daily Times
Monday, December 24, 2007

KARACHI: Former premier Nawaz Sharif has vowed that the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) would try its best to reinstate the judges sacked on November 3. “This is as necessary as Pakistan’s existence,” Nawaz told reporters after meeting some sacked judges here on Sunday. Addressing a press conference at the residence of PML-N Additional Information Secretary Sardar Rahim, he said, “Sacking honest and diligent judges should not go unnoticed.” He said the president and the PML-Quaid were to blame for the worsening law and order situation in the country. Nawaz said the present regime had written off Rs 107 billion in loans, alleging that they were for defaulters from the PML-Q and its allied parties. He said Musharraf had justified an army takeover by calling Pakistan a failed state. Following eight years under Musharraf’s rule, the country was facing an even more difficult situation, he added. “The nation wants to know what the achievement on your (Musharraf’s) part was,” he said. The PML-N chief said he had told the APDM that he supported a boycott only if it was collective. He said he still supported his colleagues, even if they chose to approach the ‘target’ in different ways. He said Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain was a ‘hurdle’ to the reunification of the various PML factions. He said the PML-N was continuing talks on seat adjustments with the Pakistan People’s Party, adding that nothing was finalised. According to Online, he said it would be difficult to reach any understanding as there was very little time left till the polls. He said anyone who cooperated with President Musharraf was betraying the country. He said he would only be willing to listen to Musharraf if he agreed to reinstate the judiciary.

Blogged with Flock

Musharraf, a 'safe pair of hands' without legitimacy

Source: The Daily Star
By: Irfan Hussain

With President Pervez Musharraf having lifted the state of emergency in Pakistan, there must be sighs of relief in the United States and Israel. The state of emergency was imposed when Musharraf pre-empted an expected verdict against his re-election on November 3, against a backdrop of mounting concern over the security of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.

Over the last eight years he has been in power, Musharraf has come to be viewed as a reliable figure in Western capitals, a "safe pair of hands." Despite the resurgence of the Taliban and the increasing potency of the threat that movement's Pakistani supporters pose in the northwest of Pakistan, the international community was more or less comfortable with Musharraf in charge. As long as he was around, went the received wisdom, Pakistan's nuclear assets were safe.

Musharraf's problems - most of them self-inflicted - began piling up after March 9, when he tried to remove the stubbornly independent chief justice, Iftikhar Chaudhry. This generated serious concern in Washington and other world capitals. Although instability in Pakistan would strengthen the extremists, the more pressing worry was the possibility of nuclear warheads and related material falling into Al-Qaeda's hands.

When the Pakistani Army was constructing facilities to store and conceal components of its nuclear arsenal, it located these sites away from the Indian border, in the northwest of the country. These are the very areas where the extremists are now gaining in strength. And although the arsenal's location remains a closely guarded secret, there is a worry that Al-Qaeda might have supporters in the ranks of the Pakistani military. It is common knowledge that both the defense establishment and the intelligence community in Pakistan have been infiltrated by Taliban sympathizers. These fears have been compounded by the country's history of proliferation and the covert help A.Q. Khan, the disgraced nuclear scientist, must have received from the military.

In the worst-case scenario in which a Pakistani nuclear device does fall into the wrong hands, Israel would almost certainly be a prime target. Frustrated by the enormous technological edge enjoyed by the Israeli armed forces, Israel's enemies would dearly love to get their hands on an equalizer. In all probability, they would be unwilling to take the risk of trying to smuggle the device into the US, so Israel would do fine as the next best target.

In much of the Muslim world, Israel is seen as an extension of the US. Indeed, regarding all hostile American policies that concern Muslim countries the prevailing view is that it is a case of the tail wagging the dog. Thus, an attack on Israel would be viewed, especially in jihadist circles, as a blow against the hated Americans.

As Pakistan has been progressively destabilized through a combination of military rule and the rise of religious extremism, another concern is the emergence of vast tracts in the turbulent tribal areas as safe havens for Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. With the weakening of the state's writ in these rugged badlands, the grip of terrorists has tightened.

With more training camps being established in these areas, an expansion of the global jihad can be expected. Western as well as Israeli targets would be at risk. Indeed, the biggest danger is the emergence of a nascent Greater Pashtunistan where Pashtun tribesmen on both sides of the Pakistan-Afghan border who have traditionally supported the Taliban will gain autonomy.

Another area in which Musharraf's support would be needed is Iran. Should there be an American decision to attack Iran or its nuclear facilities, Pakistan's long common border would be crucial to the success of such a campaign. Although Pakistan's participation would be kept secret due to the political ramifications of its involvement, the possibility of American special forces and aircraft crossing the Baluchistan border in western Pakistan could make the difference between success and failure.

Finally, Musharraf is the only Pakistani leader to have publicly advocated a debate on finally establishing diplomatic relations with Israel. Although his initiative lost steam with the Israeli attack on Lebanon last year and the subsequent political turmoil in Pakistan, Musharraf has not used the usual anti-Israel rhetoric so common in the Muslim world.

Despite the fact that Pakistan is a long way from the Arab heartland, Musharraf is still a respected figure in the Middle East. This is largely due to Pakistan being the only Muslim nuclear power. But the general's call for "enlightened moderation" is music to the ears of Arab leaders who fear Islamic militancy. They are all nervous about the possibility of an implosion in Pakistan that would encourage militants to establish a permanent presence there, as in Afghanistan during the Taliban era.

Musharraf appears to have got over the worst: he now has a subservient judiciary, a divided opposition, and a supportive White House. His generals are solidly behind him, and the newly-emerging private television channels have been cowed. His decision to retire from the army and take an oath of office as a civilian president is unlikely to cause any major changes in policies, at least in the short run. But the legitimacy he so ardently desires continues to elude him. If he cannot build bridges to the opposition, he will remain vulnerable.

Irfan Husain is a weekly columnist for Dawn and The Daily Times. He served in the Pakistani civil service for 30 years. This commentary first appeared at bitterlemons-international.org, an online newsletter.

Blogged with Flock