At Least 170 Dead in 6.4 Earthquake in Pakistan

Thousands of people homeless by the predawn temblor in the rural area, where many residents live in mud-brick homes that collapsed with the force of the magnitude 6.4 quake. Authorities said the death toll could rise as rescuers make their way to remote villages that had been cut off by landslides.

Even in good conditions, roads in the area are primitive. Pakistani army helicopters and cargo planes were ferrying in emergency aid, including food, tents and blankets. Medical teams were converging on the scene near the border with Afghanistan, but help arrived too late for some.

President Asif Ali Zardari ordered the national and provincial governments as well as the army to swiftly provide all necessary aid. The tremor was yet another challenge for his young government, which is struggling with a flagging economy, repeated clashes with insurgents in the border region, and conflicts with its American allies over U.S. military strikes into Pakistani territory.

The quake, which struck as most people were asleep, was centered about 50 miles northeast of the city of Quetta, the capital of Pakistan's impoverished Baluchistan province. With the chill of winter setting in, many of the survivors lost everything, including warm clothing, in the rubble of their homes.

The area was rocked by a magnitude 6.2 aftershock Wednesday evening, terrifying thousands of people who were preparing to spend a freezing night in the open.

In some of the hardest-hit villages in Zirat and Pishin districts, entire families were buried in the ruins of mud-brick compounds, and survivors were digging mass graves, using whatever implements they could find.

Aerial footage showing the epicentre of the earthquake:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7698260.stm

Getting It Right On China

Why should China come to rescue a defaulting Pakistani elite that has placed all its eggs in the American basket? We just can’t seem to run our affairs like big nations do. Our problem is that we have a great country with great capabilities but a political elite with the worldview of a rat.

Where would you put your money: On an America burdened by a $10 trillion debt or a China flush with almost $2 trillion cash reserves, the largest in the world?

You would think Pakistan is the luckiest country in the world for being China’s close ally as the world faces economic decline.

Wrong.

The truth is, we have a ruling class that has been betting on the wrong horse. President Zardari should know. But by no means is this his mistake alone. This is more about a shortsighted political elite that sits on one of the world’s hottest pieces of real estate – Pakistan – and simply doesn’t know what to do with it. Even MacDonald’s does a better job with its properties.

Why should China come to rescue a defaulting Pakistani elite that has placed all its eggs in the American basket? The bitter truth is that both Saudi Arabia and China want to help Pakistan. Both maintain strong military ties with Pakistan. But currently they are reluctant to contribute to the survival of a government in Islamabad that appears a little too pro-American than the acceptable limits for a sovereign nation. Let the Americans handle their own mess in Pakistan. This is the new attitude. That’s why the Saudi oil concession and the Chinese billions are not coming.

Riyadh and Beijing have good relations with America. But unlike Pakistan, both jealously guard their own interest first. The harsh truth is that we in Pakistan have a government that could have as well been made in Washington, peppered with strong U.S. and British apologists in key posts. Right or wrong, this perception is especially felt in Beijing. Eight Chinese oil workers have been kidnapped in Sudan as Africa emerges as a new battleground for clashing American and Chinese interests. But Pakistan was and continues to be the first battleground. The Chinese have been under attack in Pakistan for the past four years, something unheard of in our half-century of close ties. The Americans have made unusual political inroads in Islamabad. Now they are following this up with military incursions and full fledged psychological warfare to ensure total Pakistani compliance.

We have played both Washington and Beijing in the past. But there comes a time when you need to take a stand on national interest. Pakistan’s time has come and gone. It came again this summer, when someone in Washington decided to expand the disastrous Iraq-Afghan war into Pakistan. And we caved. Again.

By politely declining Zardari government’s request for a massive cash infusion, Beijing’s message is clear: China’s influence and interests in Pakistan must be protected. You can’t spend seven months in American laps, go to them for help as a first choice, and then dash to China as an option of last resort and expect Beijing to go weak in the knees because of a hollow statement such as ‘I’ll visit China once every three months.’

Even China’s pro-Pakistan quarters are confused. Sixty years and we still don’t have Pakistani translators who speak Chinese. Beijing went as far as spending its own money to build a modern Chinese language center in the heart of the Pakistani capital three years ago. Still no Pakistani translators to accompany our leaders visiting China. The Chinese cite the example of Indian television plays. The Indian embassy in Beijing is supplying local Chinese TV stations with copies of Indian plays dubbed in Chinese. These are playing all over the place. Pakistan’s PTV has a two-decade old treaty with China’s CCTV to do just that. But our people are yet to send anything similar. In 2005, we signed with China a ‘Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Good-neighborly Relations’. It was supposed to be the beginning of expanding the Sino-Pak relationship beyond the military. But the treaty hasn’t inched forward in three years. Chinese officials had to politely remind their Pakistani counterparts during President Zardari’s visit that the treaty “is of great historic and immediate significance” to the future of our relationship, according to the joint statement.

China’s biggest project in Pakistan, the Gwadar port, has been under attack along with its engineers and workers and we have done nothing to stop it. Our President went to Beijing to ask for a major favor while two Chinese engineers continue to be kidnapped inside our own territory. One has escaped to freedom but these kidnappings keep recurring. Can you blame a young Chinese policy analyst sitting in some think tank in China for assuming that there might be elements in Islamabad that concur with the outside powers that would like to see China forced out of Pakistan?

We just can’t seem to run our affairs like big nations do. Our problem is that we have a great country with great capabilities but a political elite with the worldview of a rat.

America is and must continue to be our friend. But this is the time to break free of voluntary submission to U.S. diktat. The world financial crisis is an opportunity to reduce our political and economic reliance on U.S. What are we afraid of? Economic hardship? America is already using donor organizations to squeeze Pakistan. Pakistanis will accept hardship if they are honestly told that the upshot will be setting our policies and priorities right.

By AHMED QURAISHI

Wednesday, 22 October 2008.

WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

Bush’s Blind Followers In Pakistan

In Pakistan, a weak government and a blind parliament are leading a nuclear-armed nation behind George W. Bush’s policy of self-destruction.

BACKGROUND

1. The U.S. wants Pakistan to lessen its focus on Kashmir, ignore how India is using Afghan soil to export terrorism to Pakistan, ignore the Indian water blockade of Pakistan, and focus instead on firmly toeing the U.S. policy in Afghanistan. Basically Washington wants us to protect their back while they refuse to commit to protecting the back of their Pakistani ally. [SEE PRESIDENT ZARDARI’S RECENT INTERACTIONS WITH U.S. OFFICIALS AND PM GILANI’S MEETINGS IN WASHINGTON IN EARLY AUG. 2008, and the U.S. media reports and leaks surrounding these two visits].

2. In order to sell Pakistanis Bush administration’s new policy line that Pakistan should ‘own’ America’s war on terror, the government of President Asif Zardari called a joint session of Parliament in Islamabad that lasted for almost a week in the hope that the politicians from all parties will endorse Washington’s desire to expand the war into Pakistan. The briefing took place in the week ending Oct. 17, 2008.

3. To rope in the Pakistani military, Mr. Zardari’s government invited the army to open the briefing. The military did send a senior officer to give a presentation that was limited to operational issues. But the briefing was not that of a military given to politicians. It was a briefing by a PPP-led government, reflecting PPP policies, which are very close to the U.S. position. Evidence:

3.1 Maulana Fazlur Rehman, leader of the religious JUI-F party, a coalition partner of the PPP government, issued a statement 0n Oct. 15 saying that his party sees the briefing as PPP’s own and that it does not reflect the view of all the coalition parties.

3.2 President Zardari’s statement to a Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens saying India is not a threat to Pakistan and that Kashmiri freedom fighters are terrorists. He also failed to raise the question of India blocking Chenab water. [Times of India published a commentary titled Why Zardari said what America wanted to hear, Oct. 12, where the author says, “Is there any rational explanation for what Zardari definitely told the Wall Street Journal--that those who had picked up the gun and bomb in Kashmir were terrorists, and that India has never been a threat to Pakistan?

3.3 The sudden emergence of expensive newspaper and TV advertisement on Pakistani channels and newspapers with the message that America’s war in Afghanistan is ‘Pakistan’s own’. It is not clear who is paying for these ads and who they represent.


3.4 Another evidence that this was a partisan, one-sided briefing is how Indian-occupied Kashmir was shown as part of India in a map during Information Minister Sherry Rehman’s briefing on Oct. 14, 2008. The same day, the Pakistani military distanced itself from the briefing and DG ISPR told The News in a report that the military’s briefing was restricted to the first round and had nothing to do with the Minister’s briefing. The spokesman also said that the military followed the government policy.

4. There is no question that the military cannot take the lead in making public some harsh truths if the PPP government is not prepared to own the consequences, especially regarding the role of some of our allies in fostering secessionism and terrorism inside Pakistan.

QUESTIONS

5. In his briefing, DG ISI/ex-DGMO alluded to weapons and support to militants inside Pakistan coming from Afghanistan. This implicates a country whose President was invited as a guest of honor when President Zardari was sworn in. How is the PPP government dealing with this challenge? Has it taken up this matter with Kabul and Washington?

6. On 5 Aug., 2008, Geo journalist Kamran Khan reported the following both on his TV show and on the front page of The News: “Impeccable official sources have said that strong evidence and circumstantial evidence of American acquiescence to terrorism inside Pakistan was outlined by President Pervez Musharraf, Chief of Army Staff General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani and Director General Inter Services Intelligence (ISI) Lt. Gen. Nadeem Taj in their separate meetings with US Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen and CIA Deputy Director Stephen R Kappes on July 12 in Rawalpindi.” QUESTION: Did President Zardari or Prime Minister Gilani or the Defense Minister or the Foreign Minister raise this urgent question of our national security when all of them visited Washington in the period between August and September 2008?

7. How come the government’s briefing failed to address what Interior Advisor Rehman Malik told a private TV channel in an interview on July 24, 2008, reported by Pak Tribune news site and I quote: “The Prime Minister’s advisor to Interior Rehman Malik has said that India was supporting the terrorist elements like Bramdagh Bugti in Pakistan, and evidences in this connection will be soon presented.”?

8. How does Rehman Malik’s statement of July 24, 2008 match with President Zardari’s statement of Oct. 4 in the Wall Street Journal where he said “India is not and has never been a threat” to Pakistan?

9. U.S. military’s Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen said in a TV interview on Oct. 11, 2008, that U.S. is considering changing its Afghanistan strategy to include India, possibly allowing Indian soldiers to jointly patrol the Pak-Afghan border. This is a serious issue. Why is it that the PPP government kept quiet on it and the Foreign Minister and Defense Minister have not responded to the U.S. official? What is the government policy on Adm. Mullen’s statement?

10. The PPP government wants Pakistanis to make America’s war on terror our own. QUESTION: Is eliminating the Afghan resistance part of our responsibility? Or is our responsibility limited to eliminating the militants who are fighting us on our own territory? What if the coalition fails in political reconciliation inside Afghanistan, leading Afghans to take up arms? Would fighting the entire Afghan population inside Afghanistan be our responsibility too?

11. Why did the PPP government not give the Parliament and the nation the bigger picture: How Washington is drastically changing the strategic outlook in the region in a way that is detrimental to Pakistani interest? There was no discussion about American plans to formalize an expanded Indian intelligence and military presence in Afghanistan, the effort to cut Pakistan’s ability to influence the future of Kashmir, the near-total Indian control over our waters, or the efforts to reduce Pakistan’s ability to protest Indian involvement in future joint patrols of Pak-Afghan border, which is also on the cards.

Eight years to 9/11, Pakistan’s parliament was expected to retake the initiative, declare that Pakistan will not help United States crush the Afghan resistance, which flourishes due to the blunders of U.S. military and the inept regime of Hamid Karzai, declare Baitullah Mehsud and others of his ilk ‘most wanted terrorists’, expose their links to foreign spy agencies so that all Pakistanis recognize their enemy. Instead, we have a government whose leader, President Asif Zardari, declares in Washington that President Bush has made the world a safer place, and then returns to Pakistan to tell Pakistanis that America’s lost war in Afghanistan ‘is our own.’

Full text of joint statement between China and Pakistan

BEIJING, Oct. 16 (Xinhua) -- Following is the full text of the Joint Statement between China and Pakistan issued here Thursday.

Joint Statement between the People's Republic of China and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan

(16 October 2008, Beijing)

On the invitation of President Hu Jintao, President Asif Ali Zardari paid a state visit to China on 14-17 October 2008.

President Hu Jintao held talks with President Zardari. Mr. Wu Bangguo, chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, Mr. Wen Jiabao, Premier of the State Council, and Mr. Jia Qinglin, Chairman of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, met President Zardari respectively. Talks between the two presidents and President Asif Ali Zardari's meetings with other Chinese state leaders were characterized by traditional warmth, friendship and mutual understanding. The two leaders reached broad agreement on strengthening China-Pakistan strategic partnership of cooperation and on international and regional issues of mutual interest under the new circumstances. The President of Pakistan also held wide ranging discussions with the leaders of Chinese corporations and financial institutions.

The leaders of the two countries reviewed with satisfaction the growth of China-Pakistan relations over the past 57 years since the two countries established diplomatic ties. They agreed that the friendship between China and Pakistan has withstood the test of time and practice, notwithstanding changes in the international, regional and domestic environments. The all-weather friendship and all-round cooperation have become the distinctive feature of China-Pakistan relations.

Both sides agreed that, it is essential that the two sides make continuous efforts to strengthen good-neighborly relations and friendship, develop mutually beneficial cooperation and deepen strategic partnership of cooperation between China and Pakistan which serves the fundamental interests of the two peoples and contributes to peace and development in the region.

Both sides agreed that the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Good-neighborly Relations between the People's Republic of China and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan (Treaty) signed in April 2005 is of great historic and immediate significance, laying a solid legal foundation for the long-term, stable and healthy growth of China-Pakistan relations. Both sides decided to abide by the policies and principles enshrined in the Treaty, earnestly implement the bilateral legal documents signed since the two countries established diplomatic ties and further intensify cooperation in the areas of economy, defense, science and technology, people-to-people contact, thus constantly advancing the China-Pakistan strategic partnership of cooperation.

China stressed that Pakistan is China's good neighbor, close friend, dear brother and trusted partner. China will continue to view China-Pakistan relations from a strategic and long-term perspective, and make joint efforts with Pakistan to lift China-Pakistan strategic partnership of cooperation to a new high.

Pakistan stressed that Pakistan-China relationship is the cornerstone of its foreign policy, and friendship with China represents the common desire of all Pakistani people. Pakistan appreciated the strong support and assistance provided by the government and people of China to Pakistan in its economic development. Pakistan remained committed to continuing its policy of friendship towards China and making unremitting efforts to promote the healthy and steady growth of relations between the two countries.

Pakistan unequivocally upholds the one-China policy and considers Taiwan as an inseparable part of the People's Republic of China and supports all efforts made by the Chinese government to realize national reunification.

China appreciated Pakistan's long-term and staunch support to China on issues concerning China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, reaffirmed its support for Pakistan's effort to uphold its sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity, and appreciated Pakistan's important role in promoting regional peace, stability and security and strengthening international counter-terrorism efforts.

Both sides opposed to all forms of terrorism, extremism and separatism, resolved to cooperate with each other to fight the above-mentioned three forces. China conveyed its complete support to Pakistan's commitment and efforts to fight terrorism and appreciated the sacrifices made by the government and people of Pakistan in this regard.

The two sides agreed that economic cooperation is an important part in the strategic partnership between the two countries. The two countries enjoy great economic complementarity and should fully tap the potential and comprehensively deepen mutually beneficial cooperation in the economic field.

Both sides agreed to fast track the implementation of the Five Year Development Programme on Economic Cooperation and make full use of the Free Trade Agreement in Goods and Investment and Pakistan-China Joint Investment Company. In this regard, they agree to convene a meeting of Pakistan-China Economic Cooperation group under the Five Year Development Programme on Economic Cooperation at an early date. They also agreed to hold the next meeting of the Joint Economic Commission at the convenience of both countries.

Both sides agreed to enhance cooperation to further develop and boost Pakistan's mineral and energy sectors as well as broaden financial and banking sector cooperation. They also agreed to further enhance 'connectivity' by developing new communication links including fiber optic links. They agreed to explore the concept of Integrated Border Management, overland trade and development of trans-border economic zones.

Both sides agreed to maintain communication and coordination on major international and regional issue to safeguard their common interests. Both sides agreed to continue to cooperate closely on issues such as the reform of the United Nations, climate change and energy and food security to promote world peace and development.

President Asif Ali Zardari offered congratulations to the Chinese government and people on the successful hosting of the Beijing Olympic Games and the Paralympic Games and the successful completion of Shenzhou VII's mission. President Hu Jintao congratulated President Asif Ali Zadari on his election as the President of Pakistan and thanked Pakistan for its valuable assistance in the wake of the devastating earthquake in Wenchuan, China. He also appreciated Pakistan's support to ensure the success of the Beijing Olympic and Paralympic Games. Pakistan applauded the outstanding achievements China has made in the 30 years of reform and opening-up and believes that China's development will contribute to world peace and prosperity.

President Zardari invited President Hu Jintao to visit Pakistan once again at his convenience. President Hu Jintao thanked President Zardari for his kind invitation.

Both sides signed the following agreement/MoUs during the visit:

1. Agreement on economic and technical cooperation between government of the People's Republic of China and government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

2. Amending protocol to free trade agreement between government of the People's Republic of China and government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

3. Exchanges of notes between the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China and the Ministry of Interior of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan regarding the exchange of properties of the Chinese embassy in Pakistan.

4. Framework agreement on cooperation in the field of minerals between the national development and reforms committee of the People's Republic of China and the Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Resources of Pakistan.

5.Memorandum of understanding on cooperation between the Ministry of Land Resources of the People's Republic of China and Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Resources of Pakistan.

6. Agreement on environmental protection cooperation between the Ministry of Environmental Protection of the People's Republic of China and the Ministry of Environment of Pakistan.

7. Framework agreement for cooperation in the field of radio, film& television between the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television, government of the People's Republic of China and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, government of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

8. Aksat-1R satellite procurement contract by & between China Great Wall Industry Corporation (CGWIC) and Pakistan Space & Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SUPARCO).

9. Memorandum of understanding on scientific collaboration in agricultural research and technical cooperation between Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences and Agricultural Research Council of Pakistan.

10. Cooperation agreement between Beijing Museum of Natural History of the People's Republic of China and the Museum of Natural History of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

11. Memorandum of understanding on cooperation between the Cricket Association of the People's Republic of China and the Cricket Board of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

12. Memorandum of understanding regarding the project of X-ray container/vehicle inspection system between Nuctech Company Limited, Tsinghua University, Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of China and Ministry of Interior of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Government asked to expedite efforts for Aafia’s release

The Islamabad High Court (IHC) on Wednesday directed the government to expedite efforts for the early release of Dr Aafia Siddiqui from US custody. The court adjourned proceedings for three weeks. The IHC issued the directions while hearing a petition filed by Barrister Javed Iqbal Jafferi against the alleged illegal detention of Siddiqui.

Reply filed: After appearing in chamber on notice, Foreign Affairs Ministry US Desk Director Mansoor Ahmad Khan told reporters the ministry had filed a reply on the developments in the case. Deputy Attorney General Shahid Iqbal Qureshi told the court that the chief justice had also directed the government to recover Siddiqui’s two missing children as early as possible. He said the Pakistan embassy in Washington was making efforts to ensure Siddiqui got a fair trial in US, besides seeking urgent medical treatment for her, adding that the embassy was working with the US Justice Department and other US authorities to ensure that her rights were protected. Qureshi rejected allegations levelled by the petitioner that the government was not serious in bringing Siddiqui back to Pakistan.

“Since Dr Aafia was not arrested from Pakistani soil, Pakistani laws are not applicable to her,” he said. Later, Jafferi told reporters Siddiqui could be brought back to Pakistan under the Pakistan-US Friendship Treaty signed in 1959.

Pakistan’s foreign policy in a spin

It is quite clear that Pakistan’s foreign policy is undergoing a sea change as it is being drastically reoriented by the nascent PPP government. Are we distancing from China is the moot question doing rounds in Pakistan? The former President Musharraf would exercise some semblance of caution and discretion while making a decision that would be acceptable or repugnant to the people at large. But under the present dispensation when the co- chairperson and President of Pakistan Asif Zardari is exclusively calling the shots that thin and deceptive veneer of euphemism put up by previous regime has been rubbed off. Now momentous decisions of far-reaching import are being made on the spur of the moment and perhaps in complete disregard of the national sentiments and showing deaf ears to the public outrage.

For instance to dub the Kashmiri militants fighting for the national liberation as terrorists is a kind of label that under no circumstances would be hurled even by the most unscrupulous of governments so daringly and so non-chalantly. If the Wall Street Journal attributes those utterances to our dare-devil President then it must be beyond doubt or contradiction although foggy rebuttals have also been dished out by the Government’s spokespersons. After all there must be some ground for such kind of remarks published by a prestigious paper. This paper cannot have a grudge against the newly elected President of Pakistan nor should it have any stakes in disparaging a new comer in the political area of Pakistan and occupying the country’s top slot. President Zardari’s unguarded remarks about the critical national issues are not confined only to Kashmiri militants. These are varied and encompass other crucial affairs and unfortunately, generally, run counter to the national interests of Pakistan. It is not a reflection of a seasoned thinker but a kind of bravado and personal penchant to say things which no one dared to say so far. To say earlier that Pakistan’s geographical integrity would be safeguarded at all costs and then go for a faux pas later by making a confession that the unmanned aircraft showering fire and bombs on the civilian population in the tribal areas were carrying out these lethal operations with Pakistan’s consent, permission and consultation is simply tragic and traumatic.

Furthermore, to stage a somersault about the traditional and age old adversarial relations between India and Pakistan by claiming that Pakistan does not face or fear any threat from India is a blatant negation of the continuous tension and war ridden history between the two countries. There might be a new initiative by the President for peace with neighborly India but to white-wash the hostility of that country by portraying it as a friend is naive simplicity, or mere cowardice and complete ignorance of confrontational past including three wars between the two countries since they achieved independence. Do the Prime Minister and President of Pakistan know that Kashmir issue was at the core of the entire animus that existed between the two neighbours and that India never missed an opportunity to harm Pakistan? One glaring example is the truncation of Pakistan in 1971 made possible by the Indian armed forces joining the separatists in the formerly East Pakistan. One can forget the bitterness and happenings of the past but to scuttle and belittle the resurging indigenous Kashmiris’ movement for independence from Indian hegemony by calling them terrorists is patently to be more Indian than a Pakistani. Still if Pakistan wants to wash its hands off the Kashmiris’ struggle for independence of Indian occupied Kashmir then you have to take your parliamentarians in confidence as that is the essence of democracy. If you would like to supercede Musharraf in making wild announcements then how you would like to be distinguished from your predecessor or a leader if you too ignore the supreme national interests. Parliament’s in-camera session is ostensibly aimed at paving way for a hurdle free and ultimate permission to the American and NATO military forces to extend their operations to the Pakistani territories more specifically to the tribal borders regions between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Let there be no doubt that the onus and focus of both Republican hawks and democrats is shifting to Afghanistan, FATA and Pakistan, primarily for a face saving subterfuge to cover up an historic and disgraceful roll back from Iraq. Secondly, Pakistan is being whisked away from the close bonds of friendship with China to be banded with the apron string of India. This carries twin purpose of crafting a bloc against China consisting of Afghanistan, India and Pakistan that was the cherished goal of Americans all these years.

Now is the right climate and more conductive circumstances for them to realize that coveted goal. The pro-India statements apart, giving a free hand to American and NATO forces to stalk Pakistan’s territories against terrorist’s bands might as well be aimed at achieving some other hidden goals. May be encirclement of China is the perceived goal. It is in this spirit that the American and NATO generals as well as Hamid Karazai the puppet President of Afghanistan are talking to win the Taliban via negotiations. Doesn’t it mean that Taliban pose no threat to American security any more and that they can be tamed to be used against China as they and other Islamic jihadists were used against the Red army in Afghanistan? Why this sudden and inexplicable change of hearts has come about? The reason is simple. There is a pliant government in Pakistan. The Indian government is a declared front line state against China. Taliban in the changing circumstances could also act as a bulwark against Iran.

That is why while America would remain relentless against Al-Qaeda, it would like to carry favour with Taliban to use them along with Pakistan and its territories for the encirclement of China. If the strife within Pakistan and in the tribal areas is being masterminded by Americans as is being projected at various forums then at a certain point Pakistan’s nuclear assets could also be possessed by America and NATO under the pretext that these were not safe and could be attacked and robbed by the anti-American groups.

Pakistan seeking $3 billion from China

Pakistan is seeking $3 billion from China in emergency aid, according to the Washington Post.
The visiting State Bank of Pakistan Governor Shamshad Akhtar told the Post that Pakistan is also seeing assistance from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
The Bush administration and Congress have been shaping a long-term economic and military assistance package for Pakistan, but there is no indication the US is able to step in with a short-term financial lifeline, the report says.
It says there are fears that Pakistan may not be able to secure the funds to avoid a debt default early next year, and its investor potential insolvency could grow into a panic in coming weeks.
Investors are more concerned about Pakistan now because Saudi Arabia has not yet responded to a Pakistan request for an oil facility, it said.

Extremists 'hijack Islam's image'

The West's image of Islam has been hijacked by extremists, delegates at the recent News Xchange broadcasting conference in Amsterdam heard.

Debate was prompted by the results of a Kuwaiti government survey that found the depiction of Muslims in the US and European media was "typically stereotypical and negative".

Several speakers concluded that the role of the media should be to understand and illustrate the complexity of the Islamic world, rather than dealing in such generalisations.

'Widespread ignorance'

The session began with Chris Yalonis of Communique Partners presenting the findings of a new international survey, "Western perceptions about Islam and Muslims", which he carried out on behalf of the Kuwaiti Ministry of Awqaf (Endowments) and Islamic Affairs.

He said there was a paradox between the perception by many Europeans of their Muslim neighbours and colleagues as "good people", while Muslims they see on television are often depicted as "terrorists".

Between March and August 2005 the survey team carried out more than 2,400 online interviews in Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the US. Their findings included:

• Muslims rated lowest in overall favourability among various religious groups.

• Ignorance of and lack of empathy with Islam is widespread.

• The portrayal of Arabs and Muslims varies according to the type of media, "but it is typically stereotypical and negative, although improving especially in certain prestigious news organisations".

• TV documentaries and news are the most influential media in influencing feelings about Arab Muslims, followed by newspapers.

• Nearly three-quarters of respondents believe that the media depicts Arab Muslims and Islam accurately only half the time, not often or never.

Trevor Mostyn, an analyst of European media interviewed by the survey team, said: "Television loves the image of the ugly, ferocious blood-curdling Muslims."

Articulate, "mainstream" Muslims are rarely seen on TV in Britain, Mostyn asserted.

Heated debate

The News Xchange session on "Reporting Islam" saw a passionate debate during which some Arab journalists complained that Muslims were frequently demonised in the Western media, while many European broadcasters stressed the need to avoid using inflammatory terms and to give airtime to moderate voices as well as extremists.

Abdul Bari Atwan, editor of the London-based paper al-Quds al-Arabi, complained of the West's coverage of the Muslim world, saying that when radical groups "hijacked" Islam, Western media simplistically depicted this as "Muslim terrorism".

He added: "Whatever we do, we are still rejected by the West... As a Muslim in Europe, which is supposed to be the continent of human rights, I am really frightened."

Wadah Khanfar, managing director of al-Jazeera, said many media and correspondents failed to differentiate between the Muslim religion and cultural tradition. He too agreed: "We should abandon simplistic coverage."

Feelings ran high when Ayan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-born Dutch MP whose criticism of Islam sent her into hiding after the murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, spoke.

She accused Arab journalists of seeing all problems as caused by some outside force, and said they should engage in more self-reflection.

Her remarks that "there is a total lack of freedom in the Arab and Islamic world", as well as "a lack of equality for and a culture of violence towards women", provoked angry denials and denunciations from many Arab and other journalists in the hall.

"Things are being done in the name of religion, but it's not good enough for the media to describe them simply as Islamic," concluded Phil Harding of BBC World Service, summing up what emerged as the majority consensus after a very heated discussion.

By Peter Feuilherade
BBC Monitoring, in Amsterdam

Fun With Obama

A Trip to Murree

Karachi to Islamabad
Location: Karachi Air Port, Karachi to Rawalpindi. The start of my tour, from Karachi airPort. It was decided to travel by aero plane instead of train. Overall it was marvelous experience. My flight was sharply at 5:00 AM and reached at Islamabad on time after almost 1:30 hours. It was very economical and costs around 100 USD per person.

Rawalpindi to Murree
My next destination on this tour was to reach Murree and spend 2 nights there. After finishing some persnol stuff and shopping, we started our journey around 12:10 PM by taxi. Good news for Murree lovers that new Motorway to Murree it is almost finished, only metal ling is left on some part. This was bit boring one and half hour drive due to hot summer day. And you can feel Global warming effects if you are travelling to Murree after 10 years. Most of the snaps are took at Murree city on our first day of visit. It cost us around 20 USD from Rawalpindi to Murree on taxi.

Murree to Patriata
My very next day journey after reaching Murree was to visit Patriata Hills and enjoy chair lift and cable car. i decided to hire Jeep to go there, so that i can enjoy places on the way. After too much negotiations on the rate we hired Jeep on 18 USD for round trip and committed with driver to get back by 3:00 PM. It was an hour journey with lots of excitement to explore roadside areas and markets on the way. i found that local people were very innocent and tourism in those areas is the only better way of earning. Despite tourism there is no other business activity on these hill stations. Government should facilitate local and foreign tourists to explore the hidden beauty of this area and to work for the betterment of local people by engaging them in different tourism related activities. Roads should be better maintained to avoid any kind of accidents and to create awareness in drivers to properly maintain vehicles and follow road signs. Patriata chair lift & cable car is a must experienced thing and you can also enjoy horse riding on top of the hill. Patriata hiking track is very safe and wide and you can enjoy trekking on it. You must follow the maps displayed on the top hill for trekking to avoid to forget the way back. The chair lift & cable car cost almost 4.5 USD per person.

Murree, NathiaGali to Abbottabad
The next journey of My trip to Mansehra for Fairy Meadows, it was planned to get up early in the morning and reach Murree General Bus Stand to get bus for Abbottabad. i checked out from Hotel at 6:30 AM morning and reached to bus stand after 15 minutes walk. The total cost of Murree to Mansehra was almost 10 USD. Journey started at 7:20 AM and reached Mansehra near 11: AM morning via Abatobad. It was good journey to move from one Provincial area to another and observe changes in culture influenced by local traditions and values. On a way we have seen many foreign organizations are running number of programs for poor areas of country to increase the living standards and to provide basic necessities of life.

Back to Islamabad Air Port to Karachi
It was almost 5 days trip. then i come back Karachi

World Disaster‏

Most Dangerous Airport

Most Dangerous Airport in the World
It's a little island in the Caribbean, half French and half Dutch, little pricey, but it's supposed to be amazing, plus the airport runway starts at one of the beaches and gives amazing close ups of incoming aircraft but considered as the most dangerous airport in the world, see for yourself.

It is the art of our Pakistani People

It is the art of our Pakistani People - W-11 in Australia‏

Pakistan's Flag Is A Symbol Of Freedom In India

GAUHATI, India—Depressed from how New Delhi is suppressing local Assamese people who want to carve a separate homeland out of India, people in Assam waved Pakistan's flags in five districts.

The eastern Indian state is one of a dozen Indian states in the north and east where ferocious freedoms movements are in full swing, demanding the right of self determination from Indian rule. As usual, the Indian government, blaming Pakistani agencies for the violence, has ordered an immediate enquiry for this incident.
The officials in New Delhi are so disturbed by this that they have invoked patriotism while asking newspaper editors across India to black out any news about the freedom movements.

This week a student delegation visited the State’s governor and told him that ‘the villagers informed us that the miscreants were shouting slogans like Pakistan zindabad [Long live Pakistan] through loudspeakers in Dalgaon and some other border areas,” according to a report in The Assam Tribune.

The Indian paper called on the government to give “stern punishment to those who hoisted Pakistani flags.”

The Indian Express reported the story in one paragraph: “Meanwhile, media persons saw a Pakistani flag in Sonaripara and Mohanpur villages and took photographs of them. Local television channels also ran footage of the flags. Officials and security forces denied any knowledge of the presence of the flags.

New Delhi is disturbed by this new trend where the Pakistani flag has emerged as a symbol of freedom in India.

Indian officials are still smarting from the shock of a unanimous rejection of India across Kashmir. For years the Kashmiris have been marking India’s national day on Aug. 15 as a Black Day. But this year, Kashmir witnessed a unanimous civil disobedience and massive street protests where Kashmiris joined in raising the Pakistani flag and chanting slogans rejecting their forced inclusion in the Indian state.

The massive protests shocked the Indian media and ordinary Indians who for years were shielded by New Delhi authorities from ground realities in Kashmir and were fed an official version that almost the entire free Indian media adhered to without asking questions. The size and the impressive unanimity of Kashmiri protests this year helped break Indian official media blackout and provided the Indian people a chance to see for their own what their governments have been hiding for decades now, where the Kashmir dispute was often peddled as a Pakistani creation and not the result of indigenous Kashmiri demands.

This story should come as surprising news to a vocal minority in Pakistani media that continues to hold an inferiority complex concerning the Indian government. This Pakistani minority is used to exaggerating Pakistani flaws and glorifying India and presenting it as a country devoid of any flaws [Editor’s note: This is called ‘Bollywood Effect’. This minority needs to break the spell and improve its taste by watching some quality movies from Hollywood and elsewhere.

This is a good opportunity for Pakistani media organizations and spy agencies to project the freedom movements inside various Indian states that want independence from Indian rule. Pakistanis recall how the Indian government broke international law and issued a statement supporting its own trained and funded terrorists in Pakistani Balochistan in 2006. This is why it has become imperative to pay the New Delhi establishment in the same coin. Assam and the rest of the twelve or so Indian states that are fighting for independence are a good place to start.

Why Mr. Zardari Is Ignoring China?

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—A small incident on the lawn of Prime Minister’s House in the Pakistani capital on Sept. 24 reverberated as far away as Beijing. In the last days of Ramadan, Mr. Gilani invited foreign media for a dinner. Probably by coincidence and not design, British and American journalists were given the high seats on the Prime Minister’s table. Chinese journalists were left out. A few blocks away, at the Chinese Embassy building, China’s ambassador was hosting a dinner and handing out DVD players as gifts for the Pakistani Para-Olympic team and the lone Pakistani player who won a medal in Beijing. At least someone feted our heroes.

A week later, a senior Chinese journalist in the capital was heard complaining. His concern was not that he and his Chinese colleagues were ignored by Pakistani officials during a formal dinner. That’s a small matter. He linked it to the overall perception that, after Feb. 18, something has changed in the relationship with Beijing and that the new elected leadership is not big on China, Pakistan’s traditionally close ally.

“Is everything over after Musharraf?” says the senior Chinese journalist, with some bitterness. I will not quote a name because I don’t have the permission to do that. It does sound dramatic. And it may not be true considering the strong military-to-military Sino-Pakistani relations, reinforced by our Gen. Kayani’s just-concluded visit to Beijing. But this is an impression from someone whose voice is heard by many Pakistan-watchers in the Chinese capital.

Obviously this is not about seating arrangements at official banquets. This is about a whole new foreign policy that is apparently being thrust on Pakistanis without discussion. While it is the prerogative of a new elected government to introduce its own vision for international relations, it is our right to debate it and even reject it, if a majority wants so. This debate is being stifled.

Whether America’s war on terror is ours or not – and no amount of paid advertisements will make it ours – there is no question that Pakistanis don’t want their country to become Washington’s third war after Iraq and Afghanistan. But the Bush administration is feverishly pushing in that direction before the end of its term in order to force the hand of a future government in Washington.

What part of American successes in Iraq and Afghanistan is the current Pakistani government so impressed with that it has no problem in turning Pakistan into CENTCOM’s third area of operations? The U.S. military, which is so keen on training Pakistanis, has been a failure in counterinsurgency warfare in two war zones. It has turned Iraq into a permanently weak and divided nation. In Afghanistan, U.S. military is supporting criminals, warlords and drug smugglers in government. The Afghan opposition, including Afghan Taliban, is being pushed to the wall and slaughtered instead of being reconciled and given a stake and ownership in their own country.

This is why it is stunning that President Zardari’s government is doing very little to stop Pakistan from becoming America’s next war zone. There should not be a problem in deciding this one: this for sure is not our war. Why is it difficult for our President to tell the Americans they need to pacify the Afghan opposition and resistance groups and end the reign of Karzai’s ‘war-lord regime’ in Kabul in order to bring peace to that country?

It is also time for Islamabad to come out of the closet. The Afghan Taliban, with whom we ended diplomatic relations seven years ago, is a legitimate Afghan player along with the other Afghan resistance and opposition groups. We have no quarrel with them and there is no way that peace can be achieved in Afghanistan without bringing them on board. This is necessary to stabilize our own areas and end America’s excuses to invade Pakistan. If Washington cannot understand this, it is our job to ensure they do.

With America’s steep financial crisis, it is strange how our government is slavishly pinning hopes on a rescue package for Pakistan and in the process is keeping mum on major acts of hostility from our so-called allies. Mr. Robert Gates, the U.S. defense secretary, has publicly declared that his country is working on ending its reliance on Pakistan as a transit route for fuel and cargo. And hardly a day goes by without Gen. David Petraeus threatening Pakistan that we risk our very ‘existence’ of we don’t allow U.S. boots on our soil. And as soon as Mr. Karzai’s ambassador in Geneva was elected to IAEA board last week, his first order of business was to raise the ‘issue’ of Pakistan’s proliferation record and urge a reopening of investigations into the matter. Meanwhile, India, which according to our President is no longer a threat, is boldly blocking water coming to us from the rivers of occupied Kashmir. Of course, there is hardly any mention of the mounting and
brave Kashmiri resistance in the face of Indian state terrorism.

Pakistanis used to be chided by the Americans after 9/11 for fostering ‘anti-Americanism’. Now our so-called friends are spreading ‘anti-Pakistanism’ around the world, misrepresenting the Pakistanis and reintroducing us as ‘Iraq II’. But not a single voice of defense from Pakistan. History is inviting President Zardari to take a stand and carve a name for himself. He should start by doing and saying the right things in his upcoming unnecessarily delayed ‘first official trip’ to China.

By AHMED QURAISHI
Tuesday, 7 October 2008.
WWW.AHMEDQURAISHI.COM

Baitullah Mehsud children's suicide camp

The Taliban have rebuilt a camp in South Waziristan that trains children to be suicide bombers, a video from Pakistan shows. Children as young as seven years old are indoctrinated to wage jihad in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The video, obtained by AfPax Insider, was shot in August in Spinkai Ragzai, South Waziristan, a tribal area run by Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud. The Taliban are seen "training dozens of boys ranging in age from seven to 14," the news service reported. "The video attempts to justify suicide bombings as a legitimate means of attack against "infidels.'"
The images shows the children reading from the Quran and an adult Taliban training the children. One slide shows a poster board with the words "Killing a Spy" written in English.
While not explicitly stated in the AfPax Insider report, the camp is run by Qari Hussain, a senior lieutenant to Baitullah who has close links to al Qaeda. Hussain has rebuilt his child training camp after the Pakistani military demolished his suicide nursery during a short offensive in Spinkai in January 2008.

In May, a senior Pakistani general described the previous camp as a "factory." The military seized numerous documents and training materials in the demolished camp.
"It was like a factory that had been recruiting nine to 12-year-old boys, and turning them into suicide bombers," said Major General Tariq Khan, the commander of Pakistan's 14 Division, which led the operation in South Waziristan.
"The computers, other equipment and literature seized from the place ... give graphic details of the training process in this so-called 'nursery,'" Dawn reported in May. "There are videos of young boys carrying out executions, a classroom where 10- to 12-year olds are sitting in formations, with white band of Quranic verses wrapped around their forehead, and there are training videos to show how improvised explosive devices are made and detonated."
The Pakistani military launched the operation in South Waziristan on Jan. 24 after Taliban forces commanded by Baitullah overran two military outposts and conducted attacks against other forts and military convoys in the tribal agency.

The Pakistani military reported that Hussain was killed in January after intercepting Taliban communications. The military later reiterated that claim during the tour of the Spinkai camp on May 18.

Hussain held a press conference at a government school building in South Waziristan five days later. During the interview,he mocked the reports of his death. "I am alive, don't you see me?" Hussain said.
Hussain is believe to be in the running to succeed Baitullah Mehsud in the event of his death. Baitullah is suffering from complications related to kidney disease and was rumored to have died last week. Baitullah was later seen visiting villagers to celebrate Eid in towns throughout South Waziristan.
The Spinkai camp is one of 157 training camps and more than 400 support locations in the Taliban-controled tribal areas and in the Northwest Frontier Province.

Kashmir separatist fury over Pakistan president's 'terrorist'

Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari's description of Islamic militants in Kashmir as "terrorists" has been greeted with dismay and anger by separatist groups in the disputed region.

"Ridiculous and inconsistent," was the verdict of hardline separatist leader Syed Ali Geelani on Zardari's shock categorisation of the two-decade old Kashmiri insurgency against Indian rule.

"Kashmiris are not terrorists. They are freedom fighters," Geelani said.

Since 1989, more than 43,000 people have been killed in the armed struggle in Indian Kashmir which has always enjoyed Pakistan's implicit backing

Zardari came out with the "terrorist" tag in a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal -- apparently the first time that any Pakistani leader has referred to the Islamic militants in Indian Kashmir in such a way.

He also said that India had never been a threat to his country.

Both views appeared to run counter to those of Pakistan's powerful military, which has regarded its nuclear-armed neighbour as an existential threat since the creation of the two countries after independence in 1947.

And among Kashmiri separatists they amounted to little short of heresy.

"It shows how ignorant he is about the sub-continent's history," Geelani said of Zardari who, as the widower of former premier Benazir Bhutto, came to power in September after the civilian government in Islamabad ousted president Pervez Musharraf.

The main militant alliance in the region, the United Jehad Council, said the president's statements had only served to rub salt into the wounds of the Kashmiri people.

"It is also equivalent to stabbing the freedom-loving nation in the back," the council said in a statement that stressed how Kashmiris had only taken up arms as a "last resort".

In the northern town of Baramulla, slogan-chanting Kashmiri youths burnt effigies of Zardari and called on him to step down as president.

India has long accused Pakistan of sponsoring the Islamist insurgency in the part of the divided Himalayan territory controlled by New Delhi.

Pakistan denies the claim but has often spoken in support of those fighting for what it calls the right to self-determination in Kashmir, while state television runs daily segments on alleged Indian atrocities in the region.

Kashmir has been disputed by India and Pakistan since the partition of the subcontinent in 1947.

The two neighbours have twice waged war over the Muslim-majority region, which is divided by a Line of Control.

Maulana Abbass Ansari, a moderate separatist and leading Shiite cleric, said Zardari's comments would have no concrete impact on the fight against Indian rule.

"We have nothing to do with Zardari. Our freedom struggle will continue," Ansari said.

Militant violence had fallen sharply in Kashmir after India and Pakistan launched a peace process in 2004.

But that process has begun to stagnate and in recent months the Kashmir Valley has witnessed the largest anti-India protests for years.

McCain, Obama clash again on Pakistan policy

* Republican McCain accuses Obama of threatening to invade Pakistan
* Democrat Obama vows to kill Bin Laden
* Obama says Afghan government should do what it needs to

Despite sparring over Pakistan in their second debate on Tuesday night, the two presidential candidates ended up saying the same thing, though in somewhat different words.
While Democrat hopeful Senator Barack Obama said the United States should only take action inside Pakistan if the government there was unable or unwilling to do so, Republican Senator John McCain was more conciliatory, recommending that the US use soft language with Pakistan but carry a big stick.
Both candidates favoured working with Pakistan in the hunt for Al Qaeda and other groups allegedly operating out of Pakistan’s Tribal Areas into Afghanistan and threatening the lives of US military personnel.
McCain opted for “working and co-ordinating our efforts together, not threatening to attack them, but working with them, and where necessary use force, but talk softly, but carry a big stick”.
Accusation:
He accused Obama of threatening to invade Pakistan, a charge the Democratic contender denied, stressing that he had only recommended that the US go at it alone if Pakistan was unable or unwilling to move despite actionable intelligence.
McCain warned that any precipitate action against Pakistan would create adverse public opinion.
Vow:
They were both equally determined as to how they would deal with Osama Bin Laden. Obama said, “And if we have Osama Bin Laden in our sights and the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act and we will take them out. We will kill Bin Laden; we will crush Al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority.”
McCain couched his position in more amenable terms, saying, “Now, our relations with Pakistan are critical, because the border areas are being used as safe havens by the Taliban and Al Qaeda and we have to get their support.” He favoured the strategy followed by Gen Petraeus in Iraq ’to get the support of the people’.
He went on to propose, “We need to help the Pakistani government go into Waziristan, where I visited, a very rough country, and get the support of the people, and get them to work with us and turn against the cruel Taliban and others. And by working and co-ordinating our efforts together, not threatening to attack them, but working with them, and where necessary use force, but talk softly, but carry a big stick.”
Afghan government:
Obama said, “It’s so important for us to end the war in Iraq to be able to get more troops into Afghanistan, put more pressure on the Afghan government to do what it needs to do, eliminate some of the drug trafficking that’s funding terrorism. But I do believe that we have to change our policies with Pakistan. We can’t coddle, as we did, a dictator, give him billions of dollars and then he’s making peace treaties with the Taliban. What I’ve said is we’re going to encourage democracy in Pakistan, expand our non-military aid to Pakistan so that they have more of a stake in working with us, but insisting that they go after these terrorists.”
Obama was at pains to establish that contrary to McCain’s charge, he had never threatened to invade Pakistan. He said, “I want to be very clear about what I said. Nobody called for the invasion of Pakistan. Senator McCain continues to repeat this.”

Palin's Foreign Policy

Sarah Palin, US Vice President Candidate


Sarah Palin, a former Miss Alaska beauty contest finalist in 1984 and a former sports reporter.

In the case of Ms. Palin, she is the former mayor of a small town and the recently elected Governor of Alaska, and has not an ounce of experience in world affairs.

May be she will use her Miss Alaska beauty contest experience in foreign policy. Anyway it is a good choice according to experience.

Islam of Talibans And American Taliban Agents inside Pakistan

Islam of Talibans

A large number of Muslims in Islamic World do not accept the Talibans Islam as a true picture of Islam. Their Islam is just based on the customs of afghan tribes and nothing.

The question that rises in ones mind: Are they doing the right thing?

What is the sunnah (custom, way) of Allah regarding the implementation of religion? The answer lies in the first and foremost source of Islam -- the Quran. It is stated in the Quran that ALLAH does not hold a person responsible beyond his or her capacity. Moreover, the period of 23 years in which the Quran was gradually revealed is a witness to the sunnah of Allah, that is Allah desires a gradual but a deep rooted change in the minds and souls of human beings, which ultimately reflects from their actions. The philosophy of this gradual implementation of religion is the avoidance of imbalance in the life of an individual and in the society, which can lead to the denunciation of religion by the people.
A criticism on this argument can be that the gradual implementation of Islam was restricted only to the time of its revelation, and now there are no reasons for the delay in the implementation of Islam. The answer is that all the laws related to moral values were already present in the previous religions, and Islam did not introduce those laws for the first time. For example, the punishment of adultery in Torah is stoning to death. But we know that it was some time after the establishment of the Islamic government in Madinah that these laws were implemented. So it can be safely concluded that Islam only holds an individual responsible for his or her deeds after it provides the environment in which the violation of laws can have no justification. As far as the correct interpretation of Islam is concerned, only that interpretation is reliable which emanates from the Quran and the Sunnah or the establishment principles of human intellect and nature. Now, if we focus on the situation of Taliban, we safely conclude that Taliban are neither striving to implement Islam in a gradual manner nor are they trying to evaluate the true Islam and understand the needs and requirements of the 21st century.impose Now let us take a look at some of the steps taken by the Taliban:

i) No education for women:
Imagine for a few moments what the fate of a country will be where women have no access to education. The whole nation will suffer generation after generation. The first school of a child is its mother. What is the legitimate reason in favour of education being forbidden for women?

ii) Hanging of Najeeb Ullah and his brother:
It seems that Taliban has forgotten the attitude of the Holy Prophet Muhammad(S.A.W) on the conquest of Makkah when he even pardoned the murderer of his own close relative.
The bottom line is:

i) Are Taliban presenting the true picture of Islam in front of the world? If not, would not they be held responsible for distorting the religion of Allah on the day of Judgement and paving the way for the enemies of Islam in this world?

ii) Are they ready to face the wrath of Allah on the Day of Judgement as a result of taking out their swords against Muslims?

American Taliban Agents inside Pakistan

The fake Talibans, American CIA agents are working inside the tribal areas of Pakistan to destabilize the Govt. of Pakistan and to impose the fake war on terror against Pakistan.
CIA is well experienced for the fabrication of enemies. Now CIA fabricate a new kind of Talibans against Pakistan who can attack on the mosques in the holy month of ramzan. Who can attack on the citizens of Pakistan everywhere inside Pakistan.
Pakistan will hit these terrorist everywhere inside Pakistan or Afghanistan and also hit their ......