The Plan To Topple Pakistan Military

Well written article Mr. Qureshi:

I have been saying the same things on my own and I am glad that there is someone else who shares the same views. Please take a look at the following article by Prof. Michel Chossudovsky. You will find it very interesting as it supports yours article "The Plan to Topple the Pakistan Military" completely:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7705

Following is the e-mail received about the author, Mr Ahmed Quraishi.

Ahmed Quraishi's ''enlightening' ' articles have been doing the rounds on the net of late. One can only describe him as Pakistan's very own Bill O' Reilly (with just as much credibility! ). And like O' Reilly, his most used weapon of choice is the tag of 'traitor' and 'unpatriotic' for anyone who criticizes the government (or perhaps just el presidente, the now retired generalisimo) , be they politicians, journalists, lawyers, academics, human rights activists, former army officers et al. It seems Mr. Quraishi gets his inspiration (along with his fake American accent) from Fox News.

Even a cursory look at his website might help one understand Mr. Quraishi's "unbiased, journalistic, analytical, and professional " approach to issues he so passionately addresses in his articles. Mr. Quraishi's website is studded with countless gems that reflect the luminosity of his brilliance, breadth of vision, and intellectual maturity.

For instance, in the 'biography' section of ahmedquraishi. com, (also known as the ''tooting one's own horn' section) we are informed that "Starting in the year 2003, Mr. Quraishi has lent his expertise to FurmaanRealpolitik www.furmaanrealpoli tik.com.pk), a political consulting firm originally based in Dubai."

A look at the website of furmaanrealpolitik. com.pk . (who came up with this subtle name, one wonders?) helps answer questions people might entertain regarding Mr. Quraishi's credibilty, motives and unique understanding of national and international affairs.

The 'services' offered by furmaanrealpolitik include "Intelligence, Research & Analysis;" "Surveillance & Confidential Investigations; " "Mobilization & Campaign Development; " and (my personal favourite) "Immaculate Deception Creations Tailored to Your Senses."
This 'service' is not only my favourite for the brilliant title it boasts but also for its content:

'Immaculate Deception Creations Tailored to Your Senses'? Immaculate Deception... Are we talking about peddling untruths in order to deceive? Oh dear! So how do Mr. Quraishi and the boys at furmaanrealpolitik serve their clients? The website says: "Anyone can do TV. But we go a step further -- we create...Our production can be tailored to business, political and military requirements. "

So whether it is Benazir Bhutto or Nawaz Sharif or Pervez Musharaf or the ISI or Coca Cola or Tapal Danedar Chai, the ''passionate' ' team at furmaanrealpolitik will sell its services to the highest bidder and come up with ''immaculately deceptive'' techniques ''tailored'' to their respective ''senses'' (and by senses I am guessing Mr. Quraishi is not talking about a sense of decency here!).

Is Mr. Quraishi telling us that as part of a political consulting/lobbying firm that proudly lists on its website its expertise in conjuring up lies and deceptions, that he actually makes his living by peddling lies and untruths? Or as he calls them "immaculate deceptions?"

As an analyst and a journalist, what does this say about his work, his credibility?

Are we to understand that every word Mr.Quraishi pens is written on the behest of a client? Could it be that Mr. Quraishi's 'insightful and unique take on national and international affairs is as faux as his American accent and can vary depending on who bids the highest for his immaculately deceptive words?

In case Mr. Quraishi has misunderstood the meaning of the word deception and used it by mistake (and with the same casual attitude and effort with which he throws conspiracy theories and allegations about in his articles), let me offer the servies of my humble thesauraus. Alternatives for the word deception are listed as: dishonesty, trickery, fraud, con, sham, trick, ruse, cheating... etc.

Forget about out the rest of the world, I wonder how seriously his own son, little Al Waleed, would take daddy dearest the next time he is instructed not to lie and to always tell the truth!

The remaining "natural" Pakistan would lie entirely east of the Indus, except for a westward spur near Karachi.

I have quoted from part of the article that talks about independent karachi . i will send in the map also later. in 1947 at time of independence ,pakistan was being ruled by urduspeakers. the ruling eurduspeaking elite as a matter of policy encouraged urduspeakers to settle in karachi . karachi was the capital . liaquat ali khan had no base or votes in pakistan and he deliberately encourage the settlement of urduspeakers in karachi to create a base for himself . the quota system is based on urban and rural sind. it does not specifically mention the two ethnicities. urduspeakers are no more than 35% of population of sind. do u think its just that they have more than they share in public sector jobs when they already completely dominate the private sector in sind? jammat islami nodoubt opposed partition before 1947. however after that it has steadfastly been most anti-india. they are the most steadfast supporters of kashmir issue. there have been others who opposed partition but these people do not command the majority of votes in their communities. ANP doesnt have majority of pukhtoons behind it . GM Syed's party never won elections. But MQM has and time and time again . part if its success is its unbashed use of terror . but the fact is that urduspeakers support MQM.Even those who do not support MQM's tactics have sympathy with its ideology. In any case no one except altaf hussain has the audacity to go to delhi and in front of whole world declare partition the greatest blunder in human history. for the rest of pakistan , this is treachery enough. As for sindhis which sindhis u r talking about? whatever their political leanings be,they are against bringing back biharis, they consider the capture of their cities by urduspeakers a great disaster for them . but they are realistic. they came to terms with the fact that you guys cant be removed . but what did u guys do? you deprived ppp,which commands the voted of most sindhis of its due share of power in sind. in 2002 elections mqm had 41 seats in sind assembly and ppp had 68. yet musharaf a biased urduspeaker refused to give ppp a chance to form government . he handed over governorship of sind to a criminal who had once assaulted an army major , and the most important ministrues of finance and police to mqm . sindhis had no important ministry in sind government during 2002-2007.

I meet a lot people. and i know their emotions. you can not imagine the anger felt at mqm for may 12 in punjab and nwfp. the NWFP assembly even passed a resoloution on this. nawaz sharif is a very keena parwar man and he will not spare mqm. one day judicary will be restored and then there will be proper investigation of may 12. justu wait and see.

{When i talk of IBA,LUMS, i am raising a totally valid point . I am talking about the complete superiority that urduspeakers have over sindhis because they control the cities.}
I don't get the point. When Mohajir migrated they were given those places in Karachi and Hyderabad and stayed there.

{In India there are quotas RESERVED IN every college,university for lower caste hindus and people accept that . But when quotas are instituted in pakistan to help lift sindhis , urduspeakers start growling and complaining . The point is that Urduspeakers have no cause to complain }
Do you think it was illogical to complain about quota system which is discriminatory against Mohajir (although I was in favor of it)

They are the most richest and prosperous community yet they have the audacity to declare partition a blunder.

that is your opinion. Many in Pakistan have written on partition and many were against partition. Most prominent among them Jamat-e-Islami. Lot of Muslim leaders from all parts of Pakistan were against partition. If you think all Mohajirs think partition is a blunder, then you should correct yourself.

{On this website i see tons and tons of hatred pumped against punjab and its people by urduspeakers and mqm supporters}

I really cannot guess by name who is mqm supporter and who is urduspeaker on this board. How do you know they are not punjabi, Pathan, Baluch, Sindhi, bengali or Indian.

{Punjabi industrial class grew mainly after 1977. before that punjabis had negligible presence in trade,commerce and industry}

That is your opinion. Textile, sports good, mechanical products have been in Punjab. If you need I will provide you with sources.

{The bottomline is that MQM is a terrorist organization that has ties with india. it has sworn to separate karachi }

Is that your opinion or you have some information like manifesto etc

{ the bottomline is that karachites are determined to deny the sindhis their fair share of power in sind .}

A lot of Sindhis have moved to Karachi. And they think development of Karachi has been good for Sind and Sindhis.

{We the rest of pakistan will no longerallow that}
Who is WE. Are you rest of Pakistan meaning only a single person or are there few more like you.

{just you wait and see . very soon ashfaq kiyani who is a glorious punjabi will withdraw support from mush dehalvi . nawaz sharif and bb will oust mush . In Sind ,Mqm will be banned . Altaf Hussain and his thugs will be tried for May12 massacre . Any attempt by MQM to use violence will be most ruthlessly crushed}

This is just pathetic. Do you want any comment on this.

Sir this is your link, I don't see anything.
:http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899

COMMENTARYsubsc ribe | email | print | continue the debate Blood borders
How a better Middle East would look
By Ralph Peters
International borders are never completely just. But the degree of injustice they inflict upon those whom frontiers force together or separate makes an enormous difference — often the difference between freedom and oppression, tolerance and atrocity, the rule of law and terrorism, or even peace and war.

The most arbitrary and distorted borders in the world are in Africa and the Middle East. Drawn by self-interested Europeans (who have had sufficient trouble defining their own frontiers), Africa's borders continue to provoke the deaths of millions of local inhabitants. But the unjust borders in the Middle East — to borrow from Churchill — generate more trouble than can be consumed locally.

While the Middle East has far more problems than dysfunctional borders alone — from cultural stagnation through scandalous inequality to deadly religious extremism — the greatest taboo in striving to understand the region's comprehensive failure isn't Islam but the awful-but-sacrosanct international boundaries worshipped by our own diplomats.

Of course, no adjustment of borders, however draconian, could make every minority in the Middle East happy. In some instances, ethnic and religious groups live intermingled and have intermarried. Elsewhere, reunions based on blood or belief might not prove quite as joyous as their current proponents expect. The boundaries projected in the maps accompanying this article redress the wrongs suffered by the most significant "cheated" population groups, such as the Kurds, Baluch and Arab Shia, but still fail to account adequately for Middle Eastern Christians, Bahais, Ismailis, Naqshbandis and many another numerically lesser minorities. And one haunting wrong can never be redressed with a reward of territory: the genocide perpetrated against the Armenians by the dying Ottoman Empire.

Yet, for all the injustices the borders re-imagined here leave unaddressed, without such major boundary revisions, we shall never see a more peaceful Middle East.

Even those who abhor the topic of altering borders would be well-served to engage in an exercise that attempts to conceive a fairer, if still imperfect, amendment of national boundaries between the Bosporus and the Indus. Accepting that international statecraft has never developed effective tools — short of war — for readjusting faulty borders, a mental effort to grasp the Middle East's "organic" frontiers nonetheless helps us understand the extent of the difficulties we face and will continue to face. We are dealing with colossal, man-made deformities that will not stop generating hatred and violence until they are corrected.

As for those who refuse to "think the unthinkable," declaring that boundaries must not change and that's that, it pays to remember that boundaries have never stopped changing through the centuries. Borders have never been static, and many frontiers, from Congo through Kosovo to the Caucasus, are changing even now (as ambassadors and special representatives avert their eyes to study the shine on their wingtips).

Oh, and one other dirty little secret from 5,000 years of history: Ethnic cleansing works.

Begin with the border issue most sensitive to American readers: For Israel to have any hope of living in reasonable peace with its neighbors, it will have to return to its pre-1967 borders — with essential local adjustments for legitimate security concerns. But the issue of the territories surrounding Jerusalem, a city stained with thousands of years of blood, may prove intractable beyond our lifetimes. Where all parties have turned their god into a real-estate tycoon, literal turf battles have a tenacity unrivaled by mere greed for oil wealth or ethnic squabbles. So let us set aside this single overstudied issue and turn to those that are studiously ignored.

The most glaring injustice in the notoriously unjust lands between the Balkan Mountains and the Himalayas is the absence of an independent Kurdish state. There are between 27 million and 36 million Kurds living in contiguous regions in the Middle East (the figures are imprecise because no state has ever allowed an honest census). Greater than the population of present-day Iraq, even the lower figure makes the Kurds the world's largest ethnic group without a state of its own. Worse, Kurds have been oppressed by every government controlling the hills and mountains where they've lived since Xenophon's day.

The U.S. and its coalition partners missed a glorious chance to begin to correct this injustice after Baghdad's fall. A Frankenstein's monster of a state sewn together from ill-fitting parts, Iraq should have been divided into three smaller states immediately. We failed from cowardice and lack of vision, bullying Iraq's Kurds into supporting the new Iraqi government — which they do wistfully as a quid pro quo for our good will. But were a free plebiscite to be held, make no mistake: Nearly 100 percent of Iraq's Kurds would vote for independence.

As would the long-suffering Kurds of Turkey, who have endured decades of violent military oppression and a decades-long demotion to "mountain Turks" in an effort to eradicate their identity. While the Kurdish plight at Ankara's hands has eased somewhat over the past decade, the repression recently intensified again and the eastern fifth of Turkey should be viewed as occupied territory. As for the Kurds of Syria and Iran, they, too, would rush to join an independent Kurdistan if they could. The refusal by the world's legitimate democracies to champion Kurdish independence is a human-rights sin of omission far worse than the clumsy, minor sins of commission that routinely excite our media. And by the way: A Free Kurdistan, stretching from Diyarbakir through Tabriz, would be the most pro-Western state between Bulgaria and Japan.

A just alignment in the region would leave Iraq's three Sunni-majority provinces as a truncated state that might eventually choose to unify with a Syria that loses its littoral to a Mediterranean-oriented Greater Lebanon: Phoenecia reborn. The Shia south of old Iraq would form the basis of an Arab Shia State rimming much of the Persian Gulf. Jordan would retain its current territory, with some southward expansion at Saudi expense. For its part, the unnatural state of Saudi Arabia would suffer as great a dismantling as Pakistan.

A root cause of the broad stagnation in the Muslim world is the Saudi royal family's treatment of Mecca and Medina as their fiefdom. With Islam's holiest shrines under the police-state control of one of the world's most bigoted and oppressive regimes — a regime that commands vast, unearned oil wealth — the Saudis have been able to project their Wahhabi vision of a disciplinarian, intolerant faith far beyond their borders. The rise of the Saudis to wealth and, consequently, influence has been the worst thing to happen to the Muslim world as a whole since the time of the Prophet, and the worst thing to happen to Arabs since the Ottoman (if not the Mongol) conquest.

While non-Muslims could not effect a change in the control of Islam's holy cities, imagine how much healthier the Muslim world might become were Mecca and Medina ruled by a rotating council representative of the world's major Muslim schools and movements in an Islamic Sacred State — a sort of Muslim super-Vatican — where the future of a great faith might be debated rather than merely decreed. True justice — which we might not like — would also give Saudi Arabia's coastal oil fields to the Shia Arabs who populate that subregion, while a southeastern quadrant would go to Yemen. Confined to a rump Saudi Homelands Independent Territory around Riyadh, the House of Saud would be capable of far less mischief toward Islam and the world.

Iran, a state with madcap boundaries, would lose a great deal of territory to Unified Azerbaijan, Free Kurdistan, the Arab Shia State and Free Baluchistan, but would gain the provinces around Herat in today's Afghanistan — a region with a historical and linguistic affinity for Persia. Iran would, in effect, become an ethnic Persian state again, with the most difficult question being whether or not it should keep the port of Bandar Abbas or surrender it to the Arab Shia State.

What Afghanistan would lose to Persia in the west, it would gain in the east, as Pakistan's Northwest Frontier tribes would be reunited with their Afghan brethren (the point of this exercise is not to draw maps as we would like them but as local populations would prefer them). Pakistan, another unnatural state, would also lose its Baluch territory to Free Baluchistan. The remaining "natural" Pakistan would lie entirely east of the Indus, except for a westward spur near Karachi.

The city-states of the United Arab Emirates would have a mixed fate — as they probably will in reality. Some might be incorporated in the Arab Shia State ringing much of the Persian Gulf (a state more likely to evolve as a counterbalance to, rather than an ally of, Persian Iran). Since all puritanical cultures are hypocritical, Dubai, of necessity, would be allowed to retain its playground status for rich debauchees. Kuwait would remain within its current borders, as would Oman.

In each case, this hypothetical redrawing of boundaries reflects ethnic affinities and religious communalism — in some cases, both. Of course, if we could wave a magic wand and amend the borders under discussion, we would certainly prefer to do so selectively. Yet, studying the revised map, in contrast to the map illustrating today's boundaries, offers some sense of the great wrongs borders drawn by Frenchmen and Englishmen in the 20th century did to a region struggling to emerge from the humiliations and defeats of the 19th century.

Correcting borders to reflect the will of the people may be impossible. For now. But given time — and the inevitable attendant bloodshed — new and natural borders will emerge. Babylon has fallen more than once.

Meanwhile, our men and women in uniform will continue to fight for security from terrorism, for the prospect of democracy and for access to oil supplies in a region that is destined to fight itself. The current human divisions and forced unions between Ankara and Karachi, taken together with the region's self-inflicted woes, form as perfect a breeding ground for religious extremism, a culture of blame and the recruitment of terrorists as anyone could design. Where men and women look ruefully at their borders, they look enthusiastically for enemies.

From the world's oversupply of terrorists to its paucity of energy supplies, the current deformations of the Middle East promise a worsening, not an improving, situation. In a region where only the worst aspects of nationalism ever took hold and where the most debased aspects of religion threaten to dominate a disappointed faith, the U.S., its allies and, above all, our armed forces can look for crises without end. While Iraq may provide a counterexample of hope — if we do not quit its soil prematurely — the rest of this vast region offers worsening problems on almost every front.

If the borders of the greater Middle East cannot be amended to reflect the natural ties of blood and faith, we may take it as an article of faith that a portion of the bloodshed in the region will continue to be our own.

Bhai Jan , property par qabza karnay kay liay sara drama kia.Wahan Bombay or Gujrat kay na laiq mussalman memons nay Jinnah ko blank cheque dia.Sab Rokray kee game thee.

SOK,

The % age of Muslim population in India was around 10% in 1951 it is about 15% now. While the Hindus and Sikhs have been decimated from around 25% in Punjab and Sind (in 1940s) to les than 2% now. So figure out who has been more hostile to its minorities!!!

As far as population figures are concerned, do back it up with authentic sources, if you can. And for your information, www.Dalitsan.org and www.Lal Masjid.com is not considered authentic!!!

Re: Bengal One distt Khulna which was 50-50 went to Pak and so did the Chittagong Hills which was almost 100% Buddhist. In turn one Muslim majority distt (I think Murshidabad went to India). So even Stevens.

(16000 muslim women and children were recovered from indian punjab while a little over 8000 non-muslims were recovered from our side. )

Which means I guess that the remaining 8,000 Kaffiroons had either been murdered or exported to Kingdom of Saudi Arabia!!!

Regards

Re: # 150:--

The Muslim League politicians in West Punjab planned the murder of Master Tara Singh's old mother in Gujar Khan Tehsil of Pindi first.This was the first incident in Punjab you bigoted man.All to grab property of Hindus and Sikhs the elite of Punjab.All for money.Massacres in West Punjab were as well organised as East Punjab .Thats why there are no Hindus and Sikhs in West Punjab.Even Sardar Shaukat Hayat acknowledged this.Read his book you ignoramus.

Gurdaspur was 51% muslims without the qadianis . out of 4 tehsins , pathankot had a high concentration of non-muslims (70%)thats . in other tehsils muslims were 60% and above. but battala and gurdaspur were handed over to india just because nehru wanted a landlink to india . even MJ Akbar accepts that nehru prevailed over mountbatten to get gurdaspur distruct . i have already mentioned Ferozepure and zira,jalandhar,ajnala. patiala , kapurthala ,chamba states were 60% muslims but had sikh rulers who acceded to india. in bengal too there was great deal of gerrymandering by mountbatten . i will present complete details tommorow. u insist on lying. Amritsar was 46% muslim . infact muslims were the largest community there,only the combined number of sikhs and hindus was greater than 46% otherwise individually these communities were smaller than muslims numerically in amritsar.


The muder and massacre in east punjab was systematic , organized and completely state sponsored. The British head of boundary Force has clearly stated this in his memoirs"while memory serves". the cruelties in westpunjab were not systematic but more of a retaliation. after partition when kidnapped children and women were exchanged,16000 muslim women and children were recovered from indian punjab while a little over 8000 non-muslims were recovered from our side. this clearly shows who suffered more.

SOK,

(muslim league won the elections in 1946 in punjab .)

Rashid mian has not challenged that at all. His point is that it was only as LATE as 1946 that Punjab went over to the ML and Pakistan cause. Till that time the Unionists who were anti-Pak had ruled the roost.

(punjab's sacrifices )

What sacrifice? They merely gave up districts which were not Muslim majority to begin with. What sacrifice is involved in giving up what does not belong to you in the first place? Besides the West Punjabi Muslims gained a lot of land and property by looting the Hindus and Sikhs who left, they owned most of the land and property in West Punjab and Sind. Besides, while it is true that Punjabi Muslims in East Punjab suffered a lot (murder, rape and looting) they equally committed atrocities on Hindus and Sikhs in W Punjab. (Btw, I EQUALLY condemn atrocties by both sides) West Punjabi Muslims suffered nothing and gained a lot.

(Gurdaspur was 51% muslim )

Gurdaspur was 51% Muslim only if you falsely include Qadianis as Muslims. And as we all know (thanks to the preachings of Maulana Urstruly (pbuh)) that Qadianis are not Muslims. Gurdaspur was non-Muslim and belonged to India.

Regards

punjab never joined late. urduspeakers deliberately harp in this point in order to magnify their efforts in freedom struggle . muslim league won the elections in 1946 in punjab . the punjab assembly voted overwhelmingly ,infact all muslims members voted to divide the province . punjab's sacrifices are the biggest and most important. kashmir was never allowed to decide. the assembly that acceded to india in 1950s was a bogus assembly where most members were elected unopposed. nobody recognizes them .
You say that after independence pakistan told muslims in india to stay in india. There was no conception i repeat no conception of transfer of population in any speech of jinnah . In any case tell me can pakistan accomodate all the indian muslims?can we ? I still see lot of indian muslims marrying in pakistan and moving to pakistan . pakistan's first priority is its own original inhabitants and not distant cousins in UP,CP. The fact is that initially Muslim League was not even very popular in UP,CP. in 1937 elections it did not win the majority of seats reserved for muslims in UP,CP.

When i talk of IBA,LUMS, i am raising a totally valid point . I am talking about the complete superiority that urduspeakers have over sindhis because they control the cities. In India there are quotas RESERVED IN every college,university for lower caste hindus and people accept that . But when quotas are instituted in pakistan to help lift sindhis , urduspeakers start growling and complaining . The point is that Urduspeakers have no cause to complain . They are the most richest and prosperous community yet they have the audacity to declare partition a blunder, their organization MQM gets arms from india and is openly conspiring to break pakistan.On this website i see tons and tons of hatred pumped against punjab and its people by urduspeakers and mqm supporters.

Punjabi industrial class grew mainly after 1977. before that punjabis had negligible presence in trade,commerce and industry. Where did u get this list?? What is the source ?? Even if this list were to be believed , there is only 1 sindhi in it and 10 karachites. No correct estimate of asif zardari's wealth exists. infact although he is from sind,he is not sindhi but a seraiki settled in sindhi.

you had asked me earlier about the map of pakistan by US thinktanks. here is the
link:http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899




The bottomline is that MQM is a terrorist organization that has ties with india. it has sworn to separate karachi . the bottomline is that karachites are determined to deny the sindhis their fair share of power in sind . We the rest of pakistan will no longerallow that . just you wait and see . very soon ashfaq kiyani who is a glorious punjabi will withdraw support from mush dehalvi . nawaz sharif and bb will oust mush . In Sind ,Mqm will be banned . Altaf Hussain and his thugs will be tried for May12 massacre . Any attempt by MQM to use violence will be most ruthlessly crushed .

Hey,

This article shows the paranoia of the ISI in PAkistan.
ISI is now witnessing a "counter-Jehad" against them- that is making them jittery- that is dangerous because ISI can very well smuggle a few bombs to Osama on a container to NY!!

Son of Kashmir:
I don't understand your logic.
Pakistan came into being voluntarily.
All the assemblies or ruler decided to join voluntarily because of your initial premise that all provinces joining will be autonomous. When people of Punjab joined (although late) they knew that they are joining Pakistan. Kashmir although never joined Pakistan and its assembly passed resolution to join India in 1954 or 1956, still Kashmiris were treated as if they are Pakistani (just because there was no plebiscite to find out what the people of Kashmir want).
Other thing after independence to prevent the flood of migrants Pakistan told Indian Muslims to stay in India.
Another thing because of Islamic relationship some states surrounded by India still decided to join Pakistan like Junagadh and Hyderabad.
There is no question that Memon and Chinioti businessmen contributed a great deal for the Industrialization of Pakistan, but as I told even at middle businessman level it is the growth of cities in Punjab like Faisalabad, Gujrat, Gujranwala, and not in any other province. Which suggest that business mainly grew in Punjab. On another level I will give you the current list of most rich people in Pakistan and you will see how the relationship has changed.

1 - Mian Muhammad Mansha Yaha Pakistan
Ranking: 1 Worth: £1.25b ($2.5billion)Industry: Businessman

2 - Asif Ali Zardari Pakistan
Ranking: 2 Worth: £900m ($1.8billion) Industry: Politics

3 - Sir Anwar Pervaiz UK
Ranking: 3 Worth: £750m ($1.5billion) Industry: Businessman

4 - Nawaz Sharif & Shahbaz Sharif family Saudi Arabia/Pakistan
Ranking: 4 Worth: £700m ($1.4billion) Industry: Politics/Businessman

5 - Saddaruddin Hashwani Pakistan
Ranking: 5 Worth: £550m ($1.1billion) Industry: Businessman

6 - Nasir Schon & family U.A.E/Pakistan
Ranking: 6 (tied at 6) Worth: £500m ($1billion) Industry: Businessman

7 - Abdul Razzaq Yakoub & family U.A.E
Ranking: 6 (tied at 6) Worth: £500m ($1billion) Industry: Businessman

8 - Rafiq Habib & Rasheed Habib Pakistan
Ranking: 7 Worth: £450m ($900) Industry: Businessman

9 - Tariq Saigol & Nasim Saigol Pakistan
Ranking: 8 Worth: £425m ($850) Industry: Businessman

10 - Dewan Yousaf Farooqui Pakistan
Ranking: 9 (tied at 9) Worth: £400m ($800) Industry: Businessman

11 - Sultan Ali Lakhani & family Pakistan
Ranking: 9 (tied at 9) Worth: £400m ($800) Industry: Businessman

13 - Sheikh Abid Hussain alias Seth Abid Pakistan
Ranking: 10 Worth: £390m ($780) Industry: Businessman

14 - Mian Mohammed Latif Pakistan
Ranking:11 Worth: £350m ($700) Industry: Businessman

15 - Haji Abdul Ghafoor & Haji Bashir Ahmed Pakistan
Ranking: 12 Worth: £330m ($660) Industry: Businessman

16 - Sheikhani Family Pakistan
Ranking: 13 Worth: £300m ($600) Industry: Businessman

17 - Razzaq Dawood Pakistan/UAE
Ranking: 14 (tied at 14) Worth: £250m ($500) Industry: Businessman

18 - Byram Dinshawji Avari Pakistan
Ranking: 14 (tied at 14) Worth: £250m ($500) Industry: Businessman

Anyway you can see the list and is about the same.
The important thing is how much the common man benefited from being rich from Karachi or Punjab.
On another count most of these businessman are National or Multinational, for example Urdu speaking Mohajir has business in Punjab, and Punjabi speaking businessman has business in Karachi. Whatever way you argue important thing is equitable distribution and development of all parts of Pakistan.

As far as Urdu speaking vs Sindhi speaking in LUMS and IBA they have their own exam and merit and are private institutions. What is the point. For your information hailing in Karachi does not mean Mohajir, there are Punjabi, Pathan, Sindhi etc who compete together.
Lets take this discussion on another board.
I am putting the list of Pakistan top 10 rich on that forum, so you know which board to go to.

Interesting analysis.I agree that Ahmad Qureshi has made some wild assertions.However as I see it the USA as Marx said may not be creating history but it makes use of a situation that it inherits.Like it made use of 9/11 to occupy Afghanistan......a great strategic attack .....larger in dimension than Operation Barbarossa!About the Zia crash I have some observations ! While reading declassified CIA archives from the CIA History Staff I came upon a passge of the CIA reports in 1997 ...." after the Soviet withdrawal US relations with Zia will become complicated" ! As an officer of the 1st Armoured Division when Zia crash occurred I also met many direct witnesses in 1988 including the major who was incharge of despatching the dead bodies by air ! The major stated that while alive Zia's arrival brought every one to the airport but on despatch he had few soldiers with clothes tied on face to avoid the stench.Even the official Airforce report stated sabotage to be the cause.The incident could be a CIA operation or a KGB operation.General Zia was not toeing the American line.In this scenario US relations with the Musharraf regime are good.However it appears that they want Benazir in the future power set up.Perhaps they hope that Benazir will be able to deliver.Although with Benazir's team as it stands I have grave doubts if she can deliver ! This is the pattern in history ! The English East India Company also first used local collaborators and once they outlived their utility the English stepped in ! Sooner or later the Americans will physically intervene ! This is why they made Afghanistan their base of operations ! Its going to be a very complicated,bloody and sticky affair ! The line between right and wrong would be blurred ! A confusion in principle has already been introduced ! Generals have forgiven the corruption of politicians and politicans have also forgiven te general.The elite is the same ! Both the civil and military first collaborated with the British an are collaborating with the Americans since 1947.The policy was initiated by Jinnah.The same story as Punjab collaboration of 1857 and now the collaboration with USA.Pakistan was not created for the common man.

Re: # 143:-- I am referring to Son of Kashmir saying that Qadiani treachery was instrumental in Gurdaspurs accession to India ! May be he thinks that Mountbatten was a Qadiani !

How can you prove Qadiani treachery ? Its a conspiracy theory gone mad ! Were all the Muslim soldiers from Punjab who collaborated with the British against Muslims in 1857 or against the tribal Pashtuns Qadianis ?