Saturday, February 19, 2011

Shah Mehmood Qureshi, "Memory Loss", & Ultimate End of Bhuttos.

[ayaz+amir.jpg]Let me enter an immediate caveat so as not to be misunderstood. Davis should be dealt with according to the letter of the diplomatic law. If he is without immunity then that’s it and to this position we should stick, regardless of pressure or threats from the seat of the American empire. But why must we make a tamasha (spectacle) of everything? Why can’t we handle this affair without fuss and without the drumbeats of patriotism sounding from every rooftop? And why, as we go about fashioning a response, must we present a picture of national disarray? The presidency in a tizzy, wanting a way out of this crisis and not being able to find one; the prime minister, as always, not in charge and hoping for the whole thing to blow away; the Foreign Office on a different page from the presidency; the former foreign minister, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, eager to turn this dilemma into the wages of heroism; and the guardians of national security not wholly able to avoid the suspicion that they are busy pulling the strings from behind.

Shah Mehmood Qureshi in Off the Record 2/17/11 - P1

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WKoP9VUZUY&feature=player_embedded

When the jihadi media goes into overdrive – some of the semi-literate babbling about national dignity and honour we are being treated to being quite an exercise in creative literature – and religious elements protest before the Press Club, Lahore, raising fists in the air and shouting full-throated slogans, it is possible to detect in these spirited forays the footprints of national security. Pakistan’s security establishment is a kingdom unto itself. In any given crisis or incident it is not always clear what it is trying to achieve. But since old habits die hard, the knights of this establishment always seem eager to make their presence felt. Almost as if to say, we are not to be ignored. Or ignore us at your peril.

Shah Mehmood Qureshi in Off the Record 2/17/11 - P2

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3-GgTB0NBg&feature=player_embedded

To repeat the earlier point, if Davis is without diplomatic immunity, as seems to be the case, his prosecution should go ahead, regardless of anything else. But we can proceed along this path without too much frothing at the mouth. National dignity is better served by speaking softly. And protestations about national honour would sound more convincing if we could somehow put our permanent begging bowl to one side, for some time if not permanently. Shah Mehmood Qureshi’s bravura press conference was bemusing: this is not the time to lower our heads but to raise them; I know that by speaking up harm can come to me but I will not bend when it comes to national honour; there is a lot more to tell and if the need arises I will do so. Oh really? Exaggerated as the comparison may seem, is he trying to sound like another Zulfikar Ali Bhutto? Silence would have suited Qureshi better but then silence is not a particularly Pakistani quality. REFERENCE: The wry taste of ultra-patriotism Ayaz Amir Friday, February 18, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=31573&Cat=9&dt=2%2F18%2F2011

http://www.senate.gov.pk/images/Members/shafqat%20mahmood.jpgIs this another Tashkent moment in our history? Shah Mehmood Qureshi may think so. His virtuoso press performance Wednesday, replete with dramatic pauses and high flown rhetoric, was as good an attempt as any to carve out a leadership niche for himself. Will he succeed? For those younger readers who may not be fully aware of the significance of Tashkent, this was the moment that made Zulfikar Ali Bhutto a national leader. In the public eye he became a hero when he ostensibly – it is still not clear to what extent – differed with his president, Ayub Khan, on signing a peace deal with India after the 1965 war. This was seen by the people as a betrayal. Primed by a constant anti India rhetoric and convinced of Pakistan’s military superiority, they thought that Ayub had let them down. Ousted from the cabinet a la Shah Mehmood, Bhutto rode the tiger of anti India sentiment to popular leadership.

Shah Mehmood Qureshi in Off the Record 2/17/11 - P3

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOUkBpqAXoQ&feature=player_embedded


http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1264/4603590776_849771ec44_m.jpgThere are some similarities between today and the Tashkent moment but also many differences. There is a huge anti American sentiment in the country as there was against India then. As a platform for leadership and popularity, this has great potential. It has been recognised by others. PML-N, Tehrik-e-Insaaf and Jamaat Islami are also trying to cash in on it. The difference is that Ayub was a hated dictator with very little support among the people. PPP with all its faults, including a leadership tainted by allegations of corruption, is still a popular political party. It has opposition, lots of it, but this space is taken by PML-N and much of the religious lobby. Where would Shah Mehmood fit in? I think he understands this and therefore has pledged his undying loyalty to the ideals of Shaheeds’ Zulfikar Ali and Benazir Bhutto. But this means making an attempt for national leadership on the PPP wicket. It would entail taking on its current leadership and if possible supplanting it through grass root support of the workers.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1312/4602979173_e35836bd02.jpgThere are enough disgruntled prominent party members like Safdar Abbasi – an old classmate of Shah Mehmood – Naheed Khan, Yousaf Talpur, Sherry Rehman and others who may rally to his cause. But, would this be enough to challenge Zardari and company? More importantly, would he be able to energise the party grass root to his cause? He has some other drawbacks that within the PPP’s peculiar culture become significant. His father, Makhdoom Sajjad Hussain Qureshi, was Punjab governor during the rule of one person that each PPP member fervently hates; Zia ul Haq. Shah Mehmood himself was initially in the PML-N, was its MPA and for a while member of Nawaz Sharif’s caretaker cabinet before the 1988 election. This background can potentially be exploited by his opponents in the party. REFERENCE: Qureshi’s bid for national leadership Shafqat Mahmood Friday, February 18, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=31577&Cat=9&dt=2/18/2011

http://ejang.jang.com.pk/2-18-2011/Karachi/pic.asp?picname=06_08.gif
http://ejang.jang.com.pk/2-18-2011/Karachi/page6.asp#;

Close



Ultimate end of "EVERY" "Wannabe" "BHUTTO" - Lets not forget as to how we (Pakistani) treat our Heroes and later Worship their "Dead Bodies"


The most lethal mix of Rawafiz and Khawarij [Jamat-e-Islami, its Founder and their Workers] often forget while lecturing Zardari and Nawaz about democracy, law and constitution that Jamat-e-Islami's Very own Pervert Chief Maulana Abul Al'a Mawdudi, Professor Ghafoor, Professor Khursheed and Mehmood Azam Farooqui were in hand gloves with a US backed Military Dictators General Ziaul Haq not only in Marital Law of 1977but also involved in the Judicial Murder of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, read the "advices" and "allegations" of JI leadership and then watch the Video Proof as to how JI Leadership [Professor. Senator Khursheed Ahmed] hailed Bhutto's Murder while talking to a Foreign Journalist in a very rare video. Read JI's history of Terrorism, Fascism, Treahery, Violence and Deceit.

LAHORE, April 4: Former chief of Jamaati- Islami Qazi Husain Ahmed Answering a question, he said all cases against beneficiaries of defunct National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO) should be re-opened and the public money plundered by anyone must be returned to the masses. Seeking that President Asif Zardari should be first to be held accountable, he said reopening of Swiss cases against the PPP cochairperson were in his (Zardari’s) and his party’s best interest as the politicians would be in a position to clarify their position, He told a questioner that if the Pakistan government requested the Swiss government to re-open the cases, the latter would be bound to oblige as being a member of the United Nations. He said both President Asif Zardari and PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif were playing a hide and seek as they clashed and reconciled at their own will. He demanded that public opinion should be elicited on the draft of 18 constitutional amendment bill before its passage in the parliament. REFRENCE: Swiss cases re-opening in PPP interest, says Qazi By Our Staff Reporter Monday, 05 Apr, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/local/lahore/swiss-cases-reopening-in-ppp-interest,-says-qazi-540

BUREWALA: Amir Jamaat-e-Islmai (JI) Munawar Hassan has alleged that Nawaz Sharif has been taking a dictation and played a puppet’s role in connection with the Constitutional package. He was addressing public meeting held in connection with Seerat-un-Nabi (SAW) here on Tuesday. “Nawaz Sharif, on the directives of some elements, first raised objections and later agreed on dictation from the same elements,” Munawar Hassan claimed. He said the murderers of Ms Benazir Bhutto be brought presented to the people before reopening the (Zulfiqar Ali) Bhutto case.“How could the man who, despite being the president of the country failed to nab the assassins of her wife, will be able to serve the nation?” he asked. He said the Government, instead of implementing the court verdict on NRO, is adopting a policy of clash with the judiciary aimed to provide protection to the thieves and plunderers. Nawaz played puppet on Constitutional package: Munawar Updated at: 2045 PST, Tuesday, April 06, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=102312

Tuesday, April 06, 2010, Rabi-us-Sani 20, 1431 A.H
http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/apr2010-daily/06-04-2010/u26697.htm

Bhutto Hanging Reaction
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iPFulZOplQ&feature=related



A world renowned research scholar, an educationist, an economist, a versatile writer and a preacher of Islam, Prof. Khurshid Ahmed was born on 23 March, 1932. He holds Bachelor's degree in Law and Jurisprudence, Master's degree in Economics and Islamic Studies and also an Honorary Doctorate (Ph. D) in Education. Prof. Khurshid Ahmed has held the portfolio of the Federal Minister for Planning and Development and has been Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission from 1978 to 1979. He is Vice-President of Jama'at-e-Islami Pakistan and Founder and Chairman of both Institute of Policy Studies, Islamabad and the Islamic Founda- tion, UK. He was elected to the Senate in 1985 and re-elected as Senator in 1991 for another six year term. He is Chairman of the Senate Standing Committee on Finance, Revenue and Economic Affairs since 1991 and a member of the Standing Committees on Planning, Development and Population Welfare and Religious Affairs and Minorities Affairs. He is also a member of the Functional Committee of the Senate on Government Assurances. REFERENCE: http://www.senate.gov.pk/ShowMemberDetail.asp?MemberCode=489&CatCode=0&CatName=

LETS HAVE A LOOK AT HISTORY OF US SUPPORT TO PAKISTANI MILITARY DICTATOR GENERAL ZIAUL HAQ AND MULLAHS.

Fall of Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto an his Family was due to his attaining Nuclear Power for Pakistan The explosive situation in the region is the direct or indirect result of the threat hurled by Dr. Henry Kissinger to late. Bhutto and tacit support of Ronald Reagan to the so-called Islamic Dictator General Mohammad Ziaul Haq (1977-1988). - "QUOTE" "It is generally believed that the US wanted Zoulfiqar Ali Bhutto to be removed from the political scene of Pakistan mainly on two accounts. First, for the nuclear policy that he framed and tried to relentlessly pursue and secondly, from apprehensions that ZAB was influencing the countries. He posed a serious challenge to the US interests in the region. “Tally-ho. Kill Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, “ yelled the self-proclaimed policemen of the world. During August 1976, Amercian Secretary of States, Dr. Henry Kissinger had warned Bhutto, “We will make a horrible example of you,” adding menacingly, “When the railroad is coming, you get out of the way.” The American had successfully cultivated a number of well-placed bureaucrats, PPP stalwarts and ministers who wittingly or inadvertently served as the US agents of influence. American diplomats and CIA operators not only got most of the ‘inside’ information from these ‘gentlemen’ but also utilized their good offices to ‘convey’ whatever they wanted to feed or plant. Some officers from USMAAG had also made meaningful ingresses in the General Headquarters and not only gathered the thinking in the Services Headquarters but would also drop a ‘suggestion’ here and there.

Some of the US Diplomats had established direct contacts with a number of PNA leaders whom they continued to aid, support and give day-to-day line of action. A number of US diplomats were not only actively involved but also directed the operations against Bhutto. Jan M. Gibney, Political Officer, US Consulate General, Lahore, duly assisted by a couple of Pakistanis, was extremely active and would frequently visit a number of Politicians Maulana Maudoodi of Jamat-e-Islami and Maulan Obaidullah Anwar, Jamiat-e-Ulmai- Islam of Sheranwala Gate, Lahore. Apart from holding meetings, a wireless network had been established between the USIS-US Consulate General – Maulana Maudoodi’s residence. It was Gibney who had telephoned and conveyed to Howard B. Schaffer, Chief of Political Affairs, US Embassy, Islamabad, that notorious sentence, “The party is over. Merchandise has gone.” The US had also released PL-480 funds. Over night some Jamat-e-Islami workers were seen with pockets full of money and spending lavishly. A number of businessmen, particularly those, who had suffered due to ZAB’s economic and industrial policies, had also been prompted to contribute towards the PNA funds. As there were no party accounts being maintained as such, the contributions were received personally by some of the leaders. Justice (Retd.) Kaikaus and Rafiq Ahmed Bajwa are among those who are alleged to have made millions." [PROFILES OF INTELLIGENCE by Brigadier [RETD] Syed I. A. Tirmazi, SI (M). "UN-QUOTE"

USA, General Zia, JAMAT-E-ISLAMI, Henry Kissinger [Former US Secretary of State] were all bedfellows who destroyed Bhutto in 1977 and later his daughter in 2007: [General Zia Martial Law Period 1977-1988] - Jamat-e-Islami nowadays calls for the restoration of Democracy and Restoration of Constitution of 1973 from the banner of APDM whereas the same Jamat-e-Islami under the banner of MMA gave clean chit to General Musharraf's Rampant Martial Law Regime [2002-2007] through notorious LFO and 17th Constitutional Amendment to do wahtever he likes. In the past the same Jamat-e-Islami [when its Deviant Founder Syed Abul Ala'a Maudoodi was alive] provided its very senior member Professor Ghafoor to serve General Zia ul Haq:-

Professor Ghafoor Ahmad of Jamat-e-Islami was a Federal Minister Production Industries in General Zia Martial Law Cabinet [1978-1979] [Reference Cabinet Division Pakistan] On August 23 1978 following person inducted in General Zia Cabinet: - 1- Ghulam Ishaq Khan [Later dismissed two elected government in Pakistan one at the behest of General Aslam Beg in 1990] - 2 - A.K.Brohi, 3 - Mahmood Haroon, 4 - Mohammad Khan Junejo, 5 - Sharifuddin Pirzada, 6 - Mohammad Ali Hoti 7 - Professor Ghafoor Ahmad (Jamat-e-Islami) [From 2002-2007 under MMA Professor Sahab was part of an alliance which shared government with Mr Musharraf's Martial Law] - You may find many names in the post/link below who also served in General Musharraf’s Martial Law. REFERENCE: High Treason Cases against Pakistani Military Dictators & Collaborators/Abettors http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/08/high-treason-cases-against-pakistani.html

Professor Abdul Ghafoor of Jamaat-e-Islami Exposed by Kamran Shahid about ISI & IJI
video


URL: http://youtu.be/oifIkorG5vg

Jamaat e Islami Go Amarica Go Exposed On Live Tv دھوکے باز غیرتمند

video

The war in Kashmir is not jihad (May 1948; quoted in M. Sarwar, Maulana Maududi ki Tahrik-I-Islami, Lahore, 1956, pp. 331-332). Haider Farooq Mawdudi on Mawdudi and Jamat-e-Islami after Mawdudi. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/04/haider-farooq-mawdudi-on-mawdudi-and.html Question: But the ‘Jamaat’ of your father, Maulana Abdul Ala Mawdudi declares it as ‘Jihad’.

Answer: Now, this is no more the ‘Jamaat’ of my father, this is now the ‘Jamaat’ of Qazi Hussain Ahmad. My father had categorically refused to accept the ongoing violence in Kashmir as ‘Jihad’.

Question: Haider Sahab, Maulana Mawdudi was a giant personality and a great religious scholar. We should talk about present scenario. Jamaat-e-Islami is still spending a lot on ‘Jehad-e-Kashmir’ also rendering sacrifices?

Answer: Yes, presently the situation is such that Jamaat receives Rs. 60,000/- for every militant killed in Kashmir out this, only 15,000-20,000/- are being given to the families of the martyrs, while as the remaining amount is eaten up by the JEI leaders themselves who have opened a factory of martyrs. JEI leaders have made money by getting others children killed. As far as they themselves are concerned, no son of Qazi Hussain Ahmad was killed either in Afghanistan or Kashmiri, ‘Jihad’ and his children are leading a luxurious life while studying in the United States.
===========


Ayub’s secularism as part of the military culture of British Indian Army was like an open book without any fine print. Even the prefix Islamic attaching to the Republic of Pakistan was dropped until restored under the writ of superior judiciary. That continued to be the case until the fateful day of 1965 when India attacked Pakistan along the international border, with Lahore as its principal target. Even in his first address to the nation within hours of the Indian invasion, Ayub went on to recite the ‘Kalama-i-Tayyaba’ in a stirring, emotion-choked voice. His subsequent meeting with religious parties – mainly the Jamaat-i-Islami under Maulana ‘Abul ‘Ala Maududi – marked the beginning of the military-mullah nexus. Yahya would not have much to do with things spiritual until the induction of retired Maj.-Gen. Sher Ali Khan into his cabinet as minister in-charge of information and national affairs. He initiated Yahya into ideological lore and saddled him with the mission of protecting the ‘ideology of Pakistan and the glory of Islam’. Yahya’s intelligence chief, Major-(later Lieut.) Gen. Muhammad Akbar Khan made no secret of his close liaison with the Jamaat-i-Islami especially in respect of its pro-active role in East Pakistan. The Jamaat was to go even to the extent of certifying Yahya’s draft constitution as Islamic. The draft was authored by Justice A.R. Cornelius, Yahya’s law minister. As for Zia, he embarked on his Islamization programme even as he assumed his army command. REFERENCE: MMA and the NSC By A.R. Siddiqi 30 June 2004 Wednesday 11 Jamadi-ul-Awwal 1425 http://www.dawn.com/2004/06/30/fea.htm#1



The series of assassinations in Former East Pakistan [now Bangladesh] was started from 1969 when a Shams Duaa-Haa, professor of Chemistry in Rajshahi University, was assassinated in daylight. Let me explain what the Al-Badar and Al-Shams were and are? Al-Badar was and is militant wing of Jamait Islami and a paramilitary force formed in Bangladesh in 1971 by General Yahya INC. Al-Badar forget that what the real Jihad is? And fight against the Muslims in Bangladesh, Bengalis use to call Al-Badar as “Butcher of Bangladesh.” The Al Badar was assigned a variety of combat and non-combat tasks including taking part in the operations, spying against Bengali Intellectuals, interrogation, working as the guides for Tikka Khan and Niazi, assassination, detecting and killing Bengali intellectuals. The force was composed of madrassah students-teachers, supporters of Muslim League and Jamait Islami. History tell us that killings which began on 25 March 1971 and sparked the Bangladesh Liberation War and also led to the deaths of at least 26,000 people as admitted by Pakistan on one hand (by the Hamoodur Rahman Commission) and 3,000,000 by Bangladesh on the other hand, (From 1972 to 1975 the first post-war prime minister of Bangladesh, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, mentioned on several occasions that at least three million died). Doctor Fazl Rabbi was an eye specialist; he was kidnapped by Al-Badar. Next day his body was found from a drainage line. His both eyes were vanished and there were marks of switchblade. “What should we think about such peccadilloes?” Ex-militants of Al-Badar are settled in UK and other European countries and they are appointed as cleric of mosques there. And I want to remind the readers that too, “Jamait Islami’s former leader Maulana Modudi had rejected the theory of Pakistan but since 1947, when Pakistan came into being, it is claimed by the leaders of Jamait Islami that they are playing leading role of toady.



Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark says - "Clark pointed to the CIA's activities in Iran as evidence of its willingness to support dictators over democrats. U.S. officials can justify supporting a dictatorship in Pakistan, said Clark, because it "daggers the underbelly of the Soviet Union." Almost three decades later, Bhutto fans, analysts and keen Pakistani observers suspect Clark's utterances to be true and insist they should not be trashed so easily. Says one Bhutto follower, ".....see in 1977 Bhutto was removed and hurriedly executed. and in just about 24 months, Russia was in Afghanistan (December 1979) and Pakistan, USA, Saudi Arabia et al were all there together running an "Islamic Jihad" against the Communists. It takes more than a year to plan an invasion so big or a counter-attack so effective no?......both the CIA and the KGB knew what each one of them were doing, planning.... But Bhutto was the "wild card" in the overall Western game plan. Read his book If I am Assassinated. ..it tells you all." In later years, Ramsey Clark wrote " Bhutto was removed from power in Pakistan by force on the 5th of July, after the usual party on the 4th at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, with U.S. approval, if not more, by General Zia al-Haq. Bhutto was falsely accused and brutalized for months during proceedings that corrupted the judiciary of Pakistan before being murdered, then hanged. That Bhutto had run for president of the student body at University of California in Berkeley and helped arrange the opportunity for Nixon to visit China did not help him when he defied the U.S. (Covert Action Quarterly magazine, Fall 1998)" REFERENCE: Who Killed Bhuttos? http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/who-killed-bhuttos.html



Just to list a few of the alleged assassinations conducted or planned by U.S. agents exposes the crisis in confidence covert actions have created for our country. Allende, Lumumba, Diem, Bhutto, with many questioning whether President Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr., should be included, and U.S. planning for the assassination of Fidel Castro part of our public record, while air and missile attacks directed at Qaddafi of Libya and Saddam Hussein of Iraq missed their targets. CIA Director Richard Helmspleaded guilty to perjury for false testimony he gave before the U.S. Senate on the CIA' s role in the overthrow of President Allende. He was fined, but his two-year prison sentence was suspended. But the American public is unaware of it, and Chile has never been the same. U.S. support for the overthrow of Allende was the essential element in that tragedy. For years, Patrice Lumumba's son would ask me whenever we met, first in Beirut, or later in Geneva, if the U.S. killed his father. I finally gave him a copy of former CIA officer John Stockwell's In Search of Enemies, which tells the story. Justice William O. Douglas wrote in later years that the U.S. killed Diem, painfully adding, "And Jack was responsible. " Bhutto was removed from power in Pakistan by force on the l5th of July, after the usual party on the 4th at the U.S. Embassy in Islamabad, with U.S. approval, if not more, by General Zia al-Haq. Bhutto was falsely accused and brutalized for months during proceedings that corrupted the judiciary of Pakistan before being murdered, then hanged. That Bhutto had run for president of the student body at U.C. Berkeley and helped arrange the opportunity for Nixon to visit China did not help him when he defied the U.S. REFERENCE: Who Killed Bhuttos? http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/who-killed-bhuttos.html


Maulana Wahiduddin Khan - As per another noted Islamic Scholar of repute Maulana Waheeduddin Khan [One of the founder member of Jamat-e-Islami who later resigned from JI]“Quote” "Maudoodi founded his movement on the maxim of 'Rule of Allah' and had said only Allah's rule is allowed on the people and the world and all the other laws made by human beings are wrong {BATIL}. For Muslims following such man made laws is Haram {forbidden} as for Muslims it is a must for him to work for enforcing Allah's Rule/Laws or die in the same cause. Maulana Mauddodi used to say those who make, decide, implement and enforce non-Godly Laws, all are committing forbidden {Haram} acts. Because you cannot even punish a culprit who is proved guilty under man made law, asit would not be considered punishment it’d be crime itself as nobody has the right to decide on God’s land to decide about the punishment through man made laws. Therefore such punishment e.g. punishment for the murder {hanging} would be a murder even if the punished person is proved killer because on God’s Land nobody is allowed to take life without God’s permission mean one has to conduct a murder trial under Islamic Law.


All his life Maulana Maudoodi kept demanding the enforcement of Islamic Shariah and System. During the last years of his life he got what he wanted, on 5 July 1977 General Zia implemented Martial Law and Maudoodi lent his and his party’s complete support to General Zia not only that many of his JI members were in General Zia’s Cabinet. During Zia’s tenure Zoulfiqar Ali Bhutto was tried on the persistency of Jamat-e-Islami and Maudoodi’s slogan “Accountability before Elections”. Maudoodi had full chance to try Bhutto in the PURE-ISLAMIC SHARIAH COURT as per Islamic doctrine. Had he done so he would have been the best example of Practical Shahadah of Islam which he had been claiming all his life and as per him without Shahadah Islami Dawah is incomplete. But Maudoodi and his Jamat-e-Islami and their members supported the trial against Zoulfiqar Ali Bhutto which was conducted as per man made law. The courts, which were the continuation of pre-partition days, were and still are run on the basis British Law. Maudoodi could have demanded the formation of Shariah Court for Bhutto’s trial but he didn’t not only that not a single person that included Maudoodi even raised a demand for establishing such Islamic Courts. The famous Murder Trial against Bhutto was run under the very eyes and support of Maulana Maudoodi and he was tried as per Anglo Saxon Jurisprudence not as per Islami Shariah. Bhutto was hanged on 4th April 1979 while Maudoodi was alive. As mentioned above by Maudoodi no punishment and law is justified and allowed in the presence of Islamic Laws but Bhutto was tried and hanged as per Anglo Saxon Laws which was man made. But Maudoodi not only supported Bhutto’s hanging but even supported the trial conducted under the auspices of man made law.

Zoulfiqar Ali Bhutto {1928-1979} was hanged to death in Rawalpindi allegedly for murder as jurists differ on his hanging but there is no second opinion on that so-called Flag Bearer of Islam in Pakistan committed a murder of a person name Zoulfiqar Ali Bhutto.

BBC in one of its report said that when Bhutto was taken to gallows the last words on his lips were O God! Help me I am innocent. But when a noted journalist Mark Tully reported this news and verbatim of Bhutto in Islamabad. He was chased and gheraoed in Islamabad by the so-called flag bearers of Nizam-e-Mustafa and was thoroughly beaten and that is not the end the then government registered a case against that reporter in Rawalpindi for the said report. This was the newest form of Nizam-e-Mustafa as its followers didn’t take this Hanging of Bhutto ample enough they also wanted the guarantee that Bhutto must be granted HELL [JAHANNUM] in the life hereafter.

Maudoodi denied what he had been propagating all his life i.e. Rule of Allah and Islam particularly in the Bhutto trial and that is the tragedy with all the Islamists particularly in Pakistan that they preach what they don’t practice: ASBAQ-E-TAREEKH by Maulana Waheeduddin Khan {New Delhi India}. Enjoin ye righteousness upon mankind while ye yourselves forget (to practise it)? And ye are readers of the Scripture! Have ye then no sense? {The Cow – II (Soora Al-Baqara) Verse 44}.”


Late. Maulana Muhammada Manzoor Naimani was one of the founders of Jamat-e-Islami and one of the reason of his leaving Jamat-e-Islami [many giant Islamic Scholars left Jamat-e-Islami e.g. Maulana Waheeduddin Khan, Maulana Abul Hassan Nadvi, Ameen Ahsan Islahi, Maulana Masood Alam Nadvi, Naeem Siddiqui, Dr Israr Ahmed (he is mystrey like his name) and countless others] was the comrpomise of Late Maulana Mawdudi on Religion and Manhaj [Islam and Manhaj] for the sake of Electoral Politics.
Late. Maulana Muhammad Manzoor Naumani in his book

Meri Rafaqat Ki Sargazasht - Maulana Madudoodi Kay Kay Sath Meray Shab O Roz [My Life with Maulana Mawdoodi] preface by Maulana Abul Hassan Ali Nadvi published in 1997 by Majlis-e-Nashariyat-e-Islam, Nazimabad, Karachi - Sindh Pakistan. While narrating as to why he quit Jamat-e-Islami, wrote, that in the name of Modus Operandi and Strategy [Tareeqa-e-Kaar and Hikmat-e-Amali] Maulana Mawdudi had compromised on many salient features of Islam like any other Secular Political Party. On this Maulana Naimani said Islam’s Basic Priniciples cannot be compromised for worldly benefit what to talk of Political Strategy and Maulana Mawududi’s wrong step would open the doors of Anarchy [Fitnah] in Pakistan. Late. Maulana Naimani was quite right in his opinion on Maudoodi and Jamat-e-Islami.

Late. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto - 4th President of Pakistan & 9th Prime Minister of Pakistan and he also gave First Consensus Constitution of 1973 to Pakistan through Parliament. JUDICIAL MURDER OF BHUTTO: QUETTA: President Asif Ali Zardari says that he considers Justice (retd.) Naseem Hassan Shah as the murderer of former prime minister and PPP founder Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Govt to develop Balochistan before talks: President Updated at: 1720 PST, Thursday, February 25, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=99501

Thursday, February 25, 2010, Rabi-ul-Awwal 10, 1431 A.H Updated at: 1700
http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/feb2010-daily/25-02-2010/u22322.htm

MR JUSTICE DR. NASIM HASSAN SHAH Former Chief Justice of Pakistan - 12th Chief Justice of Pakistan In office April 26, 1993 – April 14, 1994 - Dr. Nasim Hassan Shah in a startling press interview to the daily Jang (August 23, 1996) He did not mince words to indicate the bias of the presiding judge trial court, Maulvi Mushtaq Hussain, who bore personal grudge against Mr. Bhutto. The grudge was that he as Prime Minister, had him superseded by a junior judge while appointing Chief Justice of the Lahore High court. The former Chief Justice has no hesitation in averring that Maulvi Mushtaq Hussain should have avoided naming himself as a member of the trial bench (to maintain the dignity of the court in the principled tradition of justice). It was in this context that during the trial, Maulvi Mushtaq Hussain had made uncalled for personal remarks provoking Bhutto to boycott the proceedings. Dr. Nasim Hassan when confronted by the interviewer admitted that never before in the judicial history of the country any abettor was awarded capital punishment. He further hinted that both General Ziaul Haq and Maulvi Mushtaq had fears that Bhutto’s survival could be risky for them. So he should better be eliminated first and no chances taken. "I am very sorry it had to be done, had to be done".----a belated remorse by the judge who perhaps now suffers pricks. Emphasis by the judge on "had to be done" speaks for itself.

Was Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto's hanging a Judicial Murder?


Courtesy:Dunya News [Private Pakistani TV Channel]
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=znEiRvt2lRs

Executive and Judiciary - Chief justice Nasim H. Shah’s favorable tilt towards Muslim League and his antipathy towards Pakistan Peoples Party were well known. He had exchanged harsh words with chief justice Muhammad A. Zullah when later received Benazir at a function when she was opposition leader. He headed the bench which restored Sharif government in 1993. He had been humiliated earlier during Benazir government when Benazir refused to sit on the same table with him. The reason was that Nasim H. Shah was one of the justices who had upheld the death sentence of Benazir’s father Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in 1979 (Nasim H. Shah was one of the majority justices on the bench which had given a four to three verdict of rejection of appeal of death sentence). Executive and judiciary function in their own spheres but sometimes their interests clash. Executive tries to have some kind of control on the function of judiciary especially when its interests are challenged. Executive tries to influence judiciary through favors in postings, promotions and post-retirement benefits. Troublesome justices are mostly retired using administrative loopholes but occasionally more severe action is taken against the stubborn judge. Former Prime Minister Zulfiqar A. Bhutto was awarded death sentence by Lahore high court for ordering the murder of a political opponent. An appeal against the judgment was filed in the Supreme Court. The initial bench of nine judges (Anwar ul Haq, Muhammad Akram, Dorab Patel, Muhammad Haleem, Nasim Hasan Shah, Ghulam Safdar Shah, Karam Elahi Chauhan, Waheedudin Ahmad and Qaisar Khan) started to hear appeal. During the hearing, Qaisar Khan retired and Waheedudin Ahmad got ill. Remaining seven judges heard the case and rejected the appeal in a four to three decision on February 02, 1979. Civilian leaders have used all available means both fair and foul to prevent encroachment of judiciary which they perceive as their turf or to get desired judgments. In early 1993, relations between Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and president Ghulam Ishaque Khan deteriorated quite rapidly and Khan was planning to ouster Sharif. Some statements attributed to chief justice Muhammad Afzal Zullah indicated that judiciary may act to counter president’s move. President waited till 18 April 1993; the day of retirement of chief justice. In a very curious development, chief justice on the very day of his retirement was on a plane heading out of country. Justice Nasim Hasan Shah was sworn in as acting chief justice; another curious move as he should have been appointed permanent chief justice. President dropped his guillotine on the same day sending Sharif and assembly packing home. The judicial crisis of 1997 severely damaged country’s image and judiciary’s reputation. A reckless civilian prime minister and his cronies clashed head on with an equally reckless chief justice of the supreme court. A number of judges of supreme court openly rebelled against their own chief justice thus bringing the judiciary to new low levels. The saga of Byzantine intrigues was played at the highest levels making the country a laughing stock. The trouble between judges of supreme court had been brewing over a long time. In 1993, justice Sajjad A. Shah gave the lone dissenting opinion when Supreme Court restored Sharif government by a majority decision. Two judges; Muhammad Rafiq Tarar and Saeeduzzaman Siddiqi asked chief justice Nasim Hasan Shah to take disciplinary action against Sajjad A. Shah for the language he used in his dissenting note. (16) Chief justice didn’t take any action against Sajjad A. Shah but it caused a permanent rift. Supreme Court takes recess during summer vacations and if chief justice is out of country during recess it is not necessary to appoint an acting chief justice. In the summer of 1997, chief justice Sajjad A. Shah proceeded to an overseas trip. Incidentally second senior most justice Ajmal Mian was also abroad. Justice Saeeduzaman Siddiqi was in Islamabad when he was told that chief justice had left the country. He adjourned the proceedings, consulted lawyers and then called all supreme court registries to stop working. He declared that there was a constitutional crisis since no acting chief justice was appointed. He sent a letter to the federal government advising it to issue notification for appointment of acting chief justice. As he was the next senior judge, he was appointed acting chief justice. This caused a lot of bad blood between Saeeduzaman Siddiqi and Sajjad A. Shah and on his return Sajjad A. Shah conveyed his disapproval in writing. Sometimes people occupying high offices act in a childish manner embarrassing not only the high office but also the country. In August 1997, chief justice recommended elevation of five judges to supreme court without consulting with government. Government in return issued an order duly signed by the president reducing the strength of the supreme court from seventeen to twelve. Few days later chief justice presiding a three member bench suspended the notification and a couple of days later government withdrew the notification. Supreme Court justices rather than brainstorming about legal issues clashed with each other about the color of the Supreme Court flag. One chief justice arranged for the inauguration of the incomplete building of the new Supreme Court because he wanted to be in the limelight before his retirement. A number of justices opposed this ridiculous idea and they were not invited for the ceremony. When chief justice Muhammad Afzal Zullah received opposition leader Benazir Bhutto in a ceremony, several of his brother judges were furious and harsh words were exchanged between Zullah and justice Nasim Hasan Shah. REFERENCE: Judicial Jitters in Pakistan: A Scholarly & Historical Perspective Hamid Hussain Defence Journal, June 2007 http://watandost.blogspot.com/2007/05/judicial-jitters-in-pakistan-scholarly.html
* Justice (r) Wajihuddin demands judicial inquiry by a panel of
unbiased retired judges

* Justice (r) Fakhrunnisa Khokhar says judges responsible for
decision should seek pardon from nation

LAHORE: Constitutional experts have termed the execution of former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto (ZAB) illegal, and a judicial murder, and added that the judges – who were still alive –ordering the execution should apologise to the nation over their ruling. On April 4, 1979, Bhutto was hanged after the Lahore High Court ordered his execution on charges under Section 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The experts said several judges of the same bench had conceded that the conviction was awarded because of political pressure, and was against the law. Justice (r) Malik Saeed Hassan said various illegalities had been committed while giving the judgment. He said the then chief justice of the Lahore High Court, Maulvi Mushtaq Hussain, should not have been in the bench, as Bhutto objected his participation. When ZAB appealed to the Supreme Court against the verdict of the LHC – a bench of nine judges, consisting of Justice Anwarul Haq, Justice Muhammad Akram, Justice Dorab Patel, Justice Abdul Haleem, Justice Nasim Hasan Shah, Justice Ghulam Safdar Shah, Justice Karam Elahi Chauhan, Justice Waheedudin Ahmad and Justice Qaisar Khan – was formed. During the hearing, Justice Qaisar Khan retired and Justice Waheedudin fell sick. The remaining seven judges heard the case and rejected the appeal in a four to three decision on February 2, 1979. Justice (r) Ghulam Safdar Shah was one of the dissenting judges (the other two were Abdul Halim and Dorab Patel).
Justice Durab Patel's Interview on Z A Bhutto's Case

URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V29bpLemam8

Inquiry: Justice (r) Wajihuddin, son of Justice Waheeduddin, said a judicial inquiry should be held by a panel of unbiased retired judges of the superior judiciary, which should be constituted with the consent of lawyers and the civil society, and not by the government. He said the panel should give a verdict within two months after recoding statements by every person who wanted to present evidence. He said the outcome of the whole exercise would surely give relief to the victim’s family. Advocate Khurram Latif Khan Khosa criticised Bhutto’s trial by the high court, and said the case should have been heard by a sessions court but a five-member bench of the LHC held the trial allegedly on the directions of Ziaul Haq. He also condemned the Supreme Court’s bench for not waiting for its eighth member, Justice (r) Waheeduddin, for hearing ZAB’s appeal against his conviction. The judge was against Bhutto’s conviction, but he went on a sick leave for six to eight weeks, he said. He said the parliament should declare the Supreme Court decision in Bhutto’s case null and void after an open discussion. Pardon: Justice (r) Fakhrunnisa Khokhar said the execution of ZAB was a judicial murder, and the judgment of the court was a black law. She said the judges responsible for the decision should beg pardon from the nation and declare ZAB innocent. Justice (r) Sayed Zahid Bukhari said Bhutto was only hanged for allegedly saying ‘fix up’ Nawab Muhammad Ahmad Khan, father of Bhutto’s staunch opponent Advocate Ahmed Raza Qasuri. He said the court interpreted ‘fix up’ as an alleged direction to assassinate, and ordered his execution. Had the original bench of nine judges been maintained, the verdict would have been 5-4 in Bhutto’s favour, he said.

After the execution, a statement by Justice (r) Ghulam Safdar Shah gave the impression that he would have accepted the argument of ZAB’s defence team. This caused great apprehension and General Zia ordered the Federal Investigations Agency (FIA) director to inquire about Safdar Shah’s credentials. The government found many discrepancies and approached the chief justice for action against the judge. A case was referred to the Supreme Judicial Council (SJC) and Justice Safdar Shah was forced to resign, and hounded out of the country. REFERENCE: Experts term ZA Bhutto’s execution a judicial murder By Rana Tanveer Saturday, April 04, 2009 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\04\04\story_4-4-2009_pg7_23

If we apply Hamid Gul’s logic then Jinnah’s death was caused by a conspiracy hatched by Fatimah Jinnah to possess property, Pistol was not fired by Said Akbar on Liaquat but by Rana Liaquat and Tara Maseeh was Nusrat Bhutto in Adiyala Jail in 1979. Would Hamid Gul like to give some clue about his role in General Zia’s death?

ISLAMABAD: There is nothing new in the UN Commission report on the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, except giving a clean chit to President Asif Ali Zardari, former chief of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Lt Gen (R) Hamid Gul said here on Friday. “Despite the fact that Benazir Bhutto had deviated from the American agenda before her assassination, there is no mention of the United States and Blackwater (now renamed Xe Worldwide),” said the former top spymaster of the country while talking to The News. “Also, there is no mention of Khalid Shahinshah, who was a prime witness,” he commented. Lt Gen (retd) Hamid Gul said that former military ruler Gen (retd) Musharraf, who was at the helm of affairs when Benazir Bhutto was murdered, too was given protocol by the incumbent government and allowed to go abroad. He said there was no difference between the UN Commission report and that of the Scotland Yard. “The government’s request for a UN inquiry is nothing except expression of distrust in the national investigation agencies,” the former ISI chief said. “Had the national institutions been tasked with a thorough probe into the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, the real culprits might have been exposed,” he remarked. The former top spymaster of the country believed that the Taliban and al-Qaeda were not involved in the assassination of the former Pakistani prime minister and were dragged in merely to malign them. He opined that he did not see the involvement of Pakistani or religious elements in the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. REFERENCE: Hamid Gul says it is ‘Save Zardari Report’ Saturday, April 17, 2010 By Mazhar Tufail http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=234666

Whereas General [R] Hamid Gul's very own subordinate officer Brigadier [R] Imtiaz says...

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s former chief of intelligence Brig. Imtiaz Ahmed (Ret.) has strongly rebuffed the allegations of being the CIA and Israeli agent, which was leveled by Hamid Gul in his interview with Arab News on Sunday. In a statement, Brig. Ahmed said that Hamid Gul is a “compulsive liar.” He alleged the statement made by Gul reflects his “intellectual and mental bankruptcy” and “innate shallowness.” “Those who know Gul inside out would bear me out, as they know that Gul is the embodiment of opportunism,” he added. “The history of my 17-year career in intelligence is testimony to the fact that I have always fought against the CIA, the Mossad, the RAW (India’s intelligence service), the KGB and other hostile intelligence outfits, at the risk to my life, to defend the sovereignty of my country.” Imtiaz vowed to uncover the misdeeds and dreadful professional failure of Gul in the near future. “Gul has forgotten that he begged for a higher position from many rulers including Pervez Musharraf in the past. I also remind Gul about his dirty role played in the past to create serious misgivings between the then Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and Farooq Leghari, who was then the president.” SOURCE: Pakistan’s ex-spy chief rebuffs Gul’s remarks by Azhar Masood I Arab News Tuesday 28 July 2009 (30, Shaban, 1430) REFERENCE: Brigadier (R) Imtiaz ‘Exposes’ General (R) Hamid Gul http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/08/brigadier-r-imtiaz-exposes-general-r.html

I wonder on whose order General [R] Hamid Gul wind up the Probe of 'mysterious' Plane Explosion of General Zia??? Would Hamid Gul like to give some clue about his role in General Zia’s death?

When I got to Pakistan in February and called upon General Hamid Gul, the Director General of the ISI, I found out that political events had apparently overtaken this mandate. He told me that his agency had called off its investigation at the request of the government and had transferred the responsibility for it to a "broader based" government authority headed by a civil servant called F.K. Bandial. It was not using the resources of his intelligence service and, as far as he knew that committee had not begun the work. His tone suggested that, he did not expect any immediate resolution of the crime. REFERENCE: Major General [R] Mahmud Ali Durrani and Security Breach http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/01/major-general-r-mahmud-ali-durrani-and.html Brigadier (R) Imtiaz, Death of General Zia & American Conspiracy! http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/09/brigadier-r-imtiaz-death-of-general-zia.html


38. Ms Bhutto stated shortly after the attack that she was not accusing the government for the attack. However, on 21 October 2007, she attempted to lodge a formal complaint in the form of a First Information Report (FIR) to supersede the Karachi police’s FIR, which she believed to be too narrow in scope. In her FIR, which was only registered long after her death, after a protracted court process, she referred to the threat against her posed by persons she named in a 16 October 2007 letter she sent to General Musharraf. While Ms Bhutto’s FIR application does not name these persons, Pakistani and foreign media soon reported that Ms Bhutto’s letter referred to Lt.General (ret) Hamid Gul, Director General of MI under the General Zia ul-Haq dictatorship and Director General of the ISI during her first tenure as prime minister; Brigadier (ret) Ejaz Shah, Director General of the IB and former ISI official; and Mr Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, PML-Q Chief Minister of Punjab, one of General Musharraf’s closest political allies. The Ministry of the Interior later discounted any involvement by these men in the attack. REFERENCE: Report of the United Nations Commission of Inquiry into the facts and circumstances of the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto
http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/Pakistan/UN_Bhutto_Report_15April2010.pdf

179. Persons accused by Ms Bhutto in a letter dated 16 October 2007 179. On 16 October 2007, Ms Bhutto writing from Dubai to General Musharraf, identified three people she considered a threat to her security: (i) Brigadier (ret) Ejaz Shah, Director General of the IB at the time of the assassination, (ii) General (ret) Hamid Gul, a former Director General of the ISI, and (iii) Mr Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, Chief Minister of Punjab until 22 November 2007. REFERENCE: Report of the United Nations Commission of Inquiry into the facts and circumstances of the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/Pakistan/UN_Bhutto_Report_15April2010.pdf

218. Ms Bhutto’s own concerns about threats to her by Al-Qaida and other militants resulted in part from her knowledge of their links with people who had worked with or been assets of the ISI. She feared that the authorities could activate these connections, using radical Islamists to harm her, while hiding their own role in any attack. This was the basis for her allegations against Lt. General (ret) Hamid Gul and Brigadier (ret) Ejaz Shah, in her 16 October letter to General Musharraf. Gul was Director General of MI under Zia ul Haq and then Director General of the ISI when Ms Bhutto was Prime Minister in 1988-90. Although he was retired, Ms Bhutto believed he still maintained his former close ties with the militant jihadis. Brigadier Ejaz Shah, Director General of the Intelligence Bureau in 2007 and a former ISI officer, was a member of General Musharraf’s inner circle. When Omar Saeed Sheikh¸ the main accused in the Daniel Pearl murder case, was cornered in 2002, he requested to surrender to Brigadier Shah. Some believe this was because of Brigadier Shah’s reported intelligence connections with Mr Sheikh; Brigadier Shah vigorously denied this and told the Commission that the surrender was facilitated through family ties in their home community. REFERENCE: Report of the United Nations Commission of Inquiry into the facts and circumstances of the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto http://www.un.org/News/dh/infocus/Pakistan/UN_Bhutto_Report_15April2010.pdf



KARACHI - Another FIR of the Karsaz blast was registered here on Friday against unidentified culprits with the Bahadurabad Police Station, just a day before the first anniversary of the tragic incident on the directives of the Sindh High Court. The letter written by Benazir Bhutto has also been cited in the FIR wherein former chief minister Punjab Chaudhry Pervaiz Elahi, former DG FBI Ejaz Hussain Shah and former ISI chief Hamid Gul have been named. The Government of Sindh has got registered this FIR under No 213/2008. In her statement, Benazir Bhutto had expressed her suspicion over three persons for plotting her assassination and they would be included in investigation. Sindh Home Minister Dr Zulfiqar Mirza held a meeting on Friday in central police office in connection with registration of new FIR. IG Sindh Sultan Salahuddin, CCPO, Karachi Waseem Ahmad, DIG investigation Karachi, Ghulam Qadir and others attended the meeting. The meeting also decided to increase the reward money from Rs 5 million to Rs 10 million for those who would provide information in connection with arrest of accused persons. The Karsaz massacre took place on Shahrah-e-Faisal on October 18 last year on the arrival of martyred PPP Chairperson Benazir Bhutto and claimed more than one hundred lives and left around 500 others badly injured.
- Former Director General IB, Brigadier [R] Ejas Shah - The first FIR 183/2007 was registered within a week of the tragic incident but the PPP leadership declined to accept its subject and filed a petition for the registration of another one. The sections, added in the new FIR, included 302/324/427/120-B/34-PPC/Explosive Act 7-ATA 34 and 109. Experts believe the addition of section 109 in the FIR is a major breakthrough that defines that the conspirator, who had hatched the conspiracy, was also involved in the heinous crime. Town Police Officer, Sohail Zafar Chattha, while talking to The Nation, said that Shaheed Benazir Bhutto was the petitioner and, for that matter, was the complainant in the new FIR. He added that a case has been registered against the unidentified persons whom the complainant had named in a letter she had written to the then President of Pakistan they could be involved in her assassination. REFERENCE: Police to question Pervaiz, Gul, Ejaz By: Mansoor Khan Published: October 18, 2008 http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/18-Oct-2008/Police-to-question-Pervaiz-Gul-Ejaz

NOW SOME CLUES:

بینظیر بھٹو قتل پر اقوام متحدہ کی رپورٹ کے متعلق عائشہ صدیقہ کی رائے



COURTESY: BBC URDU ’یہ کسی لوکل کمانڈر کا فیصلہ نہیں تھا‘
آخری وقت اشاعت: جمعـء 16 اپريل 2010 , 16:49 GMT 21:49 PST
URL: http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/multimedia/2010/04/100416_bb_report_ayesha_analysis.shtml


Clue 1: As per Daily Dawn dated -04-02-2008 report “In the book some extracts of which were carried by The Sunday Times (Exclusive: Benazir Bhutto’s last testament) Ms Bhutto gives a hint about the hands that wrote the plot to kill her. “When I returned, I did not know whether I would live or die. I knew that the same elements of Pakistani society that had colluded to destroy my father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, and end democracy in Pakistan in 1977 were now arrayed against me for the same purpose exactly 30 years later. “I was told by both the Musharraf regime and the foreign Muslim government that four suicide bomber squads would attempt to kill me. These included, the reports said, squads sent by the Taliban warlord Baitullah Mehsud; Hamza Bin Laden, a son of Osama Bin Laden; Red Mosque militants; and a Karachi-based militant group.” Benazir’s ‘last testament’ gives hint about plot to kill her February 04, 2008 Monday Muharram 25, 1429 http://www.dawn.com/2008/02/04/top5.htm

Clue 2: “She disclosed that a media representative had told her on return from Dubai that he had received a phone call from a retired military official that there would be an attack on her that day and that the MQM would be doing that. “I said that if such an attack comes, it will not be from the MQM.” Zia remnants’ blamed for Karachi carnage: Benazir vows to confront militants, fears more attacks By Shamim-ur-RahmanOctober 20, 2007 Saturday Shawwal 7, 1428 http://www.dawn.com/2007/10/20/top1.htm

Clue 3:

“QUOTE”

I knew that the same elements of Pakistani society that had colluded to destroy my father, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, and end democracy in Pakistan in 1977 were now arrayed against me for the same purpose exactly 30 years later. Former prime minister and Pakistan People’s Party chairperson Benazir Bhutto on Friday condemned the suicide attack on her rally and blamed it on what she termed ‘Zia remnants

“UNQUOTE”

REFERENCE: Contractors Tied to Effort to Track and Kill Militants By DEXTER FILKINS and MARK MAZZETTI Published: March 14, 2010 A version of this article appeared in print on March 15, 2010, on page A1 of the New York edition. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/world/asia/15contractors.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/world/asia/15contractors.html?pagewanted=2
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/15/world/asia/15contractors.html?pagewanted=3

Final Clue: Seymour Hersh, Dick Cheney & Secret Assassination Wing http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/05/seymor-hersh-dick-cheney-secret.html




ISLAMABAD: The report of the UN fact-finding commission says the then Rawalpindi City Police Officer (CPO), Saud Aziz, had ordered to hose down the scene of Benazir Bhutto’s assassination at the Liaquat Bagh on the order of the chief of the Military Intelligence of the time, Major General Nadeem Ijaz, who was not only a relative of Pervez Musharraf but also a known crony of the former dictator. The report lays a lot of blame on Saud Aziz on different counts, especially washing of the crime scene and lack of autopsy. He was posted as the CPO Multan immediately after the present government came to power. The commission attached a great significance to the washing of the crime scene to eliminate the evidence that could have proved tremendously useful in investigations into the assassination. At one place, the report said, the then Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) Director General Lieutenant General Nadeem Taj met Benazir Bhutto in the early morning hours of December 27 at the Zardari House Islamabad. It said that directly knowledgeable sources told the commission that they spoke both about the elections as well as threats to her life; versions differ as to how much detail was conveyed about the threats. The commission is satisfied that at the least the ISI chief told Benazir Bhutto that the agency was concerned about a possible terrorist attack against her and urged her to limit her public exposure and to keep a low profile at the campaign event at the Liaquat Bagh later that day. According to the findings, another source, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that Saud Aziz was ordered to hose down the scene by the then MI chief.

The report said that an ISI officer, Rawalpindi Detachment Commander Colonel Jehangir Akhtar, was present at the RGH through much of the evening. At one point, ISI deputy chief Major General Nusrat Naeem, contacted senior physician Prof Mussadiq through Colonel Jehangir’s cell phone. When asked about this by the commission, Nusrat Naeem initially denied making any calls to the hospital, but then acknowledged that he had indeed called when pressed further. He asserted that he had made the call, before reporting to his superiors, to hear, directly from Prof Mussadiq that Benazir Bhutto had died. The commission said sources informed it that Saud Aziz did not act independently in deciding to hose down the crime scene. One source, on condition of anonymity, said the CPO had confided to him that he had received a call from the Army Headquarters instructing him to order the hosing down of the crime scene. Others, including three police officials, told the commission that Saud Aziz did not act independently and that “everyone knows” who ordered the hosing down. However, they were not willing to state on the record what it is that “everyone knows”. This is one of the many occasions during the commission’s inquiry when individuals, including government officials, expressed fear or hesitation to speak openly, the report said.

It said that on three different occasions, senior Physician Professor Mussadiq of the RGH, where Benazir Bhutto was brought from the Liaquat Bagh, asked Saud Aziz for permission to conduct her autopsy, and the CPO refused each request. On the second request, Saud Aziz is reported to have sarcastically asked the professor whether an FIR had been filed, a matter that the CPO should know, not the professor. The report said that the then District Coordination Officer of Rawalpindi Irfan Elahi (now a senior Punjab government official), who was also present outside the operating room of the RGH, supported the CPO’s position. The authorities, however, deny that the CPO deliberately refused to allow an autopsy. They insist that they wanted to get permission from Benazir Bhutto’s family. However, the commission said the police’s legal duty to request an autopsy does not require permission from a family member. It said that because Prof Mussadiq could not obtain police consent to carry out an autopsy, he called in X-ray technician Ghafoor Jadd, who took two X-rays of her skull with a portable X-ray machine. He did this without notifying or seeking Saud Aziz’s consent. Though not present at the time, a radiologist examined the X-rays the next day. Benazir Bhutto’s death certificate was completed and signed by the senior registrar, Dr Aurangzeb, who recorded the cause of death as “To be determined on autopsy”. The report said that soon after the blast outside the Liaquat Bagh the CPO left the crime scene for the RGH; SSP Yaseen Farooq followed shortly thereafter. The most senior Rawalpindi police official remaining at the crime scene was SP Khurram Shahzad, who continued to take instructions from Saud Aziz by telephone. The management of the crime scene and the collection of evidence by the Rawalpindi police during this time have generated considerable controversy. The commission said that senior Pakistani police officials explained to it that in law and practice, the ranking police official at the scene of the crime takes decisions relating to crime scene management. SP Khurram asserted that he made the decision to hose down the scene. Before issuing the order to the rescue and fire services, Khurram called his superior, Saud Aziz, to seek permission, which was granted. Sources, including police officials familiar with the case, questioned the veracity of SP Khurram’s claim that the decision was his initiative.

The report said Saud Aziz’s role in this decision is controversial. Many senior Pakistani police officials have emphasised that hosing down a crime scene is fundamentally inconsistent with Pakistani police practice. While they acknowledge that there is no uniformity of practice in crime scene management in Pakistan, the washing of such a place is considered extraordinary. Indeed, with the exception of some Rawalpindi police officials, nearly all senior Pakistani police officials have criticised the manner in which this crime scene was managed. One senior police official argued that hosing down the crime scene amounted to “criminal negligence”. According to the commission, several senior police officials who know the CPO were troubled that an officer with his 33 years of experience would allow a major crime scene to be washed away, thereby damaging his reputation. The report said that some senior Pakistani police officials identified further factors suggesting that the CPO was not acting independently. They point out that, while the deliberate hosing down of a scene is unheard of in police practice, it has occurred on a few occasions, in each case when the military has been the target of such attacks and the crime scene was managed by the military directly. Even Saud Aziz, the commission said, when asserting to it that there were precedents for hosing down a crime scene, acknowledged that all the incidents which he posited as precedents actually involved a military target. The police officials who point out this pattern saw it as further indication that the military was involved in having the crime scene hosed down.

The report said since the extraordinary nature of the hosing down of the crime scene generated such controversy that Punjab government officials recognised that some response was necessary. A three-member inquiry committee was set up by the chief minister to look into the washing down of the crime scene. The commission requested meetings with these individuals, which the facilitation committee was not able to arrange. No credible reason was provided. However, the committee accepted the Rawalpindi police explanation that the decision to wash the crime scene was formed by the investigating police officer at the scene, SP Khurram, with permission from CPO Saud Aziz, on grounds of public order. The committee had further found that the decision was not made with any mala fide intention and that washing the crime scene did not negatively impact on the conclusion as to the cause of death. The commission said Benazir Bhutto’s Land Cruiser was initially taken to the City Police Station some time after midnight early on December 28 and then taken to the Police Lines. In the early hours of December 28, Saud Aziz went to see the Police Lines, together with others, including ISI officers, who were the first to conduct a forensic examination of the vehicle. An investigating police officer on the orders of the CPO removed Benazir Bhutto’s shoes and took them to the City Police Station. Sometime thereafter, the shoes were ordered back into the car. The report said the commission is not convinced that the decision to wash the scene was made by Saud Aziz alone. The attack was too significant and its target too important to Pakistani society to make such a decision solely on his level. “Sources told the commission that CPO Saud Aziz was constantly talking on his mobile phone while at the hospital. In the commission’s view, he has not adequately explained who called him during that time. Other sources have provided credible information about the intervention of intelligence agencies in the case. Whoever was responsible for this decision, and for whatever reason, acted in a manner that is contrary to the most basic police standards and hampered the proper investigation of the assassination,” the report said. The report said the lack of a clear cause of death established by an autopsy severely affected the credibility of the government among the general public and has given rise to wide speculation as to the cause of Benazir Bhutto’s death. CPO Saud Aziz again appears in a setting in which he seems to have been able to impede the effective investigation of the crime. Again, it is unlikely that a police officer of his level could make such significant and ultimately destructive decisions on his own and wield such power. He maintains that he did not deny any requests for an autopsy.

Furthermore, it said, the CPO impeded some Joint Investigation Team investigators from conducting on-site probe until two full days after the assassination. The failure of Punjab authorities to otherwise review effectively the gross failures of the senior Rawalpindi police officials and deal with them appropriately constitutes a broader whitewash by Punjab officials. The commission said the deliberate prevention by the CPO of a post mortem examination of Benazir Bhutto hindered a definitive determination of the cause of her death. It was patently unrealistic for the CPO to expect that Asif Zardari would allow an autopsy on his arrival in Pakistan at the Chaklala Airbase nearly seven hours after his wife’s death and after her remains had been placed in a coffin and brought to the airport. The autopsy should have been carried out at the RGH long before Zardari arrived. REFERENCE: Ex-MI chief Nadeem Ijaz ordered CPO to wash Benazir murder scene Saturday, April 17, 2010 By Tariq Butt http://thenews.jang.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=28353

No comments: