Running Naked re Field Marshal ROmair #159:

Aetzaz Ahsan is not the messiah Pakistan is looking for. As for his not being embroiled in any financial scandal, there are many reasons. Chief amongst them are his relationships by marriage of his young ones(Harvard,McGill BTW) to a couple of very influential (ex)-Generals and bureaucrats. Add to that the fact his legal expertise is available to any scoundrel willing to pay his six/seven figure fee (you know guys like ex-Navy chief Admiral Mansurul Haq and steel mills curators Salman and Usman Fs) and he`s more trouble NAB probably wants to deal with right now. He knows where all the troublesome bodies are buried.

Sure he went to Cambridge and sure he topped the civil services exam. But the FM has no idea how feudal his background really is. I couldn`t stop laughing at the irony of someone proclaiming ``feduals living off the sweat of little children`` recommending one of the same as the future leader of the PPP. Long live the Field Marshal!!!!!!!!!!!!

Capt(Retd.) Haleem Siddiqui had a fun time in Nawaz Sharif`s time as his net worth probably quadrupled during that time. Once again he hasn`t been touched on account of his *services * rendered during the Nawaz era. Capt. Siddiqui was one of the leading go-betweens(alongwith Hamid Nawaz Chattha) between Nawaz Sharif and the Army generals. Now even the conqueror of its own people does have some respect for tradition doesn`t it?

later

-sac

Muslims and The West After 11th September Akash #236 I see sir that you have a wide range of imaginative ways to handle VHP thugs. I would be happy to have those who actually committed some crime (like killing, burning, looting) simply locked up for appropriate lengths of time, and the rest reduced to the ``lunatic fringe`` that every society has and needs to merely keep an eye on (to make sure that they do not actually walk their talk). Same for the Islamist thugs in Pakistan.

I am beginning to think in addition to the religious thugs, we probably should start worrying about the nationalists on both sides too. To my mind a nationalist is the opposite of a patriot: the latter cares for his people, the former for the glorification of the state which is generally at the expense of the people. Thus, by diverting resources away from poverty alleviation and towards military expenditures, nationalists have already been responsible for ruining the lives of hundreds of millions of people in India and Pakistan (even though this is not as obvious as the blatant killings and destruction that is the mark of the religious fanatic.

An International Failure Re: Romair #120

What could the US have done to Pakistan if it did not cooperate with the US, you ask? You know as much about economics as I know about flying a fighter. Given how much foreign aid Pakistan needs--look at the pathetic state of our economy--all the US had to do was to turn off the aid tap. I figure Pakistan would have lasted a few months before it melted down completely. See the pictures on TV about the rioting in Argentina last December? And compared to Pakistan, the Argentines actually have something that, from a distance, could pass for a real economy!

For the 1/3 of Pakistanis (is that the latest figure? probably closer to 45-50% by now) living below the poverty line, it really wouldn`t have made much of a difference but for most of the urban middle-class and lower-middle class, it would be a total catastrophe. Under this set of circumstances, I can well see a rise to power of the Islamic whackos as an extreme case. More likely, I would expect to see Musharraf resigning for ``health reasons`` (come to think of it, he actually hasn`t been looking all that well lately...) and Gen. Yousaf or some other general taking over, but one who has a much more hardline position than does Musharraf. In this particular case--complete economic meltdown--no Pakistani leader would have any choice but to keep playing the religion card as hard and as often as he can.

I assume that the US would not be sitting idly by watching this saying, ``Damn! Our job`s just became impossible! Some whacko, errrr, excuse me, Mard e Momin, is now in charge of Pakistan and controls nukes, guarded by the mighty PAF. We should call off operations in Afghanistan, allow the Taliban to `try` OBL, and when he is found `not guilty,` tell the American public that we thought we had the culprit identified but turns out he was innocent. We are now going to investigate why 4,000 Jews did not show up for work on 9-11. This clearly points to the Mossad`s hand in this. BUT, Mossad lacks the logistics to implement this operation, so it must have had RAW help. QED. We start bombing Tel Aviv and New Delhi in 15 minutes.``

Somehow, I don`t see this particular scenario coming about. What is more likely is that the Pentagon`s planners will finally get a chance to implement one of their what-if scenarios and try to either take control of Pakistan`s nuclear arsenal or, more likely, take it out completely. How this is going to play out, God alone knows. Maybe we will have a Pakistani missile launch or two--use `em or lose `em, remember? Who knows the final outcome? Want to start gambling on it? I don`t. I still have family in Pakistan.

BTW, what do you think the Indians will be doing in all this? Why wouldn`t they take the opportunity to attack across the LoC and destroy the various mujahideen camps we have there? Or will they be smart for a change and let the US do all their work for them and then go in and mop up the remnants.

Alternatively we could have remained strictly neutral, denied the US bases and overflight rights (though if the US did overfly Pakistani air space, what could the PAF have done about it? How long would it last against the USAF? One day or two? Any takers for three?)

One could go on further but I hope you get the picture. You and Ayaz Amir and Co. go on endlessly about how Pakistan should have refused to kowtow to the US. Fine. What are the alternatives? Ever look at them?

Iran and Iraq survived the wrath of full US economic sanctions BUT they have oil (i.e., ready source of income) and we don`t. And as far as Iraq goes, its people pay the price while Saddam happily goes on building his palaces and keeping the Republican Guard fat and happy. As far as Iran goes, the rest of the world wasn`t completely happy with how the US was handling these countries and was happily willing to defy US economic sanctions.

Now, you can criticize Musharraf, Shaukat Aziz and Co. for not holding out longer for a better price but there is really only so much bluffing you can do when all you hold in your hand is a pair of deuces.

So, tell me again how Pakistan could have defied the US. Maybe I missed something.

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism re: romair

...tip: read before you respond...and read what`s written, not what you want to be written...

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism Ayaz Amir, in Dawn, put it clearly.

`But Pakistan`s guardians still do not say that the policies forged in the crucible of `jihad` and now abandoned under pressure were in themselves flawed. On the contrary, by insisting on the no-choice argument they imply that there was nothing wrong with those policies. Only the external environment changed in such a way as to make them untenable. This is shirking responsibility...`

The saner voices in Pakistan have realised the fact that jihadism is bad for Pakistan but the majority is still too much in love with their jihadi addiction.

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism Ayaz Amir, in Dawn, put it clearly.

`But Pakistan`s guardians still do not say that the policies forged in the crucible of `jihad` and now abandoned under pressure were in themselves flawed. On the contrary, by insisting on the no-choice argument they imply that there was nothing wrong with those policies. Only the external environment changed in such a way as to make them untenable. This is shirking responsibility...`

The saner voices in Pakistan have realised the fact that jihadism is bad for Pakistan but the majority is still too much in love with their jihadi addiction.

Muslims and The West After 11th September ylh #22: Very nice, I must say. Couldn`t have said it better myself.

On occassion, I have been quite harsh on SameeJB. But that is only when he makes racist replies regarding a religion or a profession. I think in this article there is no such thing.

I think he has started a very useful debate, based on the vast knowledge he possesses. One cannot target a person for being popular with Indians. Nothing wrong with that. There is nothing wrong with criticising Pakistan either, as long as it is factual. I do think his analysis is relatively valid in what is going on in France, etc. But I, like yourself, cannot agree with the analysis regarding Pakistan. I think the author has let his dislike of religion effect his objectivity, in regard to Pakistan (as, usual).

Your visit to Pakistan, seems to have added ten years to your maturity :-) Are you interested in joining the Tehrik. It is not as secular as you would prefer, but it is center-left according to the Pakistani society.

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism From Dawn: ``They said the women drivers, who were still learning driving at a training school, drove their cars slow and remained to the extreme left. Those, who planted the bomb, either were following the car or waiting for it at the Frere Garden. As the car reached near the US Consulate, they pressed the button of a remote device exploding the bomb, which was so powerful that it blew the car into pieces.

The criminals did have access to the driving school and used the car for the terrorist activity. The women riders never knew about the presence of the bomb.``

The bas!rds killed these women in cold blood, along with other innocent people.

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism shankar #64: ``Nobody is gloating that innocent civilians died.``

I don`t agree with this. Please take a look at the replies from Indians on this board. Hardly, any Indian has condemned this outright, without trying to gain a political advantage related to Kashmir. Kind of like, well you guys deserved it. You have yourself stated, ``So, yes, the chickens DO come home to roost.`` The reason this has taken place is because Pakistan is supporting USA. Otherwise the only terrorism in Pakistan historically has been due to Shia-Sunni situation. Al-Qaeda never did anything in Pakistan. So which chickens are you talking about. And the attack was directed towards a US building, not towards Pakistan.

``Whether the victims were Pakistani citizens, American soldiers, Pakistani soldiers, or Indian soldiers...doesnt make a difference..it would be sad.``

Yes. And this is the point I try to get across to Indians, i.e. if Indians are going to talk about terrorism, they need to first and foremost talk about terrorism in Kashmir being commited by India. 99% of the terrorism deaths in South Asia are in Kashmir by Indian forces. Unfortunately, Indians never give this any press. Two prominent APHC leaders have been put in jail by India, but no Indian cares. Indians are just worried about protecting their beloved Kashmiris from cross-border terrorism.

India wants cross-border support to stop so that it can thoroughly cleanse the Kashmiris and completely subjugate them.

The only point ever highlighted by Indians are the few terrorist cases in Kashmir, in which non-Kashmiri Indian civilians are killed. And even in those, India refuses to allow an investigation, therefore we do not know whether India itself arranged them.

Talk to the Kashmiris and you will discover that they consider the Indian forces to be the terrorists and generally support the infiltrators coming in from Pakistan. If these infiltrators were carrying out all the terrorism, the Kashmiris would hate them and hate Pakistan. Yet the Kashmiris hate the Indian forces. So who is committing the terrorism. What difference does it make what Vajpayee says. Talk directly to the Kashmiris.

Based on this, I always make it a point to highlight that all forms of terrorism should be condemned. Unfortunately, Indians never seem to mention that being carried out by, ``Indian soldiers.``

There is definitely a double standard. Now India is bent upon propogating the falsity that it is not India but others who are terrorists in Kashmir.

That is why it sickens me when Indians try to act like they are concerned about terrorism being carried out in Kashmir, as if India is concerned about Kashmiris (while simultaneously killing them). Why would Indians be concerned about the deaths of Kashmiris in IOK, when India itself is killing most of them?

Can you really state with a straight face that Indians are worried about Kashmiri civilian lives? Damned if you do, damned if don`t if one is a Kashmiri in IOK. Indians will kill Kashmiris and then will try to act like they are protecting Kashmiris from, ``cross border terrorism.`` It is the people crossing the border who are actually protecting the Kashmiris against Indian govt.`s terrorism. That is what the Kashmiris will tell you. Why else do you think India doesn`t allow the Kashmiri voice to be heard? Why is it that Indians from Bombay do all the talking about who is killing the Kashmiris?

Has any India (other than you) ever criticised India`s forces killing the Kashmiris. Obviously not. So I don`t agree with you that Indians feel, ``sad`` about terrorism. They actually support it in Kashmir. India generally uses terrorism in South Asia to hide its own oppression in Kashmir. And that is exactly what Indians on this board have done.

Pakistanis have generally condemned terrorism in Kashmir and India and Pakistan. They only support the attacks on the Indian forces in Kashmir, which is not terrorism according the Amnesty International (regardless of what Advani or Bush say). It is also not terrorism according to the Kashmiris themselves.

I hope you now understand my point. If Indians want to condemn terrorism, lets hear them condemning their govts. terrorism in Kashmir, which causes not 10 but tens of thousans of deaths. Once I see that, I will believe your statement.

``So you understand why when Kashmiri militants (whether homegrown or imported) pull stunts like this in IOK``

Please talk to the Kashmiris in IOK to find out who is pulling the stunts. They will tell you it is the Indian govt. and military that they hate. They actually support most of the militants.

``Heck, there are tons of Pakistanis who are members of the Al-Qeeda network--or at least Al-Qeeda sympathisers``

This is ridiculous. Al-Qaeda is a Saudi and Egyptian organization. It targets the USA. Pakistanis have nothing against the USA. I am not sure where you have come up with the figure of tons of Pakistanis. Can you name a few Pakistanis who have been caught through Al-Qaeda?

If there are tons of Pakistanis supporting Al-Qaeda, then why the hell is Al-Qaeda targeting Pakistan. It should be supporting Pakistan.

You need to lay off the international propoganda, and stop using US foreign policy, and George Bush as you benchmark for human rights. The US only has political concerns. If it needs Pakistan, Pakistan will be an angel. If it needs India, India will be an angel. I would suggest you rely of what the human rights organizations say.

P.S. If nothing else, I would like to at least request you (if no other Indian will listen) to stop trying to become a spokesperson for Kashmiris, and the terrorism being carried out agaisnt them by Pakistan. They don`t need you as a spokesperson. It is sickening and condescending for Indian`s to try to attempt to highlight the plight of the Kashmiris, when the Indians themselves are killing them.

If you are concerned about terrorism in Kashmir, then please try to put pressure on the Indian govt. to allow an investigation by human rights organizations in Kashmir, to see who is actually committing the terrorism.

An International Failure scout #127: I agree wholeheartedly. Chowk is now turned into a political forum.

Even Chowk wants to discuss these issues, it can be done through poetry, stories, etc., instead of just straight political articles.

A close friend of mine is writing some chapters that go into the details of such issues like terrorism, US Govt., Kashmiri fighters etc. Chowk published the first few chapters of his novel, but hasn`t published the subsequent (did he piss off some of the person who makes the decisions on Chowk). He has now been contacted by other sites to publish it, and Chowk may have just lost the story. Things like that would cover both politics and literature.

An even bigger mystery than Al-Qaeda is how stories get published on Chowk. Who decides? What are their moods? What do they look for? Is it one person, or a machine? Is nepotism allowed? If not, why are the same people published again and again, even when many of them cannot write, nor make much sense? Is it a Perl script that uses a random no. generator to pick up the stories after specified intervals, in which they are published?

Who is this mysterious entity called, ``Chowk Staff?`` Is it male(s) or female(s)? I used to think it was Vereesh in India, combined with a few other people in Pakistan. Now, I am thinking it is one of the Binas. Then again, are all the Binas the same person?

Under the public information act, I demand that we be told.

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism Perhaps it would be a good idea for Indians to worry about the terrorist attacks in India, and let Pakistan worry about those in Pakistan.

Currently, the general Indian thought process is that any terrorist attack in India is Pakistan`s fault, and any terrorist attack in Pakistan is Pakistan`s fault also. Does this make sense?

Either every attack in India is Pakistan`s fault, and every attack in Pakistan is India`s fault, or each attack within each country is its own fault.

I would suggest joint international investigations into all such terrorist attacks, before placing blame. I am not quite sure how Indians know, without proof, that every attack in India is Pakistan`s fault, as is every attack in Pakistan.

Could Pakistan make a statement that this attack was organized by RAW (I hope it doesn`t). But how would that be any different than India always making a statement that every attack in India is organized by the ISI?

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism Rdesikan #15: Do you think RAW could have organized this attack?

I would be interested in your reasons on why it could or couldn`t have.

An International Failure A primer on Terrorism For Dummies:

Al-Qaida .. Can all the magnificently knowledgable people here who speak volumes about how evil it is, particuarly the Indians on this board i.e. sadna and the rest, please define it first? How it operates? Who`s incharge? What`s their command structure? Where do they get their funding? Indeed what is the evidence that AL-Qaida exists or ever existed? Or is it just another bogeyman propped up to blame everything on while conveniently evading pointing out the real perpetrators?

I see so much ignorance here amongst supposedly aware people that it`s unbelievable. Just consider the facts.

1) In the mid-1980s Usama Bin Laden co-founded the Maktab al-Khidamat (MAK) or Services Office, in Peshawar to help funnel fighters and money to the Afghan resistance alongwith the Palestinian leader Abdullah Azzam. The MAK received and serviced volunteers from the U.S., Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan to fight the Soviets with US funding. It also organized and funded paramilitary training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan. About 10,000 Arabs received training and combat experience in Peshawar and Afghanistan. Of these, nearly half were Saudis, with others included some 3000 Algerians, 2000 Egyptians, and others from Yemen, Sudan, Pakistan, Syria and other Muslim states. This was not named Al-Qaida or anything but simply Maktab-Al-Khidmat (School for Service).

2) After Afghanistan, Bin-Laden ran the Jihad Committee which includes the Egyptian Islamic Group and the Jihad Organization in Yemen, the Pakistani Ahl-e-Hadith group, the Lebanese Partisans League, the Libyan Islamic Group, Bayt al-Imam Group in Jordan, and the Islamic Jihad in Algeria. This committee runs the Islamic Information Observatory center in London, which organizes media activity for these organizations, and the Advisory and Reformation Body which also has a bureau in London. There never was any organisation called Al-Qaida or `The Base` initiated by Bin Laden as proclaimed after 9/11. It is true Bin Laden believes in establishing a caliphate by overthrowing Muslim governments, and eventually to abolish state boundaries, but the fact remains he never had any organisation to do that. He does have followers though from the arab volunteers from the Afghan-Soviet war, those which are left, but no organisation as such. The followers who remain with him are just his personal guard. That is why Bin Laden cannot be found as he does not have a command structure where one coulod penetrate to know where he is. He`s only a kind of a `Peer` in the Sufi sense to his followers.

3) After the Afghan war and after Pakistan and US abandoned them after using them, the Arab-Afghans had nowhere to go as they would have been persecuted in their home countries. So they climbed a habitable mountain near Terah in tribal Pakistan for a sanctuary to live but were expelled by tribal hoardes. Many Arab women and children were massacred by the tribal hoardes in that encounter in 1993. Then they moved out and splintered into small individual groups of no more than 3-4 colleagues all over the world using genuine papers. That isn`t a big deal as corruption is rampant in all foreign embassies. These small groups plan and carry out individual operations on their own as 9/11 was carried out by the Hamburg group.

4) As detailed above, there is no such thing as Al-Qaida. There is certainly a Bin-Laden as a convenient bogeyman but actually no more than a spiritual/token presence with no operational capability. The attacks on the African embassies, Yemen naval attack, as well as 9/11 were carried out by individual planning by respective groups. There`s no central command which can be blamed. In short, Al-Qaida does not exist though we would like it to exist for an easy (Terrorism for Dummies)explanation of it all.

Rgds

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism rsidhar #5: Apart from being ridiculous and repulsive, your remarks are idiotic. You are actually supporting the death of innocent poeople through terrorism.

Unlike India, Pakistan does allow the international press access to any terrorist attack carried out in Pakistan. And unlike India, Pakistan does not pile up its forces on the Indian border as a threat, after terrorist attack. These are the major differences between how Pakistan handles these situations and how India handles them. And this is exactly why, Pakistani investigations into such attacks, carry far more weightage than the one-side hidden investigations carried out in India.

Al-Qaeda has never carried out attacks in Pakistan, until Pakistan supported the US in Afghanistan. It has nothing to do with Kashmir. The attack was against the US embassy certifying this. Unfortunately India is trying to use this to support its repressive policies in Kashmir. It is in India`s interest for Al-Qaeda to carry out as many attacks in Pakistan as possible, thereby destabilizing Pakistan. It is also in India`s interest to blame everything in India on Pakistan without proof.

I hope Pakistan does not follow the Indian policies of using the deaths of innocent civilians as a shield to gain political advantage against India. It should allow third-party investigations into this attack, and try to find out who did it.

My condolensces to the famiilies of the people who died.

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism hobbyty #432 ``I have been thinking about a part your post ``

Do you have by chance the post # and the board it is on so I can see what this is about?

The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism nasah #333 I think the president`s post can exert significant influence on the government, though.