The Comedian of Pakistan

By: Dr. Ahmad Faruqui

TIME magazine has declared Vladimir Putin as Man of the Year, even though he has severely restricted civil liberties in Russia and slowed its march toward democracy. The argument is that he has brought stability to the country and restored its status as a great power. What must also have weighed heavily in the magazine's choice is that Putin remains very popular in Russia. He can even count Mikhail Gorbachev among his supporters.

Being a dictator and restricting civil liberties is of course not a sufficient condition for making it to Man of the Year. No one knows this better than Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf. Like Putin he has been in power for eight years. And like Putin he is trying his best to extend his tenure. But unlike Putin, his popularity has tanked. Events have gone downhill since he declared an emergency on the 3rd of November. Things did not improve much when he lifted it on the 15th of December. All of this is a self-inflicted wound which began when he decided to "suspend" the Chief Justice of Pakistan on the 9th of March. That event set in motion a country-wide protest by the attorneys the like of which the country had never seen. This protest threatened the army's dominant role in society since it was designed to institute the law in the country. It brought out the worst in Musharraf.

That is why he was not on the short list released by TIME for its Man of the Year competition. This is ironical, since the general was featured extensively in the magazine just a few years ago as having "the world's most difficult job." His picture in uniform, taken as he stood overlooking a panoramic view of the white government buildings in Islamabad, spanned two pages.

This year, as a consolation prize, perhaps the magazine should have created a special category and declared him "Comedian of the Year."

On the global stage, Musharraf is the undisputed king of dark comedy. But mind you, Musharraf's humor is very different from the slapstick humor you might see on the Monty Python show, the kind that would leave you in stitches.

Musharraf's comedic device is the utterance of non sequiturs with a stern demeanor. And it is this austere visage almost bordering on anger that imbues his acts with an inimitable touch.

Who else would say the following? "Against my will, as a last resort, I had to impose the emergency in order to save Pakistan." You see, he is a man of many wills. The president in him did not want to impose it while the Chief of Army Staff in him did. Hah!

And what does it mean when he says, "As a last resort?" This is an admission, albeit a very indirect one, that without the emergency, he would no longer have remained president. Just the thought of Pakistan without him as president is enough to bring a smile to most people's face.

The script continues, "The conspiracy was hatched to destabilize the country." But the conspirators were never named. Dame Agatha Christie would not have approved of such an incomplete story but it is funny in an old fashioned way.

He goes on to say, "I cannot tell how much pain the nation and I suffered." Alice would have said, "Goodness gracious, general, you had complete freedom of movement, you could go visit relatives, stop by your office if you were in the mood for working and, come to think of it, you could even go shopping. So what caused you to suffer?"

Maybe he felt the police would pick up him up because he was openly expressing his opinions on TV, which was contrary to his own diktats.

But wait. Maybe the suffering was moral. As he went to bed every night, he lay awake thinking of the people that he had put in jail that were lying awake in rotten surroundings. To relieve his suffering, all he had to do was release them.

But did he? Of course not! He had declared an emergency precisely to make them suffer. How dare they rise against him on the streets, agitate against military rule and file petitions in the Supreme Court. He was going to fix them once and for all.

The emergency was not entirely unexpected. For a while, he had been dropping hints that he might impose an emergency if (a) the senior judges of the country joined in a "conspiracy" to end his eight-year rule and (b) if street riots caused political chaos that would hobble the fight against Islamic extremism.

Musharraf went on to say that the Supreme Court, which had been poised to rule on the legality of his October re-election, was acting beyond the constitution. Now that calls for a good round of applause.

The person who suspended the constitution was acting constitutionally and staying within its boundaries but the apex court that was seeking to prevent the abuse of power by that individual were acting beyond the constitution. Says who? Perhaps the Mad Hatter at his tea party.

He concluded his 20-minute address triumphantly by saying that "Now [that] the conspiracy has been foiled [i]t is my commitment to the entire nation and the world that the election on January 8 will be on time and will be absolutely free and transparent."

He threw the gauntlet at those political parties that plan to boycott the polls because they feared that the polls would be rigged. Musharraf warned, "This is all baseless and they must desist from it." To alleviate any doubt, he said the government would invite "any number" of foreign observers to come and watch the fairness of the polls. Whether the invitations have been sent out is an open issue. Whether they have been accepted is another open issue. And whether they will show up to monitor the polls is the $64 million question.

The dictator's comments beg the question of what is free and fair. Pakistanis have had a few elections under military governments. Perhaps the fairest was held by Yahya in 1970 and the most unfair election by Musharraf 32 years later. In both cases, the results were disastrous because the military was not prepared to share power with the elected representatives of the people.

Yahya refused to hand over power to the Awami League and plunged the country into a disastrous civil war that ultimately dismembered the republic. Musharraf pretended to hand over power to parliament but never did.

In his speech during the presidential inauguration, he took a swipe at the West and lambasted it for seeking to impose democracy on Pakistan. He said it had taken the West centuries to get there and they should not expect a poor nation like Pakistan to get there in just a few decades.

So why was he now proceeding to hold free and fair elections? Pakistan is either fit for democracy or not fit for it. Perhaps he was telling us that he likes to hunt with the hound and run with the hare. That is Musharrafian humor for you.

Like the three dictators before him, Musharraf is exploiting the fact that Pakistanis have not had much success with democracy. When he says that he intends to bring "the essence of democracy" to Pakistan with the next elections, he forgets that India has been a successful democracy for the past 60 years and that it has achieved this result without a single army intervention.

It is true that India under a single prime minister (Nehru) had better luck with democracy than did Pakistan under seven prime ministers in the 1950s. But the army has been in power in Pakistan since 1958 for all but a single decade. If feudalism was the barrier to introducing democratic traditions in Pakistan, the army could have eliminated it. Surely, the generals with their big guns had more power in the country than the civilian Nehru did in India.

But that presumes that the army wanted to eliminate feudalism. The truth is that the army had no interest in bringing democracy into the country because it would threaten its prima donna status in the country. Moreover, in Pakistan, the feudal lords and the army are two of the country's leading oligarchs.

Musharraf concluded a fairly difficult interview with the Washington Post's Lally Weymouth recently by lashing out at Weymouth at the end, saying that the interviewer was implying that Pakistan was either "small" or "a banana republic." The irony is that because of the army, it has become both.

Denial won't change the reality. But repeated denial will evoke a good laugh. That is why the man who was trained as a commando, the retired general who attacked Indian in Kargil and the former army chief who seized power illegally deserves to be declared "Comedian of the Year."

Dr. Ahmad Faruqui is author of "Rethinking the National Security of Pakistan," available from Ashgate. He can be reached at Faruqui@pacbell.net.

Blogged with Flock

LUMS Pakistan signs accord with Oracle partner

Lahore University of Management Sciences (LUMS) "the University") signed an agreement with Oracle partner, Techlogix to implement Oracle's PeopleSoft Campus solution and PeopleSoft Enterprise Human Capital Management solution at its campus in Lahore. Earlier this year, a similar agreement was signed with the Higher Education Commission, Government of Pakistan, for the implementation of Oracle's PeopleSoft Campus solutions at various public sector universities.

Oracle's PeopleSoft Campus solution is the world's only complete higher education solution it is being used at over 800 campuses in more than 20 countries to streamline processes, enhance efficiency and boost productivity in a cost-effective manner.

This solution will also offer the University the most advanced Student Information System available - providing a complete solution to manage all aspects of a student's life at the University - today and in the future.

Dr Syed Zahoor Hassan, Vice Chancellor, Lahore University of Management Sciences, said,"As an institution that aspires towards excellence in both teaching and research, our university uses state-of-the-art technologies to create an environment in which its systems, constituents and communities can interact for learning, teaching, and administration."

Leading the development of a knowledge-based economy in Pakistan, the University's deployment of Oracle's PeopleSoft Campus solutions and PeopleSoft Enterprise Human Capital Management will help the University maintain its competitive edge. With the implementation of Oracle's PeopleSoft Campus Solutions, the University can better manage the student lifecycle, regulate compliance and reporting and achieve operational effectiveness. Increasingly, institutions in Pakistan are expanding their investments in recruitment activities while operating on shrinking budgets.

To manage the entire student lifecycle seamlessly from recruiting to admissions, through student services and alumni relations in a secure and stable environment, the University can gain a 360-degree view of all students, staff, alumni and other constituents including donors, thus fostering personalised communications, increased collaboration and intimacy of interaction.

As a result, the University can improve student recruiting results; its students and faculty get 24/7, secure access to information and services; and individual students enjoy higher academic success with systems that measure and analyse their performance.

Ms Samina Rizwan, Senior Country Director for Oracle SAGE West, said, "It is a new and challenging era for education. Higher education institutions face increased global competition to attract and retain students. Oracle offers the right applications that deliver the most comprehensive, adaptable solutions to meet the needs of small institutions as well as large, multi-location school districts and university systems."

In 2006, Oracle contributed more than $2 billion to education worldwide, through its various education initiatives. The reliability of its education-centric applications is reinforced by the fact that all of the world's top 10 academic universities as well as the top 10 research universities run Oracle applications.

Blogged with Flock

Tony Blair joins Catholic faith

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair has converted to the Catholic faith. His wife Cherie is a Catholic and there had been speculation that he would convert to Catholicism from his Anglican faith after leaving office.

Blogged with Flock

نواز: ججوں کی بحالی اشد ضروری

Source: BBCUrdu

پاکستان مسلم لیگ کے سربراہ نواز شریف نے کہا ہے معزول ججوں کی بحالی اتنی ہی ضروری ہے جتنا پاکستان کا وجود اور یہ کہ عدلیہ کی آزادی اس وقت تک نہیں ہوسکتی جب تک ان ججوں کو بحال نہیں کیا جاتا ۔

نواز شریف آٹھ سالہ جلاوطنی سے ملک واپسی کے بعد اتوار کی دوپہر پہلی مرتبہ کراچی کے دورے پر پہنچے ہیں، جہاں انہوں نے پاکستان کے بانی قائد اعظم محمد علی جناح کے مزار پر حاضری دینے کے بعد معزول ججوں کے گھر جاکر ان سے یکجہتی کا اظہار کیا۔ اتوار کی شاہم ایک پریس کانفرنس کرتے ہوئے نواز شریف نے کہا کہ پوری دنیا میں ایسا کہیں نہیں ہوتا کہ ججوں کو معطل کرکے گرفتار کیا جائے۔ آج پوری دنیا پاکستان پر ہنس رہی ہے۔

نواز شریف نے کہا کہ وہ صدر پرویز مشرف کو کسی صورت میں قبول نہیں کریں گے:’ مشرف کو قبول کرنے کا مطلب تو یہ ہے کہ ان کے سارے اقدامات کو قبول کیا جائے جو انہوں نے انیس سو ننانوے سے اٹھائے ہیں۔ پھر ہم بھی پاکستان کے غداروں میں اپنا نام لکھوالیں۔‘

دہشت گردی کے خلاف امریکہ کی عالمی جنگ کے حوالے سے نواز شریف نے کہا کہ اس جنگ کی تشریح کرنے کی ضرورت ہے کہ یہ دہشت گردی کے خلاف جنگ ہے بھی یا نہیں یا یہ صرف امریکہ کا حکم ہے جو ہمیں آنکھیں بند کرکے ماننا ہے۔ 

نواز شریف نے کہا کہ وہ ہر قسم کی دہشت گردی کے خلاف ہیں ایک دہشت گردی بموں کے ذریعے کی جارہی ہے اور ایک دہشت گردی وہ ہے جو مشرف کر رہے ہیں۔ ’مشرف نے آئین توڑا، قانون توڑا پارلیمنٹ توڑی یہ بھی دہشت گردی ہے اس کا بھی احتساب ہونا چاہئیے۔‘

انہوں نے چودھری برادران کو شدید تنقید کا نشانہ بناتے ہوئے کہا کہ کنگس پارٹی کے کئی لوگ جو مشرف کے کیمپ میں نظر آتے ہیں وہ ان کے دور حکومت میں وزیر اور مشیر تھے ، ان میں ضمیر نام کی کوئی چیز نہیں۔ سابق وزیر اعظم کا کہنا تھا کہ ملک میں کہیں بھی مسلم لیگ قائد اعظم کا ووٹ بینک نہیں ہے وہ کمروں میں بیٹھے کر الیکشن مہم چلا رہے ہیں اور پس پردہ دھاندلی کی تیاریاں کی جاری رہی ہیں۔

اس سے قبل پاکستان کے بانی محمد علی جناح کے مزار پر کارکنوں کو خطاب کرتے ہوئے نواز شریف نے کہا کہ آٹھ جنوری انتخابات کا نہیں ریفرنڈم کا دن ہے اس روز آمریت ہمیشہ کے لیے دفن ہوجائےگی۔ انہوں نے کہا کہ پاکستان میں ڈکٹیٹر کی نہیں عوام کی حکومت ہوگی اور کسی جرنیل کی نہیں عوام کی منتخب حکومت کو لانا ہے۔

انہوں نے کارکنوں کو مخاطب ہوکر کہا کہ ’ہمیں یہ عہد کرنا ہے کہ یہاں پاکستان کا قانون ہوگا جنگل کا قانون نہیں ہوگا۔‘
نواز شریف نے کہا ہے کہ خیبر سے لیکر کراچی تک پاکستان خون میں ڈوبا ہوا ہے، ہر طرف اصطراب ہے، کہیں بھی امن، سکون اور اطمینان نہیں ہے۔

مزار قائد پر حاضری کے بعد نواز شریف پی سی او کے تحت حلف نہ اٹھانے والے سندھ ہائی کورٹ کے چیف جسٹس صبیح الدین احمد، سرمد جلال جسٹس سعید الزمان صدیقی سے ملاقات کی اور انہیں خراج تحسین پیش کیا۔ بعد میں جسٹس سرمد جلال عثمانی کی بیگم شرمین عثمانی نے نواز شریف کے ساتھ پریس کانفرنس میں مسلم لیگ نواز میں شمولیت کااعلان کیا۔

Blogged with Flock

Queen launches YouTube channel

The Queen has launched her own channel on the video-sharing website YouTube.

The Royal Channel will feature her Christmas Day message, and has recent and historical footage of the monarch and other members of the Royal Family.

The launch marks the 50th anniversary of the Queen's first televised festive address in 1957. more

Blogged with Flock

ISI 'staged escape' of Rashid Rauf, he might be killed

Source: Times Online

The Pakistan government has blamed junior policemen escorting Rauf back to jail after a court hearing in Islamabad where he was fighting moves to extradite him to Britain in connection with the murder of an uncle.

The officers had allowed him to stop for lunch at a McDonald’s restaurant and later in the journey permitted him to pray at a mosque. His handcuffs were removed to allow him to pray freely. When the guards entered the mosque to check on the prisoner, he had escaped through another door.

Their description of his getaway has been met with disbelief throughout Pakistan, with diplomats and commentators asking how a prisoner described by the country’s interior minister as a leading Al-Qaeda operative and held in Pakistan’s highest-security detention unit could be allowed to walk away in broad daylight. Rauf’s lawyer and a close family friend both said last week that they believed he had not escaped but had been taken into secret security-service custody and they feared for his life.

They said they believed the country’s intelligence service did not want him to be extradited to Britain and had in effect kidnapped him to preempt any court decision to deport him. More than 400 opposition activists and Islamic militants have been secretly detained by the security services in this way and Pakistan’s Supreme Court has criticised the policy and ordered the government to free a number of detainees.

Khalid Khawaja, a former Pakistan intelligence agent who counts Osama Bin Laden as a friend, said he had shared a cell with Rauf and had become close to him and his family. He said Rauf was a simple man who did not have the wherewithal to plot an escape. He said he believed that Rauf might have been “taken away by the ISI” and feared that his friend might be shot dead while “on the run”.

“He was a high-value prisoner wanted by the British. How could he just get a chance to run away like this? It is not possible without the active involvement of the government. Now they have said he ran away. If he’s found killed no one will question it because he ran away,” he said.

Hashmat Habib, Rauf’s lawyer, said his client was being victimised because the Pakistani authorities had been forced to drop all charges against Rauf over the transatlantic flight plot.

“In my estimate it’s an organised disappearance. They don’t want to hand him over. He’s an innocent man. He was fixed up and the government is now afraid that he would become an embarrassment if sent to the UK because they hyped up his involvement. He was not involved in terrorism,” he said.

Pakistani officials have said that Rauf was a leading figure in the Jaish-e-Mohammed terrorist group, which is believed to have had strong links with Pakistan’s intelligence agencies. The group was behind the hijacking of an Indian Airlines jet in 1999 and the beheading of Daniel Pearl, the American journalist, in February 2002.

Its members have included Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, the terrorist from Wanstead, east London, who was later convicted of the kidnap and murder of Pearl.

Blogged with Flock

فوجی چھاؤنیوں کی سیاست

عائشہ صدیقہ

اور اب سوات کے قریب مٹہ میں بھی ایک چھاؤنی بنانے کی تیاری کی جا رہی ہے۔ فوج کو احساس ہوا ہے کہ ملک کی سالمیت اور سوات کو ’دہشت گردوں‘ سے خطرے کا ایک ہی جواب ہے کہ وہاں ایک چھاؤنی بنا دی جائے۔

یہ بالکل اسی طرح ہے جیسے اس سے پہلے بلوچستان میں سوئی اور ڈیرہ بگٹی کے مقام پر اور اُس سے پہلے سندھ میں پنو عاقل میں چھاؤنیاں بنائی گئیں۔

یہ فوج کے پکے ڈیرے جس میں ایک آرمی کی کور رہتی ہے، بنانے کی آخر کیا ضرورت پڑتی ہے؟ سب سے بڑی وجہ ہے تحفظ۔ نواب اکبر بگٹی کے خیال میں اپنے ملک میں کس سے خطرہ ہے جو کہ ایک جگہ سات ہزار سے آٹھ ہزار فوج رکھی جائے۔ آخر سوئی، ڈیرہ بگٹی اور سوات میں کوئی بیرونی خطرہ تو لاحق نہیں۔

یہ بات قابل غور ہے کہ جب بھی ملک کے کسی حصہ میں خطرہ ہوتا ہے یا ٹینشن بڑھتی ہے تو فوج ایک نئی چھاؤنی بنا لیتی ہے۔ انیس سو اسی کی دہائی میں سندھ کی فضا جب تلخ ہوئی تو پنو عاقل کی چھاؤنی بنائی گئی۔ دلچسپ بات تو مزید یہ ہے کہ وہ تمام سیاسی قوتیں جب طاقت میں آنا چاہتی ہیں وہ فوج کے سب وہ فیصلے جس میں اس ادارے کی خاص دلچسپی ہوتی ہے، ان کی تائید کرتی ہیں۔ مثال کے طور پر پنو عاقل کی چھاؤنی کی تعمیر کی پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی نے شدید مخالفت کی لیکن بعد میں وزیراعظم بننے کے بعد بینظیر بھٹو نے سندھی عوام کو مخاطب کرتے ہوئے ایک جلسے میں کہا کہ یہ چھاؤنی صوبہ کی معاشی ترقی کے لیے ضروری ہے اور سندھی عوام کو فوج میں جانا چاہیے۔

یہ بات سندھی عوام نے تو اس وقت سن لی لیکن فوج کی ہائی کمان نے یہ بات شاید اب سنی ہے کیونکہ سن دو ہزار ایک کے بعد کوئی تقریباً اسی ہزار سندھیوں کو فوج میں لیا گیا ہے اور ان میں سے بہت سے لوگ وزیرستان میں جنگ لڑ رہے ہیں۔

چھاؤنیاں ریکروٹمنٹ کے کام میں بہت مدد دیتی ہیں۔ ان کے ہونے سے مقامی لوگوں کو ادارے کی طاقت کا اندازہ ہوتا ہے۔ چونکہ ہر کوئی طاقتور سے جنگ کرنے کی جسارت نہیں کر سکتا تو بہت سے لوگ پھر فوج کی طاقت کا حصہ بننے کی کوشش کرتے ہیں، بلکہ فوج کے ادارے آئی ایس پی آر نے چند ماہ پہلے ایک پیپر شائع کیا جس میں یہ بتایا گیا تھا کہ چھوٹے صوبے یعنی سندھ، بلوچستان اور فرنٹیئر سے فوج میں بھرتی میں اضافہ کیا جائے گا۔ شاید اس طرح ان صوبوں کے معاشروں میں بھی ملیٹرائزیشن میں اضافہ کیا جائے گا۔ یاد رہے کہ خود اسرائیل میں اسی طریقہ سے فوج کی اہمیت بڑھائی گئی۔

جب فوج ایک معاشرہ کا حصہ بنتی ہے تو لوگوں کو فوج کے سیاسی استحصال پر اعتراض نہیں رہتا۔ پھر عام لوگ بھی سیاسی مسائل کے فوجی طریقوں سے حل کرنے کو برا نہیں سمجھتے۔

خیر سوات میں فوجی چھاؤنی بنانے کے تو اور بھی فوائد ہوں گے۔ اس طرح سے فوج اس سمگلنگ کو جو کہ مبینہ طور پر گلگت اور سوات سے ہوتی ہے، اس پر قابو پا سکے گی۔ اس وقت بہت سا سامان چین سے اسی راستہ سے آتا ہے۔

جہاں تک رہی بلوچستان میں دو نئی چھاؤنیوں کی بات، تو یہ ریاست کے کنٹرول کو بڑھانے میں مدد دیں گی جس کی وجہ سے بیرون ملک اور اندرون ملک کے سرمایہ کار اس صوبہ میں آئیں گے۔ رہی بلوچ لوگوں کی بات تو چلیں وہ بعد میں کریں گے، ابھی سرمایہ تو آئے۔

Blogged with Flock

Afghanistan allies 'must do more'

Nato allies must do more to fight the Taleban in Afghanistan, the US defence secretary tells the BBC.

Perhaps Amreekans have made it a habbit to keep demanding other "to do more"

Blogged with Flock

Musharraf parody

Blogged with Flock

Pakistani bowlers disappointed in series against India: Imran

Former captain of Pakistan cricket team Imran Khan has termed the performance of the Pakistani bowlers in Test series against India disappointing. Giving an interview to an Indian tv channel, the former all rounder said that performance of the Pakistani bowlers in the Test series was very disgusting.

He said that Shoaib Akhtar is a match winner but this time he failed to fulfill the expectations people had with him. The former captain said that in his period of leadership he himself assumed the responsibility but today this is not in practice.

Imran Khan said that misbah-ul-Haq’s performance was outstanding. He has been displaying magnificent performance in domestic cricket for a long period but every time he was dropped for unknown reasons. He said that if the team management was aware of Shoaib Malik’s injury then it should had played any other spinner.

Blogged with Flock

I have parted ways with Nawaz - Imran

LAHORE: 'I have parted ways with Nawaz Sharif; it is unconstitutional to contest election under PCO as it is tantamount to treason', says Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaaf Chief Imran Khan.

Talking exclusively to The Post he said when he was in the jail, he thought that APDM should follow PPP in case the latter participated in elections, adding that the situation had changed. He said he boycotted elections when the civil society, the lawyers and deposed judges questioned the validity of the elections. Imran said Raja Zafarul Haq, on the APDM platform, announced to boycott the elections on November 24 but later backed out of his promise when PML-N leader Nawaz Sharif, under the pressure of party workers, decided to participate in the elections. 'No doubt he has a huge and strong vote bank but he would not get any benefit from it as the results would be tempered', he said.

Imran Khan said he would talk to Nawaz Sharif after the elections, adding that drama of elections was staged to give legal validity to President Musharraf. He said many countries, including America and the UK, were playing a role in giving legal cover to the president. They are trying to make him Husani Mubarik of Pakistan, he said, adding that we would start anti-election campaign on December 18 in Islamabad. He said we were thankful to Qazi Hussain Ahmed for participating in this movement. He said we needed free and sovereign Pakistan capable of taking decisions independently. 'I have no intentions to participate in the by-elections' he said. He vowed not to become a part of a rubberstamp assembly whose members are looters of national exchequer.

Meanwhile, addressing participants of student's convention, he said the students should strengthen unity among themselves. He also said the student's action committee was ready to take action from December 25 to January 8, adding that he would resolve their inner disputes. He said the vested interests were sowing seeds of contention to offset the intensity of the movement. He further said no dictator could withstand the onslaught of the movement waged by the students. He said the aim of the movement was to take the civil society members out of the slumber. Fear of arrests could not dampen their spirits as their aim was to change the destiny of the nation, he added. The need of the time is to take every one along us in order to defeat dictatorship through struggle, he added.

Source: The Post

Blogged with Flock

Intellingent Judge

This is very very interesting, this judge is really smart because he figured out the way to solve a complex case.

Blogged with Flock

Is it a joke ?

I am sure that there is not even a single reasonable person around Mush. For example check the following 'Bakwas'

Blogged with Flock

To Boycott - Not to Boycott

Blogged with Flock

Azadi - Junoon

A sensational musical video

Musharraf PR Team's Mis-statements at Asia Society in New York on Friday Nov 30, 2007

(listen to the recording at: http://www.asiasociety.org/resources/pakemergency.html)

Background: An Emergency was declared in Pakistan on November 3, 2007 by General Musharraf as Chief of the Army Staff and on the same day a "Provisional Constitutional Order" (PCO) was issued by him as President of Pakistan.  Pakistan's 1973 Constitution only allows the President of Pakistan to declare Emergency.  It does not give any authority to the Chief of the Army Staff to declare Emergency.  This illegality was acknowledged by General Musharraf in an interview with BBC News on Nov 16th ( http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7090000/newsid_7099400/7099434.stm?bw=nb&mp=wm&news=1&ms3=6&ms_javascript=true&nol_storyid=7099434&bbcws=2). He specifically says, "Have I done anything unconstitutional and illegal? Yes, I did it on 3^rd November." Under the PCO, President Musharraf suspended Pakistan's 1973 Constitution depriving the people of Pakistan of their fundamental rights and preventing the actions of his government to be challenged in the Courts. The justices of the Supreme Court of Pakistan were ordered to take a fresh oath to abide by the PCO. The Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and seven other justices issued their own legal order calling General Musharraf's declaration of Emergency unlawful and urged the military officials not to act on unlawful orders.  General Musharraf then dismissed CJ Chaudhry and in his place swore in a pro-Musharraf member of the Supreme Court as the new Chief Justice. Earlier in March 2007, CJ Chaudhry was suspended by General Musharraf but was later reinstated as Chief Justice by a special bench of the Supreme Court. It should be noted that there is no provision in the Constitution of Pakistan for "suspension" of the Chief Justice. Civil society, students, lawyers and human rights activists are all rising up in protest to the actions of President Musharraf across Pakistan.   What we are witnessing, is the people of Pakistan's quest for the Rule of Law.

In late November 2007, President Musharraf sent a Special Delegation to makes its official case in various cities in the United States including New York and Washington DC.  The delegation comprised of Mr. Nasim Ashraf (Minister of State and Chairman of National Commission for Human Development), Barrister Mohammad Ali Saif (Minister of Tourism and Youth Affairs) & Ms. Kashmala Tariq (Former Member of the National Assembly of Pakistan).  What follows are rebuttals to some of their mis-statements at an event at Asia Society in New York on Friday November 30, 2007. The event was co-sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations and was moderated by Ambassador Nicholas Platt, President Emeritus of Asia Society and US Ambassador to Pakistan from 1991 to 1992. The audio of the event was made available by Asia Society on their website: http://www.asiasociety.org/resources/pakemergency.html .

While listening to the tape, it becomes quite apparent rather quickly that the main target of this delegation was the Supreme Court of Pakistan and its deposed Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry.  Several mis-statements were made specifically with regards to the person of CJ Chaudhry in order to discredit him.  The main objective of the delegation was to make a case that the pre-emergency Supreme Court of Pakistan, led by CJ Chaudhry, does not deserve to be reinstated under any circumstances.   

Mis-statement # 1: The Supreme Court of Pakistan was releasing "terrorists"

Barrister Saif and Mr. Ashraf argued that the Supreme Court was releasing terrorists. At one point, Barrister Saif stated that "Chaudhry after being reinstated [after the first suspension in March 2007] took missing person's case in which persons were 'allegedly' involved in terrorist activities." (34:05)

Rebuttal: The Supreme Court never ordered the release of any person charged with any crime. Instead, it addressed a petition filed by the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) with the names of 485 individuals who had simply disappeared. These people had been picked up by Pakistan's intelligence agencies and had never been heard of again. Many of these people have been held without being charged for years. Many apparently have no connection to terrorism, but have no way of proving their innocence since the government does not even acknowledge holding them.  At the request of the HRCP, the Supreme Court demanded that the basic right of Habeas Corpus be observed, and that these missing people be produced in court, and properly charged with crimes or offenses. In those instances where the intelligence agencies and the government were unable to provide any charge or supply even the most basic evidence against such individuals, the Courts ordered their release. There is nothing wrong with the Supreme Court demanding that, as per Pakistan's Constitution, any person in government custody be charged with a crime, and tried for it. Barrister Saif himself acknowledges on the tape that these people were "alleged" terrorists.

Mis-statement # 2: The Supreme Court ordered the re-opening of the Red Mosque

Barrister Saif stated that a two-member bench of the Supreme Court ordered the Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) to be opened.

Rebuttal: The two-member bench of the Supreme Court that ordered the reopening of the Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) was comprised of two judges who later took the oath under the Provisional Constitutional Order (PCO) after the emergency was declared by General Musharraf on Nov 3^rd.  It is clear that those two judges, Justice Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi and Justice Javed Buttar, are loyal to President Musharraf and it is not difficult to conjecture that these two "government judges" were instructed to issue such orders as a way of constructing a charge sheet against the Supreme Court and CJ Chaudhry. 

Mis-statement # 3: The necessary military action in NWFP province was not possible without declaring Emergency on Nov 3rd

Mr. Ashraf argued that the Musharraf government needed the NWFP provincial government's written approval to send military troops into Swat and because such an approval was not provided the Emergency declared on Nov 3^rd was necessary for the military to carry on its operations in Swat.

Rebuttal: The NWFP provincial government had resigned and the provincial assembly was dissolved prior to Nov 3^rd.  As a result, the central government already had full authority to send the military into Swat before Nov 3^rd and it did not need to declare Emergency on Nov 3^rd to do so. Even the Director General of Military Operations (DGMO) told several representatives of the media at a briefing at Military General Head Quarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi soon after Nov 3^rd that the Emergency was not needed for the Swat operation. The GHQ briefing was attended by leading journalists and TV anchors including Ayesha Haroon, Nasim Zehra, Talat Hussain, Zaffar Abbas, Najam Sethi, Ejaz Haider, Kamran Khan and Shafqat Mahmood.  It should be noted that President Musharraf and the newly appointed Army Chief General Kiyani both held the DGMO post earlier in their military careers. It should therefore be quite clear that when it comes to military matters, the DMGO has lot more pertinent knowledge compared to a civilian like Mr. Ashraf. 

Mis-statement # 4: There was a long list of charges against Chief Justice Chaudhry

Barrister Saif and Mr. Ashraf stated the there was a long list of charges against CJ Chaudhry when he was initially deposed in March 2007.

Rebuttal:

These charges had their day in court, and were dismissed unanimously by an 11 member bench of the Supreme Court. Yet Barrister Saif continues to malign the Chief Justice by bringing them up. Specifically, these charges were the subject of a several months long proceeding before a full bench of the Supreme Court. During the proceedings the bench not only unanimously rejected the charges, but also dismissed them as being filed with mala fide (i.e. malicious) intent, and as being false on face value. Indeed, the government actually tendered a formal apology to the Supreme Court for several of the accusations which were false on their face, and were remarkably fined Rs. 100,000 for making baseless allegations.  The credibility of these charges and thus the integrity of the Chief Justice can be judged by the fact that, last month, Harvard Law School awarded Chief Justice Chaudhry its highest award, the Medal of Freedom. The most immediate past recipients of this award were Nelson Mandela, and the legal team which argued Brown vs. The Board of Education. In addition, the New York City Bar Association, in another vote of confidence in the integrity of the Chief Justice, has awarded him an honorary lifetime membership. This rare honor was last given to the late Chief Justice Rehnquist of the US Supreme Court.

Mis-statement # 5: Chief Justice Chaudhry was making political speeches

Barrister Saif stated that after CJ Chaudhry was first deposed in March 2007, he went around the country making political speeches at Bar Association events. (52:00)

Rebuttal: The Bar Association event organizers only allowed lawyers who were members to attend the events with CJ Chaudhry.  Members of political parties were not invited at these events. CJ Chaudhry made all his speeches regarding human rights and did not touch on political matters.  There is no evidence whatsoever that CJ Chaudhry made any political speeches. 

Mis-statement # 6: Chief Justice Chaudhry was planning on running for President

Barrister Saif alleged that Mr. Aitzaz Ahsan, who was CJ Chaudhry's lawyer after he was first sacked in March 2007, had stated that CJ Chaudhry was planning on starting a "Justice Party" and CJ Chaudhry would be its presidential candidate. (52:30)

Rebuttal: Mr. Aitzaz Ahsan or CJ Chaudhry never made any comments regarding any new party or about CJ Chaudhry running for President.  Like all other public servants, CJ Chaudhry cannot run for public office till two years after his retirement from the Supreme Court, as stated in the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan. President Musharraf broke that law by running for President while still in a military uniform.  The legal challenges against his actions were pending in the Supreme Court when he declared the Emergency on Nov 3^rd.

Mis-statement # 7: None of the Supreme Court Judges are under house arrest

Barrister Saif stated that CJ Chaudhry and other judges are not under house arrest and there is no written order for their arrest. (38:09)

Rebuttal: CJ Chaudhry can't get out of his house which is under heavy police guard and his closest relatives are not allowed to see him.  CJ Chaudhry's daughter was due to take her O-Levels exams and the British High Commission arranged for her to take her exams at CJ Chaudhry's house as she was not allowed to leave the house by the police.  Even the moderator of the Asia Society event, Ambassador Nicholas Platt, told Barrister Saif that the judges were indeed under house arrest.  In addition, US Ambassador to Pakistan, Anne Patterson was not allowed by the police to meet with Mr. Aitzaz Ahsan who is also under house arrest after two weeks in solitary confinement in a prison. (http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=11535)  

Mis-statement # 8: A leading Pakistani journalist said that the Supreme Court was to blame for the declaration of emergency

Mr. Ashraf quoted Mr. Najam Sethi of The Friday Times from an article where Mr. Sethi blamed CJ Chaudhry and the Supreme Court for pushing President Musharraf to a point where he had to declare the Emergency on Nov 3^rd.

Rebuttal:  Najam Sethi is indeed considered one of the prominent journalists of Pakistan but he is clearly in the very tiny minority among Pakistan's influential journalists.  The following journalists who are as widely read as Najam Sethi have strongly criticized President Musharraf for his Nov 3^rd actions and lay the blame fully at his feet: Ayaz Amir, Tanvir Ahmad Khan, Hasan Askari Rizvi, Nasim Zehra, Shafqat Mahmood, Tariq Fatemi & Zahid Hussain. The overwhelming majority of respected journalists are against President Musharraf's declaration of the Emergency, including those who were previously somewhat sympathetic to him.

Mis-statement #9: Mr. Saif is a "neutral" member of the caretaker government

Barrister Saif stated in response to a question over the internet that he is a "neutral" member of the caretaker government installed by President Musharraf because he does not belong to a political party.

Rebuttal: Barrister Saif is not neutral.  He was an Advisor to the Ministry of Women's Affairs during the previous PML-Q government supported by President Musharraf. At the Asia Society event, he made the case in defense of the previous PML-Q government and blasted several major political parties in Pakistan as well as the lawyers, Supreme Court and the media.  In every country of the world, except under the emergency in Pakistan, such a person is considered "biased". Barrister Saif should be immediately removed from the "neutral" caretaker government and so should others belonging to the PML-Q party who are considered loyal to President Musharraf.

Mis-statement #10: International observers are welcome to come monitor elections

Ms. Tariq stated that "we welcome western observers to monitor the elections." (50:58)

Rebuttal: US government has officially raised serious concerns that foreign election observers willing to rush to Pakistan are being denied visas by the Pakistan embassies, a matter which has been raised at the level of President Musharraf and caretaker Prime Minister Muhammed Mian Soomro. US Ambassador Anne W. Patterson held an urgent meeting with the caretaker PM to raise the issue while a delegation of US Congressmen, who called on General Pervez Musharraf on Friday, also informed him that visas were being denied to election observers. (http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=11475 )

Mis-statement # 11: President Musharraf would not have to face the death penalty

Mr. Ashraf stated in response to a question that while he agreed that under the 1973 Constitution of Pakistan, a military coup or martial law is punishable by death as its considered mutiny, President Musharraf was off the hook because the (hand-picked pro-Musharraf) judiciary post the coup in 1999 had upheld the coup and a 2/3rd majority of Parliament (constituted after elections in 2002 which were considered by most to be massively rigged) had also condoned his actions.

Rebuttal: President Musharraf could still face the death penalty if the 1973 Constitution is reinstated. On Oct 12, 1999 the then-elected Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif sacked General Musharraf under powers vested in him by the Constitution of 1973 and replaced him with another general.  Mr. Musharraf who was no longer the Chief of the Army as a result of the PM's actions, later that day took the unlawful step of a military coup with the help of other military generals and breached Article 6 of the 1973 Constitution. The 1973 Constitution of Pakistan can indeed be amended by a 2/3^rd majority of the Parliament but Article 6 has not been amended or deleted even by the pro-Musharraf government and it still states that a military coup is punishable by death without any statute of limitations. Therefore, President Musharraf could still face the death penalty for his actions on Oct 12, 1999.  In addition, his actions on Nov 3, 2007 when he declared an emergency and revoked the 1973 Constitution (for the second time) are also punishable by death under the 1973 Constitution.  Interestingly enough, President Musharraf admitted in a BBC interview on Nov 16th that he had in fact acted illegally and violated the 1973 Constitution on Nov 3rd.  Since the Constitution cannot be amended until after it is reinstated and only an elected Parliament with 2/3rds majority have the right to amend it, the question at Asia Society by a member of the audience highlighted the lack of legal protection that President Musharaf would have under a reinstated 1973 Constitution.  This could be one reason why President Musharraf does not want the pre-emergency Supreme Court and CJ Chaudhry to be restored.

Blogged with Flock

First things first

There can be no free and fair election unless all the superior court judges are restored. You cannot put the cart before the horse.

 

By Muneer A. Malik

 

IT was heartening to see Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif finally sitting together. The formation of a joint ARD-APDM committee is a positive step. The committee is to agree on a minimum charter of demands that must be fulfilled before the opposition parties participate in the elections.

Naturally, the primary agenda of the opposition parties is to ensure an atmosphere where free and fair elections are possible. But such elections are impossible without the restoration of the superior judiciary to the status quo prevailing on Nov 2. There can be no transition to democracy without an independent judiciary.

 

Consider this. The Election Commission of Pakistan (EC) is responsible for the overall organisation and conduct of elections. It comprises a retired Supreme Court and one serving High Court judge from each province. The actual nomination and polling process is supervised by District Returning Officers (DROs), Returning Officers (ROs) and Assistant Returning Officers (AROs). Serving district judges, additional district judges and civil judges perform the duties of the DROs, ROs and AROs respectively. The Chief Justices of the pro vincial High Courts have administrative control over the subordinate judiciary. They control their appointments, transfers and promotions.

 

Any challenges to an RO's acceptance or rejection of nomination papers are to be decided by election tribunals constituted for that purpose. These tribunals consist of High Court judges. Any post-election disputes relating to the qualifications of candidates or allegations of unfairness or rigging are decided by election tribunals constituted for this purpose by the EC. Challenges against decisions of these tribunals end up before the provincial High Courts and finally the Supreme Court.

 

Every stage of the election process is conducted and supervised by the judiciary. Given our electoral system, it is naïve to say that the issue of restoration of judges can be taken up after the elections. There can be no free and fair election unless and until all the superior court judges are restored. You cannot put the cart before the horse. Independent judges supervising the electoral process are the only guarantee of a free and fair election.

 

On Nov 3, the Chief Justice of Pakistan, the Chief Justices of two provincial High Courts and the majority of Supreme Court and High Court judges were sacked. The Chief Justice and his brethren Supreme Court judges are under house arrest! It is impossible to over-emphasise the enormity of this action. It has no parallels in Pakistani or any other country's history.

 

What was their crime? They were hearing a petition against Musharraf's re-election as president. They had not even decided the case! When judges of the Supreme Court can be summarily dismissed and placed under detention for daring to simply hear a petition against Musharraf; how can any judge in the future ever act independently? How can a man who worries for the safety and future of himself and his family ever go against the wishes of the establishment?

 

My concern for the management and editorial staff of this newspaper prevents me from expressing my views on the few judges who decided to take oath under Musharraf's Provisional Constitution Order (PCO) superseding their original oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. They enjoy their offices while their erstwhile brother judges are forcibly confined to their houses.However, I am told that I can express my 'respectful, temperate criticism' of their judgments. I see no point in doing so. The legal fraternity does not and will not recognise PCO judges and their judgments. There is no point in petitioning courts whose independence is not guaranteed. The handful of lawyers who ignored the Pakistan Bar Council's boycott call, have already witnessed the utterly predictable results of their impetuosity. Likewise, political parties who rush to elections without first securing the restoration of an independent judiciary to supervise the electoral process will regret their haste.

 

Hundreds of district judges, additional district judges and civil judges throughout Pakistan were transferred with immediate effect by the incumbent de facto Chief Justices of the provincial High Courts just prior to the announcement of the election schedule. Again I am restrained from commenting upon the reasons behind this unprecedented step. But whatever the reasons may be, it is these lower court judges who will perform the functions of returning officers during the entire electoral process. And the EC has refused to reverse such transfers.

 

I am an optimist but I'm not a fool. The elections will be rigged. The ruling parties shall be returned with a thumping majority in parliament. Should PPP, PML-N, ANP and other opposition parties decide to participate; they shall be left marginalised. The most optimistic outcome could be a hung parliament where legislators will be left with a personal choice between packing their bags and going home or ratifying legislation that will preserve and grant indemnity to the usurper and his actions. And given the absence of an independent judiciary, there will be no legal recourse open to them.

 

The picture should be clear with the rejection of the nomination papers of the Sharif brothers. Understandably, they consider it futile to challenge the rejection before the current election tribunals and superior courts.

 

If the opposition parties are serious about securing free and fair elections with a level playing field; they must place the demand for the full restoration of the judiciary to the pre Nov 3 position on the top of their list. This demand has to be non-negotiable. In the absence of a full restoration of the judiciary; any concession granted by Musharraf's regime shall be meaningless.

 

The continuing protests, in the legal community and beyond, are taking their toll on the regime. The judicial machinery has come to almost a complete standstill. The growing consensus between the opposition parties is an endless source of concern for the establishment. The desperation of Musharraf's regime is evidenced by the number of leaks and feelers being sent out in every direction. Despite the Supreme Court's declaration that the issue of sacked judges is a past and closed transaction; it is being conveyed unofficially that the regime is amenable for a partial restoration of judges.

 

The legal fraternity shall not brook compromises on this issue. We shall not become party to the regime's attempt to pick and choose between judges and pack the courts with the more pliable ones. Each and every judge must be restored unconditionally. Our stand is based on principles and is not about individuals.

 

Now the judges who refused to take -- or were not given -- oath under the PCO are men who believe in the rule of law. They took a principled stand for the independence of the judicial institution at great personal cost. If they are restored, some may decide that the larger interest of an independent judicial institution requires them to make further personal sacrifice. But that choice must be theirs and theirs alone.

 

I have closely known the Chief Justice of Pakistan, Iftikhar Mohammad Chaudhry, Chief Justice of the Sindh High Court, Sabihuddin Ahmed and the Chief Justice of the Peshawar High Court, Tariq Pervez. I can testify to their honour and lack of vindictiveness.

 

But it is for the establishment to decide whether it prefers a course of confrontation that will plunge the nation into turmoil or whether it wishes to restore Pakistan's stability by submitting to the rule of law.

 

The writer is a former president of the Supreme Court Bar Association, who is currently hospitalised following renal failure during his detention in Attock jail.

Blogged with Flock

'Not Without My Khakis'

He said it. He probably could not control his emotions on the day when he bid farewell to the army in a ceremony reeking of pomp and excess, but Musharraf summed up, in one sentence, the supreme military psyche: “Without this army, the entity of Pakistan cannot exist” [emphasis added].

Right. And we lost East Pakistan partly because this glorious army surrendered when it most mattered that they put up a fight! Thanks to this very army the “entity of Pakistan” is struggling to stay alive today. Its interference, time and again, in the political process-not to mention its other ambitious money-making schemes- has done irreparable damage to the country’s institutions (in addition to that caused by some politicians).

Pakistanis too, are fast developing an intense dislike for the country’s army. Only the other day someone remarked “Show me an army officer, and I’ll show you a real estate agent.” What a shameful image the institution has created for itself.

What sham democracy are we heading towards, where the general-turned-president firmly believes that the army is the ‘be all and end all’ for the country, that our “existence” (no mild choice of words, mind you) depends on an institution that has, time and again, proved itself hungry only for power and wealth.

One is astounded at the audacity of the former general as he callously reduced Pakistan to a mere “entity” whose past and future rests on the shoulders of this bungling mob of soldiers called an army. And, to give credit where it is due, for so many months now and with many a heavy heart, the lower ranks of the military have been fighting fellow Pakistanis. While we empathize with them, we cannot ignore the fact that they are part of an institution that has rarely served the country faithfully. This cannot have been what armies were created for.

It is but natural then that, in these unfortunate times, Pakistanis all over the world should gasp for a breath of fresh air, and struggle to revive that document which almost every other country in the world believes is the real key to a nation’s existence – the constitution. Surely, in the 21^st century the life of any nation does not depend upon its army? And yet, in Pakistan our civilian president proclaims that his heart will remain inundated with love for the army. We only hope he can get his head out of the murky waters of military-style politics before his policies spell total ruin for Pakistan. Nevertheless, be warned all those who err to believe that Mr. Musharraf will be a force for positive change in Pakistan: you can take the man out of the army, but you will never take the army out of the man.

The struggle must continue. Musharraf may have shed his “skin” but there may be others conspiring to seize the much-coveted throne, illegally and extra-constitutionally. We can no longer allow the army, or any single person, be it a general or a politician, to attach to himself the label of indispensability. They must know that they are accountable to the people of Pakistan and, no number of self-constructed halos over their heads will detract from the oppression and misery they have wrought on Pakistan for sixty years!

We do not accept the sherwani in place of his khakis. Musharraf, the time has come for you and your beloved army to surrender your rein on power and make a full retreat!

Maria
Islamabad, Pakistan
December 2007

Blogged with Flock

Observe Dec 10 as 'black day' : HRCP urges civil society

Lahore 05 December 2007: The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan calls upon all members of civil society to observe the Universal Human Rights Day as a "black day". The worst human rights abuses, in the history of the country, were recorded in 2007. The rights of ordinary people have been violated by the government with impunity. More than 400 people have been picked up by security forces and many remain missing. The Musharraf regime obstructed the Supreme Court in providing justice to those who remain disappeared, as well as those who recorded their statements of having suffered extreme forms of torture at the hands of the security forces. Reports of torture, threats, intimidation, and arbitrary arrests run into thousands. Incidents of extrajudicial killings continue to be reported but never investigated.

The situation has now reached alarming proportions. The coercive apparatus of the State are being blatantly used against all sections of civil society. The media is chained and free expression censured. Thousands of lawyers, journalists, students, teachers and human rights activists were arrested. A number of them remain incarcerated under deplorable conditions. Lawyers and others have been accused of offences falling under the Anti-Terrorism Act. Thirty-five judges of superior courts have been put under house arrest. The family of the Chief Justice of Pakistan is also confined to their residence. This is unprecedented.

The rights of the people are being usurped on the pretext of curbing terrorism. It is the people who are suffering terrorism; both at the hands of non-state militants and state agents. The government has failed to bring militants to justice or to disarm them. On the contrary, at several occasions, the government and its agents have patronized or in the least, ignored criminal acts carried out by militants acting in the name of Islam.

HRCP warns that the claim made by Musharraf of moving towards a transition to democracy is a total farce. The assertion is yet another smack on the face of the people of Pakistan. Amendments to the Legal Practitioners and Bar Council Act as well as the Army Act are only a few examples of the government's grand plan to subjugate the spirit of peaceful members of civil society. Much more is to follow.

HRCP, along with other civil society groups, will organize a black day on the 10^th of December. Black flags and bands should be displayed on this unworthy occasion. In order to record the laudable struggle of the legal fraternity of Pakistan HRCP will award the best documentary film made on this movement. All entries are to be submitted by 30 June 2008. 

Asma Jahangir

Chairperson Human Rights Commission of Pakistan

Blogged with Flock

UN must consider new information about Iran’s nuke: China

BEIJING: China's ambassador to the UN says a new US intelligence report on Iran's nuclear programme raises questions about the need for new sanctions. 

The ambassador, Wang Guangya, said the UN Security Council would have to consider the new information because "now things have changed". 

A US intelligence report released on Monday said Iran halted a nuclear weapons programme in 2003. 

The US and its European allies are still pushing for sanctions on Iran. 

Mr Wang was asked whether the new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran made the prospect of a third round of UN sanctions against Iran less likely. 

"I think the council members will have to consider that, because I think we all start from the presumption that now things have changed," he said. 

He said diplomats would have to think about the implications of the report for Security Council action.

Blogged with Flock

GMAIL TOOLBOX: 60+ Tools For Gmail

By Sean P. Aune

Google announcing the ability to increase your Gmail storage capacity this week, we decided to delve into other ways to extend and enhance Google’s popular webmail service. Presenting: 60+ tools and resources for Gmail.

Blogged with Flock

Student Protest in Islamabad and Lahore, on 4th

Rise of Pakistan: Student Protest in Islamabad and Lahore, on 4th

Google Provides Details Of Anonymous Blogger In Israel

Google has provided the IP address of an anonymous blogger to an Israeli court as part of a defamation case, according to the Globes Online.

The defamation case centers on allegations against three members of the Shaarei Tikva council posted on Blogger, including posts that suggested the council members took bribes, pretended to be disabled to gain tax advantages, and that the councilmen have links to organized crime. The councilmen asked the court to order Google to hand over the IP address details of the anonymous blogger but the court did not order Google to do so. Instead Google entered into an arrangement where by they would contact the blogger and give him or her 3 days to respond anonymously to the allegations. There was no response from the blogger so Google handed over the IP address to the court and plantiffs despite there being no legal requirement for them to do so. (Update: See below).

According to Globes Online, Google had initially said that “disclosing the blogger’s identity violated rulings on the balance between freedom of expression and a person’s right to his reputation,” so what changed? This is the same company that refused to comply with US Government requests for information in 2005, a company that prides itself on privacy and its “Do No Evil” mantra. Perhaps the moral of the story: trust no one on privacy, even Google.

TechCrunch received email from Google regarding this story:

We wanted to let you know some facts about this case as we are concerned that the story on TechCrunch (like the one on Globes) is not accurate.

1. Google’s approach to providing users’ personal data is clear – we only provide information to third parties (such as law enforcement agencies) when they have been through the proper legal process. This ensures that we are able both to protect the privacy of our users and act responsibly where people may have used Google’s products to break the law.

2. In terms of this case:

· Members of the Israeli Shaarei Tikva Council asked for an injunction against Google - requiring us to provide the IP address of a blogger who had allegedly defamed them;

· Google opposed the injunction. Amongst other things, we wanted to give the blogger a chance to explain in court why his or her IP address should not be disclosed to members of the council;

· On 18 November the court agreed that the blogger should be sent a notice (via the blog) inviting him/her to appear at a hearing on 25 November 2007;

· The blogger failed to appear at this hearing – in his/her absence, and having considered all the various arguments, the court ordered that the IP address (which it was holding) be provided to the members of the council.

3. Google approach to this case has been entirely consistent with the way it handles all third party requests for user data.

4. In terms of Blogger, we have clear terms and conditions, which users agree to when they sign up for the service. These make clear that:

· Certain types of content is against our rules;

· Violation of our terms of service may lead not only to the termination of the users’ account but also “state and federal penalties and other legal consequences”; and

· Google may investigate any violations to “comply with any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request”.

In your comment to M Freitas you say “I’d note that Google voluntarily handed these details over, if the court had ordered them to do so, so be it but if they are serious about privacy they would have pushed it to that level, not just caved in at the first opportunity”. As you can see from the details above Google did oppose the injunction in court, we did not just cave in at the first opportunity and we did argue that the blogger in question should have the chance to make their case. But having considered all sides of the argument the judge ordered that the IP address be handed over.

Blogged with Flock

Direct US action in Pakistan possible against Osama: Bush

WASHINGTON: US President George Bush said Sunday that his country may launch an action on the report regarding the presence of Osama Bin Ladin in Pakistan.

He said this while giving an interview to an American news television. 

Appreciating Musharraf for fulfilling his promise of quitting the army office, he said that President Pervez Musharraf has played an important role for the restoration of democracy in the country, adding Pakistan arrested many Al-Qaeda operatives under his leadership, for which ‘we are grateful to Islamabad.’

Explaining his standpoint regarding venturing into an operation within Pakistan if the reports regarding the presence of Osama is proved right, President Bush maintained, ‘I still stand on the same stance that USA will undertake direct action on Pakistani soil against Osama, if his presence was proved.’

Blogged with Flock

US says it has right to kidnap British citizens

AMERICA has told Britain that it can “kidnap” British citizens if they are wanted for crimes in the United States.

A senior lawyer for the American government has told the Court of Appeal in London that kidnapping foreign citizens is permissible under American law because the US Supreme Court has sanctioned it.

The admission will alarm the British business community after the case of the so-called NatWest Three, bankers who were extradited to America on fraud charges. More than a dozen other British executives, including senior managers at British Airways and BAE Systems, are under investigation by the US authorities and could face criminal charges in America.

Read more here

Blogged with Flock

Benazir would betray Pakistan by running in poll: Imran Khan

LAHORE, Dec 1 (Reuters) Former prime minister Benazir Bhutto is betraying Pakistan by not joining an election boycott that Pakistan Tehreek-i-Insaf chief Imran Khan said Saturday was key to ousting President Musharraf. “It is a complete case of betrayal,” Khan told Reuters in an interview after addressing lawyers in Lahore. “Every day she says there is pre-poll rigging, every day she says there can't be free and fair elections. She says she doesn't trust the caretakers, she says the emergency is illegal...And yet she is participating and legitimising the whole process.” “We want the whole (election) process to be discredited,” Khan added. “To participate...is just playing on his pitch to save him. We are just giving him a lifeline…If all the opposition got together today, the elections would be discredited, then he's gone, because he's no longer head of the army…So then we have free and fair elections and hope for the future.” Khan says Bush's backing for Musharraf is compounding Pakistan's problems. “If they do not ask for the reinstatement of the judges, they are playing Musharraf's game. Basically the impression is George Bush's administration does not want an independent judiciary, because then they won't be able to control the government like a puppet supposedly to fight their war on terror.” “This movement eventually will turn against the U.S. too, like the Iranian revolution.”

Source: Insaf News

Blogged with Flock

Imran Khan: Interview with George Galloway - 11 June 2007

George Galloway interviewed Imran Khan on 11th June 2007, it was the time when Imran Khan visited England to file a case against Altaf Hussain after the shameless incident of 12 May 2007. This talk is very very interesting and worthy to lesten completely. Do not forget to leave your comments.

Blogged with Flock

Shahbaz Sharif’s nominations rejected

LAHORE: The returning officer Saturday rejected nomination papers of President PML-N Shahbaz Sharif.Former chief minister of Punjab Shahbaz Sharif had filed nomination papers for National Assembly seat NA 119, and Punjab Assembly seats PP141 and PP 142.The returning officer rejected Shahbaz papers due to Ittefaq Foundry loans default, sources said.

Source: Geo News

Blogged with Flock

Imran reacts to Maulana Fazal-ur-Rehman’s statement

ISLAMABAD, Nov 30 (APP): Chairman Tehreek-e-Insaf Imran Khan Friday strongly reacting to Maulana Fazal-ur-Rehman’s statement wherein he has said that Nawaz Sharif has been taken hostage by letterhead parties said had the PTI adopted same approach as Maulana did, it would have got sufficient share in the government.

In a telephonic interview to PTV he said that everybody knows the  parties like JUIF are alive with the support of agencies and establishment.

The PTI Chairman also criticized Pakistan Peoples Party and Mutahidda  Qoumi Movement saying they are furthering the western agenda in making way towards the power corridor.

To a question he said the manifesto of PTI stands for independent judiciary and it strongly demands for restoration of pre-November 3, position of the superior judiciary.

He said in the prevailing circumstances it would be a violation of its own constitution if the PTI opts to participate in the election.

To another question the PTI Chairman said that he had committed a mistake by supporting President Pervez Musharraf in the presidential referendum in past.

Source: APP

Blogged with Flock

Untitled

Facebook members have forced the social networking site to change the way a controversial ad system worked.

More than 50,000 Facebook users signed a petition calling on the company to alter or abandon its Beacon advertising technology. Read more here

Blogged with Flock

Hostage drama at Clinton office

A man claiming to have a bomb has taken a number of people hostage at a Hillary Clinton campaign office in Rochester, New Hampshire, police say.

Mrs Clinton is at a Democratic campaign event in Virginia and is not involved in the siege. Read more here

Blogged with Flock