Featured Post

SalaamOne NetWork

SalaamOne سلام   is   a nonprofit e-Forum to promote peace among humanity, through understanding and tolerance of religions, cul...

MQM - Time for Change


London Metropolitan Police has interrogated two leaders of Muttahida Qaumi Movement and recovered important archives as well as high valued diamonds, jewellery from two bank lockers.

 According to sources, police had tracked the details of bank lockers while conducting search operation on Altaf Hussain and his relative’s homes.

 The sources said that London police has compiled a report based on solid evidences against Altaf Hussain and sent it to Crown Prosecution Service, Dunya News reported.

 The Crown Prosecution Service is responsible for prosecuting criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales.

 Police sources added MQM chief will be part of interrogative process after governmental lawyers’ response.

 Two former leaders of the political party provided firm proofs to London police which helped the officials in investigations.

 Police officials also claimed that amount of more than one million pounds were recovered during the raid.

 London Metropolitan Police and Crown Prosecution Services will present progress report today on Imran Farooq murder case before British Home Secretary Theresa May.

 Crown Prosecution Services will hold a special session with the top police officials before meeting the home secretary.

 Earlier, Chief of the Muttahida Quami Movement (MQM) Altaf Hussain  voluntarily stepped down from his post on June 30 after the raid conducted by London police on his residence but rejoined his post after 6 hours.
-------------------------------------------------

In 1947, many Muslims living in areas declared as part of India, had to migrate to Pakistan. People who came from East Punjab [India] to West Punjab [Pakistan] got fully absorbed due to same language and culture. The word Muhajir [immigrant] is considered as derogatory by them. But Urdu speaking people who settled in Karachi, Hyderabad and other parts of Sindh  still call themselves Muhajir [immigrant] due to different language and culture.  Similar is the case of those moved from India [Bihar] to East Pakistan [now Bangla Desh]. The rural Sindhis who are mostly backward like their brethren in other provinces under the yoke of feudal system feel that educated Muhajirs have dominated them, they feel that Muhajirs have taken over their jobs and opportunities along with main cities Karachi & Hyderabad. Sindhi feel that they are going to be rendered as minority in their home land Sindh with thousands of year old civilization and culture. On the other hand Muhajirs have their own grievances, lack of jobs on merit and opportunities according to their population. Traditionally Muhajirs supported JI [Jamaat-e-Islami, a religious-political party] they were oppressed under doctorial rule like other poor Pakistanis. However being educated and vocal, concentrated in port city of Karachi, initially the capital and later financial capital of Pakistan, their voice is heard instantly. All people living in Sindh rather Pakistan have to coexist. The complex issues among them can only be resolved through patience and dialogue not militancy.

Karachi is hub of MQM [Mutihida/Muhajir Qomi Movement]. According to the census of 1998, in Karachi; Urdu speakers [Muhajir] make up 48% of the population, Punjabis 14%, Pashtuns 12%, Balochis and Sindhi together 13% and others 12%. The others include Dari, Gujarati, Dawoodi Bohra, Memon, Marwari, Brahui, Makrani, Khowar, Burushaski, Arabic, Persian and Bengali. Now arguably the population of Pashtuns has increased considerably since then and may be as high as 20-25%. The demarcation of constituencies have done in such a way that in Karachi, out of the 42 provincial assembly seats, 35 belong to MQM, 5 to PPP and 2 to ANP. Yet this is in sharp contrast to demographics of the city. Now these 52% of ethnicities other than Urdu speakers have very little representation in the National and Sindh assemblies, which need to be rectified in all fairness. Proportional representations system is a possible fair solution  all over Pakistan which can address the grievances of all smaller parties and groups in Pakistan. Fair representation is the spirit of democracy.

Simple & peace loving patriotic Urdu speaking citizens [Muhajirs] supported Mr.Altaf Hussain who in eighties founded MQM to struggle for their rights. Unlike other political parties lead by dynastic families of feudal lords and business tycoons MQM draws its leadership from middle class, this has many plus points. However unfortunately the image of MQM has been tarnished due to its zero tolerance to dissension, which is not only undemocratic but leads to fascism. The mafia like war with breakaway faction MQM (H) has cost many lives. Hence alleged involvement of militant wing of MQM in killings, torcher, extortion and other illegal and anti state activates gets out of control. While people join and leave other political parties, MQM has only one Way In.. no one  can leave MQM, those expelled, live a quiet life till they breath their last or die under mysterious circumstances. MQM has monopolized the leadership of Urdu speaking community, where as diversity is strength of democracy. 

Mr.Altaf Hussein is living in self exile in London; he is now a British citizen, with no intentions to return back to Pakistan, even though MQM remains part of successive governments during lat one decade. 

Political leaders live exile expelled by rulers but they return back to their country to lead from front when ever situation improves. Nawaz Sharif and Benazir are recent examples, though they have kept their business and wealth in foreign lands they returned back. Benazir Bhutto was well aware of threat to her life, survived two attempts but it did not deter her, finally embraced death with honor. Nowhere in the world leaders settle down abroad permanently, swear allegiance to foreign state and lead political party in their previous country. This is not only betrayal to the oath of allegiance rendered to the adopted land but to the people of Pakistan. How can a person who is not under the constitution and law of Pakistan take big decisions for citizens and state of Pakistan? A foreigner leading a political party in Pakistan does not farewell morally, ethically and legally. Every human being have limitations, which could be exploited by foreign governments to their advantage. How can one accept the oral claims of patriotism by Mr.Altaf Hussain which are contradicted by his actions? Even if for the sake of argument, claims of patriotism and loyalty to Pakistan by Mr.Altaf Hussain are accepted, granting probability of 51% to 99% in favor, still there exists probability of 49% to 1 % to be otherwise. What can be done if opposite is true; nothing as he is neither in Pakistan nor its citizen. In India Sonia Gandhi, an Indian national, living in India for years, but was kept away from heading the government due to her foreign roots. Mr.Altaf Hussain is not holding any government seat, but his clout is such that no government can be formed without his consent, especially in Sindh. He holds key to the peace in Karachi, financial capital of Pakistan.  Common people may be befooled but not the intellectuals among Urdu speaking people, they are not insane, they understand this, what makes them to remain quiet? Its fear of life through terror and violence. Recent revelations by ex home minister of Sindh [denied by MQM] have further cemented the negative perceptions about MQM leadership. History of last 25 years reveal that while MQM did make some short term administrative gains but strategically on long term basis it has not been able to solve the problems of people it claims to lead. They are kept Muhajirs, mentally if not physically. Is simmering of issues, vital for its existence and survival?   

It well known that MQM is organized on the lines some what similar to the German Nazi Party.  Mr. Altaf Hussain is like "Der Führer", with  absolute power and full command over the party. All other party offices are  subordinate to his position and depend on his instruction. Rabita Commmitte is like the Reichsleiters ("Reich Leader") directly subjected to the Führer. The Reichsleiters formed the "Reich Leadership of the Nazi Party" (Reichsleitung der NSDAP), which was established at the so-called Brown House, in Munich and MQM equivalent is 90 [Nine Zero].  The political leadership corps in Nazi party encompassed a vast array of paramilitary titles at the top of which were the Gauleiters, who were Party leaders of large geographical areas [see Sector Commandeers, Unit Commanders in MQM]. From the Gauleiters extended downwards through Nazi positions encompassing county, city, and town leaders, all of whom were unquestioned rulers in their particular areas and region. The general membership of the Nazi Party, known as the Parteimitglieder, mainly consisted of the urban and rural lower middle classes. 7% belonged to the upper class, another 7% were peasants, 35% were industrial workers and 51% were what can be described as middle class, MQM with rural base follows almost similar pattern.

 The sector commanders and others in hierarchy maintain strict watch on people down to street level.  Any one going against the party policies is handled with iron hand voices of defiance are silenced. This act as deterrence for other potential dissidents. About ninety police officers who participated in operation against criminals allegedly associated with MQM in nineties have gradually been murdered. The strict military like discipline is visible in telephonic addresses by Mr.Altaf Hussain from London and during rallies. A  political party has nothing to do with militancy and violence, this is the big line which separates a political party from terrorists like Taliban.The successive governments have to be soft with MQM due to their support for government and nuisance value. MQM can paralyze Karachi, the financial capital of Pakistan at short notice. Now with independent media and judiciary the environments have changed. The politics and militancy can not work side by side. There shall remain no difference between Taliban and MQM, if both use militancy to enforce their agenda. Present top MQM leadership can not change itself overnight.

The peace loving people, intellectuals along with young people among Urdu speaking community have to come forward to initially establish a forum or pressure group which could be called MPM [Muthidda Pakistan Movement], Pakistani Qomi Movement [PQM] or any other suitable name with a view to persuade MQM to change its approach, abandon militancy and other illegal activities. This has to be done patiently in soft and reasonable manner not to antagonize but to support, however use of social media may be helpful.
Replacement of word ‘Muhajir’ with ‘Mutehidda’ by MQM did not change its outlook. The Urdu speaking people may stop calling themselves as Muhajir, they may prefer the title of “Pakistani”. Because they are first Pakistani and then Punjabi, Sindhi, Baloch, Pathan or Kashmiri, their adopted homes. Their language Urdu is the national language of Pakistan, which is now spoken in the homes of all Pakistanis with pride. Urdu is replacing regional languages at fast pace. The word 'Muhajir' gives the impression as if they are here temporarily, which is not the case, they are here for ever, they are Pakistani it includes stranded Pakistanis in Bangla Desh as well. This ‘Pakistani Movement’ should be open to all those who consider themselves to be Pakistani first [for Muslims, first Muslim, then Pakistani] and then Punjabi, Sindhi, Baloch, Pathan or Kashmiri. The people living in present Pakistan prior to 1947 also struggled for independence but the sacrifices rendered by those who left their homes for sake of this country are much more. The new forum or pressure group should sincerely struggle for all the oppressed people in Pakistan and Pakistanis stranded in Bangla Desh since 1971. Balanced representation from all the provinces and minorities should give it a national out look and character rather than ethnic or regional.  Pakistan Zindabad.

Must Read:

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Is Chuck Hagel the man for the job?

As Obama picks his new national security chiefs, we examine the nomination of Chuck Hagel as defence secretary.
"How can we preach to other countries that you can't have nuclear weapons but we can and our allies can. There's no credibility, there's no logic to that argument."
Chuck Hagel, the nominated US defence secretary

For his independence and commitment to consensus he's earned the respect of national security and military leaders, Republicans and Democrats, including me. In the senate, I came to admire his courage and his judgement, his willingness to speak his mind, even if it wasn't popular, even if it defied the conventional wisdom. And that's exactly the spirit I want on my national security team," said the president.
"I'd take the president's word that he likes and trusts former Senator Hagel, got to know him in the Senate, likes and trusts his position and his candour on a range of issues. But I think the calculus to go ahead and in the way that they are going ahead is that Senator Hagel for all of the courageous positions he's taken on Iran, on Israel, Hamas, lots of issues, that he will assure his fellow senators that those are positions that he held as a senator and they really will not have very much to do with his position as secretary [of] defence."
- Hillary Mann Leverett, a former US state department official
But the nomination still has to be approved by the senate and that is far from a formality.

Many Republicans have criticised the nomination, saying Hagel is too soft on Iran and not soft enough on Israel. And it has also drawn criticism from some Democrats too, who want one of their own in the post.

Obama also named longtime Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) staffer John Brennan to head the agency.

But why is Hagel's nomination so controversial?

Chuck Hagel has been criticised by Republicans for being "outside mainstream thinking on most foreign policy issues".
So where does he stand?

Hagel initially supported the US-led war in Iraq, but later sharply criticised how that war was managed.

As a senator, he called unilateral sanctions on Iran "counter-productive". But he has supported some sanctions and also endorsed labeling Iran a state sponsor of terrorism.

Hagel's support for Israel has come under scrutiny.
"It is a controversial nomination and in a lot of ways, a curious one .... Any time managing the Pentagon is a very difficult job to do. It is going to be particularly difficult over the next four years because of the cuts .... Chuck Hagel has never managed a large organisation, he's never managed anything larger than his senate office."
- Clifford May, a national security analyst
Many Republicans point to comments he made in 2008, when he said "the Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people up here". On the flip side, he has also voted in favour of billions of dollars in military aid to Israel.

After the 9/11 attacks the US government began monitoring some Americans -  without their knowledge. As a member of the senate's intelligence committee, Hagel defended the government's actions, saying it struck a "delicate, but effective balance".

Hagel supported US involvement in a NATO force in Kosovo - during that country's war in 1999.

Inside Story Americas, with presenter Kimberly Halkett, discusses the new appointments with guests: Larry Korb, a former US assistant secretary of defence and a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress; Clifford May, a national security analyst and president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies; and Hillary Mann Leverett, a former US state department official and also co-author of a new book: Going to Tehran: Why the United States Must Come to Terms with the Islamic Republic.
"How can we preach to other countries that you can't have nuclear weapons but we can and our allies can. There's no credibility, there's no logic to that argument."
Chuck Hagel, the nominated US defence secretary
http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestoryamericas/2013/01/201318649274922.html
~~~~~~~~

Choosing Hagel sends an important message

MJ Rosenberg
MJ Rosenberg
MJ Rosenberg served as a Senior Foreign Policy Fellow with Media Matters Action Network and prior to that worked on Capitol Hill for various Democratic members of the House and Senate for 15 years. He was also a Clinton political appointee at USAID.
US interests are being damaged by Israel's current shift to the extreme Right, so why not nominate Chuck Hagel?
Thus far, President Barack Obama is sitting out the January 22 Israeli elections. There is no indication about who he hopes to see as the next Israeli prime minister. His noninterference, even disinterest, is not surprising except when contrasted with Prime Minister Netanyahu's open preference for the Republicans in the US election two months ago. One might have thought that a little payback would be in order.

One reason for Obama's apparent indifference may be that there is almost no possibility that Netanyahu will not be the next prime minister. The only question is whether Netanyahu's next government will be as far right (and pro-settlement expansion) as his current government or much farther to the right.
To put the Israeli election in US terms, it is as if the choice two months ago was between the right-wing Republican Party and the ultra-right-wing Tea Party with the Democrats merely hoping to win enough support to compose a credible opposition or to get a cabinet post.

But that is the case in Israel where Netanyahu and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman's Likud-Beytenu coalition is being challenged by a new party to its right, the Jewish Home party. The Jewish Home party is led by 40-year-old Naftali Bennett who is running on an openly annexationist platform, in contrast to Netanyahu and Lieberman who, although also expansionist, occasionally pay lip service to the idea of reaching a two-state agreement with the Palestinians.
Less attention to the Israeli election
Bennett favours the immediate annexation of 60 percent of the West Bank immediately which would make the creation of a viable Palestinian state impossible. His 60 percent plan is rejected by other leading figures in his party - even more radical - who favour a 100 percent annexation just to make sure. 
Inside Story US 2012What role does the pro-Israel lobby play?
Needless to say, the new party is dominated by ultra-nationalist settlers and religious fanatics who, in addition to supporting land grabs, vehemently oppose equal rights for gays, women, Arabs and non-Jews in general. Nonetheless, Jewish Home is the first choice of Israelis under 30, who are abandoning the old right-wing parties for the extreme right.
Perhaps the craziest thing is that the new ultra-right party is rising as the Netanyahu/Lieberman party has shifted rightward, too. Gone are the more pragmatic Likud types like Benny Begin and Dan Meridor. In their place are the likes of Moshe Feiglin who told the Atlantic's Jeff Goldberg:
"Why should non-Jews have a say in the policy of a Jewish state?" Feiglin said to me. "For two thousand years, Jews dreamed of a Jewish state, not a democratic state. Democracy should serve the values of the state, not destroy them." In any case, Feiglin said, "You can't teach a monkey to speak and you can't teach an Arab to be democratic. You're dealing with a culture of thieves and robbers... The Arab destroys everything he touches."
Feiglin isn't alone either. Take a look at this list of rightist extremists who top the Netanyahu-Lieberman list, yet who are seen as too moderate for voters drawn to the up and coming new party.

The interesting thing is that few Americans are paying any attention to the Israeli election, a sign that even the pro-Israel community is losing interest in and hope for Israel. A country that once was a source of joy for so many Americans is now a source of pain; the prevailing attitude seems to be to just look away and hope that things will improve by the next time they pay attention.

But then it doesn't really matter what most Americans think or don't think about what is happening in Israel. Except for one.
The President of the United States matters very much. Every Israeli is aware that without the support of President Obama, Israel would be in desperate straits. The United States provides Israel with billions of dollars of aid a year, aid which is used to purchase the weapon systems that sustains Israel's "military edge" which enables it to both maintain the occupation and defend itself.

That aid also provides Israel with the economic cushion it needs to preserve its immunity to the recession that has afflicted most of the world. It is the President of the United States who decides whether to stand (virtually alone) with Israel at the United Nations, using our veto to block any resolution that Israel opposes. It is the President who has adopted Israel's position on Iranian nuclear development as our own, leading the effort to punish Iran with sanctions and reiterating Israeli threats that there will be war if Iran develops nuclear weapons (despite the fact that Israel is said to have some 200 warheads).
Dependent on the US President 
In short, Israel is almost entirely dependent on the President of the United States. As for Congress, it matters too but, on all foreign policy matters, it is the President who leads. That is how the United States Constitution works. It is the President who defends the national interest abroad. 
"An Israeli government dominated by ultra-nationalists, racists and fascists impacts on our standing throughout the world."
And the fact is that US interests are being damaged by Israel's current course. Whether we like it or not, the United States is viewed as linked at the hip with Israel. An Israeli government dominated by ultra-nationalists, racists and fascists impacts on our standing throughout the world. After all, the world (and not just the Muslim world) understands that we are Israel's enabler.

That is why it is time for President Obama to send a clear message to Israel by nominating former Senator Chuck Hagel to be Secretary of Defence. That is not because Hagel is anti-Israel. He isn't.

The reason to nominate Hagel, in addition to his qualifications for the post, is that the Israel lobby has decided to demonstrate its clout by preventing his nomination. Like the National Rifle Association, the lobby has an intense need to demonstrate that it's in charge. It does not like Hagel, so he will not get the post. Successfully blocking him will demonstrate that no matter how far Israel lurches toward the right, no matter how many settlements are built, no many how many Palestinians are thrown off their land or just abused, the United States will simply grin and bear it.
Obama could, of course, issue a statement or deliver a speech re-stating US policy on settlements, a Palestinian state, and the need for peace. But the sad fact is that no one believes that this administration will ever back up its fine words on Israel and Palestine with deeds, not after the past four years of giving in to Netanyahu over and over again. There is only one way to send a message to Israel that will be heard: It will be by nominating Hagel. It is Israel and the lobby that created the Hagel issue. Why not use it to America's advantage? And Israel's too. After all, it is Israel not the United States that seems to be going over a cliff and, sadly, it is not just fiscal.

Mr President, nominate Hagel. And fight for his confirmation. As for the lobby, let it do what it wants. Out in the open, for a change.
MJ Rosenberg served as a Senior Foreign Policy Fellow with Media Matters Action Network and prior to that worked on Capitol Hill for various Democratic members of the House and Senate for 15 years. He was also a Clinton political appointee at USAID.
Follow him on Twitter: @MJayRosenberg

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2013/01/2013159114491198.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Hagel

Opinions divided over US president's nominations of Chuck Hagel and John Brennan to head Pentagon and CIA respectively.
Jim Lobe

Hagel: A Different Kind of Defense Secretary

Senator Chuck Hagel's nomination and inevitable appointment as Secretary of Defense is stirring controversy in the Senate. It should.

"Palestine is a country under occupation. What was Norway, Finland, Holland, France, Korea, Philippines between 1939 and 1945 - nation states under occupation. Today, the state of Palestine is officially a state under occupation. It has 192 member countries that recognise this and a nation state, Israel, which is the occupying power; these are the new realities."

  - Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator

 "Israel won't be happy about it because anything that undermines the peace process, any unilateral act, is not helpful. We have very serious and difficult issues that we face and that the Palestinians have to face that will have to be settled with negotiations."

 - Robbie Sabel, a former adviser to Israel's foreign ministry
Read full>>> http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/insidestory/2013/01/2013186722389860.html

:

Palestine is the most complex geopolitical and religious issue, confronted by the humanity, which if left unresolved will continue to pose major threat to the world peace.

The Zionist Cuckoos in Christianity's Nest
Stuart Littlewood views the ideology of Christian Zionism, which is rampant in the United States and has made some inroads in other "Christian" societies, and argues that, in essence, Christian Zionism is "a gross corruption of ...
http://peace-forum.blogspot.com/
Zionist Christians: Useful tool for Zionist Jews
Zionist Christians: Useful tool for Zionist Jews. Christian Zionists believe that in order to fulfill Biblical prophecy, Israel must conquer most of the Middle East. They are a growing force in American politics with ties to many ...
Peace-Forum: Zionist West versus Islam
The notorious crusades were initiated in by Pope Urban 2nd in 1096 when the Church was losing its hold on Christians, this ploy was used by them to bring the Christians back under the yoke of the Church. As a reaction to ...
Before Zionism, Most Christians and Jews Were Pro ...
Before Zionism, Most Christians and Jews Were Pro-Palestinian-By Rev Ted Pike. Few people realize that, as recently as 120 years ago, virtually every religious Jew was essentially anti-Zionist. They agreed that, because of ...

<<Free-eBooks Click here>>> 
Labels: , , ,

With, within, without

Over the decades, the 1956 science-fiction film, ‘The Forbidden Planet,’ has been elevated by film critics to be a vintage Hollywood sci-fi classic.
In the sci-fi genre it is sometimes placed right along side director Stanley Kubrick’s 1968 masterpiece, ‘2001: A Space Odyssey,’ as being one of the most intellectually rich sci-fi movies of all time.
‘Forbidden Planet’ takes place in the 23rd Century where a spaceship is sent from Earth to a planet that is 16 light years away to find out what happened to a space probe that was sent to the planet 20 years ago.
On reaching the planet, the captain and crew members of the spaceship find a scientist and his family who tell the investigation party that an unknown force had destroyed the probe and killed the inhabitants of the planet.
After facing attacks from the same unknown force/entity that is largely invisible, the spaceship crew finally figures out that the force is actually the subconscious manifestation of the scientist himself, triggered by a machine invented by him.
The scientist continues to deny this until he is finally convinced that the shadowy entity that is going about slaughtering the planet’s inhabitants is indeed the expression of his own subconscious mind and/or the manifestation of what German psychologist, Freud, called ‘the id’.
The film’s plot has always fascinated me; especially when I have wondered whether the unprecedented spats of violence by religious extremists that have been haunting Pakistan for years now, may be physical manifestations of our own collective subconscious.
This might also explain the inexplicable state of denial or silence that we as a nation usually fall into every time some entity goes on a killing spree in the name of faith.
May be our Dr Jekyll is simply refusing to realise that the despicable, chaotic and evil Mr Hyde is actually an extension of our own being and not some alien force unleashed across our Land of the Pure.
It is as if the figurative demons of hatred repressed deep within our sub-consciousness have suddenly leaped out to become a horrifying, tangible reality.
Laying latent in us have been awkward fantasies about gallant military takeovers and bloody revolutions based on rotating myths of bravado and a worldview that has no room for any grey areas.
Such a state of mind has given birth to a cringing mindset radiating a somewhat delusional sense of chauvinism, patriotism and ideological self-indulgence, but one that also comes attached with a persecution complex and an obsessive-compulsive need to deny and deflect one’s own failures.
Though most of us are only willing to exhibit our quivering religious/sectarian and ‘patriotic’ biases in the shape of the usual knee-jerk rhetoric on the internet and the TV, it won’t be all that wrong to suggest that most of what is harmlessly spilled out as patriotic rants in cyber space or the media, has now found its physical expression.
These are the physical manifestations of the demons of hatred most of us have been nurturing in our minds; demons fed by decades of ‘education’, propaganda or mythical tall tales of bluster and glory that have only ended up conspiring to isolate the Pakistani nation from reality.
We have been carved out and crafted (by the state, the clergy, the media and the class room), as a people who are on a divine mission to safeguard faith from its many (largely imagined and demagogically concocted) ‘enemies’.
We think of ourselves as being the chosen people and (thus) are quick to deny and hide most of our own failings by claiming that, No! These failures do not stem from our bloated perceptions about ourselves.
Instead, to most of us these failings are due to any number of diabolic forces named and numbered and then wrapped in the usual deflective clichés that are spontaneously spouted out by preachers, politicians and patriots out there: i.e. the lingering residue of ‘colonialism,’ malicious designs of ‘anti-Islam/anti-Pakistan forces’, American tinkering and intervention and, of course, democracy, liberalism, secularism…
The truth is, on most occasions than not, it has very much been us and us alone who have brought this country to its knees.
The inflexible, intolerant and gun-totting strain of the faith that was glorified from the 1980s onwards gradually began making a number of us believe that what we had (peacefully) been practicing as our religion before this was perhaps wrong.
We began to doubt our faith the way it was. The crises turned itself into a daunting dilemma of identity. Subtlety in matters of faith went out the window. The new Pakistani society started to judge this subtlety as a sign of weak faith. Consequently everything according to us and our faith became loud and pertaining to sheer exhibitionism.
Our faith’s spiritual dimensions were clipped away and it was made to freeze and lose its evolutionary and progressive spirit. It then became just another political and social ideology. A lumbering dogma.
Such a dogma means nothing spiritually to an individual. But it does detach him from the progressive and evolutionary character and body of the faith. Add politics to this mixture and you have a disaster in the making.
The violence that this country faces today in the name of faith is not very different from the violence that our state, politicians, media, and text books have instilled in each one of us.
Indeed, when we sit quietly looking in horror at images on TV of the carnage caused by a suicide bomber on our soldiers, policemen, politicians and common civilians, isn’t this a deep, dark reflection of all that was instilled and nurtured in our own heads?
That is, the idea of faith not as a spiritually, intellectually and morally enriching path, but as a demagogic, politicised weapon to retain social, political and economic power. The power to exploit.
The day we finally realise that God alone has the wisdom and right to determine and judge the level and status of one’s faith is when we may finally reign in the monster that is largely a horrendous and unwitting manifestation of our own self-righteousness and religious biases.
By Nadeem F Paracha: http://dawn.com/2013/01/06/smokers-corner-with-within-without/comment-page-2/#comment-532150
<<Free-eBooks Click here>>> 
Labels: , , ,

Hello 2013 !

Learn we must the art of being still. Can we? As prisoners of technology, it is like the body-hugging octopus that feeds our frenzy. Hallelujah! The internet, we’re convinced, is the font of all wisdom. If you need to know how to live, Google it and you’ll get hit by zillions of self-help sites; if something ails you, go to WebMD to get floored by advice, signs and symptoms you may not want to hear; if you’re lonely, chat up strangers waiting to vent in chat rooms and if you need a friend, hey, you have the Facebook! And what about that Twitter thing that has invaded the earth? Tweet and be at peace. Cheeps, peeps and squeaks will lighten your spirit.
What’s more, the internet is so sweet that it does not discriminate between old and young, black or white, rich or poor. This is one watering hole where everyone assembles. A day before New Year’s, at lunch with friends, the iPad controls the conversation. “I gave it to David as Christmas present,” says Mary. “I hate it,” pipes up David. “I am terrified of it.” We’ll get you there, sympathises the chorus. The host then proudly trots out his iPad that he too got for Christmas from his wife. “I love it!” he says, looking adoringly at his lap where the gadget sits. “I can’t imagine life without it”.
Sure enough, after lunch, David’s iPad is ceremoniously unwrapped and produced. Conversation circles around the darn thing, until it’s time to leave.
Apple doodads or thingies aside, there are still many whose heart tugs and the mind dithers when a new year rolls out, thrusting the last into the shadowy territories of history. When 2012 arrived, we made declarations to love, honour and respect life. Such vows are often a sequestered affair, unknown to the outer world. How the mind translates resolutions, wishes, hopes and promises, usually rests cloistered between the man and his soul.
While we try coming to terms with our private lives and rate our gains and losses, let’s say a big ‘Hello’ to 2013. Like the silvery pure snow, pristine blue skies and gold strands of sun that piloted the New Year (in my part of the world), we have 12 untouched months of a clean slate waiting to be lived. With the best and worst of anything you can imagine propelled into the pile we call the ‘past’, let us transfer to a future that awaits.
Trying to find answers on how to live a purpose-filled life is often impulsive. We whip out the same clichéd la-di-da ‘ways and means’ template; what we don’t have is a primer full of practical real life tips on how to achieve the unachievable.
Take happiness. Is it success, wealth, health or just plain old peace of mind that gets your body to produce serotonin? “Because happiness is hormonal, we don’t need to wait for happiness in life, we can make our body produce good hormones,” says Ilchi Lee in BrainWorld. Everybody can create happiness knowing this theory, he says. If you feel comfortable, peaceful and joyful, it secretes the “happy hormone or peace messenger” as Lee calls it. Serotonin goes direct to our brains and gives us a high.
Forming a ‘Friendship Circle’ can fulfill our multiple needs. You don’t need scores of your Facebook buddies to be in the circle. All you need is a handful of people who like you for who you are. Period. Someone you can call, text, meet, party, laugh and joke with. And when you need advice, instead of turning to the internet and scouring self-help books, you should be able to talk to your friends and ask their help.
What is a friend? The French philosopher Albert Camus has the simplest answer: “Don’t walk behind me; I may not lead. Don’t walk in front of me; I may not follow. Just walk beside me and be my friend.” The Nobel Laureate was best known as a proponent of existentialism : how to live one’s life in the present and believe that philosophical and psychological inquiry can help. Existential questions such as “death, the meaning of human existence, the place of God in human existence, the meaning of value, interpersonal relationship, the place of self-reflective conscious knowledge of one’s self in existing,” need addressing for an individual to conquer happiness.
But Apple inventor Steve Jobs had other plans in mind. The genius that he was, while he battled cancer and lost in the end, his furious race to entangle humans in technological revolution won him fame but left the human race worshipping his inventions on how to communicate. “As much as I love my iPhone 5, I’m worried,” writes Larry Momo in Washington Times. “You see, I’m a people watcher and, frankly, I don’t like what I’m seeing. In restaurants, bars, bowling alleys or just riding in cars, no one talks to each other. They text. They don’t look at each other, they don’t wave, they don’t smile at each other, they don’t know the other person is there. They just text. Couples in restaurants no longer talk. They text their friends, read their text messages and look up things on Facebook. They hardly glance at each other.”
Steve Jobs may be dead but 2013 is the world that he made. Most are lost in the techno-cloud he leaves behind.
Are we afraid to be still? Must we always be in motion to ward off isolation? Must our ears be plugged in with an earphone or our eyes fixated on a mini screen? Must our fingers be fiddling the keys on our phones or laptops? To heighten our senses, being busy is our mantra. To stop our personal universe from crashing, we think action in any form is the antidote.
Wrong! Stop! Switch off the idiot box that spews a lot of nonsense and nothing more. Shut down your computer. Switch off your cell phone. Padlock the portion of your brain where chatter is ceaseless. Go on a journey of self-discovery where you will discover something new each day as the American poet Robert Frost did in his poem The road not taken.
Instead, he took the road less travelled. Because he says it was “grassy and wanted wear”. He left the other road for another day, though he doubts if he’ll ever walk on it.
Like a sage, Frost ends with lines that haunt us till today: Somewhere ages and ages hence/two roads diverged in a wood, and I — I took the one less travelled by/ And that has made all the difference.
Happy New Year! anjumniaz@rocketmail.com
<<Free-eBooks Click here>>> 
Labels: ,

'War on terror' actually aimed at Islam

Problem with video, click here to watch >>>
Public opinion polls show that the vast majority of the world's Muslims know that the “War on Terror” is a barely-disguised War on Islam.


And it isn't just Muslims who understand this. So do all serious Western strategic thinkers. 

One of the few who is willing to say it openly is James Schall, Professor of Government at Georgetown University and Hoover Institute strategist: “I always thought it was a mistake not to say what Iraq really was, that is, a war against an expanding Islam.” 

But today - eleven and one-half years after the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center launched the War on Islam - that war is bogged down in the mother of all quagmires. 

The neoconservatives who orchestrated 9/11 hoped that their stealth war on Islam would achieve quick regime change throughout the Middle East, and break the back of Islamic political movements worldwide. To that end, they invaded Iraq and Afghanistan in order to surround Iran with US military bases. They intended to invade Iran, and destroy its Islamic revolution, by 2005 at the latest.

But the heroic resistance of the Iraqis, Lebanese and Palestinians, and shrewd strategic moves by Iran - together with ideological challenges by the peace movement, the 9/11 truth movement, and the anti-Zionist movement - slowed them down. 

By August of 2007, neocon front man Dick Cheney realized that his last opportunity to invade Iran was slipping from his grasp. So Cheney's rogue network attempted to steal nuclear weapons from the US arsenal at Minot Air Force Base, with the intention of using those weapons, whether in the US itself or the Middle East, in order to trigger all-out war on Iran. 

Stupid move. The nuke-thieves got caught. Dozens were suicided or met “accidental” deaths. 

The command structure of the US military does not look kindly on people who try to steal nuclear weapons - even if the thief-in-chief is the Vice President of the United States. 

Since then, the US military has closed ranks against the neocons. The invasion of Iran - the chief objective of the 9/11 conspirators - has been postponed indefinitely, to the infinite chagrin of Netanyahu and his “American” allies. And the larger War on Islam has lost its focus. 

But how can it end? When nations are at war, the duly-constituted authorities of both nations can end the war by signing a peace treaty. But since the aggressors (with a few exceptions like Schall) refuse to admit that they are waging war on Islam, and since Islam has no “duly constituted authority” capable of negotiating anything, it is hard to imagine how a peace treaty could end hostilities. 

To understand how the War on Islam could end, we must first understand what is really at stake. What is this war really about?

It is certainly not about terrorism. Even if we provisionally accept the official story of 9/11 (which is now doubted by the majority of the world), an American is more than ten times more likely to be struck by lightning, or drown in a bathtub, than to be killed by any kind of terrorist. And according to the FBI, radical Muslims only commit 6% of terrorist attacks - less than radical Jews, and vastly less than radical leftists and hispanics.

And if “terrorism” means “the intentional slaughter of civilians,” the US and Israel commit thousands of times more terrorism than all the Muslims of the world put together. According to studies by Gideon Polya, M.D., the US and its ally, Great Britain, have murdered roughly eight million Iraqis alone since 1950. The total number of victims of US and Israeli state terrorism since World War II, what scholar William Blum calls “the American Holocaust,” is in the tens of millions. 

So if it isn’t really about “terrorism” then what’s the actual bone of contention? The short answer: Demographics and religiosity. 

Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the world, in part through conversions, but mostly through demographics. Even though Muslim birthrates are falling in most parts of the world, they aren’t falling quite as fast as Western birthrates, which are now below replacement levels and heralding an impending demographic collapse. (Russia and Italy, for example, are projected to lose half their population within a few generations). 

Why are Muslim birthrates relatively high? Because Islam is a religion of what we might call “traditional family values.” Sexuality under Islam is limited to community-sanctioned procreative relationships (otherwise known as marriage), and the various vices that have largely destroyed the family in the West - alcohol, drugs, promiscuity, open homosexuality, widespread divorce, egotism, materialism, consumerism and so on - are only making limited progress in their war on the Islamic family. So since Islamic families are relatively happier and more stable, they have more children which means more Muslims.

And that scares some Western policy-makers, especially those who have a strong personal attachment to the state of Israel. The demographic tilt towards Islam will inevitably result in a readjustment of the global balance of power - raising questions about continued Western control of Middle Eastern and Central Asian energy resources, and even thornier questions about the future of Occupied Palestine. 

The perceived problem isn’t just the demographics, it’s the potential for Islamic unity turning into a global political force which, in tandem with the rise of China and India, could rob the West of its current status as global hegemon. And it is the shared religiosity of Muslims, the social bonds fostered by religion that draw Muslims together and offer them a chance to readjust the global balance of power in their favor. 

Proponents of the War on Islam cannot admit this openly. They cannot say “our real objective is to damage the religion of Islam, break up the Islamic family, and try to reduce the global Muslim population.” They cannot admit that their real objective is genocide. 

So they are waging a war of deception. By smearing Muslims as subhuman “terrorists” they can covertly commit genocide while pretending to be the good guys. 

The neocons have squandered their opportunity for a sudden, decisive blow against Islam. That means that only two alternatives remain: Either the low-intensity War on Islam will continue indefinitely, with its endless drone killings, false-flag terror strikes, genocidal media propaganda, attempts to provoke intra-Muslim strife, assassinations of Iranian scientists, and so on; or it will end quickly and cleanly with a Western confession that the whole “War on Terror” has been a big lie. 

The second alternative would be much cheaper, in terms of blood and treasure. 

Here is how it could happen: Senior US military commanders, tired of spilling American blood for Israel, organize a counter-coup against those complicit in the 9/11 operation. 

They declare a state of emergency and arrest several dozen current and retired military and intelligence officers, a host of politicians including most of the leading neoconservatives, the owners and decision-makers of the major mainstream media outlets, several of the planet's wealthiest individuals, and key unregistered agents of Israel who operate behind the facade of America's leading Jewish organizations. Seizing control of the newspapers and airwaves, they reveal the truth about 9/11 to a shocked, outraged world. Swift military-style trials elicit confessions and convictions. 
Islam is declared innocent. Zionism is guilty. Palestine is liberated. And the war is finally over. 

Will it happen in 2013? 

If YOU work hard enough spreading the truth about 9/11 and the phony “War on Terror,” anything is possible. 
Labels: , , , ,
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)