2012: LAHORE, June 28: The Pakistan Tehrik-i-Insaaf and the Jamaat-i-Islami have agreed to launch a joint struggle for upholding supremacy of the Constitution with full support to the Supreme Court, and for holding free, fair and transparent elections under an independent election commission. A PTI’s four-member delegation led by Imran Khan called on JI chief Syed Munawar Hasan at Mansoora here on Thursday. The two leaders discussed the current political situation in the country. JI’s Prof Khurshid Ahmed, Dr Muhammad Kamal, Muhammad Aslam Saleemi and Liaqat Baloch were also present. The PTI and JI leadership also called for setting up an interim government involving all the stakeholders for ensuring free and transparent elections. They demanded that the names of the people killed in drone attacks and military operations should be disclosed so that the facts could be known. They also called for the implementation of the Supreme Court directives in regard to the missing persons. After the meeting, Imran Khan told reporters the two parties had decided to foil all conspiracies against the Chief Justice and the Supreme Court. He said plunderers had ganged up in the name of democracy and wanted to demolish the constitution and constitutional institutions. Mr Khan said Raja Pervez Ashraf had been elected as prime minister only to protect Zardari’s corruption. He said the PTI would not have an election alliance with any party present in the assembly. He said the armed forces should have no role in the formation of the government. REFERENCE: Independence of judiciary PTI, JI to wage joint struggle http://dawn.com/2012/06/29/independence-of-judiciary-pti-ji-to-wage-joint-struggle/
Imran Khan and Munawar Hassan media talk in Lahore 28th June 2012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHwd46ExuSM
2002: Imran Khan’s choice of candidate for prime minister has left many of his ardent fans, especially women, dumbfounded. The cricketer-turned-politician voted for Maulana Fazlur Rehman, the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal’s nominee for premier, against the advise of many liberal and progressive members within his Tehrik-e-Insaaf (TI). Imran used his solitary vote in parliament in Rehman’s favour, forwarding the argument that the MMA is the only political force that is independent and does not take dictation from abroad. He maintained that he found himself ideologically and politically close to the MMA, which denounces President Pervez Musharraf’s support to the international coalition in the war against terrorism, especially in neighbouring Afghanistan. “Khan has more than a soft corner for the ousted Afghan Taliban,” a senior leader of his party said on the condition of anonymity. “He thinks that the orthodox religious militia did a great service to Afghanistan and Islam before they became a target of the Americans.” Also, the MMA’s firm stand against Musharraf, especially his series of controversial constitutional amendments, won the heart of Pakistan’s former speedster, he added. Imran’s protracted bitterness towards the Pakistan Peoples’ Party and anger against the Pakistan Muslim League left him with no alternative other than the MMA, which secured 86 votes, including those of the Pakistan Muslim League (N). Khan’s vote for the pro-Taliban cleric has added to the political confusion within his party, which performed poorly in the October 10 elections. “It would have been understandable, had Imran voted for a candidate that was nominated jointly by the opposition,” said a senior Tehrik-e-Insaaf leader. “But by voting for the MMA, he most certainly has lost his standing among the liberal, democratic and progressive elements in society.” Human rights groups and the majority of the moderate and liberal Muslims have been extremely critical of the MMA’s narrow interpretation of Islam and the conservative views of its leaders on women, education, fine arts, television and sports. By voting for the MMA, the Tehrik-e-Insaaf chief has, in effect, endorsed the religious alliance’s stand on these issues as well. Will the women’s wing of the Tehrik-e-Insaaf, led by Jemima, Khan’s British-born wife, endorse the Taliban-like interpretation of Islam? That remains a moot point. Mairaj Mohammed Khan, the Tehrik-e-Insaaf’s secretary general who has spent a lifetime advocating socialism and secular politics, finds it hard to defend the somersaults of the party leader, who has drifted from one extreme (of being pro-Musharraf) to the other extreme (of being anti-Musharraf) within a short span of time. “Even we are finding it difficult to figure out the real Imran,” quipped another of his Karachi-based leaders. “He dons the shalwar-kameez and preaches desi and religious values while in Pakistan, but transforms himself completely while rubbing shoulders with the elite in Britain and elsewhere in the west.” REFERENCE: Will the Real Imran Please Stand Up? By Amir Zia 9 DECEMBER 2002 http://www.newslinemagazine.com/2002/12/will-the-real-imran-please-stand-up/
Glimpses of Imran Khan's Islamic Welfare State
July 8, 2012 Taliban shoot woman 9 times in public execution as men cheer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOKErvlv5KQ
July 8, 2012 Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- A shot rings out, but the burqa-clad woman sitting on the rocky ground does not respond. The man pointing a rifle at her from a few feet away lets loose another round, but still there is no reaction. He fires a third shot, and finally the woman slumps backwards. But the man fires another shot. And another. And another. Nine shots in all. Around him, dozens of men on a hillside cheer: "God is great!" Video: Taliban shoot woman 9 times in public execution as men cheer By the CNN Wire Staff July 8, 2012 -- Updated 2157 GMT (0557 HKT) http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/08/world/asia/afghanistan-public-execution/index.html?iref=NS1
2007: Swat anti-terrorism judge, family threatened by Taliban Rauf Klasra Tuesday, June 29, 2010 ISLAMABAD: The family of anti-terrorism judge, Malakand Division, Mohammad Asim Imam, who is currently dealing with terrorism cases of Sufi Mohammad and his group of the Taliban arrested last year during the military operation, received threats from the three armed Taliban, who visited the residence of the judge in Peshawar city on Saturday. As the judge’s wife, his two daughters and a son were not at home when the Taliban visited their place, they left a message for the family and the judge to fall in line or be ready for the consequences. They also told the family cook, the only person present in the house at that time, to tell the judge that they were after him and would soon sort him out. This is the first time since the completion of the military operation in Swat last year that a judge dealing with the anti-terrorism cases has received threats from the Taliban. The judge, whosefamily is now under serious threat, is the son-in-law of retired Justice Javed Nawaz Gandapur of the Peshawar High Court. Justice Gandapur, who refused to support Musharraf, was sent home in 2000 although he was supposed to retire from service in 2009. The family of anti-terrorism judge Asim lives in Peshawar, where his wife works as senior research officer at the provincial assembly secretariat. The judge has two daughters aged 15 and 13 and a 5-year-old son. Talking to The News from Peshawar, Justice (retd) Gandapur confirmed that his daughter and grand children were issued threats on Saturday evening. He said he immediately reported the incident to the authorities concerned. The government has provided security to the family but he was still worried about the safety of his son-in-law, who is serving in the danger zone of Malakand, the hub of the Taliban. Asim Imam (BPS-21) is posted at the Malakand Division as anti-terrorism judge. Right now he is in the final phase of prosecuting those arrested Taliban, who took up arms against the state of Pakistan. REFERENCE: Swat anti-terrorism judge, family threatened by Taliban Rauf Klasra Tuesday, June 29, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=29728&Cat=13&dt=6/29/2010
Jamat-e-Islam/Imran Khan Alliance: Kharijites - Takfiri Ideology
2007: Musharraf gets new lease of life, thanks to MMA Rauf Klasra Saturday, September 29, 2007 ISLAMABAD: The three-year-old political sins of top MMA leaders have once again given a second lease of political life to General Pervez Musharraf at a very crucial phase, as the infamous 17th Amendment becomes the basis of the Supreme Court’s decision to allow a uniformed president to get himself re-elected for the next five years from the present assemblies. For many, the most-important thing is that the verdict of the Supreme Court has justified the recent claim of Musharraf that he had made with a lot of pride and arrogance in his choking voice that “let the agitators do their job, he would have the last laugh”. Likewise, the government’s prediction that it would win the case with a majority also turned out to be right. Meanwhile, the critical role of the MMA in facilitating the rule of Musharraf in uniform is so definite and irritating that during the two-week-long proceedings on the case, some judges did not forget to remind the religious parties about their ‘deeds’. It is now widely believed in the political circles that the MMA would go down in the history as a force which used political Islam not only to validate the rule of General Musharraf since October 12, 1999, but also helped him to become president in uniform first after the general election in 2002 and now in 2007 by providing legal and constitutional excuses to the Supreme Court to extend a favourable decision to a military general. One political observer said that if Musharraf gets himself re-elected as the president on October 6, it would be only because of the MMA leaders who had decided to vote in favour of 17th Amendment after striking a deal with a uniformed general and distorted the Constitution of 1973. Likewise, General Musharraf once again would be feeling grateful to the MMA leaders, particularly Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Maulana Fazlur Rehman, whose single act not only gave him the crucial support when he needed it most, but it continued to yield results when he once again needed it. At the time of passage of the Legal Framework Order (LFO) in 2004 after the MMA leaders decided to betray the political forces engaged in desperate struggle against the rule of Musharraf, it was widely assumed that it might be only one-time “political sin” of the MMA leaders. But, now the SC verdict on Friday confirms the wild doubts of critics of the MMA that the country would continue to suffer from the havoc created by the decision of Qazi and Fazl. The MMA, nicked named as a “B team” of General Musharraf, had given a false impression after the 2002 elections that it would fight for the supremacy of the Parliament when President Musharraf would push his LFO for approval from the Legislature. In the absence of two former prime ministers – Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto – Qazi Hussain Ahmed and Fazlur Rehman simply hijacked the agitation movement of the opposition parties to oppose Musharraf and his LFO in the Parliament. The movement became so aggressive and popular in nature that at one stage, it emerged that Musharraf might yield to the rising political power of these forces. The international media and community were also giving serious attention to the political turmoil in Pakistan amid the rising pressure from the Commonwealth and the European Union on Musharraf to get legitimacy from the Parliament or he might lose their vital support. The agitation movement within and outside the Parliament against the LFO was so effective that it crippled the Jamali government. At that time, Musharraf appointed two of his top and trusted generals, Maj Gen Zaki and Maj Gen Ehtasham Zamir, assisted by S M Zafar, to negotiate a secret deal with the MMA. Qazi, Fazl and Liaquat Baloch started meeting these generals late nights. Finally, a deal was brokered between the generals and the MMA, which exclusively benefited both the parties. The first reward was the continuation of the MMA-led NWFP government, share in the Balochistan cabinet and slot of the Opposition Leader in the National Assembly. Likewise, the MMA also got the references against its MPs blocked after certain forces tried to get them disqualified on account of educational qualification. After initial dents in its lost credibility, the MMA leaders once again revived their political credentials when they used Nawaz Sharif who, too easily, accepted their role as a major opposition when he started giving them more importance despite being partners of Musharraf in the government. The MMA got the real boost as a major opposition alliance, despite being part of Musharraf regime, when Nawaz Sharif gave them importance at London during the All Parties Conference and later formed an alliance with them. But, soon Nawaz realised that he was only being used by smart and shrewd politicians of the MMA to defuse his rising popularity as none of them turned up at the Islamabad airport on September 10 to receive him. It is interesting to note that the MMA leaders are so smart that they have not only been facilitating Musharraf in power but they have also been successfully acting as the real opposition to the regime. When contacted by The News, MNA Liaquat Baloch did not agree with the conclusion that the religio-political alliance was actually responsible for the continuation of Musharraf rule. He said the 17th Amendment had given benefits to all the parties, including all the women parliamentarians, minorities and other segments. He said that under the agreement with Musharraf, he was to take off his uniform by December 31, 2004, but he backed out. Likewise, the MMA leader said Musharraf was given concession only for one term and now he was allowed to contest the election in uniform without any valid justification. He said the doctrine of necessity was once again revived and the MMA should not be blamed at all. “What is our fault,” Baloch put a counter question. REFERENCE: Musharraf gets new lease of life, thanks to MMA Rauf Klasra Saturday, September 29, 2007 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=10367&Cat=13&dt=9/29/2007
Jamaat e Islami Go Amarica Go Exposed On Live Tv دھوکے باز غیرتمند
2007: A little less foggy September 29, 2007 WITH the Supreme Court judgment dismissing the opposition’s petitions on the dual office issue on Friday, the way is clear for President Pervez Musharraf to contest the Oct 6 election to the nation’s highest office. Coming after weeks of a constitutional and legal battle, the six-to-three judgment dashes the opposition’s hope and disappoints those who find the very idea of a man in uniform contesting a presidential election repugnant. Nevertheless, the doomsday scenario is now behind us. President Musharraf must now abide by the pledge he made to the Supreme Court that “if elected” he would give up his army post before taking a fresh oath of office. The full judgment will be written later, but going by what the judges had said during the hearing, the 17th Amendment seems to have been a major consideration. The MMA leadership must blame itself for a bad bargain while voting for the 17th amendment, for it made the entire Legal Framework Order part of the Constitution in exchange for such minor concessions as those relating to the NSC, the judges’ age and action under 58-2(b) being made justiciable.
The SC judgment went against the opposition by a technicality under article 184-3. For that reason, the opposition has two options: one, it can restart the legal process but with a new constitutional basis; two, when the new assemblies meet the opposition parties can forge unity among themselves, create a united front and then force President Musharraf out of office by forging the necessary majority laid down in the Constitution. Indeed, what follows Friday’s judgment is going to be crucial in the context of the orderly holding of the presidential election. All along, the two sides have to keep one aim in view — the democratic process must be advanced. The post-judgment scenario is both a challenge and an opportunity for the government and its opponents. By their epic struggle this summer, the lawyers made a major contribution to the cause of the judiciary’s independence and rule of law. This struggle must be pursued relentlessly, but in a way that does not cause a setback to constitutionalism or give an opportunity to extra-constitutional forces to queer the pitch for democracy. In one go, let us accept, Pakistan cannot make up for the 60 years it has lost in terms of democratic evolution.
With the constitutional tangle behind us, the issue now revolves round the opposition’s political strategy, especially its decision to quit the assemblies en bloc on Oct 2 and recommend the dissolution of the NWFP assembly. The latter issue is full of constitutional pitfalls, because of the (NWFP) opposition’s resolve to pre-empt the dissolution by bringing a vote of confidence against the chief minister. This would give time to the federal government to work out its strategy for securing a majority for Gen Musharraf when the vote is taken. Side by side some parties have threatened to lay siege to the provincial assembly. This is hardly going to help the opposition’s cause, because the show of force by the law enforcement agencies in Islamabad and the crackdown on opposition leaders make it amply clear that the government has no scruples about resorting to any tactics to have its way. REFERENCE: A little less foggy September 29, 2007 Saturday Ramazan 16, 1428 http://archives.dawn.com/2007/09/29/ed.htm#1
2006: VIEW: The government-MMA relations —Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi Sunday, September 24, 2006 The MMA often criticises the Musharraf government on cultural and political issues and for its pro-US policies — including its role in the global effort to contain terrorism. Recently it threatened to launch street agitation against the government. However, the government and the MMA both avoid the point-of-no-return in their relations. Each applies pressure on the other to extract political gains and control the political initiative The failure of the government to amend the Zia-era Hudood laws in the recently concluded National Assembly session represents a typical dilemma of the Musharraf government. It wants to project a moderate and liberal disposition under the caption of ‘enlightened moderation’ and amend the Hudood laws to remove the hardships faced by women charged under these laws. However, the exigencies of staying in power compel it to step back on many ‘Islam-related’ matters under pressure from the Muttahida Majlis-i-Amal (MMA) and the pro-MMA elements in the ruling Pakistan Muslim League (PML). On August 21, the government introduced a bill in the National Assembly to amend the Hudood laws. The MMA, in view of its conservative and literalist approach to Islam, reacted bitterly — tearing its copies on the floor of the house — and vowed to resist. It maintained that the ‘basic tenets’ of Islam could not be changed. The government rejected the MMA opposition and sent the bill to the parliamentary select committee where it obtained the support of the PPPP — a development that alarmed the MMA and a section of the PML leaders. While the select committee approved the bill the government reviewed its strategy in view of the MMA threat to resign from the National Assembly and the Balochistan Assembly if the government passed the bill. It is interesting to note that the MMA did not talk of quitting the provincial assembly in the NWFP, where it is the ruling party. Some senior PML leaders contacted the MMA for a dialogue and the government established a committee of religious scholars to develop consensus on the bill. These scholars suggested some changes, which were incorporated in the draft. However, the government could not move the bill in the house because the MMA rejected the amended draft, claiming that it fell short of the agreement. On September 13 the government put the bill on hold to bring the MMA on board. It is now expected to be shelved or changed to such an extent that the original purpose of the amendment is defeated. This is not the first time that the government has backtracked under pressure from the MMA. In the past it accommodated the MMA on the insertion of a religion column in the new passport and the proposed amendments to the blasphemy laws. For its part, the MMA joined hands with the government in December 2003 to pass the 17th constitutional amendment that enabled General Pervez Musharraf to continue as president on the basis of the uncontested referendum in April 2002. The amendment also paved the way for the government to pass an ordinary law enabling him to hold on to the command of the army, although he had made a commitment in an address to the nation to give up this office by December 31, 2004. The government and the MMA have strong ideological differences but they work together periodically in pursuance of their political power agendas. This is a complex relationship manifesting divergence and convergence at the same time. The MMA often criticises the Musharraf government on cultural and political issues and for its pro-US policies — including its role in the global effort to contain terrorism. Recently it threatened to launch street agitation against the government. However, the government and the MMA both avoid the point-of-no-return in their relations. Each applies pressure on the other to extract political gains and control the political initiative. Rather than a permanently friendly relationship they pursue issue-oriented cooperation. From time to time, for understandable reasons, the government and the MMA come close to each other. Like the Musharraf government the MMA has a stake in the continuation of the present political order. Religious parties have never enjoyed so much power and influence in Pakistan as they do now: they rule the NWFP and share power in Balochistan. Time and again they have also displayed political clout at the federal level. Thus their situation is different from the mainstream political parties like the PPP and the PML-N, which do not have any stake in the continuation of the present political order. Therefore, it is convenient for the government to work out issue-oriented arrangements with the MMA. The MMA enjoys another advantage. Several ruling PML leaders maintain pro-MMA leanings. The PML president, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, and his close associates are generally viewed as MMA sympathisers. This is mainly because they use their relationship with the MMA to ward off Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif. They do not want the presidency to cultivate Benazir Bhutto and the PPP because this threatens their privileged position. Two developments led Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain and his associates to woo the MMA on the Hudood laws. First, though the PPPP favoured the abolition of the Hudood laws, it supported the amendments in the select committee as a step in the right direction. Second, this PPPP decision coincided with reports that the presidency had approached Benazir Bhutto for political accommodation. Though the PPPP denied this report, political circles continue to talk about some kind of indirect interaction between the presidency and the top PPPP leadership. The PML leaders did not want the presidency to cultivate Benazir Bhutto or get the bill passed from the parliament with PPPP help. They opened negotiations with the MMA and then used their clout to stall the bill. This boosted the MMA morale. For the PML, it neutralised, at least for some time, the prospects of an understanding between the presidency and the PPPP. The episode brought the government another gain. The opposition parties are no longer in a position to launch the joint agitation they threatened. The MMA and the ARD, especially the PPPP, entertain serious doubts about each other’s ultimate goal, i.e. a nationwide agitation against the Musharraf regime or exclusive understanding with the government about future political arrangements. The MMA’s current closeness with the government is mediated through a section of the ruling party. However, it will continue to maintain its autonomous profile and continue building pressures on the government. It is hard to say whether the Jamaat-i-Islami and the JUI-F are equally keen to confront the Musharraf regime in the streets. The same can be said about the major ARD parties. Both alliances are looking for non-confrontational options for political change. However, the MMA has a clear advantage over the ARD in that a powerful section of the ruling PML prefers it over the PPPP. If this group stays effective, the MMA may not go for a nationwide agitation, although it will continue to criticise the government and to make demands to maximise its political gains. REFERENCE: VIEW: The government-MMA relations —Dr Hasan-Askari Rizvi Sunday, September 24, 2006 http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2006%5C09%5C24%5Cstory_24-9-2006_pg3_2
Imran Khan & APDM Election Boycott in 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04-wjilvd3w
2004: MMA and the NSC By A.R. Siddiqi 30 June 2004 The MMA's boycott of the inaugural session of the National Security Council remains a sort of a 'riddle inside an enigma'. How would the MMA be able to reconcile its support of the passage of the controversial (and basically undemocratic) Legal Framework Order (17th Amendment) with its boycott of the NSC - an integral part and off-shoot of the LFO? Regardless of polemics, the MMA marshalled its parliamentary vote for the LFO as an expedient pro-democracy measure, irrespective of the fact that the LFO tended to violate both the letter and the spirit of the Constitution.
How can a popularly elected parliament through a joint session at all allow an elected president to stay in his military uniform as army chief even for a short period of time? Ayub, Yahya and Zia all forged devices like LFOs and 'Continuance in Force' laws to legitimize their regimes by an extra-parliamentary executive fiat.
Ayub Khan and Ziaul Haq had their parliaments indemnify their constitutional violations to close the chapter of their coups. Only Yahya ended with his boots around his neck as a vanquished general.
Pliant and muted through Yahya's disastrous reign, the superior judiciary came into action only after his fall to brand him a 'usurper'. Never before, however, it fell to the sad lot of an elected parliament to vote for an army chief to combine in his person the brass and the bowler hat even as an expedient move.
Political pragmatism is not the same as party or individual opportunism. While the pragmatist knows where to stop, the opportunist fails to resist the fatal attraction of yet another chance, yet another pasture new around the corner.
The MMA's supreme council must ask itself whether or not by supporting the passage of the LFO they did indeed commit a terminal error of judgement. And whether they did not sacrifice their reputedly principled party politics at the altar of expediency and opportunism.
Worse still, they did so at the cost of the united front they had forged with such mainstream parties as the PPP and the Muslim League-N. A major compromise was made with Gen. Pervez Musharraf's regime, now invoking the NSC as the main plank of its future governance.
If such were to be the end of the military-mullah alliance, it should not be difficult to see who is the loser. The nexus has been a part of our history, either marginally as under Ayub Khan or covertly as under Yahya Khan or naked and deeply written into the system as under Ziaul Haq.
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.
He gave the army the triple motto of 'Iman, Taqwa, Jihad fi Sibil Lillah'. Subsequently, as president, he introduced the Hudood Ordinance and collaborated with the Americans in projecting the Soviet-Afghan war as a jihad. The country continues to pay the bitter wages of Zia's jihad syndrome.
Gen Musharraf continued to recognize the Taliban's radical Islamic regime as a legacy of the Nawaz Sharif period and extend muted support to the Kashmiri mujahideen until 9/11.
That was the turning point and the defining moment for the future shape of relations between a para-secular government on the one hand and jihad-oriented, religious groups on the other.
Musharraf relented on his temporal stance vis-a-vis the religious group under the pressure of political necessity during the general election of October 2002. He placed the mullahs at par with university graduates to qualify for membership of his 'graduate' assembly.
The mullahs returned with strength sufficient to form coalition governments in the NWFP and Balochistan. Once in power they gradually and subtly clanged their religion-based stance into realpolitik where it suited their interest.
They supported the LFO to extract from Musharraf the promise that he would shed his uniform by the end of 2004. However, when it came to endorsing the NSC by an act of parliament, they abstained from voting.
Hence the present crisis. The MMA's Supreme Council, in no uncertain terms, declared its resolve to 'scrap' the NSC when it 'obtains a simple majority in the house'. The inaugural session of the NSC (June 24) was off to an unhappy and not a little ill-tempered start.
Chairing the session, the president was livid over the absence of the leader of the opposition, Maulana Fazlur Rahman, and NWFP Chief Minister Akram Durrani. He took particular note of the latter absenting himself as a government functionary - a somewhat strange observation to make about an elected public leader with a party mandate of his own.
The president spoke spiritedly and at some length on the rationale and functions of the NSC. Prior to the NSC, he said, there was no forum where 'key functionaries' including the opposition, provincial heads and armed forces chiefs could debate issues of national importance and 'exercise checks on each other and lend support to each other'.
Of course, the defence committee of the cabinet (DCC) was always there, but hardly as a body as comprehensive as the NSC. The question now is: what other body could be either more comprehensive and competent to discuss and resolve all issues of national importance than an elected parliament? Even in the context of a best-case scenario, it won't be easy to rule out a perpetually difficult relationship between parliament and the NSC. REFERENCE: MMA and the NSC By A.R. Siddiqi 30 June 2004 Wednesday 11 Jamadi-ul-Awwal 1425 http://archives.dawn.com/2004/06/30/fea.htm#1
2004: ISLAMABAD: The National Assembly on Sunday evening adopted Article 58(2)b of the Constitution by a two-thirds majority to pave the way for the passage of the 17th Constitutional Amendment Bill and a clause-by-clause discussion on it will continue today. Two hundred and thirty-six members voted in favour and 46 against the constitutional amendment, which empowers the president to dismiss the Assembly and refer the matter to the Supreme Court within 15 days after the dissolution. The Supreme Court shall decide the reference within 30 days and its decision shall be final. The National Assembly also passed an amendment to Article 112 of the Constitution, which empowers provincial governors to dismiss provincial assemblies and refer the matter to the Supreme Court within 15 days after their dissolution, with the previous approval of the president and the Supreme Court shall decide the reference within 30 days. The only amendment to the constitutional bill passed unanimously by the treasury and opposition was to remove the provision to set up the National Security Council (NSC) under the Constitution. However, the MMA still had certain reservations and asked the government to clear the ambiguities today. While empowering the president to make constitutional appointments including those of the services chiefs in consultation with the prime minister, the house rejected a proposal to make it binding on the president to act in accordance with the advice of the prime minister. The house also approved the inclusion of the Local Government Ordinance (LGO) in the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution for a period of another six years starting from the day the Constitution is amended with the approval of both houses of parliament. The house rejected a proposed amendment by Aitzaz Ahsan to Clause 2 of the bill providing for separation of offices of the president and chief of the army staff with an overwhelming majority of 236 votes. Only 46 MNAs voted in favour. During the proceedings, the Alliance for the Restoration of Democracy (ARD) was critical of the Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal “taking a u-turn” on the Legal Framework Order (LFO), saying the MMA had accepted the LFO as part of the Constitution. The constitutional bill did not seek to amend provisions providing for a joint electoral system, increase in the number of the seats in the Senate, NA and provincial assemblies, reserve seats for women, change in educational qualifications, suggesting that all these and other provisions had been accepted as part of the Constitution under the LFO. PPP-P’s Aitzaz Ahsan, PML-N’s Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan and their colleagues vehemently opposed the amendments which sought to empower the president and place him on top of every institution in this country. “The passage of Article 58(2)b will threaten the supremacy of parliament,” Mr Ahsan said. He said Khwaja Nazimuddin, Maulvi Tameezuddin and Feroz Khan Noon fell victims to such provisions in the constitution, adding that it was the same clause which encouraged MNAs and senators to shift political loyalties in the past. “The members ditched Nawaz Sharif, Benazir Bhutto and Muhammad Khan Junejo,” he said. Makhdoom Amin Fahim said the Bill was being passed under an “unholy alliance”. He was critical of the government and said the treasury with the support of the MMA was endorsing everything blindly. “The nation was told that the proposed bill was aimed to amend the 1973 Constitution but the LFO-amended Constitution was being amended in reality.” Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan said the passage of Article 58(2)b was a death warrant for the National Assembly. “No government completed its term from 1985 to 1998 because of this article”, he added. The house completed the second reading of all nine clauses of the proposed bill. REFERENCE: NA gives 58(2)b powers to president * ARD leaders call it death warrant for National Assembly * President to consult prime minister on appointment of services chiefs * NSC unanimously struck off the bill * Article 112 empowering governors to dissolve provincial assemblies also passed * Second reading of all nine clauses of the bill completed By Rana Qaisar & Shehzad Raza Monday, December 29, 2003 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_29-12-2003_pg1_1
Imran Khan Flase Allegations on MMA & Intelligence Agencies (Jirga - 23 Dec 2011)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgp0Dr9aF1g
2005: EDITORIAL: Imran Khan, the MMA and Two-Nation Theory Friday, March 25, 2005 At the MuTtahida Majlis-e-Amal’s anti-Musharraf rally in Lahore on March 23, the Tehrik-e-Insaaf chairman, Imran Khan, said that General Pervez Musharraf’s policies went against the grain of the Two-Nation Theory. What does he mean by this? But before we go any further, it is important to recap Mr Khan’s credentials. As a cricketer, he was — and remains so even after retirement — the pride of this nation. He also made his mark throughout the world by establishing a world-class cancer hospital in Lahore which is being run very efficiently. He is thus a man who expects to be taken seriously.
But Mr Khan also chose to enter politics. No harm in that except that he has found himself in a Daedal labyrinth, trying to grope his way through the tunnel of Pakistani politics without a thread. He has tried several options. His first awakening came when he went out to get funding for his hospital. The response by the people was overwhelming. This led some rightwing, former intelligence elements to conclude that he might be propped up as a candidate to upstage the Pakistan People’s Party. In due course, Mr Khan fell for the trap, in the process hitting out at the liberal intelligentsia by accusing them of colonial and anti-Islamic ways of thinking and being. That, in our book, was a “no-ball”.
His next step was to hit out at both parties, the PPP as well as the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz. This is why, when Mr Sharif was ousted by General Pervez Musharraf, Mr Khan clutched at the idea of a honeymoon with General Musharraf. Given his perception of his own credentials, he thought that he might make the grade as the next civilian principal. But politics works differently from cricket and even philanthropy. Personality, deportment, articulation and many other traits that might make a person extremely personable do not necessarily beget a coveted niche in politics, especially in Pakistan where politics has its own vagaries and peculiarities.
Small wonder then that Mr Khan saw General Musharraf’s agenda getting bogged down in the vortex of Pakistani politics, the high ideals giving way to mundane practicalities. The sympathetic view would be that he felt disillusioned and fell out. The uncharitable view would be that it was a case of sour grapes. The truth was probably somewhere in-between. So it was back to square one for him. This time he offered a mea culpa to Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif and tried to find a berth on the opposition bandwagon. The events of September 11, 2001 and General Musharraf’s handling of foreign policy since then has also given Mr Khan much ammunition a la the mullahs of the MMA. So he has thought it politically wise to regularly hit out at the imperial United States and General Musharraf. Therefore when he says that General Musharraf’s policies militate against the Two-Nation Theory, he subscribes to the view in which ideology has been sacralised. This should not be surprising because he has gone back to the right wing, having despaired of other options. He is a man still trying to find his rhythm. While in Pakistan he accuses General Musharraf of “abandoning Kashmir”, promoting liberal ideas (which he equates with “un-Islamic” thinking) and negating the Two-Nation Theory. But when he visits India, he agrees with the “composite dialogue” and CBM approach to solve issues bilaterally, and in real life his own practice is hardly as Islamic as the mullahs and Islamists would like it to be. In the process he continues to deliver a plethora of no-balls. And what he has said about the Two-Nation Theory is both a no-ball as well as a wide.
For a start, we now know how, since General Zia ul Haq’s time, there has been an effort to change the hue of the real Two-Nation Theory that led to partition. Rightwing parties that actually opposed the creation of Pakistan have tried to put a religious gloss over the theory and mould it to their post-Pakistan requirements. The communal situation which was said to have begotten the theory was a far more complex offering than the simplistic pronouncements of the theory make it out to be. But the most important thing that must be said about it is the speech the founding father, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, made to the constituent assembly on August 11, 1947. In that speech, he made plain that Pakistan was to be a secular state where citizens will have the right and freedom to practise their religion since it is not the business of the state to enter a citizen’s private domain. (Incidentally, to be secular is not to be anti-religion, but to merely separate religion from state politics).
The first assault on this exposition was the Objectives Resolution of March 12, 1949, that pulled the state into the domain of religion and tried to Islamise Pakistan. That resolution, now an operative part of Zia’s constitutional tinkering, in tandem with religious legislation under Nawaz Sharif, has played havoc with the state both internally and externally. Mr Khan should realise that the elements he is standing with today in opposition to General Musharraf have an agenda very different from his. He must not fall prey to their interpretations. Things are getting mixed up here. General Musharraf definitely has much to do on the political front; he has to open up and make arrangements to hand over power to constitutionally elected representatives, and so on. But just because he did not come to power through elections does not mean that he should be faulted for whatever he does, especially if it is good. The MMA is against the US; it is also against General Musharraf. The clever thing for it is to kill two birds with one stone. This is why it is oscillating between pointing out General Musharraf’s un-democratic credentials and also chiding him for fulfilling the US agenda. But surely Mr Khan should know better. Pakistan-US relations are based on the self-interest of the two countries. There are areas where interests diverge; there are also areas where they converge. Mr Khan should look at these relations with greater nuance than his comrades in the moral brigade. It certainly shows him up in a poor light when he swallows the MMA’s warped sense of history hook, line and sinker and begins to talk about the Two-Nation Theory in a manner designed to make Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the great leader and founder of Pakistan, turn in his grave. * REFERENCE: EDITORIAL: Imran Khan, the MMA and Two-Nation Theory Friday, March 25, 2005 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_25-3-2005_pg3_1
June 27, 2012: In a dramatic development and consistent with PTI’s Extremist inclinations, A rabid Deobandi Mufti Abdul Qavi, announced to join PTI in a crowded press conference. The press conference was held in presence of Imran Khan, Javed Hashmi, Shah Mehmood Qureshi and others. Imran Khan’s political party Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) enjoys support of numerous Extrenimst parties and individuals including but not limited to the Sipah-e-Shaba Pakistan (SSP aka ASWJ-LeJ), Taliban, Jamaat-ud-Dawa (aka Lashkar-e-Taiba) and Jamaat-e-Islami. Mufti Abdul Qavi is the latest addition. Imran Khan has often stated that he wants to make Pakistan an Islamic State and would like to implement Islamic Sharia in the country in the footsteps of Mullah Omar led Taiban government in Afghanistan.
PTI Leader Mufti Abdul Qavi on Barelvis
MULTAN: Sarwat Ijaz Qadri, Chairman Sunni Tehreek (ST) said on Tuesday that his party was still contemplating joining the Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf (PTI) and that the ST was yet to reach a consensus on the move. “I cannot confirm as the executive council will decide but we will soon reach a positive decision and the nation will hear good news. We are pondering over all aspects for becoming the part of the movement lead by PTI,” he said. Qadri was talking to the media in Multan after visiting Bahauddin Zakriyah’s shrine. The ST chairman added that his party had also requested PTI Vice Chairman Shah Mehmood Qureshi to bless them with his generosity, leadership and guide the ST as part of an impending move to join the ‘tsunami’. ‘Sufism can save Pakistan’ Qadri said that only in Sufism lay Pakistan’s survival. He added that inter-faith harmony was imperative to save the nation from destruction. He added that sectarianism, suicide attacks and bomb blasts were signs of extreme intolerance in society which could be cured through serenity, peace and love for all as taught by Islam. “Extremism can only be controlled by propagating tolerance for every faith and religion in society according to Islam.” Qadri said that funds collected from mausoleums and shrines of holy saints in the country were sufficient to run the country. “The donations collected from these shrines are more than the demand of the budget of Pakistan. If these funds will be used properly and honestly, then they are sufficient to fulfill the needs of the people of Pakistan and if government cannot do it, then we can take up the challenge and prove ourselves. He added that the democratic government should complete its tenure as it was in the interest of the country but the government should not take advantage of democracy and avoid actions which compel people to protest against them. Talking about peace in Karachi, he said that criminals who had been arrested with evidence against them for being involved in target killings and other crimes, must be put behind bars. “They should be given stern punishment, only then would peace prevail in Karachi,” he said, adding peace in Karachi was a victim of police and political reconciliation. While calling for Rangers to be allotted police powers in Karachi to maintain peace in Karachi, he said “I can only request the Supreme Court of Pakistan to announce punishment for all those criminals who were arrested for target killing, extortion, kidnapping and militancy in Karachi.” REFERENCE: Swept by Tsunami: Sunni Tehreek contemplates joining PTI By Owais Jafri Published: January 17, 2012 http://tribune.com.pk/story/322918/swept-by-tsunami-sunni-ittehad-council-contemplates-joining-pti/
Salman Taseer, American Funded Mullahs, Imran Khan & WikiLeaks. (Bolta Pakistan - 12-1-12)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3G5viJq4Tw
ISLAMABAD: The US gave money to a Pakistani Muslim group that organised anti-Taliban rallies, but which later demonstrated in support of an extremist who killed a leading liberal politician, the US Embassy in Pakistan said Wednesday. US government website Usaspending.gov shows that the group, the Sunni Ittehad Council, received $36,607 from Washington in 2009. A US diplomat said that the embassy had given money to the group to organise the rallies, but that it had since changed direction and leadership. He said it was a one-off grant, and wouldn’t be repeated. He didn’t give his name because he wasn’t authorised to speak about the issue on the record. The grant was first reported by the Council of Foreign Relations on its website. The Ittehad council was formed in 2009 to counter extremism. It groups politicians and clerics from Pakistan’s traditionalist Barelvi Muslim movement, often referred to as theological moderates in the Pakistani context. The American money was used to organise nationwide rallies against militants and suicide bombings, the embassy official said. The demonstrations received widespread media coverage, and were some of the first against extremism in the country. The rhetoric at the rallies was mostly focused on opposing militant attacks on shrines, which Barelvis frequent but are opposed by Deobandi Muslims, Pakistan’s other main Muslim sect. In 2011 and also this month, however, the council led demonstrations in support of the killer of Salman Taseer, a governor who was killed a year ago for his criticism of anti-blasphemy laws. The displays have appalled Pakistani liberals and stoked international fears that the country is buckling under the weight of extremism. Taseer’s assassin, Mumtaz Qadri, is a Barelvi. He claimed he acted to defend the honour of Prophet Mohammed. At its rallies, the group maintains its criticism of the Taliban even as it supports Qadri — a seemingly contradictory stance that suggests its leaders may be more interested in harnessing the political support and street power of Barelvis than in genuinely countering militancy. Two leading members of the council who have been with the group from the beginning of its existence denied receiving any American funds. The apparent discrepancy could be explained by lack of transparency within the organisation. However, given the current anti-American climate, owning up to receiving funds from the United States would invite criticism. ”This propaganda is being unleashed against us because we are strongly opposed to Western democracy and American policies in the region and in the world,” said Sahibzada Fazal Karim, the head of the council, before reiterating the group’s support for Qadri. ”We are against extremism, but we support Qadri because he did a right thing,” he said. REFERENCE: US aided Pakistan group which supported extremists AP January 11, 2012 http://www.dawn.com/2012/01/11/us-aided-pakistan-group-which-supported-extremists.html US Aided Pakistan Group Which Supported Extremists By CHRIS BRUMMITT Associated Press ISLAMABAD January 11, 2012 (AP) http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/us-aided-pakistan-group-supported-extremists-15337104#.TxbIPKXrrje http://www.usaspending.gov/explore?typeofview=complete&recipname=SUNNI%20ITTEHAD%20COUNCIL&tab=By+Prime+Awardee&overridecook=yes&frompage=assistance&target=_parent&carryfilters=on&federal_award_id=SPK33010GR009&fromfiscal=yes&fiscal_year=2010&recipientid=605899
ISLAMABAD: The Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan Saturday said WikiLeaks has made the greatest disclosure that the Pakistani politicians, whether they are in government or in opposition, are American stooges. Imran, who has come clean like a handful of other politicians, alleged Pakistani politicians proved themselves as Mir Jaffars and Mir Sadiqs (two hated characters in the Islamic history for they betrayed the valiant Muslim ruler Sultan Tipu). Speaking at a news conference here after his foreign visit, the cricketer-turned-politician regretted that the incumbent was a dummy parliament and Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani had proved it by asking the US authorities to continue with drone strikes, as he would take care of the legislature. Referring to the startling cable disclosures, Imran said neither the people of Pakistan were free nor the nation had a free and independent foreign policy. He added a political party, which was a part of the movement for the judiciary’s independence, had supported the government in undermining the judiciary’s independent character through the 18th Amendment. His reference was towards PML-N. The PTI chief went on to say that the NRO-tainted politicians involved in money-laundering could never safeguard the national interests. REFERENCE: WikiLeaks proves Pak politicians US stooges: Imran Mumtaz Alvi Sunday, December 12, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=2622&Cat=13
Imran Khan's Press Conference After WikiLeaks
He said that the on-going peaceful protest demonstrations of the PTI against price hike in consumer goods, corruption in high places and against RGST, would lead to civil disobedience soon. He claimed that the corrupt political elite had obtained as many as 0.4 million electricity connections and Wapda had no will to lay a hand on them. Replying to a question, Imran ridiculed the idea of giving powers to parliamentarians under the parliamentary committee to approve appointment of superior court judges. He charged that one of the committee members had grabbed 80-kanal piece of land in Bani Gala. Imran also has his residence in the picturesque locality near Rawal Lake. The PTI chief welcomed the formal joining of the PTI by 40 lawyers of Rawalpindi bar on the occasion and cautioned them to beware of the government’s efforts to divide them for which money was being doled out. “Majority of those named in the committee are corrupt and how can corrupt people be authorised to appoint judges,” he said. REFERENCE: WikiLeaks proves Pak politicians US stooges: Imran Mumtaz Alvi Sunday, December 12, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=2622&Cat=13
Sunni Tehreek is a Gang of Criminal (AAJ TV)
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MdssekCLeDg
KARACHI: A young man was killed and at least two injured in a clash between Sunni Tehreek (ST) workers and the police in the PECHS area on Wednesday. Tension and fear gripped various areas of the city following the incident and unknown men torched at least three vehicles. The incident took place outside the house where slain ST leader Abbas Qadri used to live. Qadri was killed in the Nishtar Park suicide blast. The house is located within the limits of Ferozabad police station and is its residents are Qadri’s relatives. Trouble started when the police arrived at the house to vacate Qadri’s family. A score of ST workers had gathered to stop the police. They hurled stones at the police, which retaliated with aerial firing, baton charges and tear-gassing. According to eyewitnesses, both the police and ST workers not only aerial fired but also took shots at each other, resulting in the death of a man and injuries to two.
However, the police and the ST have traded allegations of being responsible for the incident. The youth killed in the incident was identified as Wasim Ahmed Siddiqui, 25, a resident of Shah Faisal Colony. Police: SHO Farooq Satti said the police did not fire at ST workers and instead it them who fired at the police from different sides. The SHO said that the police hadn’t even reached the house and were some distance away when ST workers started firing. “They also used kalashnikovs,” he said. “The man was killed due to the firing of ST workers and it is still unclear whether he was one of them or a passerby,” the SHO said. “An FIR against ST workers is being registered.” The owner: The house where Qadri’s family is living belongs to Additional Secretary (LE) Riazuddin. “They (Qadri’s family) have occupied the house and the police was taking action on court’s order,” Riazuddin said. ST: ST’s central leader Shahid Ghouri said that the police on the behest of Riazuddin tried to vacate the residents of the house. He claimed that the deceased and the injured were their party workers. “Wasim (the deceased) was deputed at Qadri’s house due to security concerns,” Ghouri said. The ST leader said that Qadri’s family was living in the house since six years on Rs 20,000 per month rent, but Riazuddin and his family had disappeared since the last four years and therefore the rent was being paid in the court.
“The house is a memorial of our beloved leader and we are ready to pay money for it, but won’t vacate it,” he added. Ghouri also demanded that an FIR be registered against Riazuddin and the police officials involved in the incident. Tension: Soon after the incident, tension and fear gripped various areas of the city including Shah Faisal Colony, Saddar, PECHS, New Karachi Town, Kharadar, Meethadar and other ST-dominated areas after unidentified people restored to aerial firing. Routine life was suspended due to panic and shops were shut down. Unidentified people also torched a route no W-11 passenger bus in New Karachi area, a route no 17-D passenger bus in Jut Line and one motorcycle near Merewether Tower. REFERENCE: Tension prevails in various areas of city, 3 vehicles set ablaze: One killed, two hurt as ST workers clash with police By Faraz Khan Thursday, July 02, 2009 http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\07\02\story_2-7-2009_pg12_1
According to the cable, the local police believes that “MQM-H still maintains its armed groups in the areas of Landhi and Korangi, and that the party will re-organise itself once its leadership is released from jail. MQM-H had broken from the main MQM and its strongholds in Landhi and Korangi were regarded as no-go zones. It was in 2003 that the MQM, as a precondition to join the government, asked for the elimination of the MQM-H. The local police and Rangers were used to crack down on MQM-H, and its leaders were put behind bars. The rank and file of MQM-H found refuge in a local religious/political party, Sunni Tehrik,” the assessment reads. The cable goes on to note that the “ST is a small religious/political group with a presence in small pockets of Karachi. The group has only managed to win a handful of council seats in local elections but militarily it is disproportionately powerful because of the influx of MQM-H gunmen. ST has organised the party and its gunmen along the lines of MQM by dividing its areas of influence into sectors and units, with sector and unit commanders”. REFERENCE: ‘Armed gangs outnumber police in Karachi’ By Idrees Bakhtiar | From the Newspaper (18 hours ago) Today http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/23/armed-gangs-outnumber-police-in-karachi.html
Karachi Sunni Tehreek's Encroachment
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uueVB7KfWMQ
KARACHI, July 30 The Fereozeabad police registered on Thursday an FIR against the additional home secretary for the murder of a Sunni Tehreek activist. The police acted on the orders of a sessions court, which acknowledged a complaint from the ST that the senior provincial official, Riazuddin Qureshi, was behind the July 1 shootout that killed one of its activists. An ST worker was killed and another was wounded during the shootout with the police in front of the rented house of the party`s slain chief, Abbas Qadri, in PECHS. The house was originally owned by the mother of Mr Qureshi. The police authorities claimed that the law enforcers had gone with a bailiff for the compliance of court orders for the eviction of the tenants when ST workers opened fire on the police party to prevent eviction. The ST, however, alleged that the police opened heavy fire on the ST workers who were protesting against the police harassment on the instruction of the additional home secretary. The officials said the FIR was registered after district and sessions judge Munawar Sultana ordered the Ferozeabad police to entertain the ST request. “Under the court directive, we have registered an FIR (837/09) under Sections 302 and 324 of the Pakistan Penal Code against Riazuddin Qureshi and some police officials,” said Javed Akbar Riaz, the SP of Jamshed Town. “In the court orders there are no specific names and ranks of the policemen to be nominated in the FIR. So, only Mr Riazuddin has been mentioned by name and for police there are `several personnel`.” After the July 1 incident, the Ferozeabad police had registered a case (FIR 748/2009) against ST workers under Sections 147 (rioting), 148 (rioting armed with deadly weapons), 149 (every member of unlawful assembly guilty of offence committed in prosecution of a common object), 302 (murder), 324 (attempted murder) and 34 (common intention) of the Pakistan Penal Code on the complaint of the court bailiff. REFERENCE: KARACHI: Bureaucrat booked for killing ST worker By Our Staff Reporter July 31, 2009 http://archives.dawn.com/archives/163212
ST (Sunni Tehrik – Sunni Movement) ———————————- 9. (S) ST is a small religious/political group with a presence in small pockets of Karachi. The group has only managed to win a handful of council seats in local elections but militarily it is disproportionably powerful because of the influx of MQM-H gunmen after the government crack-down on MQM-H (see above). ST has organized the party and its gunmen along the lines of MQM by dividing its areas of influence into sectors and units, with sector and unit commanders. ST and MQM have allegedly been killing each other’s leadership since the April 2006 Nishtar Park bombing that killed most of ST’s leadership. ST blames MQM for the attack. There appears to have been a reduction in these targeted killings since 2008. REFERENCE: 2009: US assessment of Karachi violence http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/23/2009-us-assessment-of-karachi-violence.html
Imran Khan meets Sunni Tehreek delegation in Islamabad By Hammad Cheema 6821 Views Press Release, Islamabad, Karachi http://www.insaf.pk/News/tabid/60/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/2298/Imran-Khan-meets-Sunni-Tehreek-delegation-in-Islamabad.aspx http://www.insaf.pk/News/tabid/60/articleType/ArchiveView/month/5/year/2011/Default.aspx
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) stopping NATO supply with Empty Chairs
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_WFJwgZxU4
PTI Karachi Dharna, Massive Media Campaign but result "Zero"
URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHAqUlbisrI
Rallies against capitalism and in favour of Mumtaz Qadri, the self-confessed killer of Punjab Governor Salmaan Taseer, paralysed life in downtown for several hours on Saturday. Thousands of people gathered on MA Jinnah Road in a show of support for Mumtaz Qadri, who was recently convicted by a Rawalpindi court for killing Punjab Governor Slamaan Taseer. The Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC), a conglomerate of more than a dozen religious parties, staged a protest rally, which started from Old Numaish and culminated at Tibet Centre. Carrying party flags and pictures of Qadri, the participants converged at Old Numaish from different parts of the city. The rally was led by Sahibzada Fazal Karim, Haji Hanif Tayyab, Sarwat Ejaz Qadri, Syed Shah Turab-ul-Haq and others. REFERENCE: Rallies cause hours-long traffic chaos Shamim Bano Sunday, October 23, 2011 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=73950&Cat=4
Daily Jang, Sunday, October 23, 2011, Ziqad 24, 1432 A.H.
http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/oct2011-daily/23-10-2011/main.htm
Non Barelvis Are Kaafir (Apostate) says Pir Syed Irfan Shah
http://youtu.be/FTANZusPICU
Note: There are millions of Non-Barelvis i.e. Shias, Salafis, Deobandis and others who are in every Political Party.
Saudi Fatwa Against Barelvis (The Sunni Ittehad Council (SIC) belongs to Barelvi Sect)
"QUOTE"
CREED \ Deviant groups and individuals \ The ruling concerning the Braylwiyyah
Question: There is a particular group in Pakistan called the ((Braylwiyyah)) or ((Jamaa'ah Nuwaaree)) which is a reference to their current leader known as ((Nuwaaree)). I ask your excellencies the Sharee'ah ruling regarding them and their 'aqeedah, and the prayer behind them as this is a contentious issue which many people are unaware of the reality. I will mention some of their defective ways and beliefs:
1) The belief that the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) is alive;
2) The belief that the Messenger of Allaah (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) is present and all-seeing, especially immediately after Salaat al-Jumu'ah;
3) The belief that the Messenger (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) is the foremost intercessor;
4) They believe in "saints" and the dead in their graves, and they offer salaah at the graves requesting them for their needs to be met;
5) Their commendation of domes and lighting up of graves;
6) Their saying ((Yaa Rasool, Yaa Muhammad (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam)));
7) Their hatred towards whoever loudly says ((Aameen)) and raises his hands in the salaah, considering such a person to be a Wahhaabee;
8) Their great astonishment at the use of the miswaak before the salaah;
9) Kissing the thumbs whilst doing wudhoo., the adhaan and after the salaah;
10) After the salaah, their imaam repeating the aayah:
{Allaah sends His prayers on the Prophet and also His angels too}, [Soorah al-Ahzaab, Aayah 56].
11) They gather after the Salaat al-Jumu'ah standing and reciting anaasheed and sending praises (to the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam));
12) After they complete the Noble Qur.aan in the Salaat at-Taraaweeh in the month of Ramadhaan, they prepare alot of food and distribute it in the dining area of the masjid, in addition to sweets;
13) They build masaajid and seek much importance in decorating them, writing ((Yaa Muhammad)) above the mihraab (standing place of the imaam);
14) They consider themselves the people of the Sunnah and correct 'aqeedah and that (all) others are in error;
15) What is the Sharee'ah ruling regarding performing the salaah behind them (their imaam), considering I am a medical student in Karachi and live next door to the masjid where they are in (overall) control (i.e. their beliefs and practices prevail)?
Response: Whoever has these characteristics and attributes, then it is not permissible to offer your salaah behind them (their imaam), and whoever knows of their condition, then their salaah is not correct. This is because most of their characteristics and attributes are of kufr and bid`ah which negate the tawheed (oneness) with which Allaah had sent His messenger and revealed in His Book, and that which conflicts with the Qur.aan, such as His (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) saying:
{Verily, you (Muhammad) will die and verily, they (too) will die}, [Soorah az-Zumar, Aayah 30]
And His saying:
{And the mosques are for Allaah (alone), so invoke not anyone along with Allaah}, [Soorah al-Jinn, Aayah 18]
And their bid`ah which they practice should be detested with good manners, and if they accept (and leave these pratices) then all praise is for Allaah (alone); And if they do not accept (and continue in these practices) then you should leave them and offer your salaah in the masjid of the Ahlus-Sunnah. And in this, with respect to Ibraaheem (alayhis-salaam) there is a good example:
{And I shall turn away from you and from those whom you invoke besides Allaah. And I shall call on my Lord; and I hope that I shall not be unblest in my invocation to my Lord}, [Soorah Maryam, Aayah 48].
And with Allaah lies all success and may Allaah send prayers and salutations upon our Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) and his family and his companions.
The Permanent Committee for Islaamic Research and Fataawa, comprising -
Head: Shaykh 'Abdul 'Azeez Ibn Abdullaah Ibn Baaz;
Deputy Head: Shaykh 'Abdur-Razzaaq 'Afeefee;
Member: Shaykh 'Abdullaah Ibn Qu'ood
Fataawa al-Lajnah ad-Daa.imah lil-Buhooth al-'Ilmiyyah wal-Iftaa., - Volume 2, Page 396, Fatwa No.3090
"UNQUOTE"
No comments:
Post a Comment