Rupee News

Pakistan was inevitable– its seeds had been sown many centuries earlier

Share

”Tis the season of mellow fruitfulness, close bosom friend of the conspiring sun–and “til the season of the breakup of the BJP and the season of the ascendancy of Jinnah’s stature in the land of Ganges. ‘Tis the season for writing about Mohammad Ali Jinnah and discussing the events of 1947. The newspapers are full of analysis of the Lucknow Pact, Jinnah’s 14 points and the Cabinet Mission Plan. Khushwant Singh in an article in the Hindustan Times brings forth some great points. He is right when he says that the seeds for the events of 1947 had been sowed hundreds of years ago.

Books on Mohammed Ali Jinnah, founding father of Pakistan, will fill many shelves of a library. We assume that all that could be known about him has been recorded and there is little new material to bring to light besides interpreting his role in Indian politics leading to the Partition of the country in August 1947.

Evidently, that is not so. In his recently published book, BJP leader Jaswant Singh has uncovered new material from sources hitherto untapped and come to the conclusion that Jinnah was deliberately demonised by Indian politicians and writers. That is the theme of his book Jinnah: India-Partition Independence (Rupa).

Kushwant Singh is right when he discusses the writings of Lala Lajpat Rai–the original proponent of the Two Nation Theory. Haldiram, Gwalkar, and V.D. Sarvaker were others show propounded “shuddi and shangtram” (reconversion back to Hinduism, death or expulsion from Hindu Bharat). The Muslims reacted to the onslaught of the RSS and the Hinduvata who wanted Hindustan (a land for the Hindus). The Muslims adopted the TNT as a result of being harassed for a hundred years. The Muslims suffered the most after the events of 1857. The British took out the vengeance against them. “every civil building connected with Mohammaddans should be leveled to the ground without regard to antiquarian veneration or artistic prediliction”(British Prime Minister Palmerston’s Letter No. 9 dated 9 October 1857, to Lord Canning, Viceroy of India, Canning Papers).

Muslim families paid a heavier price after the diminution of the Mughal Empire. The elimination of their lands and states (Oudh etc), and the imposition of the Devanagri script reduced their chances of succession agriculture and government employment. Their demand for parity with the Hindus was only partially accepted by the British but it was not accepted by the Nehru. Thus the fate of the region was sealed.

I do not agree with Jaswant Singh’s reading of the events leading to the division of the country. I believe Partition was inevitable as its seeds had been sown many centuries earlier and nurtured by Indian politicians of British times. My analysis is as follows :

Indians were never an integrated society. Besides caste and language divisions, the greatest was the Hindu-Muslim divide. They got along reasonably well but kept their distance from each other. There was never any real mixing of families visiting each other’s homes or even contemplating matrimonial relationships. The British fostered the feeling of separateness between the two. As the time neared for the British to leave, Muslims began to feel uneasy at the prospect of living in a Hindu-dominated India.

National divisions of India had been made before. Lala Lajpat Rai had made a rough map dividing India along communal lines. Later, Chaudhary Rehmat Ali coined the word Pakistan. Allama Iqbal, who at one time composed patriotic verses including Saarey Jahaan Se Achha, spoke of a Muslim state. Jinnah’s contribution to separateness was evolving the two-nation theory that Hindus and Muslims were two separate nations which would not live together in one state.

The feeling was echoed in the minds of middle-class Muslims across the sub-continent. After that no one, neither Gandhiji, nor Nehru, nor Sardar Patel nor Jinnah, could stop the process of religious cleansing of Hindus and Sikhs from Muslim-dominated areas. It may be recalled that as early as March 1947, Hindus and Sikhs were being driven out of towns and villages in north-west Punjab. There were communal riots in many Punjab cities, including Lahore. Hindustan Times. Khuswant Singh

Of course Mr. Singh’s current narrative is also biased. He blames the rioting in the Punjab on Pakistan. Nothing could be farther than the truth. Gurdaspur and Ferozepur were Muslims majority areas. Both cities were crucial for Bharat. Gurdaspur was the only land-link to Kashmir and Ferozepur was the only arsenal that should have been part of Pakistan. Both cities were denied to Pakistan. Both cities were ethnically cleansed so that the populations could not create problems for Bharat later.

By August 15, 1947, the migration of Hindus and Sikhs from Pakistan had become a bloody exodus. Sikhs and Hindus of east Punjab made sure that this was not going to be one-way traffic: they drove out Muslims from east Punjab with double the violence. It was the most catastrophic exchange of populations in the history of mankind, leaving a million dead and tens of millions homeless.

Pointing accusing fingers at Nehru or Patel or Jinnah serves no purpose. Not one of them, nor indeed all of them put together, could have stopped the process of Partition. They were helpless against the tidal wave of hatred generated by history. They were the real causes of the wars we have fought against Pakistan and the continuing conflict over the future of Kashmir.Hindustan Times. Khuswant Singh

The BJP and the RSS are parties that dwell on the wrog done to the Hindus by the Muslims.

In his famous Khuda Bakhsh Annual Lecture (1985) Dr Pande said: ‘Thus under a definite policy the Indian history books text-books were so falsified and distorted as to give an impression that the medieval [i.e. Muslim] period of Indian history was full of atrocities committed by Muslim rulers on their Hindu subjects and the Hindus had to suffer terrible indignities under Muslim rule. And there were no common factors [between Hindus and Muslims] in social, political and economic life.’

Muslim rule in “India” has been much maligned the the Hindu mahasabah who took a cue from the British.

The Muslim rule in India lasted for almost 1000 years. How come then, asked the British historian Sir Henry Elliot, that Hindus ‘had not left any account which could enable us to gauge the traumatic impact the Muslim conquest and rule had on them’? Since there was none, Elliot went on to produce his own eight-volume History of India from its own historians (1867). His history claimed Hindus were slain for disputing with ‘Muhammedans’, generally prohibited from worshipping and taking out religious processions, their idols were mutilated, their temples destroyed, they were forced into conversions and marriages, and were killed and massacred by drunk Muslim tyrants. Thus Sir Henry, and scores of other Empire scholars, went on to produce a synthetic Hindu versus Muslim history of India, and their lies became history. THE MUSLIM RULE IN INDIA by M H Faruqi. Courtesy: Impact International, Vol 28, July 1998

The Muslim took the brunt of the British backlash because they were seen as the main protagonists.

Christopher Hibbert’s The Great Mutiny; India 1857 provides valuable insights into the genesis and causes of Ghadar – the massive uprising.

On page 60 (1978) Hibbert mentions how the “fakirs and maulvis” moving about the countryside, were warning the attentive crowds of the designs of the ‘Fringhis.’ They also exhorted to prepare for the looming fight for their faith. The mutineer’s slogan was: “Help, O King! We pray for assistance in our fight for the faith” (p.93). Jivanlal’s diary recorded a proclamation issued by the beat of drums that his Majesty (Bahadur Shah Zafar) would himself lead an attack on the English. “In consequence of this proclamation upwards of 10,000 Mohammedans converged near the Kashmir gate and waited till midnight for the arrival of the King.”

Neo-nationalist historians rarely mention Muslim heroes of this first war of India’s Independence except Bahadur Shah Zafar. However, they portray several insignificant players as the real heroes.

Who knows about Nawab Mahmud Khan, Ahmadullah Khan, Made Khan, Enayat Rasul, Khan Bahadur Khan, Bahadur Khan (of Rampur), Molvi Wahajuddin (of Mau), etc? Where do we get the mention of massive killing of Muslim noblemen? The detention and deportations of the Muslim activists to Kala Pani continued for decades after Ambala (1864) and Patna (1871) plots.

Bakht Khan Rohila’s contribution is largely maligned and ignored. He was the one who organised the rebellious sepoys into a fighting force that kept the freshly recruited reinforcements from the Punjab and the Gurkha Battalion from retaking Delhi for more than four months from June-September 1857. Muslims and 1857. Radiance Weekly. Muslims and 1857 War of Independence

Noticias de Rupia | Nouvelles de Roupie | Rupiennachrichten | ??????? ????? | ???? | Roepienieuws | Rupi Nyheter | ??????? | Notizie di Rupia | PAKISTAN LEDGER | ???????? ????? | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | DefensebriefsIntellibriefs Translate to: RSS feed: | RUPEE NEWS | Moin Ansari | ???? ??????? | ????? ????? | Save/Share

Pakistan Historian.

Pakistan was inevitable– its seeds had been sown many centuries earlier

Share

Advani: Peace process for "India Pakistan confederation"

Share

The purpose of the peace process is to form a confederation between India and Pakistan. This was stated by Indian leader Advani which represents the thoughts of the majority of the Indians and the Indian leadership.

The hawks in the Pakistani body politics understand that the “peace process” is a ruse to eliminate the Radcliff line and build the “Akhand Bharat” from Kabul to Raj Kalhani (a mythical land East of Bali, Indonesia. The US right now wants India and Pakistan together to confront China.

The doves in Pakistan don’t have a clue and think that the peace process will lead to peace and prosperity.

THE CHARISMATIC ZULFIQAR ALI BHUTTO WAS HATED IN WASHINGTON :  The youngest Foreign Minister of Pakistan, the mercurial Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was building Pakistani bridges with China. He wanted to close the US base in Pakistan, which he succeed in doing. President Johnson told President Ayub Khan  ”Bhutto must Go! Bhutto must Go!”. Soon thereafter Bhutto resigned a created the Pakistan Peoples Party.

The favourite slogan, the one that caught on during the May 1968 fête in France was “it is forbidden to forbid”. There is nothing to forbid the youth of Europe to reject both communism and capitalism. What will they build in the absence of both systems? Will their concept of building a new structure with a new philosophy mean willful self-destruction? This sounds insane but the youth of Europe is not insane. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto A letter from the Death Cell (2007)] p. 15  p. 20

BHUTTO’S UNIQUE BRAND OF ISLAMIC SOCIALISM APPEALED TO THE PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN: Bhutto was “Left leaning” and a Socialist. President Johnson wanted President Ayub Khan to fire Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. Bhutto launced a movement and forced Ayub Khan to resign. disappointed with the Americans after 1965, President Ayub Khan wrote a book called “Friends Not Masters” for America. Bhutto wrote a book called “Myth of Independence” in which he wanted to eliminate American influences on Pakistan.After 1971 Bhutto was elected Prime Minister and started Pakistan’s nuclear program.

“We badly need to gather our thoughts and clear our minds. We need a political ceasefire without conceding ideological territory.We need a ceasefire to bury dead thoughts and to overcome fatigue. The modus vivendi has to be honourable and above board. Both sides have lost or, should I say, neither side can win. During the ceasefire a combination of existing forces might create a new order or a new equation between existing forces. Whatever the formula, it cannot be evolved on the battlefield of the old or new cold wars. The new international order has to emerge through the demands of a Third World summit conference. The answer to the North-South conflict, which is more serious than the East-West conflict, has to be found honestly and with unimpeachable integrity. Genuine disarmament will not come on its own or by platitudes at special sessions of the United Nations on disarmament, although, I was among the first to propose such a conference eighteen years ago. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto A letter from the Death Cell (2007)] p. 15  p. 28

KISSINGER THREATENED BHUTTO: In May 1974 India exploded a Nuclear device which it called “peaceful”. Following India’s explosion, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto pledged to press ahead with Pakistan’s nuclear program.

“We will eat grass… “Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto’s Referring to financing the Pakistani Nuclear program. 

Insistence on Kashmir will do Pakistan no good: Advani By Nayyara Rahman

NEW DELHI, April 19: Senior leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party and leader of the opposition in the Indian parliament L.K. Advani has said that Pakistan’s insistence on describing Kashmir as the core issue “would not achieve anything”.

In an exclusive interview with DawnNews TV, Mr Advani spoke of communalism in India, his party’s role in national politics and the prospects of peace between India and Pakistan.

The BJP leader said although he encouraged the Composite Dialogue between the two countries, he believed that other issues, like information and commerce, should precede Kashmir. “Kashmir later,” he said.

However, he remained optimistic that although the Kashmir problem would take time to resolve, a day would come when India and Pakistan would form a confederation, to solve the issue.

In comments pertaining to the Agra Summit, Mr Advani said he was ‘incorrectly’ blamed for its failure by President Pervez Musharraf. Far from being the cause behind its failure, he said, he was in fact one of the architects of the summit.

According to Mr Advani, it was President Musharraf’s inflexibility that led to the summit’s failure. “Musharraf just would not admit that there is any such thing like terrorism in Jammu and Kashmir, or in Punjab, which has been inspired by him or his country. And he maintained that what was happening in Jammu and Kashmir or in other parts of the country… cannot be called terrorism. It is a ‘freedom struggle’ of the people of Jammu and Kashmir for their own freedom.”

Mr Advani stressed that cross-border terrorism was a serious bone of contention in the India-Pakistan peace process. While agreeing that militancy had decreased along the borders, he said it could be attributed to the Joint Statement reached by India and Pakistan, and was still there in the country. He was of the view that until this problem was dealt with, there could be no progress on the peace process.

When asked why diplomacy was not initially used to solve the Kargil crisis, he said that it was not diplomacy that resolved the issue, but intervention by the United States. He believed that it was a ‘war of a kind’ in which ‘Pakistan refused to accept its own dead bodies’ and implied that Pakistan had capitulated before the US while India had not.

The former deputy prime minister also spoke at length about his party’s communal image and its role in nationhood. He implied that religion was inherent in any democracy, since ‘religion is a considerable part of life’, and anyone not subscribing to the view could live in a ‘communist country’.

“The role of religion is not much. But it is considerable in life. In a democracy religion is important. In a communist state, it isn’t.”

He consistently denied accusations of playing the communal card, but was less successful in projecting a non-communal image of his party. When asked to comment about his support for Chief Minister Narendra Modi, after the ‘post-Godhra’ riots, instead of defending his actions he quoted the onslaught India’s Sikh community faced after Indira Gandhi’s assassination in 1984.

“They were not riots. Not a single Hindu was killed. About 3,500 Sikhs were killed. Congress said, ‘So what? When a huge tree falls, the earth is bound to shake.’

“How can I find fault with the [Gujarat] government then? I am bound to say that this is not fair to the Gujarat government and this is why I defend it.” Furthermore, he said, the votes spoke for themselves.

Responding to whether the Gujarat killings followed an ‘action-reaction’ logic to Godhra, he said he agreed to the suggestion to some extent.

When asked if Pakistan’s ‘Islamic Republic’ status bothered India, he said, “A theocratic state does bother us… it does.” But he insisted that Jinnah was inherently a secular leader, and had his 11th August, 1947 speech been implemented, Pakistan too would be a secular state.

Mr Advani said his party’s hard-line resolution on Pakistan following his 2006 visit to the country, was because Jinnah’s speech ‘was pushed beneath the carpet’.

The most striking moment of the interview, however, was when Mr Advani, in his own words, clarified his stand on Ayodhya for the first time. He said that while he stood by the Ayodhya Movement, and embraced it, he was saddened by the demolition of the Babri Mosque.

BJP’s subsequent electoral victory, he said, was because the Ayodhya Movement, and not the demolition, reflected the people’s aspirations. “I believe a temple should have been built at the site. But the demolition disturbed me.”

It would have been interesting to see how a mosque and a temple could have co-existed on exactly the same spot in Ayodhya.

Advani: Peace process for "India Pakistan confederation"

Share

Pakistan: Foreign Investment increases exponentially: $8 Billion from Qatar, Muscat

Share

The Pakistani Stock Market is the worlds fastest growing stock market in 2008. In 2007 despite earthquakes and elections the Pakistani Stock Market reached records heights. Qatari, Muscat, Saudi, UAE, Arab, Chinese, Malaysian, and other Asian investment in Pakistan is increasing exponentially. Western investment is also expected to increase with the new aid package with the USA. The FTA with China, the new plans in energy, defense, train, pipelines will further enhance the pace of growth. With UAEs Emaar heavily entrenched in Pakistan homes (pun intended), it is investing $28 Billion in building two islands near Karachi. Additionally other Arab investments are coming to totally transform Manora and the Hawkesbay area into a “mini Dubai”. The FTA with Malaysia and Qatar will bring new benefits to Pakistan by opening up ASEAN, UAE and Arab markets. With the Iran Pakistan pipeline in the works, and the Tukmenistan Pakistan pipeline being planned, and the $7 Billion package from the USA, Pakistani exports will increase dramatically. Pakistan is also ready to export Al-Khalid tanks and JF-Thunder fighter jets to friendly countries which is a boom to the export industry and also to the 2nd and 3rd tier manufacturers in Pakistan. The Pakistani IT industry is expected to reach $11 Billion within a few years. This baseline will improve the track to make it into a robust industry. An FTA with the USA has not been approved, but Pakistan is working on the plans to convince the Americans on expanding the Reconstruction Opportunity Zones (ROZ)  from the border areas, FATA to all of NWFP and Baluchistan. 

Now the latest news from Qatar and Muscat informs us that another $8 Billion will be invested in Pakistan. The exponential affect of these huge investments will further expedite the growth of Pakistan’s indigenous entrepreneurs and have a trickle down effect on increasing the growth.

Qatar, Muscat to invest $8 bn in Pakistan Updated at: 2040 PST, Saturday, April 19, 2008

ISLAMABAD: Qatar will invest 5 billion dollars in Pakistan while Muscat 2.75 billion dollars in various projects in Balochistan.

This was stated by ambassadors of Qatar, Jordon and Muscat during their meeting here with Federal Minister for Finance, Revenue, Economic Affairs and Statistics, Senator Ishaq Dar.

Hamad Ali Al-Hanzab, Ambassador of Qatar said that Qatar would be investing in all US $ 5 billion in Pakistan.

He said that Qatar has launched Islamic Taqaful Insurance Company in Pakistan and hoped that more investment would be made in the financial sector to tap Pakistan’s investment potential for the mutual benefit of the two countries.

The two sides also agreed to convene the meeting of Joint Ministerial Commission at the mutually convenient dates.

Dr. Saleh Ahmed Aljawarneh, Ambassador of Jordan proposed convening of the meeting of the Joint Economic Ministerial Commission and the meeting of Joint Business Council to increase economic cooperation between the two countries.

He informed the Finance Minister that Free Trade Agreement (FTA) wasexpected to be signed in August between the two countries.

The two sides also reviewed the cooperation in the fields of agriculture and railways. Possibilities of Joint venture in manufacturing of phosphate fertilizer was also discussed.

The Ambassador of Muscat, Mohamed Said Mohamed Al-Lawati discussed role of Pak-Oman Investment Company in promotion of economic cooperation between the two countries.

He said Muscat by financing various projects has been instrumental in accelerating development in Balochistan.

It was also noted that Pak-Oman micro finance is playing a positive role in poverty alleviation in Pakistan.

The two sides agreed to accelerate implementation of various projects in Balochistan costing around US $ 27.5 million being financed through grant from Muscat.

The two sides also noted positive development of purchase of 65 percent shares by Pak-Oman Joint Investment company of World Call shares, its interest in telecommunication and power sector.

The Muscat Ambassador also expressed the interest to develop tourism in Balochistan.

Finance Minister, Senator Ishaq Dar assured the envoys of his full cooperation for promoting increased economic cooperation

Pakistan: Foreign Investment increases exponentially: $8 Billion from Qatar, Muscat

Share

We loved Pope John Paul. This new one..what's his problem?

Share

 Mr. Gratzinger disliked by Jews, Muslims, and Protestants

Pope, Papa John Paul the 2nd beloved by Jews and Muslims

We would like to respond to the Pope’s recent message denigrating the prophet Muhammad and misinterpreting Islam and misunderstanding jihad (self control).

Papa John Paul. May God Bless his soul. He was a saint and did much for harmony among the religions.

1) John Paul II was the embodiment of the love of Jesus and he endeared people to him and Catholicism. Praying to the common God and joint prayers were a fantastic manifestation of our common humanity. Any other direction will alienate Muslims, Christians and Jews away from each other.

2) Arab armies never conquered or stayed in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, or Bangladesh, where 80% of all Muslims reside. Arab armies did reach the Indus, but Mohammad bin Qasim quickly withdrew. The conversions for a vast majority of Muslims (who now live in Asia)was by Sufis and traders and by example and because Islam was LOGICAL and simple…pray to one God.

3) In the 7th century, Arab armies comprised of less than 25,000 able bodied men as soldiers, out of a population of 50,000. It is a physical impossibility to spread Islam to millions with such a small army or by force of arms. Muslims could not have spread Islam through the sword from Arabia to Morocco and destroyed the Byzantine and Roman empires, if Islam did not have grass level appeal based on “Arianism” (unity of God), which was never actually eliminated even though Emperor Constantine had imposed trinity at the Council of Nicea in 325AD.

4) The idea of holy war or jihad (which is about defending the community or at most about establishing rule by Muslims, not about imposing the faith on individuals by force) is also not a Quranic doctrine. The doctrine was elaborated much later, on the Umayyad-Byzantine frontier, long after the Prophet’s death. In fact, in early Islam it was hard to join, and Christians who asked to become Muslim were routinely turned away. The tyrannical governor of Iraq, al-Hajjaj, was notorious for this rejection of applicants, because he got higher taxes on non-Muslims. Arab Muslims had conquered Iraq, which was then largely pagan, Zoroastrian, Christian and Jewish. But they weren’t seeking converts and certainly weren’t imposing their religion. http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/09/15/18311787.php 5) But there have been many schools of Islamic theology and philosophy. The Mu’tazilite school maintained exactly what the Pope is saying, that God must act in accordance with reason and the good as humans know them. The Mu’tazilite approach is still popular in Zaidism and in Twelver Shiism of the Iraqi and Iranian sort. The Ash’ari school, in contrast, insisted that God was beyond human reason and therefore could not be judged rationally. (I think the Pope would find that Tertullian and perhaps also John Calvin would be more sympathetic to this view within Christianity than he is).As for the Quran, it constantly appeals to reason in knowing God, and in refuting idolatry and paganism, and asks, “do you not reason?” “do you not understand?” (a fala ta`qilun?)http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/09/15/18311787.php

6) The idea of holy war or jihad (which is about defending the community or at most about establishing rule by Muslims, not about imposing the faith on individuals by force) is also not a Quranic doctrine. The doctrine was elaborated much later, on the Umayyad-Byzantine frontier, long after the Prophet’s death. In fact, in early Islam it was hard to join, and Christians who asked to become Muslim were routinely turned away. The tyrannical governor of Iraq, al-Hajjaj, was notorious for this rejection of applicants, because he got higher taxes on non-Muslims. Arab Muslims had conquered Iraq, which was then largely pagan, Zoroastrian, Christian and Jewish. But they weren’t seeking converts and certainly weren’t imposing their religion. http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/09/15/18311787.php
7) Did the Pope have selective amnesia about tolerating the holocaust, sprinkling holy water on the marching Nazi soldiers, directing the crusades, supporting the ethnic cleansing of native Americans, supporting conquistador invasions, administering the Spanish inquisition, encouraging colonialism to civilize the natives, and finding quotes in the Bible to support slavery.

7) Finally, that Byzantine emperor that the Pope quoted, Manuel II? The Byzantines had been weakened by Latin predations during the fourth Crusade, so it was in a way Rome that had sought coercion first. And, he ended his days as a vassal of the Ottoman Empire. http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/09/15/18311787.php

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Crusade

8) Emperor Manuel II Paleologos of the Byzantine Empire did not agree with the Vatican. He wrote the quote during the siege of Constantinople.
9) The propaganda against our prophet has been waged for centuries, and Muslims keep growing. The more they send crusades, the more Islam grows.

10) [2:62] Those who believe (in the Qur’an), and those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Christians and the Sabians– any who believe in God and the Last Day, and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve. ‘

11) This is one of the best responses that I have seen: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/spiritual-niggers-islam_b_29663.html

12) “As Politi points out, the underlying question now facing the Church is the following: ‘Does Ratzinger want to deal with the Islamic world as merely a cultural partner, or is he willing to recognise that Islam should enjoy the same status as Christianity?”(© 2006 dpa – Deutsche Presse-Agentur, http://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/article_1202570.php/Pope_Benedicts_Islam_blunder_undermines_dialogue)

13) “Rather than rail at the pope’s characterization of Islam, Muslims might have responded as follows: “Excuse me, Your Holiness, but did we hear you say that you represent a religion of reason, whereas Allah is a god of unreason? Do you not personally eat the body and blood of your god – at least things that you insist really are his flesh and blood – every day at Mass? And you accuse us of unreason!”"

Regarding Benedict XVI’s statement that the characterization of the Prophet Mohammed did not reflect his “personal opinion”: In 1938, at the peak of Stalin’s terror, a Muscovite called the KGB to report that his parrot had escaped. The KGB officer said, “Why are you calling us?” The Muscovite averred, “I want to state for the record that I do not share the parrot’s political opinions.” (http://atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/HI19Aa02.html)

In one of the most conceited statements of the century, the Pope full of hubris said he was sorry because his remarks had been misunderstood. e said that deeply sorry” that Muslims were offended. This is not an apology, it is an indictment on Muslims who were unable to comprehend his message. Therefore the onus of the problem is on the Muslims still.

I miss John Paul 11 (papa) who did so much for Muslim-Catholic and Catholic-Jewish dialogue. Such grace, such beuty, such class. In spite of the fact that John Paul apologized to the Jews for the inquisition, but did not apologize to the Muslims for the Crusades or the inquisition, he was near and dear to Muslim hearts. Pope Benedict should not have made the remarks, and he needs to withdraw them, apologize properly and make restitution to Muslims around the world. He should also apologize for historical wrongs against Muslims, including, the crusades, colonialism, and the inquisition.

May God forgive the sins of the Pope and may he find enlightenment. God Bless him.
GreenPeaceIslam

We loved Pope John Paul. This new one..what's his problem?

Share

"Change Pakistan into Anti-Insurgency force":-Biden's Price for US AID

Share

Change Pakistan Army to Insurgency force:-Biden’s Price for tripling US AID

• 2943 and more than 3500 have been injured in the Afghanistan war
• 763 Pakistani soldiers died during the war of 1965 war with India
• On inadequate US Aid to Pakistan. Pakistan keeps hearing the “do more” mantra from ingrate “friends” who want to be masters.Pakistani Cheese for Western “Whine”

Joe Biden wants to triple the aid to Pakistan but it may be too little too late.Senator Jospeh Biden and other members of the US adminstration want to transform the entire Pakistan Army from a Defense force into an Anti-Insurgency force compliant to the wishes of the US goverment. For this Senator Biden and the Democratic Congress are willing to triple the Non-military aid to Pakistan. US again offers peanuts in aid. Reject and negotiate upThis means that Pakistan would be eneligible to purchase any more F-16s or ships or helicopters, unless the equipment is needed to fight Al-Qaida. Wish list of Pakistani people. Brookings finally realizes that Pakistan is not being taken over by the extremists. Invoice for Defeating terror, Securing Pakistani Nukes $150 Billion per annum.

Afghanistan-Pakistan forgotten by Joe Biden.The aid offered by Mr. Biden and the US Congress is not enough. It is inadequate and it has too many strings attached to it. Pakistan responds to Pentagon demands. Review Pakistan USA relationship.

On many occasions, Pakistan had requested predator drones, all terrain vehicles, AWACS and choppers for the border area. However this request was turned down. The Pakistan Frontier Constablary does not have adequate arms and still uses WW2 vintage equipment. A request was made to upgrade the FC and provide it with helipcopters. This was also denied. Selective amnesia of Americans. Pakistan is the most mistreated friend of America. The post Benazir era must be different

Mr. Biden has repeatedly made speeches about transforming the US-Pakistan relationship from a transactional relationship (Pakistan US Relations should be normal not transactional ) into a mutually benefiail long term strategic partnership. Pakistan US Relations should be normal not transactional. Mr. Biden than turns around and asks Pakistan to destroy the structure of its armed forces and change it into a anit-insurgency force. What he and others like him really want to do is to outsource the GWOT to the Pakistani soldiers. This would be a purely transactional relationship with based upon master to slave directions.

Pakistan has genuine defense needs. She lives in a difficult neighborhood, and she was dismembered by force of arms while the allies CENTO, SEATO and the USA stood by. America has to rethink India policy

As such, Biden proposes, the US should make it a priority to help Pakistan train and reorganise its military. He also believes that Washington must convince Pakistanis that it cares about their needs and not just for its own narrow interests. “That happens to be the best way to secure the support of the … for our priorities, starting with the fight against Al Qaeda and the fight for Afghanistan. If Afghanistan fails or Pakistan falls prey to fundamentalism, both countries will pay a heavy price. And America will suffer a terrible strategic setback. I believe it is still within our power to shape a different, better future,” the senator has said. By Khalid Hasan Daily Times

Hands off Pakistan is the slogan on the Pakistan news media. Pakistanis want to hear “Thank You” from the ingrate Americans. Nothing is good enough!

Pakistan-China-Russia:- An historic realignment

"Change Pakistan into Anti-Insurgency force":-Biden's Price for US AID

Share

US again offers peanuts in aid. Reject and negotiate up

Share

Triple Aid to Pakistan is not enough. Aid should be 20 times that number. Compensation for lost opportunities is separate.

Pakistan has lost about $10 Billion per year (DOD calcualtion) plus opportunity costs. That alone in lost money is $100 Billion. The lost opportunity costs is 10 times that amount.

Invoice for Defeating terror, Securing Pakistani Nukes $150 Billion per annum.

Pakistan was unfairly sanctioned during the 80s and this allowed Korea and others to get ahead. Wish list of Pakistani people. More than 1000 Pakistanis have been killed. Pakistani Cheese for Western “Whine”

This aid deal is inadequate. Turkey was offered $38 Billion for attacking Iraq. Egypt’s $35 Billion debt was forgiven. Israel gets Billions.

The USA should wipe Pakistan’s $38 Billion debt, and confirm Pakistan’s sovereignty.

Pakistan needs 1000 hospitals, 100,000 shools, 1000 new universities, 5 new dams, freeways, and nuclear power plants. This open ended war is bad for the country.

Let us hope the PPP and the PMLN does not sell the country’s soul for a few Dollars.

On deconstructing the wrong paradigm of the USA media

Pakistanis want to hear “Thank You” from the ingrate Americans. Nothing is good enough!

Pakistanis to USA: We want “Friends Not Masters”

Pakistan US Relations should be normal not transactional

On inadequate US Aid to Pakistan

US offers Pakistan government $7bn in non-military aid to fight terrorism
· Civilian cabinet told drone air strikes will be curbed
· New strategy marks break with Musharraf and army

This article appeared in the Guardian on Thursday April 17 2008 on p17 of the International section. It was last updated at 00:02 on April 17 2008.

The US has promised to curb air strikes by drones against suspected militants in Pakistan, as part of a joint counter-terrorism strategy agreed with the new civilian government in Islamabad, the Guardian has learned. That strategy will be supported by an aid package potentially worth more than $7bn (£3.55bn), which is due to go before Congress for approval in the next few months.

The package would triple the amount of American non-military aid to Pakistan, and is aimed at “redefining” the bilateral relationship, US officials say.

Pakistan will also be given a “democracy dividend” of up to $1bn, a reward for holding peaceful elections and forming a coalition government. Of that, $200m could be approved in the next few days.

The aid package, being put together by the Democratic senator Joseph Biden, will mark a decisive break in US policy on Pakistan, which for much of the past nine years focused on President Pervez Musharraf and the Pakistani military as Washington’s primary partners in the “war on terror”. Officials in Washington said yesterday that the shift had already been made.

“Senator Biden wants to show the relationship is much broader than a military one, and that we are willing to sustain it over time,” one of the senator’s senior aides said yesterday.

A US administration official said: “Each day Musharraf’s influence becomes less and less. Civilians are in control. People aren’t meeting with Musharraf any more … we are very pleased with the new civilian government.”

Pakistani officials say much of the new counter-terrorism aid will be spent on civilian law enforcement institutions, such as the interior ministry, the intelligence bureau and the federal investigation agency, rather than being channelled almost exclusively through the army and the military-run Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) organisation.

The new government says it has also won American support for its policy of opening a dialogue with Pashtun tribes along the Afghan border, led by an ethnic Pashtun group, the Awami National party, that is part of the government coalition.

The new understanding on air strikes by US Predator drones is seen in Islamabad as a critical benchmark for the new relationship.

In January senior US intelligence officials flew to Islamabad and struck an agreement with Musharraf to give the American military a freer hand in the use of Predators against targets in Pakistan’s tribal areas, which have become havens for al-Qaida and other foreign jihadists as well as Taliban forces fighting Nato forces and the government in Afghanistan.

The subsequent increase in Predator strikes – estimates of the number range up to eight – caused outrage in Pakistan. Britain also broke with Washington over the reliance on air strikes often guided by uncertain intelligence.

Pakistani officials say they have been given assurances by Washington that there will be close consultation with the civilian government, not with Musharraf, before any future strikes.

However, the use of Predators is held as a closely guarded secret and US intelligence is reluctant to share information about targets, and there is some scepticism in Islamabad over whether the deal will stick.

“We’ll have to take them at their word, won’t we,” said the new information minister, Sherry Rahman, in an interview in Islamabad. She added that Washington’s previous emphasis on ties to Musharraf and the Pakistani military “hasn’t provided the results that were supposed to happen on the ground”.

The US has given Pakistan about $10bn in military aid during the past seven years, but it has not diminished the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan, while Pakistani extremism is also on the rise. Some officials in Washington believe most of the money has been used to build up Pakistan’s conventional forces for use in a possible future conflict with India, rather than spent on counter-insurgency.

Furthermore, much of the money being used for counter-terrorism is being misspent, both Pakistan and US government officials say. As an example they say that Musharraf distributed the $25m reward money for capturing or killing “high value” al-Qaida targets in the form of an “inverted pyramid”.

“A few thousand would go to the police constable on the ground who actually spotted the guy, but the millions go to the generals up the chain,” a Pakistani official said. No wonder, he added, that the tip-offs stopped coming in and the number of high-profile arrests dropped.

The New Deal
· $1.5bn a year in civilian aid for at least five years

· $1bn “democracy dividend” as a reward for holding elections and forming a coalition government

· Counter-terrorism aid will be performance-based

· The Pakistani government will be consulted before any further air strikes against militants on Pakistani soil by US unmanned “Predator” aircraft

· More counter-terrorism assistance will be given to civilian law-enforcement and intelligence organisations

US again offers peanuts in aid. Reject and negotiate up

Share

Is this "Democracy"? You get what you deserve! 27 days have passed and counting.

Share

Project Promoting Polyarchy in place in Pakistan has been completed. An illiterate population, an obsequious and partisan press, a bigoted leadership and gaggle of self-centered politicians who believe in “Cest Le estat me moi” ( I am the state) are now all working for profit and their Swiss bank accounts.

God helps tholeader of the PMLNse who help themselves.The Quran says, God will not change the condition of a people, ’till they change themselves. A nation is led by the leader that they deserve.

The Pakistanis voted for the PPPP and the PMLN….now after 30 days, the people are asking…”what about”…we say “Hore Chumpow”

If they can nominate a Neocon as an Ambassador they can do anything. We suggest hiring the real thing, why settle for a cheap Pakistani imitation of Dr. Emerson, Dr. Spencer or Peter King. Hire them as Ambassadors also.

The prices of flour are at an all time high in Pakistan. No more general to blame! The PPP is silent about the 5Es and the PMLN does not even mention the 5Ds. Flour prices despite the increase to Rs 625 per mound is half the international rates for wheat. This will place tremendous pressure on the smuggling supply chain to sell the wheat to other countries outside the borders.To keep pace with the international price of oil, the government will have to eliminate the subsidies on oil, and quadruple the prices. This will be political suicide, so the government will resort to deficit financing, a hall-mark of Darnomics (VooddooSupply Side economics). Enter the IMF with strings attached to roll back the Nuclear program etc. The IMF will also impose harsh edicts to take away the financialpowers of the central government and hand it over to the provinces. This is exactly what happened in Yugoslavia.

The 30 days have passed the judiciary has not been restored. Maulana Faslul Rehman said is best. We do not believe in “ulti ginntee”. He said 18 days have passed and counting.

The new government claimed that they would bring down the prices to 50% of the levels of 2007. Mr. Nawaz Sharif and the PPPP claimed that the electricity shortage was a result of incompetence and they would instantly fix the issues of energy and water shortages. They also claimed that the price of “atta” would go down and that the government would not increase the price of oil. All these were empty promises. Inflation is going up unabated, the shortage or food items is at crisis level.

The leaders of government incessantly complained about the growing role of American armed forces in Pakistan.

The New York Times is reporting the US trainers plan to “accompany” Pakistani troops to where the action is (point of contact). This is the South Vietnam and South Korea model now being followed in Iraq. The purpose of the model is to outsource the killing to Pakistan, while management sits behind the bunkers.

The “United States trainers initially would be restricted to training compounds, but with Pakistani consent could eventually accompany Pakistani troops on missions “to the point of contact” with militants, as American trainers now do with Iraqi troops in Iraq, a senior American military official said. Britain is also considering a similar training mission in Pakistan..

The new government with all its Anti-American rhetoric, tall claims of sovereignty, and the supremacy of the parliament has apparently acquiesced to the American demands and decided to roll over and play dead while the forces pour down carnage on the people of FATA and NWFP.

Salman defends economic strategy of past govt By By our correspondent 4/15/2008

LAHORE: Former federal finance minister Dr Salman Shah has defended the overall economic strategy of the past government, stating that undue pressure created by high oil and commodity rates did put temporary pressures.
He was speaking at a discussion arranged by SAFMAon the State of Pakistan’s economy.Defending the increase in petroleum rates by the interim government, he said that budget deficit would have gone out of hand had these raises not been made. He said the new government in fact should announce similar increases in petroleum rates before the end of the current fiscal.
He said even then the government would be burdened with subsidies on petroleum products. He advised the government to eliminate all subsidies on petrol by the end of next year.He said the government promoted use of locally produced natural gas that has kept the petroleum demand to almost the same level as in 1999. He said now that entire available gas production is being utilized the import of petroleum products is on rise. He said Pakistan would pay $11.5 billion for the same amount of oil it imported in 1999-2000 for $3.1 billion.
He said global wheat rates were at almost the same level as in Pakistan only 16 months back. Today he added even after increasing the wheat support price to Rs625 per maundthe internationalwheat rates are double the local rates.
He said that there is no overshooting of expenses. He said Rs400 billion budget deficit amounts to four per cent of GDP. It would be higher this year due to high oil and commodity rates that burdened the national exchequer.
He claimed that the growth, inflation and debit indicators have improved vastly during past eight years. The GDP he added has shot up from $65 billion to $160 billion. Tax revenues he continued have shot-up from Rs300 billion in 1999 to around one trillion rupees now. He said these increased revenues in fact facilitated the government in accelerating growth and development work.
He said it was wrong to assume that 9/11 facilitated the transformation in economy. He claimed that Ghazi-Brotha hydropower project completed in 2004 added over 1400 MW power in the system. He said the electricity consumption however increased by higher percentage than envisaged by the planners. He added that there was a lapse on the part of the government to neglect further addition in electricity production. However he clarified that 3000MW power projects were initiated by the previous regime that would be operational in 16 months.

U.S. military prepares to train Pakistani forces
US officials have requested $750 million to expand a program designed to assist foreign militaries engaged in counterterrorism.
By David Montero
posted April 16, 2008 at 10:00 am EDT

Suggesting a dramatic shift in Washington’s counterterrorism strategy, the State Department and the Pentagon want to beef up training of foreign militariesand paramilitary troops. The proposal comes as US military trainers are preparing to train Pakistan’s paramilitary forces this summer.

In a proposal to Congress this week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice requested $750 million to train troops around the world who are engaged in counterterrorism operations. That would constitute a 250 percent increase, The New York Times reports.

Mr. Gates said that rapidly building up the armed forces of friendly nations to combat terrorism within their borders was “a vital and enduring military requirement.”

The additional funding is designed to augment the Global Train and Equip program, created in 2006 to assist foreign militaries, The Times reports.

“The current program has paid for parts and ammunition used by the Lebanese Army against terrorist threats in a Palestinian refugee camp as well as for helicopter spare parts, night-vision devices and night-flight training for Pakistani special forces fighting suspected members of the Taliban and Al Qaeda along the Afghan border, Mr. Gates said.”

Funding for the program expires in about five months, The Washington Post explains. But Gates and Ms. Rice hope to make the program permanent.

Gates and Rice seek to increase funding authority for the program from $300 million a year to $750 million, make it permanent and expand it to allow assistance to police and paramilitary forces. The program is to expire at the end of September….

A third facet of the proposal would make permanent a program that allows U.S. Special Operations Forces to spend $25 million annually to pay or supply equipment to indigenous forces that support their clandestine operations.

The proposal comes as Washington is preparing to send military trainers to Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province, an area near the Afghan border where Taliban troops and Al Qaeda have been on the upsurge, CNN reported last week.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has signed deployment orders that will send U.S. military trainers to Pakistan this summer, CNN has learned.

Their mission: To teach Pakistan Frontier Corps units counterinsurgency skills critical to fighting the Taliban and al Qaeda.

The Christian Science Monitor corps against Al Qaeda
Pakistan’s Frontier Corps, as well as the Pakistani Army, have come under increased attack in recent months, suffering several hundreds of casualties in a spate of suicide attacks. And in a battle with Taliban militants in Swat Valley last fall, poorly trained Frontier Corpsmen were killed in large numbers or fled without fighting, prompting alarm from many observers, including the editors of Foreign Policy magazine, who wrote, “Desertion is becoming a serious problem in the ranks of the Frontier Corps, the locally recruited paramilitary force that has been on the front lines of Pakistan’s fight against insurgents in its tribal areas.”

US military trainers on Pakistani soil is not a new thing, The New York Times explained in an article last month. But their numbers are set to rise significantly.

For several years, small teams of American Special Operations forces have trained their Pakistani counterparts in counterinsurgency tactics. But the 40-page classified plan now under review at the United States Central Command to help train the Frontier Corps, a paramilitary force of about 85,000 members recruited from ethnic groups on the border, would significantly increase the size and scope of the American training role in the country.

United States trainers initially would be restricted to training compounds, but with Pakistani consent could eventually accompany Pakistani troops on missions “to the point of contact” with militants, as American trainers now do with Iraqi troops in Iraq, a senior American military official said. Britain is also considering a similar training mission in Pakistan, officials said.

But American troops stationed in Afghanistan’s border region appear to harbor suspicions about the Frontier Corps, The Washington Post reported.

“The Frontier Corps might as well be Taliban…. They are active facilitators of infiltration,” said a U.S. soldier who spoke on the condition of anonymity for security reasons.

Many Pakistani analysts and leaders have warned that a larger US military footprint could lead to a backlash from the public in Pakistan, the British newspaper the Guardian reports.

“They are making a big mistake. With the Frontier Corps they are going to put people to fight against their kith and kin. It will create a greater problem,” said General Hamid Gul, a former head of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence, the country’s spy agency.

But some Pakistani observers see the proposed new training program as a welcome and vital change, writes Haider Ali Hussein Mullick, a Pakistani scholar and US foreign policy researcher, in Newsweek’s PostGlobal blog.

The current U.S. plan to increase the training of Pakistani troops – paratroopers, Pakistani Special Forces, and Frontier Corps – is a step in the right direction. U.S. training programs must be supplemented by U.S. military hardware and intelligence exchange across the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. A unilateral U.S. attack on Pakistan’s rustic tribal areas, however, will be devastatingly unsustainable and counterproductive.

Is this "Democracy"? You get what you deserve! 27 days have passed and counting.

Share

India: A budget fit for a Superpower!

Share

A country where 30% of the population dies of malnutirition and medical issues can afford to spend $2.5 Billion on a Russian Ship?

A country where a million girls are killed during or after a pregranancy can afford to buy hundreds of planes?

Some estimates say that at current spending it will take Bharat three centuries to reduce proverty to human levels.

VIEW: India’s fiscal follies -Mira Kamdar

For all the attention that India’s retail revolution, information technology prowess, and booming manufacturing sectors have garnered in recent years, agriculture, on which 70 percent of the population still directly depends, is in crisis

India’s new budget for 2008-2009 says less about the country’s current financial health than it does about the irresistible tendency of Indian governments to use the national budget as a pre-election cudgel.

Every year, India struggles to reconcile the irreconcilable: stimulate economic growth and investment, alleviate endemic poverty, and feed a ravenous military appetite. The government must be seen to care about the aam aadmi, the common man (who votes), while satisfying the needs of businessmen (who keep the economy humming).

Indeed, the new budget is a pre-election bonanza for key constituencies: tax cuts for the middle class and perks for the country’s big corporations. There’s a little something for everyone, including a stunning $15 billion in loan waivers for small farmers. For all the attention that India’s retail revolution, information technology prowess, and booming manufacturing sectors have garnered in recent years, agriculture, on which 70 percent of the population still directly depends, is in crisis. Growth in India’s agricultural sector declined from a lacklustre 3.8 percent to an even more anaemic 2.6 percent last year.

Water tables are dropping where farmers are lucky enough to have wells, and rainfall has become increasingly unpredictable. Subsistence farming of traditional food grains, fruits, and vegetables is giving way to cash crops and monocultures dependent on high-priced inputs that small farmers cannot afford and water that they can’t provide. Farmers borrow money from usurious private lenders. Unable to repay their loans, they kill themselves.

Farmer suicides in India have raged unabated over the past decade, a period of much-vaunted rapid growth. These more than 100,000 deaths are a tragic indictment of India’s economic “miracle”, and an embarrassment for a government eager to promote India’s image as an up-and-coming global economic and military power.

While well intentioned, the new budget’s lavish loan forgiveness scheme will not help those farmers who most need relief: 80 percent of India’s farmers have no access to formal credit, and it is bank loans that are to be forgiven. Moreover, since farmers who do have access to formal credit will have less incentive to repay their loans, banks will become more reluctant to lend to any farmers at all.

A policy of expanding legitimate micro-lending schemes and prosecuting illegal loan sharks, not to mention the promotion of sustainable agricultural practices that require fewer expensive (and environmentally dangerous) inputs, would do far more to help India’s poorest farmers than this expensive and misguided measure.

The new budget, recognising the country’s acute water crisis, also calls for more money to expand irrigation. Most Indian farmers will benefit from greater access to irrigation, but if this means building more ill conceived dams and pursuing large-scale projects, the result will be more water for industrial agriculture, more damage to India’s damaged environment, and little improvement for poor farmers. Aggressive expansion of proven low-cost, high-impact micro-irrigation techniques would do more to help small-scale farmers.

The new budget is also likely to do little to improve India’s poor education and primary health-care systems. True, spending in these two critical areas is to rise dramatically (by 20 percent for education and 15 percent for health care). But, because these items amount to a pittance of India’s total budget, total spending remains low, especially relative to need.

Meanwhile, the lion’s share of the new budget, 63 percent, will go to the military, police, administration, and debt service. India’s defence spending will hit a new record of $26.5 billion as the world’s fourth-largest military embarks on an aggressive drive to modernise its capabilities in the face of the deteriorating situation in Pakistan and China’s military expansion.

Having performed poorly in a spate of recent state elections, the ruling Congress Party is betting that the new budget will swing voters its way if the national election, currently scheduled for April 2009, is moved forward to this autumn. The lesson of the 2004 election, when poorer voters, fed up with the previous BJP-led government’s “India Shining” policies and slogans, threw it out of office, has not been forgotten.

But the strategy of embracing “poor-friendly” policies that deliver little real relief could backfire. Poor voters may not associate the largesse with the Congress-led government in New Delhi, but rather with the state governments that actually hand out the goods. Moreover, there is nothing to indicate that the government aid proposed in the budget will reach those who need it with any more efficiency than the dismal record so far.

It is conceivable that Mayawati Kumari, the self-appointed “goddess” of the poor whose low-caste-based party, the BSP, swept to power last year with a clear majority in Uttar Pradesh, could be the biggest winner in an early election. This would represent a revolution in Indian politics, but it is hardly the outcome the champions of business-driven market reforms would welcome.

Whether a more populist government would be able to break radically with India’s flawed fiscal policies and create an environment favourable to a dramatic improvement in India’s shamefully poor human and physical infrastructure – which would give a solid boost to India’s economy over the long term – remains to be seen. -DT-PS

Mira Kamdar, the author of Planet India: The Turbulent Rise of the Largest Democracy, is currently a fellow at the Asia Society

India: A budget fit for a Superpower!

Share

America's favorite whipping boy!–Pakistan

Share

Like a whimsical and angry giant America lashed out against her real or perceived enemies. The Neocons, drunk with power and intoxicated with hubris stated “you are with us or aginst us.” The carpet bombing of Kabul and Kandhar could not satiate the demand for blood. Kissinger said “we attacked Iraq, because Afghanistan was not enough”.Facing defeat in both places, now the Neocon’s favorite whipping boy is Pakistan. Pakistan had nothing to with either the attack or America’s defeats. None of the hijackers were Pakistani. Blame all evil on Pakistan. Blame Pakistan for the defeats and hide the incompetence of Mr. Karzai and the inadequacies of the NATO forces.

The simple knee jerk reaction is to blame Pakistan for all ills–whether it is the defeat in Iraq or the annhilation in Afghanistan

Published on Monday, April 14, 2008 by The Boston Globe

America’s Whipping Boy For 9/11 by James Carroll
As a high school freshman, attending a small private prep school, I was one of a number of pranksters. We made the flag disappear from the flagpole. We put goofy hats on the bust of the school patron in the foyer. We organized silent boycotts of the greasy French fries in the lunch room. We dropped books on cue in Latin class.

One day, we went some act of mischief too far, and the headmaster went ballistic at morning assembly. A buzz of anxiety coursed through the school. I forget how, but the damning finger soon pointed to me, and I took the fall. I was summoned to the headmaster’s office, where, wielding a stick with grave ceremony (“This hurts me more than it hurts you”), he inflicted multiple blows on my backside.

The memory of the pain I felt has faded, but not the humiliation. In those days, such corporal punishment was not unusual in schools, and “spanking” was ubiquitous in families. It is notable today how such public violence as a method of disciplining children has become taboo, even if children are still shockingly at risk for abuse in private.

But that memory is revealing to me now as an instance of scapegoating, and the lesson it offers in the social use to which designated victims are put. I was not consciously attuned to the sadomasochistic undercurrent of the event, but inwardly I burned with shame to have been so treated, especially by a figure whose authority was absolute.

Yet the most striking aspect of the experience was the sharp contrast between the private mortification I felt at being beaten in such a way and the public respect it earned me. My degradation stood in marked contrast to the new status I found myself occupying in the aftermath of my “strokes,” as the blows were called. My schoolmates quietly treated me with an unprecedented deference which, at the time, was mystifying. How could such an experience of shaming lead to what was, in effect, a social promotion?

It was not only that I took the punishment that could have been meted out to a handful of others who went undisciplined. It was also that the headmaster’s rage had been mollified, and the communal anguish that had upset the school had been dispelled. The punishment inflicted on me sparked a broad sense of relief, and the gaze with which my mates greeted me was infused with gratitude.

The aftermath of my beating was a period of good feeling in the school. The headmaster’s authority had been reinforced, and with it the structure of order. The affectionate bond among us boys was strengthened as well, and even I felt somehow ennobled. Crucial to this outcome was the fact that I had been physically hurt. A mere bawling out would have resulted in no such mystical cohesion.

Now I understand that violence can have this effect across a range of social situations. Indeed, hurt-induced mystical cohesion accounts in large part for why we humans are addicted to turning on each other with weapons. We find an infinite variety of victims, and their suffering serves a social purpose. African-American men subjected with wild disproportionality to the caged violence of prisons. Muslim “terrorists” in torture camps. Enslaved women. Death row. In case after case, threatened authority locates a victim on whom to unload.

Whether the designated object of punishment is guilty (Saddam Hussein, say) or innocent (the American soldiers whose faces we see on the news each night) does not matter. This impulse to salve communal anxiety by inflicting hurt was the defining core of American public life after Sept. 11. It engendered the present war.

Up until the point of his “Mission Accomplished” celebration on that aircraft carrier, President Bush was the self-satisfied headmaster, and Baghdad was the chastened, if mulish, pupil. An ennobled US population was mainly pleased. No more. The war in Iraq is demonstrably mistaken by now, and American authority has self-destructed. Shame abounds.

In deciding what to do next, we should not compound the mistake by pretending any longer that the

America's favorite whipping boy!–Pakistan

Share

Hollow Victory! Defeat's agony! Afghanistan-Iraq

Share

As Robert Fisk and others have noted, the sickly scent of defeat wafting over the the campaigns in Mesopotamia and Bactria cannot be disguised with the sweet smell of roses. The American people have seen through the fog and understand the real facts about the war. The repudiation of the war mongering is everywhere, in election results, in polls and in the general demeanor of the people.

Published on Saturday, April 12, 2008 by The Independent/UK Semantics Can’t Mask Bush’s Chicanery by Robert Fisk
After his latest shenanigans, I’ve come to the conclusion that George Bush is the first US president to march backwards. First we had weapons of mass destruction. Then, when they proved to be a myth, Bush told us we had stopped Saddam’s “programmes” for weapons of mass destruction (which happened to be another lie).

Now he’s gone a stage further. After announcing victory in Iraq in 2003 and “mission accomplished” and telling us how this enormous achievement would lead the 21st century into a “shining age of human liberty”, George Bush told us this week that “thanks to the surge, we’ve renewed and revived the prospect of success”.

Now let’s take a look at this piece of chicanery and subject it to a little linguistic analysis. Five years ago, it was victory – ie success – but this has now been transmogrified into a mere “prospect” of success. And not a “prospect”, mark you, that has even been glimpsed. No, we have “renewed” and “revived” this prospect. “Revived”, as in “brought back from the dead”. Am I the only one to be sickened by this obscene semantics? How on earth can you “renew” a “prospect”, let alone a prospect that continues to be bathed in Iraqi blood, a subject Bush wisely chose to avoid?

Note, too, the constant use of words that begin with “re -”. Renew. Revive. And – incredibly – Bush also told us that “we actually re-liberated certain communities”. This, folks, goes beyond hollow laughter. Since when did armies go around “re-liberating” anything? And what does that credibility-sapping “actually” mean? I suspect it was an attempt by the White House speech writer to suggest – by sleight of hand, of course – that Bush was really – really – telling the truth this time. But by putting “actually” in front of “re-liberate” – as opposed to just “liberate” – the whole grammatical construction falls apart. Rather like Iraq.

For by my reckoning, we have now “re-liberated” Fallujah twice. We have “re-liberated” Mosul three times and “re-liberated” Ramadi four times. The scorecard goes on. My files show that Sadr City may have been “re-liberated” five times, while Baghdad is “re-liberated” on an almost daily basis. General David Petraeus, in his pitiful appearance before the US Senate armed services committee, was bound to admit his disappointment at the military failure of the equally pitiful Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki in Basra. He had not followed Petraeus’ advice; which was presumably to “re-liberate” the city (for the fourth time, by my calculation but with a bit more planning).

Indeed, Petraeus told senators that after his beloved “surge” goes home, the US will need a period of “consolidation and evaluation” – which is suspiciously close to saying that the US military will be, as the old adage goes, “redeployed to prepared positions”. Ye gods! Where will this tomfoolery end?

In statistics, perhaps. By chance, as Bush was speaking this week, my mail bag flopped open to reveal a letter from my old American military analyst friend, George W Appenzeller. He gently (and rightly) corrects some recent comparative figures I used on US casualties in Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. “In previous wars,” he writes, “the US army has not reported to the public the number of wounded who are treated and immediately released back to duty. They have reported these casualties in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars”.

So here are a few Appenzeller factoids (glossed by Fisk, so the responsibility is mine!). The correct ratios for wounded in action vs killed in action for Iraq and Afghanistan is 8.13 to 1; for Korea, it’s 7.38 to 1 and for Vietnam it’s 6.43 to 1.

The true number of US wounded in Iraq until 18 March this year was 13,170, of whom 8,904 were so badly wounded that they required air evacuation to hospitals outside Iraq. The number of killed in action in Iraq is 3,251. (The other 750 died in accidents or of sickness.) But this does not include the kind of figure that the Pentagon and Bush always keep secret: an astonishing 1,000 or more Western-hired mercenaries, killed in Iraq while fighting or killing for “our” side.

But now I’ll let George Appenzeller speak in his own words. “There are widely ranging estimates, but roughly 450,000 individuals … fought on the ground in Vietnam … At the height of the Vietnam war there were 67,000 ground combat troops there. That is roughly the number of ground combat troops the US presently has deployed in Iraq. Interestingly enough, that is also about the number of ground combat troops the US had fighting at any one time in the Korean war.

“The US army now has a much leaner and meaner organisation than in the past with a higher proportion of combat troops to total troops. All those American civilian truck drivers and Bangladeshi cooks have freed up troop slots that have gone to the combat arms.”

No, Iraq has not yet reached Korea and Vietnam proportions. The three-year Korean war resulted in 33,686 US battle deaths and about 250,000 US wounds, an average of 94,562 casualties per year. The American phase of the Vietnam war lasted 14 years and resulted in 47,378 US battle deaths and 304,704 US wounds, an average of 25,149 casualties per year and an average of 66,792 during the four years of 1966-1969, the height of American fighting.

The Iraq war has lasted five years and has resulted in 3,251 battle deaths and 29,395 wounds, an average of 6,529 casualties per year. “Thus, the average number of killed and wounded during the Korean war was three times the total number of killed and wounded in the five years of the Iraq war. The average number of killed and wounded during each of the most difficult years of the Vietnam war was twice the total for the five years of the Iraq war.”

Now for much more blood, the civilian variety. According to George, “About 1,600,000 were killed in the Korean war, 365,000 (according to American authorities) and four million (according to the Vietnamese government) during the American phase of the Vietnam war, and who knows how many in Iraq. No fewer than 250,000, certainly.”

Not that long ago, Bush claimed that civilian fatalities in Iraq were “30,000 more or less” – again, note the “more or less” – but I can see why these statistics matter even less for him. It’s not just that we don’t care a damn about Iraqi lives. We are going to care even less about Iraqi civilian casualties when we walk backwards, when we are renewing and reviving and re-liberating all over again.

Robert Fisk’s new book, ‘The Age of the Warrior: Selected Writings’, is published by Fourth Estate

Hollow Victory! Defeat's agony! Afghanistan-Iraq

Share