Tuesday, May 3, 2011

Jang/GEO TV vs Jang/GEO TV on Osama Bin Laden & Truth!

Traditionally, an agent provocateur (plural: agents provocateurs, French for "inciting agent(s)") is a person employed by the police or other entity to act undercover to entice or provoke another person to commit an illegal act. More generally, the term may refer to a person or group that seeks to discredit or harm another by provoking them to commit a wrong or rash action. As a known tool to prevent infiltration by agents provocateurs, the organizers of large or controversial assemblies may deploy and coordinate demonstration marshals, also called stewards. An agent provocateur may be a police officer or a secret agent of police who encourages suspects to carry out a crime under conditions where evidence can be obtained; or who suggests the commission of a crime to another, in hopes they will go along with the suggestion and be convicted of the crime. A political organization or government may use agents provocateurs against political opponents. The provocateurs try to incite the opponent to do counter-productive or ineffective acts to foster public disdain—or provide a pretext for aggression against the opponent (see Red-baiting). Historically, labor spies, hired to infiltrate, monitor, disrupt, or subvert union activities, have used agent provocateur tactics. Agent provocateur activities raise ethical and legal issues. In common law jurisdictions, the legal concept of entrapment may apply if the main impetus for the crime was the provocateur. REFERENCE: Agent provocateur http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_provocateur 

Mr. Hamid Mir says that he was the first Pakistani Journalist:) who met Osama Bin Laden, I wonder who was Late. Eqbal Ahmed (Senior Columnist of Daily Dawn) who met Osama Bin Laden in mid 1980s: Reference: Terrorism, Theirs & Ours by Late. Eqbal Ahmad (1933/34 - 1999) http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2011/05/terrorism-theirs-ours-by-late-eqbal.html

Osama Bin Laden Capital Talk (02 May 2011)

Courtesy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3UPQDORfND0

“I am son of a rich father, I could have spent my life in luxury in Europe and America, like many other wealthy Saudis. Instead I took up arms and headed for the mountains of Afghanistan. Was it personal interest that drove me to spend each moment of my life in the shadow of death? No! I was merely discharging a religious obligation by waging Jihad against those who attacked Muslims. It does not matter if I die in the course of fulfilling this responsibility; my death and the death of others like me will one day awaken millions of Muslims from apathy”. These were the words of Osama bin Laden, which he spoke to me one morning during March 1997, in the cave of Tora Bora mountains of eastern Afghanistan. I was the first Pakistani journalist to interview Osama bin Laden. In May 1998, I encountered him for the second time in a hideout near the Kandahar Airport for many hours. He mentioned his possible death again and again to me in that long conversation and said: “Yes, I know that my enemy is very powerful but let me assure you, they can kill me but they cannot arrest me alive”. I received his messenger within a few hours after the 9/11 attacks and he praised all those who conducted these attacks but he never accepted the responsibility of the 9/11 attacks. It confused me. I tried to meet him again. I took the risk of entering Afghanistan in November 2001 when American warplanes were targeting Al Qaeda and Taliban from Jalalabad to Kabul. REFERENCE: REFERENCE: The Osama bin Laden I knew Hamid Mir Tuesday, May 03, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=5713&Cat=13&dt=5/3/2011 

Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Sath Operation  Abbottabad - 1 (2 May 2011)


I was lucky to meet him for the third time on the morning of November 8, 2001. I was the first and the last journalist to interview him after 9/11. Intense bombing was going on inside and outside the city of Kabul. He welcomed me with a smile on his face and said: “I told you last time that the enemy can kill me but they cannot capture me alive, I am still alive”. After the interview, he again said: “Mark my words, Hamid Mir, they can kill me anytime but they cannot capture me alive; they can claim victory only if they get me alive but if they will just capture my dead body, it will be a defeat, the war against Americans will not be over even after my death, I will fight till the last bullet in my gun, martyrdom is my biggest dream and my martyrdom will create more Osama bin Ladens”. Osama fulfilled his promise. He never surrendered. US President Barack Obama finally announced the death of Osama bin Laden on May 2, 2011. His death is the biggest news of 2011 for Americans but his sympathisers are satisfied that Osama bin Laden was not captured alive otherwise the Americans would have humiliated him like Saddam Hussain. For me, it was a great surprise that the world’s most wanted person was hiding in a Pakistani city, Abbotabad, home to Pakistan Military Academy (PMA). This is the same area where Pakistani intelligence agency ISI conducted a search operation to arrest Aby Faraj al Libbi in 2004 but the son-in-law of Osama escaped to Mardan where he was captured by ISI after few weeks. REFERENCE: The Osama bin Laden I knew Hamid Mir Tuesday, May 03, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=5713&Cat=13&dt=5/3/2011 

Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Sath Operation  Abbottabad - 2 (2 May 2011)


ISLAMABAD: When they told us he is a great Jihadi hero, we treated him like a prince. When they said he is the main architect of 9/11, we blindly believed them and cursed him. When they stated he is the world’s top “terrorist”, he instantly became a terrorist for us too. And now they claim they have killed him within Pakistani territory and have thrown his body into the sea, we also took it as the gospel truth and are jubilant because they are delighted. Pakistan is really a sold nation. We have truly become America’s voice. We have no decision of our own. We have stopped thinking and acting independently, and we can’t believe Pakistan can survive without Washington’s support. It was President Obama, who made the announcement of one of the “most successful” operations during his tenure. He confirmed that the US Special Forces conducted the operation against what is claimed as Osama bin Laden’s hideout, just adjacent to Pakistan’s top military academy Kakul in Abbotabad. Our Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani termed it a “great victory” hours after Obama’s announcement but did not feel, even slightly, about the flagrant breach of Pakistan’s sovereignty by the US forces. The Americans say it was an operation, carried out by 25 US Marines in two fighting helicopters, one of which was shot down but not even a single Marine was injured or dead. We and our rulers buy everything that Washington sells without raising any fundamental question. From which part of Pakistan these helicopters flew and where were the US Marines stationed. Did they come from across the border? In any case, Pakistan’s sovereignty was breached yet again, but it did not bother any of the government or military leader. According to reports, while the American Special Forces opted to conduct the operations, the Pakistani soldiers were made to cordon off the area to ensure no one interrupted it. A leading Pakistani journalist claims that the operation was a shock for the Pakistan Army, which was not informed prior to it. REFERENCE: Has our civil, military leadership failed totally? Ansar Abbasi Tuesday, May 03, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=5715&Cat=13&dt=5/3/2011
Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Sath Operation  Abbottabad - 3 (2 May 2011)


ISLAMABAD: Members of the Senate from the opposition benches on Monday termed the US operation to kill Osama bin Laden a breach of Pakistan’s sovereignty. “The US forces’ operation in a cantonment area of the country has raised many questions,” said PML-N parliamentary leader, Senator Ishaq Dar, while speaking on a point of order. Prof Khurshid Ahmed, Raja Zafarul Haq, Maulana Naseeb Gul, Abdul Rahim Mandokhel, Mir Hasal Bazenjo and Syed Zafar Ali Shah also spoke on points of order to express their view about the US operation. Senator Wasim Sajjad, who is going to resign as the opposition leader in the upper House, was not present; nor were his other PML-Q colleagues who were possibly busy preparing for an oath-taking ceremony at the Presidency.

Dar said President Obama had stated that US forces participated in the operation without informing Pakistan while no categorical statement on this regard has come from the Pakistan government side. He requested the chair to ask the prime minister to come to the House to appraise the nation of the facts. Prof Khurshid Ahmed of Jamaat-e-Islami said the arrival of US Marines in Pakistan and their activity on Pakistani soil was a serious issue and that all facts relating to the Abbottabad incident should be made public. He had state terrorism was being conducted in the country for the last ten years in the name of the war on terror.

He also regretted that the president, prime minister and ISPR were not issuing any statements about what was a clear breach of the country’s sovereignty. The JI senator said it was not right to assume that the so-called war against terror would come to an end following the killing of Osama Bin Laden. He also asked the prime minister to take the nation into confidence about the incident. PML-N’s Raja Zafarul Haq said the incident would have far-reaching impact, adding the alleged unawareness of the country’s intelligence agencies was a big failure on their part and Pakistan’s enemies would now exploit the incident. He also referred to the statement of Indian home minister who said that Pakistan was a sanctuary for terrorists. Zafarul Haq called upon the prime minister to take the House and the nation into confidence before undertaking his upcoming foreign tour. Maulana Gul Naseeb said a drama was being staged to shift the war and attention away from Afghanistan to Pakistan. “The world, after destroying Afghanistan, wants to play the game in Pakistan,” he said. Abdul Rahim Mandokhel said it was high time the country was purged of foreign elements. Syed Zafar Ali Shah of the PML-N regretted that foreign forces had acted inside a cantonment in Pakistan, and that the army chief was silent about this. “Prime Minister should tell the House about what has been happening,” he said. Responding to points of order, leader of the House, Nayyar Bokhari said he had conveyed the members’ concern to the prime minister. He said people who had brought American presence to Pakistan were now expressing concern about alleged US presence here. REFERENCE: Senators say US forces breached Pak sovereignty Muhammad Anis Tuesday, May 03, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=5725&Cat=13&dt=5/3/2011 

Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Sath Operation  Abbottabad - 4 (2 May 2011)



In the afternoon, Mahmood was invited to CIA headquarters at Langley, Virginia, where he told George Tenet, the CIA director, that in his view Mullah Omar, the Taliban chief, was a religious man with humanitarian instincts and not a man of violence! This was a bit difficult for the CIA officials to digest and rightly so as the Taliban’s track record, especially in the realm of human rights, was no secret. General Mahmood was told politely but firmly that Mullah Omar and the Taliban would have to face US Military might if Osama Bin Laden along with other Al-Qaeda leaders were not handed over without delay. To send the message across clearly, Richard Armitage held a second meeting with Mahmood the same day, informing him that he would soon be handed specific American demands, to which Mahmood reiterated that Pakistan would cooperate. {Bush at War by Bob Woodward, published by Simon & Schuster, 2002, New York}, p 32. {Pakistan: Eye of the Storm by Owen Bennett Jones, published by New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2002}, p. 2.

General Mahmood on September 13, 2001, was handed a formal list of the US demands by Mr. Armitage and was asked to convey these to Musharraf and was also duly informed, for the sake of emphasis, that these were “not negotiable.” Colin Powell, Richard Armitage, and the assisstant secretary of state, Christina Rocca, had drafted the list in the shape of a “non-paper”. It categorically asked Pakistan:

Stop Al-Qaeda operatives coming from Afghanistan to Pakistan, intercept arms shipments through Pakistan, and end ALL logistical support for Osama Bin Laden.

Give blanket overflight and landing rights to US aircraft.

Give the US access to Pakistani Naval and Air Bases and to the border areas betweeen Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Turn over all the intelligence and immigration information.

Condemn the September 11 attacks and curb all domestic expressions of support for terrorism.

Cut off all shipments of fuel to the Talibans, and stop Pakistani volunteers from going into Afghanistan to join the Taliban. Note that, should the evidence strongly implicate Osama Bin Laden and the Al-Qaeda Network in Afghanistan, and should the Taliban continue to harbour him and his accomplices, Pakistan will break diplomatic relations with the Taliban regime, end support for the Taliban, and assist the US in the aforementioned ways to destroy Osama and his network.

Having gone through the list, Mahmood declared that he was quite clear on the subject and that “he knew how the President thought, and the President would accept these points.” {Bush at War by Bob Woodward, published by Simon & Schuster, 2002, New York}, p 58-59. Interview: Richard Armitage, “Campaign Against Terror,” PBS (Frontline), April 19, 2002}

Mahmood then faxed the document to Musharraf. While the latter was going through it and in the process of weighing the pros and cons of each demand, his aide de camp that Colin Powell was on the line. Musharraf liked and respected Powell, and the conversation was not going to be a problem. He told him that he understood and appreciated the US position, but he would respond to the US demands after having discussed these with his associates. Powell was far too polite to remind him that he in fact was the government, but did inform him that his General in Washington had already assured them that these demands would be acceptable to the government of Pakistan. {Pakistan’s Drift into Extremism : Allah, the Army, and America’s War on Terror by Hassan Abbas, published by An East Gate Book , M.E. Sharpe Armonk, New York. London, England.}.

More Explicit:

Common "civilians" in Pakistan can be picked up from anywhere without any cogent reason and can be detained for months [without producing them in the Court of Law] if not years without a trace and incommunicado too. You can slap, oust, try, imprison, torture, insult and discredit them through media trial and even hang the elected representatives of the people but when the real test comes those who are entrusted with the responsibility of defending the country always show you clay feet, read and lament.

The first thing they do after retirement is to join the Tableeghi Jamat. Whom you are trying to hoodwink? You cannot hoodwink Allah.

WASHINGTON : Richard Armitage, Daily Times can confirm, did not use the words attributed to him by President Pervez Musharraf in a CBS 60 Minutes interview, namely that unless Pakistan did American bidding, it will be bombed into the “stone age”. However, neither the President of Pakistan, nor Richard Armitage, who has denied using such language, nor President Bush who said he was “taken aback” when he learnt what had been said, is being untruthful. What actually happened was that after his meeting with Richard Armitage, Lt Gen Mahmood Ahmed – who now wears a long, white beard and has reportedly gone Tableeghi – called Gen Musharraf from the Pakistan embassy in Washington. The conversation took place in Urdu and when the president asked him what the bottom line of the American message was, Gen Mahmood replied in Urdu that the Americans were intent on the removal of the Taliban regime and would not let Pakistan stand in their way and if Pakistan did not fall in line and cooperate, “wo hamari eent se eent baja dey gain” or words to that effect. That being so, President Musharraf’s recollection of the conversation with Gen Mahmood, who was then the director general of the ISI, is accurate, only he translated into English what he had been told in Urdu. It is time for Gen Mahmood to go on record and reproduce exactly the words in which he conveyed the Armitage message to Gen Musharraf on that September day five years ago. khalid hasan. REFERENCE:  'Wo eent se eent baja dein gay’, ISI DG told Musharraf Monday, September 25, 2006 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006/09/25/story_25-9-2006_pg1_4

ISLAMABAD: Former ISI chief General Mehmood has simply vanished from the media which is trying hard to get his comments on the Musharraf-Armitage controversy over the wording of the post-9/11 threat hurled at Islamabad by Washington to win its unconditional support for the so-called war on terror. Mehmood, who has already retired from the Army, is settled in Lahore but despite repeated attempts since Saturday last he is not available to offer his comments on the issue on which his statement really matters a lot. Every time the former ISI chief was approached at his Lahore residence telephone number, the home servant-cum-operator, who identified himself as Banaras Khan, gave the ready response, ‘General Saab is out of the city, he will Inshallah call you upon his return.’ On Saturday afternoon when initially contacted, Banaras said Mehmood would be back by the evening. However, later attempts the same evening and again on Monday and Tuesday, showed that Mehmood is still out of the city. Banaras has no answer when asked where exactly has the general gone. He also claims to have no contact number of Mehmood, who Banaras insists, doesn’t carry a cell phone after it was lost recently. President Musharraf in a recent interview with CBS News magazine show “60 Minutes,” charged that after 9/11 the then deputy secretary of state Richard Armitage told the then DG ISI General Mehmood to “be prepared to be bombed. Be prepared to go back to the Stone Age”. According to a report, Mehmood, who had seen ups and downs with Musharraf in the post Oct 12, 1999 coup, has joined the Tableeghi Jamaat after he was relieved of his post-retirement assignment to head Fauji Fertilizer. Mehmood is amongst those few top generals (all retired now) including General Aziz, General Usmani and General Jamshed Gulzar, who had strongly opposed Musharraf’s siding with America in its attack on Afghanistan. REFERENCE: General Mehmood ‘vanishes’ By Ansar Abbasi The News International http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=3286 Sunday, October 01, 2006, Ramzan 7, 1427 A.H.
Aaj Kamran Khan Ke Sath Operation  Abbottabad - 5 (2 May 2011)


Pakistan’s chief spy Lt. General Mahmoud Ahmad “was in the US when the attacks occurred.” He arrived in the US on the 4th of September, a full week before the attacks. He had meetings at the State Department “after” the attacks on the WTC. But he also had “a regular visit of consultations” with his US counterparts at the CIA and the Pentagon during the week prior to September 11. REFERENCE: Cover-up or Complicity of the Bush Administration? The Role of Pakistan’s Military Intelligence (ISI) in the September 11 Attacks by Michel Chossudovsky Professor of Economics, University of Ottawa Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), Montréal Posted at globalresearch.ca 2 November 2001http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO111A.html

Michel Chossudovsky is Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa. TFF Associates http://www.transnational.org/SAJT/tff/people/m_chossudovsky.html

General (R) Pervez Musharraf with Kashif Abbasi  Operation  Abbottabad  (ARY NEWS 2 May 2011)



PORTLAND: The former president of Pakistan criticized U.S. plans to begin pulling troops out of Afghanistan in just over a year. At a stop on his speaking tour, Pervez Musharraf praised President Barack Obama for committing 30,000 more troops to fighting the Taliban. But the former leader was sharply opposed to Obama's plan to begin withdrawing forces in July 2011, saying U.S. soldiers should fight until the Taliban is defeated. ``We are there because we understand how critical it is to the region, to the world,'' Musharraf said. ``We must win.'' The recent arrests of key Taliban leaders in Pakistan are positive signs but not a major blow to Taliban forces, Musharraf said. ``The Taliban is spread over the Afghan countryside,'' he said. ``I get the feeling here that people think it's a monolith. The Taliban is not a monolith. A person who is the second-most important man. He's not a great impact on the Taliban.'' Musharraf said he would return to Pakistan if its people wanted him and if he could help the country.Musharraf opposes plan for Afghan pullout Updated at: 1245 PST, Tuesday, March 16, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=100836

Musharraf is stopping USA from early pull out from the region due to Militancy whereas General Musharraf and Pakistan Army themselves had promoted the Militancy and that too after 911.

KHAAR, Nov 2: A second batch of about one thousand Tehrik-i-Nifaz-i-Shariat-i-Muhammadi activists crossed into Afghanistan to take part in Jihad. The first group of armed men had entered Afghanistan on Thursday. Riding pick-up trucks, the armed group crossed the Ghaki Pass border to enter the Kunar province around 12 noon. TNSM chief Maulana Sufi Muhammad who is in Afghanistan persuading the Taliban leadership to let his volunteers take part in fighting, has not returned. REFERENCE: More fighters cross into Afghanistan Staff Correspondent Dawn Wire Service Dated 3 November 2001 Issue : 07/44http://www.lib.virginia.edu/area-studies/SouthAsia/SAserials/Dawn/2001/nov0301.html

PESHAWAR, Nov 21: Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-i-Mohammadi (TNSM) chief, Maulana Sufi Mohammed, was imprisoned for three years under section 40 of the Frontier Crimes Regulations (FCR), governing the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (Fata) at Kurram Agency, according to official sources. The secretary of home and tribal affairs, Javed Iqbal, told Dawn that section 40 FCR had been applied to the TNSM chief by the court of political agent of Kurram Agency. “THIS IS NOT A CONVICTION,” the secretary said, adding that the PA court had the authority to release him any time. Maulana Sufi Mohammed and some 30 of his armed supporters were arrested by the political authorities of Kurram Agency in Fata, on Friday last on the charges of entering Pakistan without valid documents and possessing unlicensed weapons. The secretary said the PA court had the authority to release him if he the TNSM chief furnished an affidavit assuring good conduct in future. The TNSM chief and his supporters were sent to Dera Ismail Khan jail under tight security. Legal experts said under the law the detainees did not have the right to move higher courts. However, they could be released at any time or their imprisonment could be extended for another three years if the detainees failed to improve their behaviour. REFERENCE: TNSM chief jailed for three years By Intikhab Amir 24 November 2001 Issue : 07/47http://www.lib.virginia.edu/area-studies/SouthAsia/SAserials/Dawn/2001/nov2401.html


In October 2001, Sufi Mohammad after taking over parts of Swat, Dir and Korakoram Highway, led his 5000 strong army of Tehrik Nifaz Shariat-I-Mohammadi to attack the US forces operating in Afghanistan, with weapons ranging from world war 1 antiques to mortars used by modern day armies. The fact that most of these illiterate and misguided soldiers lost their lives to unfriendly daisy cutters, and Sufi, who had himself never seen either an American or an aeroplane, deserted the battle field, ran for his life, and ended up in a Pakistani jail, with a cosmetic three year sentence, perhaps for not possessing valid travel documents.

In December 2000, Maulana Akram Awan marching with his private army of ten thousand misguided zealots, camped at Chakwal, and threatened to capture Islamabad, the capital of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, if the laws considered Islamic in the medieval mind of Maulana were not promulgated throughout the country. The government was so unnerved that it sent a delegation consisting of the Home Secretary, Inspector General Police and the minister for religious affairs to please, pamper and compensate the Maulana and convince him to return with his army to where ever he came from. Having never met an official beyond the rank of SHO, the Moulana was so moved at the top officials of the nuclear state obsequiously falling to his feet, that he withdrew without a battle, and declared to come back next year to implement his promised mission.

For ten long years the JUI Madrassahs of Balochistan retained the dubious distinction of operating as the world’s largest nursery for producing teenage soldiers who had only two missions in life. To secure an entry into paradise by their rhythmic pendulum like reproduction of memorised portions from the Holy Book, and to participate in a global jihad with ignorance and Klashnikovs as their only two assets. In the last ten years any thing between 10 to 20 thousand of these innocent children were killed as fodder in the proxy war that ultimately reduced Afghanistan to rubble, and Pakistan to an embarrassing but much needed voltafaccia. Those responsible for this mass genocide however still wear royal robes and go around freely to restart if possible, from where they last left.

Till a few days back travelling between Lahore and Peshawar by road, one could see dozens of sign boards offering short cuts to paradise to those who sought recruitment in one of the many private armies operating under names such as Jaish-e- Mohammad, Lashkar-e-Tayuba or Harkat ul Majahideen. The proliferating religious fervour of these private armies has resulted in creation of downstream sectarian militant organisations whose strong sense of loyalty to their own brand of ideology requires killing of every one else who does not subscribe to their point of view. The ignorant Mullah has often joined this chorus of madness by condoning this barbarism from his unchallenged pulpit, and even suggesting that such acts could in fact guarantee the reservation of suitable seats in paradise. Karachi alone bore the sorrow and pain of hundreds of its outstanding citizens mercilessly killed by these sectarian fanatics. The brother of the interior minister is shot to death two days after the minister articulates his much belated intention of curbing the religious extremists. The private armies thus freely rule and till recently even collected “bhatta” (compulsory donations) in the land of the pure, making a mockery of the writ of the state. This phenomenon often generically referred to as “Talibanisation” of society remained unchecked till recently when its excessive export drew an angry response from the world at large as well as the already fed up neighbours.

Pakistan’s primary think tanks remain pathologically addicted to a frozen world view based on a dogmatic and bigoted understanding of religion, emphasis on rituals instead of spirit, hatred instead of tolerance, ideological slogans instead of service to people, state agencies instead of participative institutions, abhorrence to science and technology, deep disinclination to reason and rationality, obsession with female behaviour and dress, and the megalomaniac self image as the flag bearer and champion of the cause of Ummah, (not one of the Ummah countries offered even lip service of support at the time of India Pakistan stand off.) It is around this irrelevancy that the state has coined its signature for the past fifty years. While the large majority of Pakistanis are as moderate, tenacious, vibrant and enterprising as people of any other country, their rightful place amongst the developed and civilised nations of the world has been a hostage to the tribal traditions, private armies and religious fanatics who forcibly dictate the social order of the country. Only a week back the Orakzai tribes got together to declare photography as an offence punishable by demolition of the offenders’ house and a fine of one million rupees.

The events of nine-eleven in many ways provide a miraculous opportunity and impetus for Pakistan to re-evaluate its direction and make a conscious decision to make a departure from the past. It can choose to follow the path that has enabled other nations to pursue progress, prosperity and enlightenment. Alternately it can remain glued to its ancient and obsolete mindset, and gradually acquire the status of an irrelevant and failed state. Many would argue that it has already reached that point. A more factual assessment would be that while Pakistan does have the necessary capacity and desire to enter the 21st century, it is restrained by its own medieval mindset that is frozen in an imaginary past and not open to the reality and ideas of the modern times.

Any nation must first address issues that are vital to itself and its own citizens. For Pakistan these are issues of creating a just and civil governance mechanism, education, industry, addressing poverty, and providing host of basic amenities and services to its burgeoning population. For too long the voluntarily adopted culture of obscurantism has come in direct conflict with the scientific and rational methods that could be applied towards solving these issues. The bigoted clergy, the Lashkars, the Sipahs , the Jaishes the agencies and the increasingly bureaucratic and incompetent state machinery are either completely reluctant to change for better or desire a change in the reverse direction only.

The first step is to realise that there can possibly be no sanity, peace or progress in Pakistan, as long as it retains a multitude of fully loaded private armies, each in pursuit of its own brand of intolerance and bigotry. It is time for Pakistan to realise that the private armies representing the feudal and tribal thinking of the medieval times are simply not compatible with how the progressive modern nations pursue their interests and conduct their business in the 21st century. There can be no serious investment or development interest by any outsider (for that matter even insiders) in a writ-less state ruled by private armies eternally at war within and without. The first step towards peace and progress must therefore begin by firmly disbanding and disarming all militant religious, political and tribal organisations in Pakistan. This needs to be done as a national challenge and not like the lame, half hearted, incompetently managed and half way aborted earlier de-weaponisation campaign. It is also time to extend the rule law to areas and tribes that hitherto made their own laws. The days of private armies and the wild west must come to an end if a new beginning is to be contemplated. While this may also be a high profile international demand, it is essentially for its own good that Pakistan needs to clean up its militant backyard. It is only through creating a law abiding, pluralistic and tolerant society that Pakistan can hope for peace, progress and dignity in the years to come. REFERENCE: Peace, progress and the private armies [Courtesy: South Asia Watch] Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2002 17:17:24 +0500 http://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/2002-January/001038.html


In interviews, however, American intelligence officials and high-ranking military officers said that Pakistanis were indeed flown to safety, in a series of nighttime airlifts that were approved by the Bush Administration. The Americans also said that what was supposed to be a limited evacuation apparently slipped out of control, and, as an unintended consequence, an unknown number of Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters managed to join in the exodus. “Dirt got through the screen,” a senior intelligence official told me. Last week, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld did not respond to a request for comment. Musharraf won American support for the airlift by warning that the humiliation of losing hundreds—and perhaps thousands—of Pakistani Army men and intelligence operatives would jeopardize his political survival. “Clearly, there is a great willingness to help Musharraf,” an American intelligence official told me. A C.I.A. analyst said that it was his understanding that the decision to permit the airlift was made by the White House and was indeed driven by a desire to protect the Pakistani leader. The airlift “made sense at the time,” the C.I.A. analyst said. “Many of the people they spirited away were the Taliban leadership”—who Pakistan hoped could play a role in a postwar Afghan government. According to this person, “Musharraf wanted to have these people to put another card on the table” in future political negotiations. “We were supposed to have access to them,” he said, but “it didn’t happen,” and the rescued Taliban remain unavailable to American intelligence. According to a former high-level American defense official, the airlift was approved because of representations by the Pakistanis that “there were guys— intelligence agents and underground guys—who needed to get out.” REFERENCE: The Getaway Questions surround a secret Pakistani airlift. by Seymour M. Hersh January 28, 2002http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2002/01/28/020128fa_FACT


And while the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan and the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi stand officially disbanded, their most militant son and leader, Maulana Azam Tariq, an accused in several cases of sectarian killing, contested elections from jail - albeit as an independent candidate - won his seat, and was released on bail shortly thereafter. Musharraf rewrote election rules to disqualify former Prime Ministers Mohammed Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto, and threatened to toss them in jail if they returned from abroad, which badly undermined both Nawaz Sharif's Pakistan Muslim League and Bhutto's Pakistan People's Party (PPP). Musharraf has plainly given the religious groups more free rein in the campaign than he has allowed the two big parties that were his main rivals. In Jhang city, in Punjab province, Maulana Azam Tariq, leader of an outlawed extremist group called Sipah-e-Sahaba, which has been linked to numerous sectarian killings, is being allowed to run as an independent�despite election laws that disqualify any candidate who has criminal charges pending, or even those who did not earn a college degree. "It makes no sense that Benazir can't run in the election," says one Islamabad-based diplomat, "and this nasty guy can."

References: And this takes me back to Pervez Musharraf’s first visit to the US after his coup. At a meeting with a group of journalists among whom I was present, my dear and much lamented friend Tahir Mirza, then the Dawn correspondent, asked Musharraf why he was not acting against Lashkar-e Tayba and Jaish-e Muhammad. Musharraf went red in the face and shot back, “They are not doing anything in Pakistan. They are doing jihad outside.” Pakistani neocons and UN sanctions Khalid Hasan This entry was posted on Sunday, December 28th, 2008 at 6:00 pm. http://www.khalidhasan.net/2008/12/28/pakistani-neocons-and-un-sanctions/ For http://www.newsline.com.pk/newsJan2003/cover1jan2003.htm - General's Election By TIM MCGIRK / KHANA-KHEL Monday, Oct. 07, 2002 http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,361788,00.html

Aapas Ki Baat - Part 1 (02 May 2011)

URL: http://youtu.be/upGP4jJzKLU

The death of Osama bin Laden ends the story of a man who had, over the last decade, dominated much of the news around the world, even after he disappeared from the public eye – presumably into the mountains of the Pak-Afghan frontier – following the 9/11 attacks. A hero to some and a villain to many, Bin Laden remained, till his last moments, the symbolic leader of Al-Qaeda, even if there is some doubt as to how much actual command he wielded in terms of the day-to-day running of the world’s most feared terrorist outfit. The delighted reaction over his death in a US operation that has poured in from many parts of the world is thus expected. While Washington has led the chorus, the rest of the West has chimed in. Not unexpectedly, India and Afghanistan have wasted no time in repeating their allegations of Pakistan harbouring terrorists. Within Pakistan though, except amongst the extremist outfits, there will be relief that a man whose operatives claimed lives in cities everywhere is no more.

Aapas Ki Baat - Part 2 (02 May 2011)

URL: http://youtu.be/duvslCAKitA

Certainly, the astonishing manner in which the operation that resulted in Bin Laden’s death – the news of what had happened broke first on Geo TV – leaves us all gasping in astonishment. Bin Laden, and it appears that at least two other persons including a woman, were killed in what the US says was a gun-fight, as helicopters swooped towards the palatial house where he, his guards and some family members apparently lived. This estate stood not in some remote, mountain valley but in a peaceful Abbotabad suburb, only kilometres away from the Kakul Military Academy. The failure of Pakistan to detect the presence of the world’s most wanted man here is shocking – though there is still a lack of clarity as to what role, if any, our security and intelligence apparatus played in the whole affair. It is hard to believe that foreign aircraft could have flown so deep into our territory undetected and unanticipated. Delay in any kind of official response only added to the initial confusion, with a Foreign Office spokesperson finally issuing a statement after an emergency meeting at the presidency that the action against Bin Laden had been carried out in line with US policy to go after him anywhere in the world. President Obama has meanwhile spoken of Pakistani cooperation and discussion with President Zardari regarding the operation, and Prime Minister Gilani has described Bin Laden’s death as a victory.

Aapas Ki Baat - Part 3 (02 May 2011)

URL: http://youtu.be/IYV_lEfWb70

Many questions still hang in the air. We may find answers to some of these questions in the near future. Other questions may remain a mystery for far longer. For Islamabad, the whole business is something of an embarrassment. Despite years of fervent denial, Bin Laden has been found on Pakistani soil. And now that the brazen US action in Abbotabad has happened, there may be other attempts to go after key militant figures in different urban centres. The thought is not a comforting one, considered in light of its implications for national sovereignty. Security has been stepped up at US consular buildings and in all cities. There have been reports of sporadic protests – but it is not known if these will expand. A lot may depend on how the operation and Pakistan’s role in it are perceived. The Western jubilation we are seeing on our television screens should not distract us from the fact that militancy will continue. It has not died with Bin Laden. Al-Qaeda has, over the years, splintered, and given rise to many other groups. These will continue with their actions; revenge may be attempted – and the dangers we face are, tragically, far from over, even if the killing of Bin Laden delivers a demoralising blow to militants everywhere. REFERENCE: The fall of Osama Tuesday, May 03, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=44827&Cat=8&dt=5/3/2011

KANDAHAR, Dec 31: The eight-day hijacking of an Indian airliner with 160 people on board came to a sudden end on New Year’s Eve after India bowed to demands to release three Kashmiri freedom Fighters. After five days of intense negotiations, the five hijackers gave up peacefully just after Indian Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh arrived in Kandahar with the three Mujahideen whose release had been demanded by the hijackers. Wearing masks and armed with pistols, the five hijackers descended from the Airbus A300, got into a van and were driven away from the airport. Shortly afterwards the passengers, trapped and blindfolded for long stretches inside the plane since Dec 24, began to emerge. The 160 passengers and crew were immediately driven in buses to two waiting Indian aircraft and flown to India. Those released included the widow of the only fatality during the hijacking – a newlywed Indian who was stabbed to death, apparently for peeking at the hijackers through his blindfold when the plane was seized on Christmas Eve en route from Kathmandu to New Delhi. The plane eventually landed in Kandahar, the Taliban headquarters, on Saturday after crisscrossing South Asia and the Gulf. “As a result of the negotiations with the Taliban and the hijackers, there has been an agreement for the release of all the hostages in exchange for three militants,” Indian National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra told reporters in New Delhi. He identified the three Mujahideen as Maulana Masood Azhar, Mushtaq Zargar and Ahmad Umar Syed. One of the key issues in the negotiations had been the fate of the hijackers. But Singh scotched rumours they would be given political asylum by the Taliban in Afghanistan, saying they had just 10 hours to leave the country. It was not immediately clear what had happened to the three Kashmiris freed from Indian jails when they arrived in Afghanistan. Azhar, a charismatic scholar arrested in held Kashmir in 1994, was a senior leader of the Harkat-ul-Ansar, one of several hardline Muslim groups fighting Indian occupation forces in Kashmir. India has accused the Harkat of staging the hijacking. Zargar is described by Indian officials as one of the founding fathers of “militancy” in held Kashmir.-AFP REFERENCE: Hijackers get three freedom fighters released Week Ending : 01 January 2000 Issue : 06/01http://www.lib.virginia.edu/area-studies/SouthAsia/SAserials/Dawn/2000/01jan00.html
He released a letter written in June 1996 by former interior minister Gen (retd) Naseerullah Babar, to the Indian High Commissioner in Islamabad seeking Masood’s release on humanitarian grounds. In the letter, Khan described Masood as a young “Pakistani journalist… (who) travelled to India in February 1994 on a Portuguese passport under the name of Essa bin Adam. Apparently he had gone to India to see the conditions in Jammu and Kashmir himself for some report for his magazine”. REFERENCE: Indian plane’s hijacking: Pakistan seeks Nepalese findings Week Ending : 8 January 2000 Issue : 06/02 http://www.lib.virginia.edu/area-studies/SouthAsia/SAserials/Dawn/2000/08jan00.html

Rubin further said Pakistan must assure the safety of US citizens, Indians and all foreigners in their country. “We would hold the government of Pakistan responsible for Masood’s activities which threaten the lives of our citizens. Masood Azhar is the secretary general of the renamed ‘terrorist’ organization. REF: US warns Pakistan over Azhar’s threats. Week Ending : 8 January 2000 Issue : 06/02http://www.lib.virginia.edu/area-studies/SouthAsia/SAserials/Dawn/2000/08jan00.html

News item – “Leaders of religious organizations have said that Khatam-i-Nabuwat conference shall be held today at Mosque Aisha, Sector 11-B North Karachi, under any circumstances. And today evening, in an emergency meeting, central office bearers of Jamiat-i-Ulema-i-Islam, Sipah-i-Sahaba, Pakistan Shariat Council, Sawad-i-Azam Ahl-i-Sunnat, International Khatam-i-Nabuwat, Tanzeem Ulema-i-Pakistan, Jaish Muhammad, Harkat-ul-Jihad Islami shall declare strategy for resisting mosque demolition. “Deputy Secretary General of Pakistan Shariat Council and head of Tehrik-i-Ansar-ul-Islam, Maulana Abdul Rasheed Ansari, has said in his statement that in the eyes of Mohtasib, liquor stores are sacred instead of mosque. Mohtasib has issued directions on the advice of English newspaper columnist Ardeshir Cowasjee and minorities member of dissolved Sindh Assembly, Mehromal Jagwani. He said that his crime was that some weeks back he had taken a strong stand and made a speech against Cowasjee in a local hotel and asked Mohtasib Haziq-ul-Khairi to cancel licence of liquor stores established in Muslim neighbourhoods and the selling of liquor to Muslims.

“Mohtasib Sindh was given video film of liquor being sold to Muslims and was told that employees of these stores not only sold liquor to Muslims but these Hindu employees supply illegally to local five-star hotel. Cowasjee got out demolition order for Mosque Aisha by using his influence over Mohtasib Sindh, but licences for these liquor stores have not been cancelled; instead these stores remain open on Shab-i-Barat also. “Moulana Abdur Rashid Ansari has said that today, November 13, in Khatam-i-Nabuwat conference, prominent religious scholars Maulana Manzoor Ahmed Chinioti, Maulana Fida-ul-Rehman Darkhuasty, Maulana Ajmal Qadri, Maulana Asas Thanvi, Maulana Qari Sher Afzal, Maulana Asfandyar, Maulana Ikram-ul-Haq Khairi, Qari Saeed Qamar Qasmi and other shall address the gathering. Maulana Fazl-ur-Rehman, Maulana Azam Tariq and Maulana Masood Azhar have decided to come to Karachi. We want a peaceful demonstration but if administration creates any trouble, then it shall be responsible for any consequences.” REFERENCE: Man bites dog Ardeshir Cowasjee DATED Week Ending : 25 November 2000 Issue : 06/45 http://www.lib.virginia.edu/area-studies/SouthAsia/SAserials/Dawn/2000/nov2500.html

No harm in initiating peace talk with India provided it is backed by well defined and through Institutionalized Decision [I mean thorough debate in Parliament with the consent of Opposition] and also no more “Adventurism” like “Kargil or Operation Gibraltar/Operation Grand Slam” without taking Civilian Government in Confidence when Government was caught its pant down by the International Community and caused much embarrassment and above all those [Musharraf/Mahmood/Aziz/Hamid Javed/Tauqir Zia/Jamshed Gulzar Kiyani] were ran to Nawaz Sharif to save them and later the same group sacked Nawaz Sharif. I learnt about Kargil from Vajpayee, says Nawaz By Our Correspondent May 29, 2006 Monday Jumadi-ul-Awwal 1, 1427 http://www.dawn.com/2006/05/29/nat1.htm Musharraf advised against Kargil, says Benazir Staff Report Wednesday, July 02, 2003 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_2-7-2003_pg7_19 LAHORE: Former prime minister Benazir Bhutto on Tuesday said President Pervez Musharraf had brought the Kargil plan to her when she was prime minister and he was the director general of Military Operations. “Kargil was an absolute disaster,” Benazir said in an interview with the Third Eye Television. “I asked Gen Musharraf what would happen after the execution of his plan. He said he would hoist the flag of Pakistan atop the Srinagar Assembly. I vetoed the plan because I knew we would have to surrender the territory when it would come to the international community and that’s exactly what happened.”

External Affairs Minister Jaswant Singh today released transcripts of the conversations between Pakistani Army chief Gen Parvez Musharraf, who was in China, and Chief of General Staff Lt Gen Mohammed Aziz in Pakistan on May 26 and 29. "These two tapes and the transcripts have been authenticated through voice authentication and printing," the minister said. The conversations ranged on a wide variety of issues relating to the conflict -- from the downing of the Mi-17 helicopter on May 28 to the visit of Foreign Minister Sartaj Aziz to New Delhi tomorrow.

Gen Musharraf was told that the helicopter had fallen in Indian territory after being shot down.

Gen Musharraf: Has this Mi-17 not fallen in our area?

Lt Gen Aziz: No, sir. This has fallen in their area. We have not claimed it. We have got it claimed through the mujahideen. (May 29).

During the conversations, Gen Musharraf was apprised of every aspect of the developments by Lt Gen Aziz.

Following are excerpts from the conversations:

Gen Musharraf: What is the news on that side?

Lt Gen Aziz: There is no change in the ground situation. They have started rocketing and strafing. That has been upgraded a little. It had happened yesterday also and today. Today high-altitude bombing has been done... Our stand should be that all these bombs are falling on our side.

Gen Musharraf: That briefing to Mian Sahib (Nawaz Sharief) that we did, was the forum the same as where we had done previously? There at Jamshed's place.

Lt Gen Aziz: No. In Mian Sahib's office... Today for the last two hours the BBC has been continuously reporting on the air strikes by India. Keep using this -- let them keep dropping bombs. As far as internationalisation is concerned, this is the fastest this has happened. You may have seen in the press about UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's appeal that both countries should sit and talk.

Gen Musharraf: This is very good.

Lt Gen Aziz: Yes, this is very good.

The above conversation on May 26 also took note of the protests made by Indian officials to the Pakistani authorities about the support -- logistical and otherwise -- that Islamabad provided to the infiltrators holed up in Kargil and other areas, demanding its immediate withdrawal.

Excerpts from the May 29 conversation:

Gen Musharraf: Idea on LoC.

Lt Gen Aziz: Hint is that given that the LoC has many areas where the interpretation of either side is not what the other side believes. So comprehensive deliberation is required. So that can be worked out by DGMOs.

Gen Musharraf: If they [the Indians] are assured that we are here from a long period, we have been sitting here for long, like in the beginning, the matter is the same -- no post was attacked and no post was captured. The situation is that we are along our defensive Line of Control. If it is not in his [Foreign Minister Sartaj Aziz's] knowledge, then discuss it altogether. Emphasise that for years, we are here only. Yes, this point should be raised. We are sitting on the same LoC for a long period.

Lt Gen Aziz: This is their weakness. They are not agreed on the demarcation under UN's verification, whereas we are agreed. We want to exploit it.

Gen Musharraf: This is in Simla Agreement that we cannot go for UN intervention.

Lt Gen Aziz: Our neighbour does not accept their presence or UNMOGIP arrangement for survey of the area. So we can start from the top, from 9842 [NJ 9842]. On this line, we can give them logic but in short, the recommendation for Sartaj Aziz Saheb is that he should make no commitment in the first meeting on the military situation. And he should not even accept a ceasefire, because if there is a ceasefire, then vehicles will be moving [on Drass-Kargil highway]. In this regard they have to use their own argument that whatever is interfering with you, that we don't know, but there is no justification about tension on the LoC. No justification. We want to give them this type of brief so that he does not get into any specifics." REFERENCE: Excerpts of the conversation between Gen Musharraf and Lt Gen Aziz June 11, 1999 http://www.rediff.com/news/1999/jun/11talk.htm

No comments: