Aurangzebawan's Weblog

October 2, 2009

Dialogue between Student and Teacher

Filed under: Uncategorized — aurangzebawan @ 2:48 pm

Here is an dialogue between Student (Khanzadajee) and Teacher (Idris Azad). Topic is “WHAT IS THE MEANING OF LA ILAHA ILALLAH

khanzadajee: Assalam-o-Alikum

Idrees Azad: Wa alaicum Salam sorry main utha hua tha

Idrees Azad: Khair mubarak

Idrees Azad: aur aap ko b akhtar day mubarak sha

khanzadajee: its ohk sir ji

khanzadajee: so how is the day of eid-ul-fitre

Idrees Azad: fine r u zeb?

khanzadajee: yes

Idrees Azad: oh right. aap ko to etekaaf ki b mubarak ho

khanzadajee: khair mubarik

Idrees Azad: aap nay 10 din guzaray band ho kar

khanzadajee: hhahaha

khanzadajee: sir ji itna shaitan tu nahi hoo

khanzadajee: ke band ho giya

Idrees Azad: oh nahin yar

Idrees Azad: aray wah. ap nay to kamal bat badli

Idrees Azad: subhanallah

Idrees Azad: Allah ap ko aur aap kay ehl e khana ko khush rakhay

khanzadajee: yeh fun ap se hi seekha hai sir ji

khanzadajee: Ameen

Idrees Azad: aap ki hisse mazah hamaisha say bahut umda hay

khanzadajee: Allah apko khush rakhey

Idrees Azad: shukria aameen

khanzadajee: yeh uski karam nawazi hai

Idrees Azad: bay shak

khanzadajee: warna banda tu nacheez hai

Idrees Azad: yeh usi kareem ka karam hay

Idrees Azad: bay shak

khanzadajee: or sunaye sir ji ke sub theek thak hai

khanzadajee: Qasim ko meri taraf se Eid Mubarik keh dejiye ga

Idrees Azad: Allah ka shukar hay

Idrees Azad: qasim say keh dia wo abi online ho jai ga

Idrees Azad: zara pkanay main masroof hay

khanzadajee: acha kia pak raha hai

khanzadajee: sawiyan?

Idrees Azad: qorma.

Idrees Azad: murgh ka

khanzadajee: ammm monh me pani aa giya nam suntey hi

Idrees Azad: mujhay b bhook lagi hui hay

khanzadajee: acha….Qasim nak rooh hai uskey hath me ziaqa bhi acha ho g

Idrees Azad: han bahut hi acha zaiqa hota hay

Idrees Azad: isi liay to paka raha hay

khanzadajee: he is a very cute and gentlman

khanzadajee: I admire him

Idrees Azad: yes of course

Idrees Azad: aap kay bhai ka kia hal hay

Idrees Azad: unko meri taraf say eid mubarak keh dain

Idrees Azad: plz

khanzadajee: he is sleeping right now, but I will…..when he wokeup

khanzadajee: thanks

Idrees Azad: ok right

khanzadajee: sir ji in das ratoo me koshish ki ke LA ILAH HA ILALLAHO  ka matlab samjh sakoo

Idrees Azad: i m on call

khanzadajee: ohk

khanzadajee: take u r time

Idrees Azad: oh

Idrees Azad: very good

Idrees Azad: to kuch samajh aai?

Idrees Azad: plz tell me if you got something like samajh

khanzadajee: hahahaa

khanzadajee: well I got little bit

khanzadajee: which is Yakeen-e-Kamil

Idrees Azad: oh plz little bit is more than enough

khanzadajee: Nahi koi bhi Mabood magar Allah, jo Raziq, Malik, Khaliq or sub se barh kar Rehman

khanzadajee: Sirf Mangna Shart

Idrees Azad: bay shak

khanzadajee: or mangna humko nahi aata

Idrees Azad: koi shak nahin

Idrees Azad: magar baghari maangay b o wo deta hay

khanzadajee: 1 baba ji miley or unho ney bus 1 baat kahi ke chor de khudi ko wali ho jai ga

Idrees Azad: jab keh allama iqbal farmaatay han khudi ko buland kar to wali ho jai ga

Idrees Azad: mera apna aik sher hay.

khanzadajee: beshak woh rahim bhi hai

Idrees Azad: tu khuda hay to bina maangay ata kar sabko

Idrees Azad: kiun teray dar peh koi ban kay sawali jai

khanzadajee: subhannallah

Idrees Azad: jab koi aam insaan sadqa deta hay

Idrees Azad: to wo yeh nahin kehta keh jo mujh say mangay ga main usay dunga

khanzadajee: Allah ho Akbar

Idrees Azad: aam insan yeh b nahin kehta keh jo jitni aajzi saymaangay ga main usay utna ziada doonga

Idrees Azad: balkeh aam insaan ka amal us waqt khuda kay amal say behtar mehsoos hota hay kiunkeh ba qaol mulla kay khuda ka amal yeh hain keh wo minnatain karnay walon ko deta hay

Idrees Azad: aam insaan khuda say behtara amal wala kaisay ho sakta hay?

Idrees Azad: impossible

Idrees Azad: chunaacheh saabit hua keh khuda minnatain karnay ka nahin kehta

Idrees Azad: balkeh ham par chhorta hay

Idrees Azad: keh ham kis tarah usay maantay hain

Idrees Azad: aik zaalim baadshah ki tarah

Idrees Azad: ya aik raheem maan ki tarah

Idrees Azad: ya aik shafeeq bap ki tarah jis tarah eesaai maantay hain

Idrees Azad: to bat yeh keh allah ki sab sifaat hain.

Idrees Azad: aur ham kisi aik sifat kay peechay par kar yeh samajhnay lagtay hainkeh wohi sara allah hay

Idrees Azad: sab sifaat but hain. but parasti hay sifaat ki pooja

Idrees Azad: zat ki ibaadat nahin ki jaati usay apnay andar utaara jata hay

Idrees Azad: salaaat ka arbi main tarjama hay nizaam e islaah

Idrees Azad: namaz to lafz hi faarsi ka hay

Idrees Azad: isi tarah allah ta’ala say ro ro kar maangnay wola allah ko kia samajhta hay. keh wo koi baadshah hay

Idrees Azad: toba toba

Idrees Azad: doston say koi b ro ro kar nahin mangta

Idrees Azad: allah ko dost banao to yeh maslay nahin rehtay

Idrees Azad: i am sorry yar

khanzadajee: Sir ji kion sharminda kartey hai

khanzadajee: Aap ney tu sahi matlab batya hai LA ILAH ka

Idrees Azad: oh thanks

Idrees Azad: bas main to yahi kehta hun keh molvi ham say chhupaata hay. haqeeqat ko

Idrees Azad: aur bas

khanzadajee: bilkul sahi keha

Idrees Azad: thanks

khanzadajee: molvi bhut kuch chuppata hai

Idrees Azad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3xoctNSw44E

Idrees Azad: yeh haqeeqi movi hay

khanzadajee: wow

Idrees Azad: hay keh nahin?

khanzadajee: he is such a good singer

Idrees Azad: of course

Idrees Azad: really he is

khanzadajee: Uffffffffffffffff

Idrees Azad: ham nay is banday ki qadar nahin ki

khanzadajee: yeh tu mai bhi manta hoo

khanzadajee: or is cheez per achi khasi chand parade bhi hotee hai meri

khanzadajee: becoz mery ghar me molvi ziyda hai

Idrees Azad: hahahah

khanzadajee: sir ji 1 baat ke ….Duniya Baghair Mehnat ke mil saktee hai magar Aakhirat baghair mehnat ke nahi milie gi, or is Din ke liye mehnat shart hai

Idrees Azad: aakhriat k liay sirf khaalis niyyat hona zaroori. baqi dunia b chalti rahay aur niyyat theek ho to akhrat theek hoti hay

Idrees Azad: bas

khanzadajee: Niyyat se murad?

Idrees Azad: innmal aamaalu binniyaat

Idrees Azad: hadis hay

Idrees Azad: aamaal ka daaro madar niyat par hay

khanzadajee: theek, magar niyyat ke sath kuch Farz bhi jurey hai

Idrees Azad: matalab?

khanzadajee: Nimaz, Roza Haj Zakat or La iLaha illalah

Idrees Azad: yeh badni tarbiat kay tareeqay hain. har mazhab aur qaom peh paai jatay hain. in ehmiyat is say ziada kuch nahin keh yeh izteraari halat main ulta mana ho jata hain

Idrees Azad: jismaani tarbiat zaroori hay magar dunia ka har kam agar theek niyat say ho to bas wo naiki hay

khanzadajee: Iztarai halat me ulta mana se mai kia samjhoo?

Idrees Azad: maslan jang main kul 2 rakat hotay hain aur aik rakat aik saf walay parh kar chalay jatay hain to doosri saf doosri rakat parhti hay. yeh quran main hay. isi tarah aurat ko haiz kay dino main mana hay. isi tarah nasha ki halat main namaz parhni mana hay

Idrees Azad: isi tarah roza beemar aur musaafir kay liay na rakhnay ki ijazat hay

Idrees Azad: to yeh hain jismaani tarbiat kay tareeqay

Idrees Azad: allah yeh nahin kehta keh meray aagay is tarah jhuko aur us tarah jhuko

Idrees Azad: bas wo kehta keh jis tarah b ho

Idrees Azad: shukar ada karo

Idrees Azad: aur dil say karo

Idrees Azad: main aap ko quran ki aik aayat sunaata hun aap hi faisala karain

Idrees Azad: innallazeen aamanoo

Idrees Azad: wallazeena haadoo

Idrees Azad: wannasaara

Idrees Azad: man aamana

Idrees Azad: billa hi

Idrees Azad: walyoumil

Idrees Azad: aakhiri

Idrees Azad: wa amila saalihan

Idrees Azad: falahum ajruhum

Idrees Azad: inda rabbihim

Idrees Azad: fala khaofun alaihim

Idrees Azad: wala hum yahzanoon

Idrees Azad: aur eeman walay

Idrees Azad: aur yahoodi

Idrees Azad: aur nasraani

Idrees Azad: aur sitaara parast

Idrees Azad: in main say jo

Idrees Azad: allah ko maanta hay aur aakhrat ko

Idrees Azad: aur saalih aamal karta hay

Idrees Azad: us kay liay allah kay pas ajar hay

Idrees Azad: aur un ko koi khaof nahin

Idrees Azad: aur un ko koi huzn nahin

Idrees Azad: ab in ayaat main 4 mazhab kay logon ko Quran nay nijaat ki khush khabri d hay

Idrees Azad: to kia ham is say ziada kia keh saktay hain keh asal cheez amal hay

Idrees Azad: allah ko hamari bhook say koi gharaz nahin

Idrees Azad: us ko hamari niyat say dilchaspi hay

khanzadajee: Agar mai sahih Niyyat se khao ke Ya Muhammad……tu kia theek ho ga?

Idrees Azad: bilkul theek hoga

Idrees Azad: 100 percent

Idrees Azad: agar aap ki niyat theek hogi to

Idrees Azad: aur agar niyat theek nahin hogi aur aap ya allah b kahin gay

Idrees Azad: to theek nahin hoga

khanzadajee: Magar Quran me 1 bar bhi Allah ney yeh nahi kaha ke Ya Muhammad………?

Idrees Azad: kia matlab?

Idrees Azad: allah nay to sara quran ya muhammad keh kar utaara

Idrees Azad: maslan ya ayuhal muddassir

Idrees Azad: ya ayyuhal muzammil

Idrees Azad: ya ayyuhannabi

Idrees Azad: muhammad to aik insan ka nam tha. quran main us insan ki sifat tak say pukara

Idrees Azad: aur phir zati nam bi 3 jaga ayaa

Idrees Azad: aur sara quran direct unhi say mukhatib kar kay utara gia

Idrees Azad: aap ka matlab kia hay is say?

Idrees Azad: aap mujhay aik bat batain

Idrees Azad: keh wo log jo musalmaan nahin hain

Idrees Azad: lekin bahut naik hain

Idrees Azad: un ka kia muaamla hoga?

Idrees Azad: jannat keh jahannam?

khanzadajee: jahnum

khanzadajee: Jannat ke liye musalman hona shart hai

khanzadajee: kionkey janat musalman ke liye banai gai hai

khanzadajee: Dasara Taira ahushaho ka kia matlab hai?

Idrees Azad: to kia yeh insaaf ka taqaza hay?

Idrees Azad: aap khud bolo

khanzadajee: Amal ke lehaz se

khanzadajee: ji han

Idrees Azad: asal main jo aayaat main nay ooper likhin

Idrees Azad: un main ghair mulsimon kay sath jo muaamla hoga

Idrees Azad: wo bataya gia hay

Idrees Azad: asal main islam ka matlab hay salaamti

Idrees Azad: aur jo b salaamti kay nizaam main yaqeen rakhta hay

Idrees Azad: wo musalman hay

Idrees Azad: aur jannat us ka ghar hay

Idrees Azad: asal main ham musalman salamti ko bhool chukay hain aur qatal aur zulm ikhtiar kar kay allah say jannat maangtay ahin

Idrees Azad: yahoodiyon ko b yahi wehm ho gia tha

Idrees Azad: jis ka quran main zika aya hai

Idrees Azad: keh wo kehtay thay keh jannat to sirf hamaray liay banai gai hay

Idrees Azad: islam salamti hay

Idrees Azad: sirf salaamti

Idrees Azad: agar aap aik mandir main aik but kay samnay kharay ho kar b allah waid ko pukartay hain to wo sunta hay

Idrees Azad: allah hamari namazon ko utha kr hamaray munh par day maarta hay. agar un main salaamti kay haq main ikhlaas nahin

Idrees Azad: masjid main uthak baithak karnay ka nam islam nahin (hazrat umar)

khanzadajee: Magar LA ILAHA ILLALAH shirt-e-awal hai ke nahi?

Idrees Azad: La ilaha illallah bay shak shart e awal hay magar arbi main parhna zaroori nahin agarcheh behtar hay. aur bahut behtar hay keh arbi main parha jai. ab agar aik jazeera hawai ka banda salamti ka qail hay to wo la ila illaha apni zabanmain keh rha hay

Idrees Azad: ham par arab ki tehzeeb laagoo ki jaanay ki koshish ghalat hay. islam ksi ilaqay ki tehzeeb ko nahin khatam karta

Idrees Azad: ham aaj jis islam ko maantay hain yeh musalman faatiheen ki waja say hamain mila

Idrees Azad: agar ham huzoor kay mizaj shanas hain to ham rahmatul lil aalameen kay naqsh e qadam par chalain gay

Idrees Azad: aur rahmat ka matlab to ap ko ata hoga

Idrees Azad: quran nay huzoor ko aalameen k liay rahmat kaha hay

Idrees Azad: salamti aur rahmat kay ilawa islam nay kabi koi bat nain ki

Idrees Azad: einstine musalman tha kiunkeh wo naik b tha aur aik khuda ka qail b tha

Idrees Azad: isi tarah laakhon log aur b hain

Idrees Azad: ham nay apni alag dukan kiun bana rakhi hay?

Idrees Azad: kia ham yahood kay naqsh e qadam par chaltay hain

khanzadajee: Dukan tu nasamjhi ki alamat hai

khanzadajee: warna islam tu itna nahi jitna hum paish kartey hai

khanzadajee: or duniya ko karobar banya howa hai, halankey jab Allah ke ahkam or Nabi ke tareqey Toot rahey ho tu musalman per duniya ka karobar karna haram hai

khanzadajee: Kia yeh fatwa theek hai?

To be Continued…………………..

July 1, 2009

$2,000 For A Dead Afghan Child, $100,000 For Any American Who Died Killing It

Filed under: Uncategorized — aurangzebawan @ 9:42 am

By JAY JANSON
Opednews

Tuesday, 30 June 2009.

New York – After Obama apologized for the strike which the Afghan government claimed killed well over a hundred ordinary country folk, came the report that the families of those killed, and subsequent Afghani dead falling in harm’s way of the US military, continuing as before, can apply to receive up to $2,000 compensation. This is the price the great United States of American puts on an Afghan or Pakistan human being, while awarding $100,000 to families of Americans who die while fighting and killing wherever.

Shocking? Shame provoking? Embarrassing that no Afghani or Pakistani child or parent has any human right at all, including the right not to be blown to pieces in a US drone air strike? – the final insult being the value of their lives put at a mere $2,000 by the wealthiest nation in history?

Naw, not within the general public, which more or less accepts this assessment of a well-liked Commander-in-Chief President Obama, and accepts the calculations by his generals and higher officers.

In imperialist America, there is not even any interest in such ‘war casualties,’ considered ‘inevitable’ by the U.S. government, now led by the Obama administration, as it continues to react worldwide to the Saudi Arabians (and one Algerian and one Yemenite) who suicided themselves into the walls of the Pentagon and World Trade Center in 2001.

Why bother to continue amplifying the point of this article? Why bother to remind people that the Prime Minister of Pakistan has demanded that US stop killing its citizens from the air? The U.S. installed President Karzai of Afghanistan has pleaded for a bombing halt for years to no avail. His legislature has long called for negotiations with the former governing Taliban, amnesty for all, and the removal of U.S. and other foreign armed forces.

Why bother to remind people that the Iraq legislature asked for the same, years ago? Who remembers? All this was reported by the Associate Press but appeared only on the Internet. (In Iraq, a ‘Sympathy Payment’ – as reported in 2005 – could be as high as $6,000. Maybe it is higher in Iraq because Iraq has a lot of oil.)

But, in any case, who cares? Only the exceptional so called ‘bleeding hearts’, ‘oversensitive’ progressives, communists, socialists and overseas anti-imperialists like Presidents Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales, Rafael Correa, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Daniel Ortega and some others, like Lula of Brazil, who are aware that it is healthier for their country to keep their reaction to themselves.

Words, words, words, as drones continue to fire missiles on orders from the popular highest elected official in America.

Yours truly will never forget being taken aback by Barak Obama’s hand shooting up in the air in answer to Wolf Blitzer, monitoring a Democratic Candidates Debate, ‘Raise your hand, if you would give the go ahead for a missile strike to take out an important al Qaida leader, if you knew there would be civilian casualties.’ (Blitzer emphasized the last phrase.)

Wish that Dennis Kucinich or Mike Gravel were president today. They did not raise their hands.

All the more puzzling is this observation in context of the fact that President Obama is the loving father of two young children. Too bad Blitzer didn’t ask, ‘Raise your hand if you would give the go ahead for a missile strike to take out an important al Qaida leader, if you knew YOUR OWN CHILDREN would be casualties.’

Still more puzzling because the children of nations under US militarily occupation are Obama’s and America’s responsibility, as Jesus, Obama’s Savior, taught, as even more basic than the Geneva Convention’s civilian protection signed agreements.

Jay Janson , musician and writer, who has lived and worked on all the continents and whose articles on media have been published in China, Italy, England and the US, and now resides in New York City. This article is courtesy Information Clearing House.

June 27, 2009

Guide to Iran Power Players

Filed under: Uncategorized — aurangzebawan @ 10:25 am
Tags:

While Mir Hossein Mousavi’s election battle plays out in the streets of Tehran, his most powerful ally, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani (Ack-bar Hah-sheh-me Raf-san-johnny), 75, is leading the charge behind the scenes to annul the disputed election—and perhaps even overthrow the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Rafsanjani heads the Assembly of Experts, which has the power to remove Khamenei, and reports suggest he has been leading a reformist bloc of insiders in hopes of securing the protesters’ demands from within the current government. He enjoys tremendous credibility with the public, making him a difficult foe to suppress. In addition to participating in the 1979 revolution, Rafsanjani served as president from 1989 to 1997, and helped select Khamenei as supreme leader in 1989. He ran for president again unsuccessfully in 2005 against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and was a vocal critic of the current president during the most recent election. In a possible attempt to stifle Rafsanjani’s pro-Mousavi campaign, Iranian police briefly jailed members of his family this week, including his daughter, before they were freed on Sunday. While Rafsanjani may be a democratic icon for the moment, he is by no means a friend of the West. In addition to being regarded as the father of Iran’s nuclear program, Argentine officials hold him responsible for the 1994 bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires that killed 85 people. A federal judge there issued a warrant for his arrest in 2006.

Jackson’s Doctor Faces Questions

Filed under: Uncategorized — aurangzebawan @ 9:43 am
Tags:

Police say they will question Michael Jackson’s cardiologist about whether drugs were to blame for the star’s death, after 911 tapes released Friday afternoon revealed the doctor was present at the time of Jackson’s collapse. Dr. Conrad Murray, who briefly disappeared Thursday after the singer was pronounced dead, was hired months ago to treat Jackson ahead of his upcoming tour. Investigators later briefly interviewed Murray and towed a car registered to Murray’s sister near Jackson’s home in the hopes that it may contain medication or other clues. LAPD Officer Robert French stressed that Murray is not the target of a criminal investigation, but said he may provide important information before Jackson’s toxicology results are returned. Jackson’s addiction to prescription drugs has led to suspicions about whether they were to blame for his untimely death.

June 19, 2009

Filed under: Uncategorized — aurangzebawan @ 7:45 am

October 7, 2008

Pakistani Official to U.S.: Talk to Taliban’s Mullah Omar

Filed under: Uncategorized — aurangzebawan @ 7:23 am

Karzai an ‘obstacle’ to peace

 

U.S apologists and poodles inside Pakistan are trying to convince Pakistanis to unnecessarily ‘own’ America’s blunders in the region as Pakistan’s own.  Not Owais Ghani, the governor of NWFP.   Terrorism inside Pakistan is partially linked to foul play on the Afghan side of the border, and partially to misguided local Pakistani extremists who, again, are influenced from across the border. The real issue is Washington’s failure to bring peace to Afghanistan despite seven years of occupation. Mr. Ghani comes out to tell the truth: The U.S. must broker a power-sharing agreement with the head of the Afghan Taliban, Mullah Omar, in order to establish peace in the region. Mr. Ghani’s also said that Hamid Karzai represents no one but himself and is dependent on a foreign power and that he is an obstacle to bringing peace to Afghanistan. When asked about allegations that Pakistan has used the Taliban to retain its influence in Afghanistan, Mr. Ghani replied: “We could counter that by saying India uses the Northern Alliance.” Mr. Ghani’s landmark proposal came in an interview published by London’s Daily Telegraph. Here are excerpts.

 

 

PESHAWAR, Pakistan—Owais Ghani, who governs the North West Frontier Province and its adjoining tribal areas, is the most prominent figure to date to publicly advocate holding talks with militant commanders leading the insurgency against coalition forces in Afghanistan.

 

“They have to talk to Mullah Omar, certainly – not maybe, and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and the Haqqani group,” Mr Ghani told The Daily Telegraph in an interview in Peshawar.

 

“The solution, the bottom line, is that political stability will only come to Afghanistan when all political power groups, irrespective of the length of their beard, are given their just due share in the political dispensation in Afghanistan.”

 

The governor’s remarks are likely to cause controversy among Pakistan’s allies in the U.S.-led “war on terror” and at home where the ruling Pakistan’s People’s Party is opposed to the Taliban.

 

Mullah Omar went into hiding during the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. British intelligence believes that he has his headquarters in Quetta in southwestern Pakistan. But there is no evidence to suggest he is anywhere in Pakistan.

 

In 2006, Mr. Musharraf acknowledged that some retired Pakistani intelligence officials may still be involved in supporting their former Taliban protégés whom they worked with during the 1990s when Pakistan helped the movement sweep to power in Afghanistan.

 

[Seven years later, and with the fact that U.S. has empowered Pakistan’s traditional enemies in Afghanistan, including the Indians, it is only natural some officials in Islamabad begin to review their blind support to the U.S. occupation next door-Editor.]

 

Jalaluddin Haqqani is a veteran commander of the American-backed Afghan war against Soviet invasion in the 1970s and 1980s, and developed links with Osama bin Laden during that period.

 

Haqqani has had close links with the CIA and Pakistani intelligence agencies, notably the military Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI).

 

The New York Times reported in July that the CIA had given the prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, evidence of the ISI’s continued involvement with Haqqani, who is now leading militants against coalition forces in Afghanistan, along with evidence of ISI connections to a suicide bombing at the Indian embassy in Kabul that killed nearly 60 people on July 7.

 

[On 12 July, Islamabad retorted by giving U.S. military chief Adm. Mike Mullen and the deputy director of CIA who arrived for a brief visit evidence that Afghan soil was being used for exporting terrorism into Pakistan as part of deliberate effort to stoke ethnic and sectarian terrorism in the country-Editor.]

 

The Hezb-e-Islami, the Mujahideen faction of the former Afghan prime minister Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, was one of the groups which helped end the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan but has had links with Pakistan since 1978.

 

But in the civil war that followed in the early 1990s, his group clashed violently with other Mujahideen factions in the struggle for control of the Afghan capital, Kabul. The Hezb-e-Islami was blamed for much of the terrible death and destruction of that period, which led many ordinary Afghans to welcome the emergence of the Taliban.  Some of his party members are part of the Afghan parliament and he is said to have taken part in back-channel negotiations with the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai.

 

Mr. Ghani said that all three militant commanders were in Afghanistan.

 

“They are a power group that has to be preserved to seek political solutions. We would not destroy them because then you are contributing to further instability,” he said.  He denied that Pakistan “wants the Taliban back”.  He added: “No sir, we have no favorites in Afghanistan.”

 

Mr. Ghani said that West must accept that the “Mullah is a political reality”.

 

However he denied that Pakistan is supporting them by pointing out that it had handed over key Taliban ground commanders operating in Helmand province where British forces are based. [Not only that, but Islamabad needlessly humiliated and handed over to the Americans such Taliban officials as the former ambassador to Islamabad, Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, someone who has in the protection of the Pakistani State and had not taken part in any unlawful activity, as transpired later when the Americans released him prematurely from Guantanamo Bay detention facility-Editor].

 

Senior American commanders and policymakers are considering a shift in strategy in Afghanistan. The chairman of the U.S. joint chief of staffs, Admiral Mike Mullen, recently said that failure there was possible and “time was running out”.

 

Mr Ghani said: “You are headed for failure. I think Afghanistan is practically lost. It is compounding our problems.”

 

The governor added that the West must hold talks with the Taliban as al-Qaeda was regrouping from Iraq to Afghanistan. Russia had begun to supply weapons to militants and that the Afghans were intolerant of foreigners on their soil and so were staging “a national uprising”.

 

“To eliminate the Taliban you have to slaughter half the Afghan nation,” said Mr Ghani.

 

Members of a cross-border Afghan-Pakistani tribal council agreed last year to pursue talks with the Taliban. The initiative received initial encouragement from the Taliban but its leadership then set preconditions for the 50,000 U.S. and Nato troops to be withdrawn.

 

Washington rejects talks with the Taliban maintaining that America will not negotiate with “terrorists”.  Mr. Karzai and the United Nations have stipulated that a key condition for peace talks is that the Taliban must accept the constitution that was signed by Mr. Karzai in 2004.

 

It is doubtful that America’s allies in Afghanistan, the Northern Alliance, would accept such talks.

 

Mr. Ghani said that Mr. Karzai “does not represent any power group – tribal, religious or political and therefore like the people in his government he is dependant on foreign power. He is therefore an obstacle to dialogue and peace.”

 

He described Pakistan’s military strategy as one of containment. “We are not looking for quick fixes. We want to hold it to a level where we can just tolerate it until Afghanistan settles down,” said Mr. Ghani.

 

When asked about allegations that Pakistan has used the Taliban to retain its influence in Afghanistan, Mr. Ghani replied: “We could counter that by saying India uses the Northern Alliance.”

September 26, 2008

Time to End Pakistani Role in America’s War

Filed under: Uncategorized — aurangzebawan @ 11:34 am
Tags:

Pakistan is being punished for refusing to allow U.S. military boots on Pakistani soil, for the bombings in India, for the July 7 attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul, and for the failures of the American military in Afghanistan. The attack is a clear message to the Pakistani ruling elite: We will bring the war to your home. The Americans are now accusing army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani of complicity in bombing the Indian embassy in Kabul, an accusation that even the Indians dared not make. The General is a suspicious man now in the eyes of the Americans and the Zardari government. After its bungled attempt on the ISI, there is a possibility that the pro-U.S. Zardari government might try to remove Gen. Kayani and replace him with a more pliant army chief who can subordinate the Pakistani military to Washington’s agenda in the region. To end this mess, Pakistan needs to say goodbye to the coalition that Washington assembled in 2001 to occupy Afghanistan, a coalition that has shrunk in seven years to only U.S., U.K. and Pakistan.

 

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan: – The massive attack on the Marriott hotel in the heart of the federal Pakistani capital is a punishment for Pakistan for refusing to allow U.S. military boots on Pakistani soil, for the bombings in India, for the July 7 attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul, and for the failures of the American military in Afghanistan.

 

The attack is a clear message to the Pakistani ruling elite: We will bring the war to your home; we will convince you and the world that your situation is worse than Iraq and Afghanistan and that you are unable to handle it alone and need foreign intervention.

 

Pakistan stands accused of attacks in both Afghanistan and India. The Americans have gone as far as blaming Pakistan in advance for future attacks against United States. In fact, in a calculated leak, The New York Times on Sept. 11 accused Pakistani army Chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani of complicity in the July 7 bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul, something that even the Indians didn’t dare do. And on Sept. 7, President Bush delivered a speech at the National Defense University in Washington where he almost called Pakistan a terrorist state.

 

The Americans had hoped that the pro-U.S. Zardari government in Islamabad would move to neutralize or disband the ISI and check the Pakistani military. They waited enough. The Zardari government did make a failed attempt on July 27 to clip the wings of ISI, which would have ended the agency’s external counterintelligence operations, crucial for the world’s sixth declared nuclear power and an important regional power that has legitimate security and strategic interests to protect.  But it seems Mr. Zardari has decided not to risk alienating the country’s powerful military. Hours before the attack, President Zardari told a joint session of Parliament “We will not tolerate the violation of our sovereignty and territorial integrity by any power in the name of combating terrorism.”  This statement ended the confusion, at least for now; on Zardari’s apparent reluctance to endorse army Chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani’s stern warning to Washington not to attack Pakistani soil.

 

The punishment for Pakistan is not limited to the Marriot hotel, which was more of a symbolic target, close to the houses of the President, Prime Minister, federal ministers and senior federal bureaucrats.  Hours earlier, explosives-laden cars attacked two military convoys in the tribal belt. Eight hours after the Marriot attack, the power grid in Swat, northern Pakistan, was blown up.  The frequency and intensity of attacks inside Pakistan have exceeded the attacks that U.S. military is facing in Afghanistan.

 

Which is in itself a strange thing? If the U.S. accusations are true and Islamabad is behind Afghan Taliban’s resurgence in Afghanistan, then why are the ‘Pakistani Taliban’ attacking Pakistani military targets? They should be happy that Pakistan is allegedly supporting the Afghan Taliban? But what is happening is the opposite: The so-called ‘Pakistani Taliban’ is punishing Pakistan, exclusively. The question is: Who benefits?

 

According to one Pakistani source, there are close to 8,000 foreigners in the country’s tribal belt at the moment.  Before 9/11, they were under 1,000, and most of them were peaceful leftovers from the anti-Soviet war in the 1980s, grownup, aging, with local wives and children.  Yes, Pakistan did have a domestic religious extremism problem but it consisted of small groups and not armies with endless supplies of money and sophisticated weapons and, apparently, advance knowledge of Pakistani military movements.

 

There is no question that many of these 8,000 foreigners are agents of foreign intelligence agencies who have infiltrated the Pakistani tribal belt from Afghanistan. This is not Hollywood. During the 2001 war against the Taliban government in Kabul, U.S. military used special ops teams made up of Pashtun look-alikes complete with perfect Pashtun accents, assisted by local help, purchased in U.S. dollars, in the areas of their deployment.

 

In Pakistani tribal belt, the numbers of foreigners dramatically increased in the years 2002 to 2004. These foreigners used the natural local anger at Pakistani military’s alliance with U.S. to work up the locals against Islamabad.  The area remained quiet for most of the time after the 2001 war until it finally erupted in insurgency led by a series of ‘rebel Mullahs’ who caught the Pakistani government and military by surprise.

 

Karzai’s security and intelligence network is populated with strongly anti-Pakistan officers. The Indians received an American nod to establish an elaborate intelligence and military training setup in Afghanistan.  Indians and Karzai’s men are directly involved in training, arming and financing rebels and insurgents and sending them into Pakistan.  There is a full backing for an ethnic insurgency in southwestern Pakistan where China is building a strategic seaport.  There are reports that the Israeli intelligence, the Mossad, is helping the Indians and Karzai’s security in destabilizing Pakistan’s western parts. The Israeli ambassador in New Delhi admitted in February that Israel offered crucial help to India during the Kargil war in 1999 which was the only reason India managed to repeal what appeared to be a surprise Pakistani victory. The Israelis have built a close defense relationship with India ever since and are also helping India perfect its occupation methods in Kashmir.

 

Pakistanis don’t have evidence that shows direct U.S. involvement in this anti-Pakistan campaign. But the circumstantial evidence is more than overwhelming.  Afghanistan could not have turned into a staging ground for anti-Pakistan covert operations involving several players with out Washington’s nod.  U.S. military has also been deliberately attacking those militant tribals inside Pakistan who are pro-Islamabad, and sparing those militants who only fight Pakistani military. Also, U.S. government has refused to designate the ethnic insurgency in southwestern Pakistan as terrorism.  One very interesting piece of information that points the fingers to both India and U.S. is that these shady ‘Pakistani Taliban’ have focused their efforts in the past four years on attacking Chinese citizens and Chinese interests inside Pakistan. No U.S. or NATO citizens have been attacked.

 

The Afghan Taliban –who are the real Taliban before this American-orchestrated insurgency in Pakistani border areas was deceptively termed ‘Taliban’ – have never attacked Pakistan despite Islamabad’s policy change after 9/11. In fact, senior Taliban officials, like its ambassador to Islamabad Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, never said anything against Pakistan despite having been captured and handed over to the Americans by Islamabad.

 

There is no question that Washington destabilized Pakistan using the same methods it had perfected in South America in the 1970s.  As Pakistan faced instability on the border, Washington moved in late 2006 to destabilize the country from the inside. A discredit former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto, was convinced to end her self-exile and enter into a U.S.-brokered deal with a weakened President Musharraf in exchange for endorsing the U.S. agenda and having her stolen millions whitewashed. The fast paced political change threw Pakistan off-balance and resulted in massive internal upheaval that continues until today, almost ending Pakistan’s remarkable economic rise of the past decade.

 

Once Pakistan was trapped, U.S. media sprung into action and mounted a massive propaganda about Pakistan becoming ripe for an Iraq-like U.S. intervention to neutralize its nuclear weapons and to ‘save’ the country from turning into a haven for al-Qaeda.

 

The entire purpose of this anti-Pakistan campaign is to remove the Pakistani hurdle that stands in the way of Washington’s plans for the region: China, Russia, Central Asia and Iran, and also to help pave the way for India to assume a bigger role, which it can’t in the presence of Pakistan.  This is what the planners in Washington might be thinking. The Indian thinking, however, is more short term. India is more interested in disorienting Pakistan and using all possible opportunities to make hurt Pakistanis and deprive Islamabad of any strategic advantage, whether in Afghanistan or with regards to the Chinese-built seaport near the Gulf.

 

WHAT ISLAMABAD CAN DO

 

Pakistan will continue to face instability as long as it continues to be part of the war on terror on Washington’s terms. Pakistan’s legitimate security interests have been so damaged and ignored by Washington that it is time to tell the Americans to go and deal with Afghanistan on their own.  This is the only way for Islamabad to regain respect in the eyes of its own people. Pakistan can say that it will help Washington where possible but that it is no longer part of the coalition that Washington assembled to occupy Afghanistan 2001, a coalition that only includes three nations now: U.S., U.K., and Pakistan.  In this regard, Pakistanis can renegotiate the terms of letting U.S. use Pakistani soil and airspace for the transport of supplies. Pakistan can ask U.S. military to vacate the remaining Pakistani airbase under American use. Also, Islamabad can revoke the permission that former President Musharraf granted CIA to establish outposts in Pakistan’s tribal belt and the permission to recruit local assets.  Meanwhile, Pakistan can continue eliminating the shady foreign and local criminals who call themselves ‘Pakistani Taliban’. This is what the Pakistani military has been doing recently, wiping off all these foreign assets. Which probably explains some of the recent American panic?

 

This way Pakistan can regain some of the stability and also the confidence of other countries in the region, especially China which has been watching with concern how Islamabad has allowed itself to be dragged by Washington into this mess.

 

KAYANI’S FUTURE

 

Of immediate interest is how the Zardari government will balance its strong pro-U.S. stance with the military’s resolve to stop U.S. belligerence. Mr. Zardari did try to please Washington by his risky July 27 move on ISI.  But now, with Gen. Kayani’s strong statements, it is fair to say that the army chief might become the new target of American’s and this government’s anger.  There is a possibility that Mr. Zardari might try to replace the army chief, using powers that Mr. Musharraf left in the hands of the new president.  Gen. Kayani is the last standing roadblock in Zardari government’s way to seize control of the military and spy agencies and subordinate them to U.S. policy interests in the region.

Please leave Pakistan alone

Filed under: Uncategorized — aurangzebawan @ 11:25 am
Tags:

The ‘Kid’ In Kabul

Amrullah Saleh, the thirty-six-year-old director of Karzai’s spy agency, known as NDS, became the world’s youngest intelligence chief in 2004, at age 32. Since 2005, NDS has emerged as a major source of strategic instability in the region.

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—He is young, bold, and methodical, often delivering his arguments in bullet-form even in an informal chat. According to one account, he went from earning $400 a month working for an NGO in Pakistan to making $6,000 working as a liaison officer for CIA with Northern Alliance. This is not the official version of course. His American patrons describe this assignment in a less dramatic way as “an informal ambassador and coordinator of non-governmental organizations with Afghanistan’s Northern Alliance.” This is how U.S. Congressman Mike Rogers introduced him during a reception three years ago.

This is Amrullah Saleh, the thirty-six-year-old director of Karzai’s spy agency, known as NDS, who probably became the world’s youngest intelligence chief in 2004, at age 32.

Mr. Saleh is also a central figure in the undeclared, low-intensity war against Pakistan, although he is more of a good executioner than an original thinker. Since 2005, NDS has emerged as a major source of strategic instability in the region. Armed with what appears to be an American nod that goes as far back as 2002, and with direct help from fourteen Indian intelligence outposts on Afghan soil, the NDS has facilitated the launch of a covert operation that has successfully created multiple insurgencies across Pakistan’s western belt – from Gwadar to swat – in less than three years.

Pakistan stands accused of attacks in both Afghanistan and India. The Americans have gone as far as blaming Pakistan, in advance, for all future attacks against United States. In fact, in a calculated leak, The New York Times on Sept. 11 accused Pakistani army Chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani of complicity in the July 7 bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul, something that even the Indians didn’t dare do. And on Sept. 7, President Bush delivered a speech at the National Defense University in Washington where he almost called Pakistan a terrorist state.

The ground reality, however, is a little different. The frequency and intensity of attacks inside Pakistan over the past two years have exceeded the number of attacks the U.S. military faces in Afghanistan. This is strange because if the U.S. accusations that Islamabad is behind Afghan Taliban’s resurgence in Afghanistan are correct, then why is the ‘Pakistani Taliban’ attacking the Pakistani State and people? The so-called ‘Pakistani Taliban’ should be happy that Pakistan is supporting the Afghan Taliban? But what is happening is the opposite. It is more like the ‘Pakistani Taliban’ is punishing Pakistan. The question is: Who benefits?

According to one Pakistani official source, close to 8,000 foreigners have infiltrated Pakistani territories over the past two to three years. The figure was under 1,000 before 9/11, and most of them were peaceful leftovers from the anti-Soviet war in the 1980s, grownup, aging, with local wives and children. Yes, Pakistan did have a domestic religious extremism problem but it consisted of small groups and not armies with endless supply of money and sophisticated weapons and, apparently, advance knowledge of Pakistani military movements.

There is a pile of evidence with Pakistani security officials that leaves no doubt that many of these 8,000 foreigners are operatives of foreign intelligence agencies who have infiltrated the Pakistani tribal belt from Afghanistan. This is not a Hollywood script. During the 2001 war against the Taliban government in Kabul, U.S. military used special ops teams made up of Pashtun look-alikes complete with perfect Pashtun accents, assisted by bought local help in the areas of their deployment.

In Pakistani tribal belt, the numbers of foreigners dramatically increased in the years 2002 to 2004. These foreigners used the natural local anger at Pakistan’s alliance with U.S. to work up the locals against Islamabad. The area remained quiet for most of the time after the 2001 war until it finally erupted in insurgency led by a series of shady ‘rebel Mullahs’ who caught the Pakistani government and military by surprise.

Karzai’s security and intelligence network is populated with viciously anti-Pakistan officers. Under U.S. patronage, the Indians are suspected of having raised the strength of their soldiers in Afghanistan to around ten thousand, mostly under the guise of security for Indian construction projects. Indians and Karzai’s men are directly involved in training, arming and financing rebels and insurgents and sending them into Pakistan. There is a full backing for an ethnic insurgency in southwestern Pakistan where China is building a strategic seaport.

Pakistanis don’t have evidence that shows direct U.S. involvement in this anti-Pakistan campaign. But the circumstantial evidence is more than overwhelming. Afghanistan could not have turned into a staging ground for anti-Pakistan covert operations involving several players without Washington’s nod. U.S. military has also been deliberately attacking those militant tribals inside Pakistan who are pro-Islamabad and sparing those who exclusively fight Pakistani military. Also, U.S. government has refused to designate the ethnic insurgency in southwestern Pakistan as terrorism. One very interesting piece of information that points the fingers to both India and U.S. is that these shady ‘Pakistani Taliban’ have focused their efforts in the past four years on attacking Chinese citizens and Chinese interests inside Pakistan. No U.S. or NATO citizens have ever been attacked.

The Afghan Taliban –who are the real Taliban before this foreign-orchestrated insurgency in Pakistani border areas hijacked the word ‘Taliban’ – have never attacked Pakistan despite Islamabad’s policy change after 9/11. In fact, senior Taliban officials, like its ambassador to Islamabad Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, never said anything against Pakistan despite having been captured and handed over to the Americans by Islamabad.

The only way out for Islamabad now is to leave the U.S.-led coalition that occupied Afghanistan in 2001.

Pakistan will continue to face instability as long as it continues to be part of the war on terror on Washington’s terms. Pakistan’s legitimate security interests have been so damaged and ignored by Washington that it is time to tell the Americans to go and deal with Afghanistan on their own. Pakistan can say that it will help Washington where possible but that it can no longer remain part of the coalition, a coalition that only includes three nations now: U.S., U.K., and Pakistan. In this regard, Pakistanis can renegotiate the terms of letting U.S. use Pakistani soil and airspace for the transport of supplies. Pakistan can ask U.S. military to vacate the remaining Pakistani airbase under American use. Also, Islamabad can revoke the permission that former President Musharraf granted CIA to establish outposts in Pakistan’s tribal belt and the permission to recruit local assets. Meanwhile, Pakistan can continue eliminating the shady foreign and local criminals who call themselves ‘Pakistani Taliban’. This is what the Pakistani military has been doing recently, wiping off all these foreign assets. Which probably explains some of the recent American panic?

‘Insurgency,’ Mr. Saleh, the Afghan spymaster, told American journalists in 2006, ‘is like grass. Two ways to destroy it: You cut the upper part, and after four months, you have it back. You poison the soil where that grass is, and then you eliminate it forever.’

What Mr. Saleh got wrong is the soil. It is not Pakistan. The Afghan insurgency is sustained by Afghans. It is an Afghan problem.

Please leave Pakistan alone.

September 6, 2007

Do you want to finish the reading of Holy Quran in this Ramadan

Filed under: Uncategorized — aurangzebawan @ 12:36 pm

Do you want to finish the reading of Holy Quran in this Ramadan