Voice of Karachi Blog

Al Houla Massacre: Who did that?

2012-05-29T10:39:00.001+01:00

Who committed the crime? Who could profit it? And what could the international community do to avert further violence in the country seized by 14 months of unrest?
_______________________________________________________________

The Syrian government is being blamed for the massacre in the area of Houla on Friday, May 25, where at least 108 people, including 34 women and 49 children were killed, yet circumstances indicate that rebel forces or terrorist groups with backing from the U.S., NATO, and its regional allies may have actually been responsible, and the atrocity will likely be cited as a pretext in increasing calls for military intervention to overthrow the Assad regime on “humanitarian” grounds.

The U.S. has been providing to the Syrian opposition what the State Department has called in Orwellian newspeak “nonlethal assistance”, which effort is coordinated with those of U.S. “friends and allies in the region”, such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar, who are funding and arming the rebel forces, including with antitank weaponry. The U.S. coordination effort includes directing arms shipments to “worthy rebel recipients”, according to the Washington Post.

The U.S.’s NATO ally Turkey has provided a base of operations for the Free Syrian Army, where they are supplied with surplus weapons from NATO’s campaign to oust the Gaddafi regime in Libya. The arms are “being shipped on NATO aircraft”, according to former CIA military intelligence officer Philip Giraldi. Turkey is “taking the lead as U.S. proxy”, Giraldi wrote last December, in a clandestine NATO effort with the ultimate goal of another military intervention that would be based on the pretext of “humanitarian principles, to defend the civilian population based on the ‘responsibility to protect’ doctrine that was invoked to justify Libya.”

And as Daniel McAdams has observed, “as soon as the U.S. began supplying the rebels with specialized communications equipment enabling them to more accurately target government forces and institutions, some of the most deadly and gruesome bombings have taken place.”

As former NATO commander General Wesley Clark explained in a talk at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco, California, on October 3, 2007, after 9/11, there was a “policy coup” in which the long-term goals of the neoconservatives were implemented. Clark was an inside witness to the efforts to use 9/11 as a pretext to launch the war on Iraq, despite the complete lack of evidence of any Iraqi involvement in the attacks or possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). But the plan didn’t stop with Iraq.

Clark recalled a discussion with an officer in the Defense Department who showed him a memo he had received from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld’s office. “It says we’re going to attack and destroy the governments in seven countries in five years—we’re going to start with Iraq, and then we’re going to move to Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran,” Clark recalled the officer telling him. He explained to his audience that the foreign policy goal of the U.S. was “to destabilize the Middle East, turn it upside down, make it under our control.”

Taking out the Assad regime in Syria, in addition to being a goal in its own right, would also be another step towards implementing the ultimate goal of regime change in Iran, which would be further isolated by the loss of its regional ally.

_________________________________________________________________

Thank You For Reading

US And China Set For A Trade War?

2012-05-29T08:19:00.000+01:00

The US too accused China of protectionism and pegging the Yuan 30 percent below its value last February. The US is eager to keep China market open to its products but it appears that globalization rules, run and supported by pro-liberalization corporations in America, are now making trouble for the US itself.
_________________________________________________________________

Heads of the G20 member states pledged in an April 2009 meeting that they would “not repeat the historic mistakes of protectionism of previous eras." As a member of the group of 20 industrialized nations, the United States has not been able to keep that promise, having imposed tariffs on importing products in several cases.
A recent case is about exports from China to the United States. To counter the U.S. protectionist measures, China, a key trade partner of the U.S., has complained to the World Trade Organization about Washington’s anti-subsidy tariffs on 22 Chinese goods. China began the challenge by requesting consultations with the United States through the international organization to resolve the dispute. However, if that fails, Beijing can request a ruling by a WTO panel, which can order the United States to scrap measures found to violate free-trade commitments or to pay compensation.
U.S. mainstream media has said the complaint is not that serious. But Chinese solar panel manufacturers, whose products are now facing U.S. trade barriers, have warned they would push their government to retaliate.
China's Ministry of Commerce says it has found six U.S. policies of supporting or subsidizing the U.S. renewable energy industry which run counter to WTO rules. The ministry claims that these policies constitute trade barriers and distort normal trade between the world's two largest economies.
The U.S. too accused China of protectionism and pegging the Yuan 30 percent below its true value last February. The U.S. is eager to keep china’s market open to its products but it appears that globalization rules, run and supported by pro-liberalization corporations in America, are now making trouble for the U.S. itself.
When the WTO commenced 17 years ago, it aimed to liberalize international trade in an apparent bid to ease trade at a global level. Since then, all countries have been urged, by leading liberal states namely the U.S., to liberalize their trade with other nations by removing policies that serve as “barriers” to trade.
Examples of trade barriers include tariffs and subsidies. Both policies keep foreign producers from selling easily in domestic markets, because when given the choice, most people will buy what is the cheapest.
The WTO was originally considered as a shield against protectionist backsliding. Among supporters of the anti-protectionist policy was the United States or, to be exact, Corporate America - the world of corporations and big business - that sought easier access to additional markets.
Asian markets were among the popular ones the U.S. targeted. As an example, the Chinese market with a 1.3 billion consumers was a good place for products made in mass by American big business. This was, of course, a two-way trade. But, China’s industries were not capable enough, some two decades ago, to produce the goods American companies made for their domestic market.
So the U.S. government had no reason to restrict the Chinese goods to avoid competitiveness issues. However, as China’s industries developed year by year, the United States faced more and more troubles on the way to block the importing goods which mainly competed with domestically-produced goods in the U.S. in terms of price and quality.
Over the past decade, Chinese economy has boomed with an average annual growth rate of 10 percent. That economic growth has been propped up to a large extent by a very strong contribution from exports. Today the country’s exports to the U.S. alone are estimated to be more than $400 billion in value. The U.S. has a trade deficit of almost $300 billion with its giant trade partner. China’s exports vary from electrical machinery and equipment to power generation equipment, furniture, steel, and vehicles.
Well, the situation has been changing. China, already an economic giant in Asia, is set to become an industrialized power on the world stage. This expansion of economy is threatening the monopoly of the U.S. as the largest economy in the globe. And the U.S. has already felt it and has started to react.
Today on the one hand, the U.S. government has to respect WTO protectionism rules and on the other, it should support its troubled domestic factories and manufactures. The production of solar system equipment is among top issues the U.S. companies are worried about as their Chinese rivals are offering more competitive prices for same products in the U.S. market.
Given the faltering U.S. economy, Washington struggles to keep some domestic manufacturers afloat by imposing tariffs on some importing goods. The move, of course, is a sign of withdrawal from liberal rules and values in practice. But for America, this withdrawal does not seem to be of any significance.
The U.S. launched about 30 countervailing cases back in 2008. China complained at the time to the WTO regarding four of the countervailing cases and won support from the Dispute Settlement Body in 2011. But regretfully, the U.S. did not carry out the rulings and repeated its wrongful practices in the following cases, according to Chinese trade officials.
But for how long would the U.S. be able to play the game? Does China’s move to correct the U.S. misuse of trade remedy measures help maintain a “healthy” trade relationship between the two nations as some Chinese officials hope? If it doesn’t, the relationship could lead to a “trade war” as predicted by many economists.

____________________________________________________________

(By A. Ramezani, Business Journalist; Press TV)

Thank You For Reading
________________________________________________________________

World shocked by new Syria carnage

2012-05-28T11:03:00.001+01:00

Syrian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jihad Makdissi says Damascus holds "armed groups" responsible for recent deadly clashes in the western town of Houla that killed 92 people, including at least 32 children.

Thank You For Watching

Glorious day on 28th May, 1998

2012-05-28T09:06:00.000+01:00

It was a proud day for the people of Pakistan on May 28,1998, the day the Chagi mountains of Balochistan witnessed the brith of Pakistan as a nuclear power.
_____________________________________________________________________

Pakistan had its ambiguous but to an extent credible nuclear deterrence against India to counter New Delhi's conventional superiority even long before May 28, 1998.
This ambiguous nuclear deterrence did work effectively to defuse past Indo-Pak, war like crises, notably Bras Tack Military Exercise 1987-88 and 199O Spring Crisis famously known as Zarb-e-Momin. Before May 1998 nuclear tests it was widely believed that Pakistan has stealthily become a Nuclear Weapons State (NWS); yet had not crossed a threshold in respect of nuclear tests to declare itself as a NWS.
And few cold tests have been carried out by Pakistan and all the cold tests conducted in mid 80s and the start of 90s in Pakistan. There were also numerous rumours that Pakistani nuclear weapons' capability could be a "bluff "only to deter India. After the 11th May 1998 Indian nuclear tests, Indian Home Minister L.K. Advani warned Islamabad to "roll back its anti-India policy, especially with regard to Kashmir".
Indians were in aggressive mood and reportedly, it is said that Pakistani side was receiving information of a possible attack by India to destroy its nuclear facilities. On the pattern of Operation Opera, a precise attack for limited objective in this operation Israel destroyed Iraqi Osirak Nuclear Plant on June 7, 1981. So, it was obligatory for Pakistan to show off its nuclear capability to restore strategic stability in the region. This was the reason that then US President (Bill Clinton) offered the then Pakistani PM Nawaz Sharif a five billion dollar not to conduct nuclear tests and Sharif denied to achieve long-term national objectives.

May 28, 1998, PAEC's Directorate of Technical Development carried out five nuclear tests at the Chaghi nuclear test site. Pakistan's Foreign Office termed it as "Pakistan's Finest Hour". No more fights with anyone; (national security), equal sovereignty and stable domestic environment for a prosper Pakistan and more over the resolution of Kashmir dispute.
These were the prime objectives of this tiresome struggle to achieve nuclear capability, in black and white. It is nuclear capability which makes Pakistan equally strong against India and neutralizes India's conventional superiority.
Atal Behari Vajpayee historical visit to Pakistan and signing of Lahore Memorandum of Understanding laid down the foundation stone for a new beginning of bilateral relations on equal basis between Indo-Pak. First time in history Indians were ready even to negotiate over "Kashmir dispute". It was a pleasant era of Indo-Pak bilateral relations and Indian PM's visit at Minar-e-Pakistan, it is a self explanatory event in itself. He saluted and accepted Pakistan a sovereign and independent state.
All this was happening under the command of international community, so that these two NWSs continue a peace dialogue for the resolution of all disputes. But anyhow it was mutually beneficial for these two South Asian rivals. Nobody was taking care of "Kashmir dispute" but after overt nuclearisation in South Asia almost all states recognized its status as "nuclear flash point" between Indo-Pak, the two nuclear weapons states. Lahore MoU was the cornerstone in respect of guidelines to solve almost all controversial issues with the passage of time. Kargil War disrupted this whole peace process badly which was in practice between two PMs.

Soon after it Nawaz Sharif's government was toppled in a bloodless coup by Musharraf and Indians refused to continue peace talks or Confidence Building Measures for the time being. Then the tragic incident of 9/11 occurred and this incident directly affected Pakistan. Pakistan decided to join US, as a front line ally in War on Terror.
The extreme wave of terrorism and insurgency erupted and prevailed in Pakistan. These terrorists can't be deterred with nuclear weapons as they are present over Pakistani territory. But despite of this Pakistan's "minimum credible deterrence" remained quite effective against India. Indians have announced in recent past their Cold Start Doctrine and then Two-Front War strategy but soon they felt they can't successfully execute these war plans, even still they not say so. Currently the successful test of "NASAR" is a great achievement to keep deterrence stable at all levels.
We all are proud to be a Nuclear Weapon State/Nation and this nation has been suffering since the day one when our leadership decided that we will eat grass but will make nuclear bomb. Did we have been able to achieve the national objectives ever by making this nuclear bomb? No doubt that these nukes are capable to deter any country in the world but it is "political will " that makes the deterrence credible and avert the likely chances of any type of war at state level. Mao Zedong, using calculated irrational strategy deterred US during Korean War, said these nuclear weapons are paper tigers but if any one nuked China I can too.
Pakistan has nuclear weapons but despite of it, we never been able to exert political influence on international arena. We are unable to induct strategic power in our foreign policy many time smaller states like Israel know that no one can dare to engage with it even with its existential ambiguous nuclear deterrence. This world has been transformed into a global village and we can't live in quarantine, we have to interact with all other nations of the world and especially with all nuclear weapons states. Pakistan has remained unable to declare publicly its nuclear doctrine even after twelve years of its nuclear tests.
A country announced almost it does clear thresh holds that under which sort of condition it can use its nuclear weapons. Pakistan nowadays is facing a crisis like situation and it is a known fact that crisis always bring opportunities and failures. It is up to victim that which track it adopts. It is a good opportunity for Pakistan that it can declare its war oriented semi-offensive nuclear doctrine for the period of only five years then it could be changed according to that time circumstances. It is true that we can't deter terrorists but we can deter those states which provide them assistance, support and training to target Pakistan's strategic facilities.

It is necessary to restore nation's confidence on Pakistani armed forces. May 28, 1998 the day when Pakistan practically demonstrated that it is a sovereign state and has no need of such foreign aid which demands compromise to its sovereignty. Whole Pakistani nation has consensus that we are with our leadership and ready to face any worse situation, to maintain our sovereignty and independence.
Our ancestors had sacrificed their lives for an independent Islamic State, we are ruining their sacrifices. We should not step down in the front of terrorists but we have to defend our independent status, integrity and sovereignty. This nation is still ready to eat grass but when it sees that its political leadership is unable to protect the infrastructure, image, sovereignty and human lives from internal and external offenders it loses its will for sacrifice. Yes we consider War on Terror an obligatory obsession and Pakistan should fight this war even with more available strength to destroy the terrorists' network in Pakistan. But it is also necessary that by utilizing a calculated irrational strategy it should intimidate its allies and enemy not to make it a "corner Cat".
Moreover it would bring drastic effects for Pakistan if we would take a sudden u-turn. First plan it well, and then execute according to ground realities. The day when Pakistan strictly denies and says a big no in respect of drone strikes it would be "Pakistan's finest hour" and consequently with the passage of time there would be no more suicide attacks.

______________________________________________________________

By Ikram Ullah Khan

Ikramb63@gmail.com ( The Frontier Post )

Thank You For Reading
_________________________________________________________________

Al Qaeda's new base

2012-05-27T10:19:00.000+01:00

Leaders of Qaeda in Islamic Maghreb, Islamist rebel group Ansar Dine, both occupying parts of northern Mali, are holding talks to outline their relationship.
______________________________________________________________

Leaders of Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and Islamist rebel group Ansar Dine, both occupying parts of northern Mali, are holding talks to outline their relationship, sources said Friday.

"The leaders of AQIM and Ansar Dine (Defenders of Faith) began meeting on Thursday in Timbuktu to talk about their future relationship," a leader of the Islamic High Council in the city said.

Ansar Dine spokesman Sanda Ould Boumama confirmed the meeting was taking place, without giving details.

"They have begun the meeting in the Timbuktu military camp, they are all there," a Malian security source said.

AQIM heavyweights Abou Zeid and Moktar Ben Moctar, as well as Algerian Nabil Makloufi who coordinates the groups' actions in the Sahel "katiba" or fighting cells, were all at the meeting, according to corroborating sources.

Ansar Dine leader Iyad Ag Ghaly was also present.

The fighters from both groups have been dominant in the north of Mali after seizing its main cities in the days following a coup in Bamako on March 22. Tuareg separatist rebels and other criminal groups also have a hold in the area.

Ansar Dine has set about imposing Islamic law, Sharia, in the areas under its control.

On Thursday AQIM chief Abu Musab Abdul Wadud advised his militants to proceed slowly with the implementation of Sharia for the successful creation of an Islamic State.

The north African branch of the terrorist network has its roots in Algeria, and has notably been involved in the kidnapping of westerners for ransom in recent years, several of whom have been killed.

____________________________________________________

Thank You For Reading

The useless Chicago summit.

2012-05-27T09:42:00.001+01:00

Thank You For Watching

The Tragedy of the Split

2012-05-26T10:11:00.001+01:00

How the current state of the US-Pakistani relations is affecting the situation inside the country and what might be done, what needs to be done to improve this condition?

Thank You For Watching

US-Pakistan: Ditching Old Allies

2012-05-25T10:09:00.001+01:00

Why is President Zardari’s trip to Chicago seen as a failure? What is it that’s irritating Islamabad in relations with its former US allies?

Thank You For Watching

NATO will never win Afghan war.

2012-05-24T09:59:00.001+01:00

After 11 years of NATO presence in Afghanistan we have a total quagmire. They will never win that war. In fact the war is already lost years back. They are just trying to organize the exit to the doors by 2014. Nobody knows what is going to happen afterwards apart from the fact that the Pentagon wants to keep military bases in Afghanistan, it wants to keep three big bases in Bagram, in Kandahar and Shindand. This means the Pentagon doesn’t want to leave Afghanistan, they will never leave. They may have a reduced presence but they will never leave.
___________________________________________________________
Thank You ForWatching

Death marches on Karachi streets

2012-05-23T08:27:00.001+01:00

As many as 11 people were killed and 19 others wounded when armed men attacked a rally by outlawed operatives of the people`s Aman Committe and other nationalist organisation against the Mohajir province movement, in Lyari area of the city.
________________________________________________________________

15 motorcycles, seven vehicles, eight shops, three houses set on fire

As many as 11 people were killed and 19 others wounded when armed men attacked a rally by outlawed operatives of the People’s Aman Committee and other nationalist organisations against the Mohajir province movement, in Lyari area of the city.

According to details, Awami Tehreek leader Ayaz Palijo had announced to take out a rally against the Mohajir province, while the Aman Committee and other Sindhi nationalist organisations supported him.

The rally was taken out from Football House and moved towards the Cheel Chowk, the most sensitive area where police have failed to restore peace despite a week-long operation that claimed 40 lives last month.

Participants of the rally were holding placards and banners inscribed with comments against the division of Sindh, and also chanting slogans against the Mohajir province movement and other rival political groups.

As soon as the rally reached near Ghas Mandi, close to Cheel Chowk, unidentified gunmen started firing on it and fled, leaving four demonstrators and passersby injured.

Following the incident, participants of the rally staged a sit-in protest at Napier Road near Pan Mandi. However, armed men appeared again and resorted to indiscriminate fire at the protest. They also opened indiscriminate fire in various areas, including Lee Market, Garden and other areas. The firing incidents resulted in over 70 people, including women and children, sustaining bullet wounds. The injured were rushed to the Civil Hospital Karachi, Lyari General Hospital and Abbasi Shaheed Hospital.

Witnesses said the firings incidents brought a halt to commercial and non-commercial activities as shopkeepers were trapped inside their shops and localities.

Those killed included M Iqbal, a security guard at Civil Hospital, who was shot dead near KMC workshop, while Yousuf Abdullah, Amina, Ejaz Khan, Manzoor Fareed, Sher Muhammad, Babar, Sharifa Shamsher, Ghazala Batool were also killed. Police sources said Ghazala was an employee of PIA and a resident of Gulshan Hadeed. They also claimed seven people died due to firing at the Awami Tehreek rally while four others were killed in Dhobi Ghat area during clashes in reaction to the firing.

South SSP Nasir Aftab said at least 51 injured people, including women and children, were rushed to different hospitals.

The injured also included a cameraman of a private TV channel, Khalil Adeel, a reporter Aslam Khan, Inspector Idrees Alam Bangash, Constable Bahadur, and Zulfiqar Bacchal.

Miscreants also torched some 15 motorcycles, seven other vehicles and eight shops in various areas of Saddar Town, while three houses were also set ablaze near Nigar Cinema. Heavy aerial firing was reported in several area of the city, including Korangi, Chamra Chowrangi, Rabia City, Micasa Apartments and other areas, injuring five people.

Later, heavy contingents of law enforcement agencies rushed to maintain law and order following the violence.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani and President Asif Zardari strongly condemned the killing of innocent people in Karachi. Gilani sought a report from the provincial government on the abhorrent killings and both him and the president directed strict measures to bring peace to the city.
___________________________________________________________

Thank You For Reading

NATO Chicago summit and Pakistan

2012-05-22T08:25:00.000+01:00

Pakistan`s role at the Summit is unclear, though its importance in a final settlements is evident. It should also be acknowledged that the decision to re-open Nato supplies without an apology for the Salala massacre, which provoked the ban originally.
_____________________________________________________________

The southern route of supplies was blocked by Pakistan following the November 26, 2011, attack on its border posts by NATO air forces which killed 24 Pakistani servicemen

That this time around the Nato member countries seemed to have taken a slightly realistic view of the war in Afghanistan was evident mainly from two signals emanating from the summit. The first was the statement by President Obama after his meeting with President Karzai that though the alliance is committed to a stable Afghanistan, there could be “hard days ahead.” What he meant by hard days is of course dropping a hint the combat forces are bogged down in the mess and could further get embroiled in the maelstrom. In the presence of representatives from other countries, who have had a first hand experience of the power of the Taliban, he was careful not to brag about victory like he did at the Bagram air base recently. Secondly, and in fact even more importantly, the summit came out with the general realisation expressed by Nato officials as well as President Karzai that Pakistan’s role was central to establishing lasting peace inAfghanistan. For one thing, this is going to be a huge disappointment for New Delhi that has been trying to isolate us. The funds earmarked for nation building including the Afghan National Army and public infrastructure also bode well for the future since currently its economy lacks any source of income except for poppy cultivation and smuggling. The Summit simultaneously tried not to give the impression that it was a losing side, apparent from French President Hollande’s unwillingness to stay put in the quagmire anymore and also from thousands of protestors fiercely clashing with the police outside the McCormick Palace demanding an end to the war. Condescending as it might seem, in reality Nato Chief Rasmussen’s statement that they were in no hurry to get out of the country was more of an attempt to put a gloss over their dilemma. Otherwise the member countries would not have agreed to stick to the 2014 roadmap. On the sidelines, when President Zardari whose late flight cost him his scheduled meeting with Rasmussen had a discussion with Secretary of Sate Hillary Clinton. As expected, it ended without the Pakistani camp extracting either an apology or agreement over new transit rates. How can Pakistan have a central role in the Afghan equation if its basic problems are not taken care of?

Meanwhile, it is interesting to note that the Taliban too had been closely observing these developments. It is because they have time and again shown the occupying forces what they are capable of that the leaders at the Summit seemed so concerned. Any future settlement would also have to take into consideration their growing control of the country. Their inclusion in the political process would greatly help establish peace once the combat troops withdraw.

While the leaders of NATO countries and guests at the NATO summit in Chicago were discussing plans for troop withdrawal and Afghanistan's future, one issue remained unresolved and threatened to overshadow whatever relative success might have been achieved during the discussion. The issue in question is the relationship between the alliance and its one-time ally-turned-nuisance, Pakistan. Pakistani president Asif Ali Zardari had received a last-minute invitation to the summit in what most observers saw as an attempt to put more pressure on him in order to persuade Pakistani authorities to reopen the southern route of supplies for the NATO forces in Afghanistan. For the U.S. President Barack Obama a consent from his Pakistani colleague would have meant a boost in his reelection campaign. In early May he managed to sign a Strategic Partnership Agreement with Afghanistan, and reopening the route would have meant a double success in his efforts to get out of the war with a saved face. The southern route of supplies was blocked by Pakistan following the November 26, 2011, attack on its border posts by NATO air forces which killed 24 Pakistani servicemen. Since then, NATO has had to rely upon the northern route going via Russia, the Caucasus and Central Asia, which is much longer and an estimated 2.5 times more expensive. The importance of the resumption of the southern route is highlighted by the assumed troop pullout – moving more than a hundred thousand soldiers and thousands tons of equipment from Afghanistan via the northern route seems virtually impossible. But Pakistan's Zardari turned out to be much less servile than his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai. Pakistani authorities remain firm in their determination to demand at least three concessions from Washington needed for reopening the route of supply. First, Pakistan still demands an apology for the November incident. NATO and the U.S. have expressed regret, but stopped short from a formal apology. Second, Pakistani president still demands an end to all drone strikes over Pakistani territory, and reiterated this demand during his meeting with the U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Sunday. As for Washington, it has not sent any signal that it intends to stop the drone strikes. And third, Pakistan is demanding a transit fee for every truck moving via its territory amounting to $5,000 (a 20 to 25-fold increase from the previous fee of $200-250). The U.S. rejects the demand as unreasonable. The reason why Obama's administration and Obama himself are not inclined to fulfill Pakistani demands is simple. If they did, this would be regarded both in Pakistan and in the U.S. as a sign of weakness, which Obama cannot afford in the middle of the ongoing election campaign, when he is constantly accused by the Republicans of being too soft in his foreign policy. This has left only one option open for the U.S. and NATO topmost officials in their treatment of Pakistani president – that is, open humiliation of the latter. NATO General Secretary Anders Fogh Rasmussen initially made an appointment to meet President Zardari on the sidelines of the summit, but later cancelled the meeting citing a "scheduling conflict". White House officials totally ruled out the possibility of a bilateral meeting between President Obama and President Zardai. Instead, Zardari met with State Secretary Clinton, which is totally unbefitting of a head of state according to the protocol. Now, this leaves open one question, what's next? The need to reopen the route is still there. So, how is the U.S. going to achieve this end? Was the mistreatment of Pakistani President in Chicago meant to make him more submissive, or are Washington strategists mulling other options? It should be kept in mind that for Zardari, too big a concession would also be disastrous in view of his low popularity and the looming general elections that are to be held in 2013, but may happen even sooner. This suggests that the U.S. has already discharged Zardari as the head of state in 2014, and now Washington is looking for someone in Pakistan who would be more cooperative. But in view of the general public mood in today's Pakistan, the task seems even harder than the one of forcing Zardari into cooperation. __________________________________________________________________

Thank You For Reading

US declares 'total war' on Islam

2012-05-21T08:21:00.000+01:00

In an organized act of brutality, a number of US soldiers went on a house-to house shooting spree in Zangabad village, Kandahar in March and massacred 16 people including nine children while they were sleeping and all Washington had to say were a few words of condolence and apology nonchalanty strung together in order to appease the overwhelming public rage in Afghanistan. Western media howere reduced the number of the killers to one.
__________________________________________________________________

The bodies were reportedly wrapped in blankets and were set on fire.

US President Barack Obama said he was deeply saddened, "I offer my condolences to the families and loved ones of those who lost their lives, and to the people of Afghanistan, who have endured too much violence and suffering. This incident … does not represent the exceptional character of our military and the respect that the United States has for the people of Afghanistan."

As contradictory as these words seem, the very 'exceptional character' of the US military had earlier urged them to burn copies of the Holy Quran, an incident which saddened the hearts of Muslims all across the world.

These and earlier incidents are not coincidental and well attest to a prevailing mindset in the US military and a dominant policy in Washington. It is clear that the US government has commenced a large-scale campaign against Islam with the express intention of debilitating the Muslim community.

In fact, the war on Islam started in 2001 when the then US president George Bush made a crass reference to his so-called war on terror as ‘crusade’. He warned Americans that "this crusade, this war on terrorism, is going to take awhile." Bush’s politically untoward remark rang alarm bells in Europe and the Muslim world although it went barely noticed in the American community who took the word for its sound rather than for its meaning.

Gradually, Washington instilled a sensation of anti-Islamism in America and Europe by attributing the nine-eleven tragedy and ensuing terrorist operations to the Muslims. Soheib Bensheikh, Grand Mufti of the mosque in Marseille, France said Bush’s use of the word ‘crusade’ was most unfortunate and that “It recalled the barbarous and unjust military operations against the Muslim world" by Christian knights.

A delusional man who was overwhelmed with the idea of a messianic mission, George Bush wittingly or unwittingly dragged the world to the margins where a clash of civilizations was imminent.

The legacy of hatred which was started by George Bush was later continued in the form of classes and organized trainings.

In line with this Islamophobic policy funded by Washington and the powerful Zionist groups in the country, the US military has long been involved in fomenting anger and hatred against the Muslims by teaching its future leaders that a “total war” against the Muslims would be necessary to protect America.
According to hundreds of pages of course material and reference documents obtained by Danger Room (wired.com), the US military held a course at the Defense Department’s Joint Forces Staff College and taught the students that they had to use a Hiroshima-style in Muslim counties and target the “civilian population wherever necessary.”

The officer in charge of the hate lessons was Army Lt. Col. Matthew A. Dooley who still maintains his position at the Norfolk, Virginia College. Sadly, those who sat in his classes are now in the top positions in the US military.

The course ‘Perspectives on Islam and Islamic Radicalism’ was offered five times a year for groups of 20 at a time, the course may have been taught to as many as 800 mid-level and senior US military officers.

In a July presentation, Dooly said, “We have now come to understand that there is no such thing as ‘moderate Islam. It is therefore time for the United States to make our true intentions clear. This barbaric ideology will no longer be tolerated. Islam must change or we will facilitate its self-destruction.”

In his ugly lessons, he taught that “International laws protecting civilians in wartime are no longer relevant,” and that mainstream Muslims are dangerous, because they’re violent by nature. He also called for a Hiroshima-style destruction of the holy cities of Mecca and Medina.

Those who sat in his classes and patiently listened to his mad remarks are the ones who are now serving in Afghanistan and teaching the same hate lessons to their subordinates and even encouraging them to wipe out the Muslim community.

The atrocities perpetrated by the US military in the Muslim countries over the past 11 years or so are closely associated with and inspired by these appalling teachings.

Washington and the Zionist groups have long been making relentless efforts to depict Islam and the Muslims in dark shadows. An in-depth investigation into Islamophobia ‘Dubbed as Fear, Inc. The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America’ was carried out by the Center for American Progress in the United States. The report sheds light on the collective efforts of the Zionist groups funded by the United States in pedaling a hatred for and a fear of Islam in the form of books, reports, websites, blogs, and carefully crafted talking points. According to the report, these wealthy donors and foundations also provide direct funding to anti-Islam grassroots groups.

The project of Islamophobia which has cost more than $40 million over the past ten years has been funded by seven foundations in the United States: 1. Richard Mellon Scaife Foundation; 2. Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation; 3. Newton and Rochelle Becker; 4. Foundation and Newton and Rochelle Becker Charitable Trust; 5. Russell Berrie Foundation, Anchorage Charitable Fund and William Rosenwald; 6. Family Fund; 7. Fairbrook Foundation.

After all, Islamophobia is nothing new. Despite its rising upsurge in recent years, there have been efforts in the past to promote this pernicious trend.

Years ago, prominent Orientalist Edward Said warned of these calculated efforts in the West, arguing that the essentializing nature of the Orientalist enterprise has resulted today in misguided, inaccurate depictions of Islamic cultures: “Most of the pictures represent mass rage and misery, or irrational (hence hopelessly eccentric) gestures. Lurking behind all of these images is the menace of jihad. Consequence: a fear that the Muslims will take over the world.”

Islamophobia is a form of political colonialism; an ideological war against Islam and the Muslims. It is a pernicious practice used by Washington and its allies to justify their lust for Muslim blood, give validity to their military expeditions in Muslim countries and seize hold of their numerous resources.
_____________________________________________________________________

Islam Times

Thank You For Reading

Pakistan test fires Ghaznavi ballistic missile

2012-05-10T08:41:00.000+01:00

Two weeks ago Pakistan test-fired an intermediate range ballistic missile, seen as a response to arch-rival India`s launch of its new long-range Agni V, capable of hiting targets anywhere in China.
_____________________________________________________

Hatf III ballistic Ghaznavi missile

Pakistan army on Thursday successfully test-fired short range ballistic missile Hatf III (Ghaznavi), capable of carrying nuclear and conventional warheads to a range of 290 kilometers. In a statement, ISPR said the training-launch was conducted at the conclusion of the annual field training exercise aimed at testing the operational readiness of a Strategic Missile Group. “The field exercise of the ASFC was witnessed by the Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee General Khalid Shameem Wynne, Director General Strategic Plans Division Lieutenant General Khalid Ahmed Kidwai (R), Commander Army Strategic Force Command Lieutenant General Tariq Nadeem Gilani, Commander Karachi Corps Lieutenant General Muhammad Ijaz Chaudhry, Chairman NESCOM Mr Muhammad Irfan Burney, and other senior military officials and scientists,” ISPR said. Addressing the troops in the exercise area, the CJCSC commended the troops on displaying a high standard of proficiency in handling and operating the state of the art weapon system. The launch of the Hatf III, which has a range of up to 290 kilometres (200 miles) and can also carry conventional warheads, came at the end of a field training exercise, a military statement said. Two weeks ago Pakistan test-fired an intermediate range ballistic missile, seen as a response to arch-rival India's launch of its new long-range Agni V, capable of hitting targets anywhere in China. India and Pakistan -- which have fought three wars since independence from Britain in 1947 -- have routinely carried out missile tests since both demonstrated nuclear weapons capability in 1998. President Asif Ali Zardari and Prime Minister Syed Yusuf Raza Gilani have congratulated the scientists and military officials over the successful test of the missile. ____________________________________________________

How Nuclear can Israel be?

2012-05-09T13:52:00.000+01:00

Imagine a world plunged in darkness and extreme cold with the sunlight screened off by a thick pall of dust cloud. Imagine a world flung back into chaos. This is an image conceived of a world abandoned to dereliction by doomsday weapons.
___________________________________________________________

According to Samson Option theory, Israel reserves the option to retaliate massively with nuclear weapons when its existence is gravely endangered by the military might of another country although the regime refuses to admit to the possession of a huge nuclear arsenal. As a first sign of a nuclear threat, in the 1973 Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement) War considered to be the fiercest Arab-Israeli conflict, when Arab forces were about to defeat Israeli forces, the Zionist Prime Minister Golda Meir ordered that 13 nuclear bombs be readied to be used either by missiles or by aircraft. And President Nixon agreed to the Israeli demand. In fact, the Samson Option is a horrific plan drawn up by Israel leaders to take down the Middle East and the entire world if necessary and proclaimed \'kosher\'. Pulitzer Prize-winning author Seymour M. Hersh hypothesized that "Should war break out in the Middle East again and should the Syrians and the Egyptians break through again as they did in 1973 [Yom Kippur War], or should any Arab nation fire missiles again at Israel, as Iraq did [in the 1991 Gulf War], a nuclear escalation, once unthinkable except as a last resort, would now be a strong possibility."

Israel test-fired a missile on November 2, 2011 which it said was capable of carrying a nuclear warhead and targeting any part of the Middle East including Iran.

Israeli officials maintain that the nuclear-capable missile can hit any target within the range of 10,000 kilometers. In other words, it can hit even Russia, China or any part in Europe.

It is now public knowledge that Tel Aviv is a powerful nuclear regime which has at its disposal a huge arsenal surmised to accommodate 300 to 400 nuclear warheads. Israelis have long been mum on the issue and still decline to acknowledge the existence of this nuclear arsenal.

In his revealing book “The Samson Option” (1991), Seymour Hersh argues that the idea of producing nuclear weapons was initially articulated by Israeli military leader Moshe Dayan in early 1968. Since then, Israel began to produce three to five bombs a year. After all, Israel started its illegal nuclear activities back in 1950 in Dimona, an Israeli city in the Negev desert, as it was geographically ideal for such clandestine activities. If we take Hersh\'s words for granted, Israel is expected to possess more than 200 nuclear bombs by now. The Zionist regime inked an agreement with France early in the sixties and received required materials for commencing a nuclear weapons program including a reactor, a factory for extracting plutonium and the design. The French helped build an underground plutonium processing facility for Israel in 1962 which was completed 1965. The Israelis kept tight security in and around the perimeter of the nuclear facility and in 1973 they shot down a passenger Libyan plane flying in the vicinity and killed 104 passengers. The regime was reportedly ranked sixth in producing nuclear bombs in the sixties. Other required materials such as uranium and heavy water were also provided by Norway, France, and the United States.

An operation codenamed Plumbat was jointly carried out by Mossad and LAKAM (An intelligence-gathering agency of Israel\'s Defense Ministry for stealing technology for Dimona.) in spearheading the Israeli nuclear weapons efforts. A German freighter with a cargo of 200 tons of uranium oxide suddenly disappeared. When it was found in a Turkish port, the cargo was gone. Later, it became obvious that it had been transferred to an Israeli ship thanks to the joint efforts of Mossad and LAKAM.

Before Seymour Hersh shed light on the nightmarish aspects of the Israeli nuclear bombs, it was Mordechai Vanunu, a former technician at Dimona who brought Israel\'s nuclear weapons program to the attention of international community. In 1986, Mordechai Vanunu, a leftist supporter of Palestinian rights, smuggled dozens of pictures and documents out of Dimona and gave them to the London Sunday Times. The pictures and documents proved that Israel was in possession of a sizeable nuclear arsenal i.e. as many as 200 highly sophisticated thermonuclear bombs. The documents also revealed that the Dimona\'s capacity had increased drastically over the years and that Israel was producing 1.2 kilograms of plutonium on a weekly basis, enough to make 10 to 12 bombs per year. However, Vanunu paid the price for these disclosures and spent 18 years in prison including 11 years in solitary confinement.

Israel follows a policy of nuclear opacity. In other words, the regime is advised not to acknowledge or deny the possession of nuclear weapons. Mum is the word in Israeli nuclear policy. In a secret meeting in 1968 between Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir and US President Richard Nixon, the two parties came to the agreement that as long as Israel refused to declare the possession of nukes publicly or test them, the United States would endure and screen the regime\'s nuclear program. This has ever since become an indispensable part of US-Israeli policy. However, in 2006, incoming US Defense Secretary Robert Gates told a senate committee in a momentary lapse of reason (?) that Israel has nuclear weapons.

This has actually changed nothing concerning Israel\'s nuclear program over the years and Washington\'s officials have voiced their constant support for Israel and its security. In July, 2011, US President Barack Obama even reassured Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Washington\'s unreserved support for the regime, "We strongly believe that, given its size, its history, the region that it\'s in . . . Israel has unique security requirements. It\'s got to be able to respond to threats. . . . And the United States will never ask Israel to take any steps that would undermine [its] security interests."

The story of Israel\'s nuclear weapons program is a painfully sad one and the fact that some European countries secretly catapulted this regime into a nuclear nightmare is a shame. However, it is more than a shame when one contemplates that during all these years the US has been aware of these clandestine illegal activities and even supported them.

The worst is yet to come.

With over 300 to 400 nuclear bombs, Israel has been translated into an image of apocalyptic horror for the entire Middle East if not for the world.
____________________________________________________________

By Ismail Salami
Islam Times
Thank You For Reading
______________________________________________________________

Dr Ayman Zawahiri Another ghost

2012-05-09T08:34:00.000+01:00

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, has asserted that al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri is somewhere in Pakistan. Then why don`t they share the intelligence with Pakistan? Isn`t Pakistan their professed ally in their war on terror?
___________________________________________________________

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stating that Washington believes that Al-Qaeda chief Dr Ayman al-Zawahiri is based somewhere in Pakistan.
_____________________________________________________________

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s charge that Osama bin Laden’s successor as al-Qaeda chief, Dr Ayman Zawahiri, is in Pakistan, was made during a visit to India, thus virtually ensuring that the charge would not be taken seriously. It would be ascribed to a desire to keep the hosts happy, by raising the prospect of another raid, such as the one on Abbottabad a year ago, by US Navy SEALs, which killed bin Laden. However, Pakistan’s response, expressed by Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar while briefing the Parliamentary Committee on National Security, was appropriate. The charge is probably based on the fact that bin Laden was found near the Pakistan Military Academy, and on the frequent American media charge that Pakistani agencies are involved in protecting militants, but Pakistani authorities must tell the USA to put up or shut up. Either they should provide their Pakistani counterparts the information on which these claims are based, or they should hold their peace, leaving India, and pro-Indian elements within the Obama Administration, to find solace elsewhere. This should not merely be a pro forma demand, to be made once, and then conveniently forgotten, but used as a weapon to badger and bully with when suitable.

There are many reasons why the USA has chosen to make this accusation, not least to counter the wave of demands for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan after President Barack Obama’s triumphalist crowings about having finished off al-Qaeda. It was meant also to enthuse India, to whom anything portraying Pakistan in a bad light is music to the ears. Secretary Clinton did say that it was also in Pakistan’s interest to pursue terrorists, but she did not explain how it serves Pakistan’s interests to have its citizens killed in drone attacks. However, she did say that the USA would continue to work for the arrest of Lashkar-e-Taiba founder Hafiz Saeed, who is wanted over the 2008 Mumbai attacks, and the American reward for whom was announced only last month, in India. Though the only permanent solution lies in Pakistan abandoning the US alliance, and making sure that Pakistani citizens are not killed indiscriminately and anonymously from the sky by drone attacks, this particular accusation must not be lost sight of, and Secretary Clinton be held to it, and forced either to provide evidence, or admit that there is none. There has already been too much supine acceptance of US accusations against Pakistan. Pakistan should realize that this accusation is of a piece with those which have gone before, and reflects the American desire to keep India happy, which would explain both why the charge was made and where.

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar

Pakistan Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar deserves credit for rejecting the allegation promptly and with the contempt it deserved. She told Clinton that Pakistan has no such information and if anybody has anything substantial in this regard then it should be shared with Islamabad. Foreign Office spokesman has also described these allegations as mere conjectures, asking Washington to share intelligence, if any. This is not for the first time that the United States is indulging in open blame game as on a number of occasions in the past as well it levelled similar allegations about presence of so-called Quetta Shoora and Taliban supreme leader Mullah Omar but has so far failed to provide any actionable intelligence. The timing of the assertion that Al-Zawahiri was in Pakistan is particularly significant as it comes in the backdrop of adoption of recommendations by the parliament of Pakistan defining terms of engagement with the United States and NATO. Instead of respecting the will of the people of Pakistan as reflected in these recommendations, the United States is resorting to pressure tactics to force Pakistan to toe its lines. And more important is the fact that the volley of allegations have been levelled on Indian soil and in a bid to please Indian Government and Indian audience, Clinton repeated the mantra of action against Hafiz Saeed despite the fact that the super power so far possesses nothing substantial to sue him anywhere in the world. The absurdity of allegations against Hafiz Saeed is that the US is asking ordinary people to help provide evidence and get hefty reward. Anyhow, the remarks of the US Secretary of State clearly indicate the mindset of Americans and this means possibility of another Abbottabad-like operation. Pakistan must take the issue with all seriousness with the United States and prepare for safeguarding its sovereignty in case Americans opt for any misadventure.
________________________________________________________________

Thank You For Reading

The Lyari joke

2012-05-08T09:16:00.000+01:00

Al Qaeda and Taliban militants have also a significant presence in the city. A number of Al Qaeda militants had been arrested from Karachi. The recent statement of a widow of Osama bin Laden that she lived in Karachi for some time shows that terrorist groups have spread its tentacles in the city. The militants have also shown their muscles by attacking a number of targets including the well-guarded Mehran base of Pakistan Navy. Taliban have claimed responsibility for several attacks in the city.
______________________________________________________

What kind of a cruel joke is this Lyari police operation with the residents of the port city of Karachi and their compatriots at large? It was amid great media hype that the so-called crackdown on the criminals was launched in this part of the city. And the action has veritably turned out to be a spectacular fiasco. Throughout the over a-week-long operation, the targeted criminal gang palpably kept an upper-hand, inflicted numerous fatalities and injuries on the police force, and dispatched it into an ignoble retreat to lick its wounds, splattering in the process the mud all over the face of the Sindh government as well the federal top echelons.
And yet the humiliated officialdom is shamelessly upbeat. The crackdown would continue on a "limited scale", crowed has the interior minister Rehman Malik cockily, as if the operation was originally on a wider scale, whereas right from the outset it was a limited action aimed only at a particular gang, not the entire criminal syndicate based in the area. And the fighting remained confined just to a few streets.
But how comes the police botched up the operation so abysmally? By every indication, it was a blind action that the police had undertaken. It had obviously no firm information about the gang's dens, its dons' lairs, the deadly arsenal it was in possession of, its supply pipelines to replenish its diminishing stocks of weapons and to beef up its fighting manpower constantly. Given this, the debacle of the police raiders was writ large on the wall right from the beginning. So it met its inevitable waterloo with heads down.
But what is intriguing is as to why had the police force been pushed into the den of the gang unprepared for the action it was tasked to accomplish? There indeed are some curious happenings attendant to the whole operation that do not sit easily on the mind. For the first thing, it really beats the mind that while the police raiders were visibly being badly mauled by the gang right in the early stages, why the Rangers were not sent in to reinforce the besieged official raiders? The chief minister kept declaring that the Rangers were on their way to deploy in the area. But they never appeared on the scene. Nor did any police reinforcements arrive to beef up the muscle power of the cornered raiders.

It appears that those who had tasked the police to this mission had actually had no real heart in the campaign. Indeed, right when the operation was in the thick of it, of all the people the Sindh home minister declared sickness, took a month's leave and made haste to land in Dubai purportedly for a medical check up. More intriguingly, going by the media reports, the police raiders in their operation had the targeted gang's adversaries on board for leads and guidance. What does it says if not that a devious game is in play in this action in this erstwhile stronghold of the PPP where the party statedly stands badly factionalised?
The tongues are indeed waging. Given the fact that criminal gangs nowhere in the world can operate without powerful political patronage and connections, a view is fast gaining in wide currency that this selectiveness in targeting a particular Lyari gang is in effect reflective of the infighting in the local PPP apparatus. In any case, picking up only Lyari, and that too only a part of the sprawling locality, for the anti-criminal operation is in itself quite mystifying, particularly when the entire port city is under the sway of the underworld, with various criminal gangs having parcelled it out between themselves as their closed preserves.
All said and done, this botched-up Lyari operation has raised a host of sizzling questions, suspicions and doubts in the people's minds, which cannot be left unallayed. Someone in the provincial administration has to tell candidly why only a particular gang was targeted in Lyari and all others spared, and why the operation was not extended to other parts of the city to bust the criminals gangs embedded there. And secondly, the people must be told why the police raiders went in action wholly unprepared to accomplish the task and why the Rangers were not deployed when the police was so visibly failing in carrying out the assigned mission.
The people, particularly the residents of Karachi, must insist on getting the answers in the great interest of the restoration of peace and tranquility to the long-troubled port city. The hub of the nation's commerce and trade cannot be allowed to continue remaining hostage to competing political ambitions and rivalries.
__________________________________________________________________

The Frontier Post

Thank You For Reading
______________________________________________________________________

US-Afghan strategic accord

2012-05-06T09:39:00.000+01:00

President Obama`s surprise visit to Kabul, on the eve of Osama Bin Laden`s death anniversary, bought news of a strategic agreement signed with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
_____________________________________________________________

The whole game of the Obama Administration seems to be targeting Pakistan after guaranteeing a permanent presence in Afghanistan with the connivance of Hamid Karzai. The strategic pact was finalised between Obama and Karzai on the eve of sudden and unscheduled visit of the former to Kabul, on May 2, 2012. As reported in the media, one of the items of the pact is, “The US has the right to take action militarily if some one interferes in Afghanistan to harm the US interests there”. America is already blaming Pakistan of having hide-outs of terrorists in its tribal areas, wherefrom they are intruding into Afghanistan for attacking the allied forces on the other side of the border. She is particularly fingering at the Haqqani network, which has been so vigorously portrayed by the Western media to force Pakistan to start military operation in the North Waziristan against its own faithful tribal citizens. In view of this pact it now becomes a very easy job for the occupying forces to produce an undeniable proof against Pakistan for intrusion into Afghanistan and hurting American interests. It is easy for them to make an explosion and killing a dozen Afghans at the border area and then blame Pakistan for the mishap. With a few such incidents, America will clear its way for direct interference into Pakistan where it has two priority targets, the Nukes and Balochistan. We understand that strongest lobby in the US is the Zionist Jews, who from the very first day are inimical to Pakistan, an Islamic state with an ideology and now possessing the nuclear weapon. Whatever party is in power in America, it cannot reject the policies that are dictated to it by the powerful Zionist lobby. We also understand that our western neighbour is continuously struggling to create problems for Pakistan and leaves no chance of harming our interests. It has already been doing lot of damage to the detriment of our solidarity in the province of Balochistan in addition to the water terrorism where it diverts our rivers. The US, the Israel and India are on the same frequency in following the nefarious agenda in Balochistan. For the above two goals the troika has been doing a number of activities in Pakistan through their open and covert agents engaged by RAW and the CIA. Even the responsible people in the ruling class like Rehman Malik have time and again admitted the active presence of these elements in the country. The people who have stood in rebellion against the state of Pakistan are being supported by the foreign powers having inimical sentiments against Pakistan. Barahamdagh Bugti is one example, who has been given a VIP protocol and has been termed from the UN forum as to be a leader of Balochistan, struggling for the independence of his ‘country’. People like Congressman Dana Rohrabacher and his partners are zealously active in blowing the issue of Balochistan out of proportion. This man has the backing of the Jews and support of the anti-Pak and pro-Indian lobby in the American Congress. There is no denying the fact that the successive governments at home have not fulfilled their responsibilities regarding securing the rights of the Baloch nation, nor serious attempts have ever been made for the uplift of that province. Even the present rulers have done nothing albeit making false promises of Huqooq-e-Balochistan. The conditions have been made so much conducive for the alien forces that they have now a free hand to do what they like to. On the other hand the rulers are busy in looting the state and corruption is rampant throughout the country and within all the state institutions. The clean and honest officers who are unearthing the corruption of high-ups are being transferred and dislocated so that no inquiry can be effectively implemented in a number of cases where the ruling class is involved. The Prime Minister convicted for continuously defying the orders of the apex court, instead of stepping down has been organising open demonstrations through his Jiyalas against the judiciary. There can hardly be any country in this civilized era where the state Premier comes out openly and challenges the courts in open political gatherings. The Prime Minister should have had sufficient moral strength to resign there and then when he first came to know the involvement of his two sons in mega corruption cases. Instead he hurried to replace the honest team of officers carrying out the investigation. In view of the coming election the rulers have been busy in merciless distribution of national money to its voters and party cronies in different names like Benazir Support Programme etc.

The party leaders of the local level have been provided with huge funds to distribute water supply pipes and other material to their voters. This has provided ample chances of embezzlement and kickbacks to the people belonging to the ruling parties. It is the duty of the Election Commission of Pakistan to take notice of this plunder since it is done for getting votes of the beneficiaries. This is an open rigging of the election to come. The security concerns are still there. There is no merit and appointments to various posts are done either on the basis of party affiliation or the posts are sold out at very higher prices. Thus the internal situation has become very precarious and the country is very much vulnerable to foreign interference. America is extending its embassy’s premises in Islamabad to make another Islamabad therein. No body is going to ask as to what for she is doing this. Is it not proving that the US will be accommodating its “Blackwaters” and “Xes” in these sophisticated hide-outs to be called for when it starts attacking our Kahuta installations (God forbid). Is there anybody in the mob of these effete rulers to stop America making defence garrisons in the name of embassy extension? This situation calls for immediate remedial steps and the responsibility comes first on the ruling parties and then on all the political entities. Unfortunately there seems very little will amongst the politicians to give a second thought to what they are doing. Situation cannot improve until we start giving preference to national cause rather than to our own interest. There is a need that we strive for the establishment of a system of justice and allow the law to take its course without applying political pressure for saving the criminals. If we can ensure internal coherence and solidarity, there will be very little chance for the foreign elements to interfere and succeed in damaging our national interest. Contrary to it, the alien forces will succeed in their designs when our rulers and politicians are in the habit of seeking self interest at the cost of national priorities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By Mohammad Fahim
mfaheem@yahoo.com

The Frontier Post
Thank You For Reading
______________________________________________________________

Osama bin Laden -- Operation Enduring Myth

2012-05-05T09:53:00.001+01:00

Thank You For Watching

PPP and the PML (N) two sworn enemies

2012-05-05T08:34:00.000+01:00

By passing a resolution calling for a province in southern Punjab, the beleaguered PPP government has clearly tried to pull off a political counter-attack intended to put the opposition PML-N on the defensive. The opposition has been on the offensive in the assembly since the Supreme Court’s conviction of Prime Minister Gilani and has been demanding he step down.
_________________________________________________________________

Is that repulsive era of the 1990s staging its loathsome comeback, when the PPP and the PML (N) were perpetually at loggerheads like two sworn enemies to the great consternation and revulsion of the masses? Evidently, yes, it is. Like then, both are flying at each other's throat rashly and recklessly, with no-holds-barred. Wildly are they trading accusations of sleaze and corruption. Point-scoring of every sort is at its peak. Stridency is being matched with stridency equally. Notorious witch-hunts of yore too seemingly are not far off. Worse, the filthy shows of rowdyism and scuffles on the parliamentary floors have ensued. More worryingly, street agitation against each other is being planned by both that could potentially plunge the country into chaos and turmoil.

And this is what the nation can least afford at this point in time. By every consideration, the country is in far worse condition in every manner than what it was in the 1990s. Then, at least it was not so direly placed economically. Nor was it so challengingly positioned internationally. It was not in the vortex of alien conspiracies either to harm it so viciously as is it now. Furthermore, its national cohesion, solidarity and stability were not so tattered as are they now. Nor was it then being battered woefully by stalking terrorism, militancy or low-intensity insurgency as now. The country was for the most part at peace, which at present it is not so visibly.

A confrontation between the two could thus hurt the nation and the country irreparably. And the worst victims will again be none else but the masses whose woes and problems would now go doubly unaddressed and unattended. There indeed is no cause for the two to get into a brawl. The prime minister's continued incumbency is certainly problematic. Had he laid down the baton after his court conviction for contempt, he would have gained morally. But he has a legitimate right to legal remedies, which the PML (N) should not grudge him. It should let him exercise that right and wait for the outcome. By trying to force him out with street action, the PML (N) is in effect going after setting a precedent which could potentially boomerang on it some day.

In any case, this country is no wrestling ring of the PPP and the PML (N) to test their muscle powers nor is it their personal property. It belongs to its 180 million people who actually own it and want it to be run exclusively for their wellbeing and betterment. It was with abhorrence that they viewed their self-centred political fracas when they were battling like two fighting cocks all through the 1990s for political supremacy and one-upmanship. And, again, they are looking with disdain at their antics to do down each other. The media or civil society may be partisans, but the people certainly are no part of their fracas or confrontation. Too overwhelmed as they are by the untold grief both have inflicted on them in their respective domains, the people have no heart whatsoever to be on the either's side. Both may rent crowds for their marches and rallies, but the real people's participation definitely will not be there.

So, even now both may do well to give way to sanity, sobriety and sense, and pull back. If for their madness and stupidity, the country does hit a rock, which in all probability it would, the nation will never forgive them. And both will stand condemned in the eye of the posterity for good. Their cheerleaders in the media, civil society and chattering classes also must take rest. The enterprise they are so blindly embarked upon is too dangerous. They too must understand this. The baneful consequences of the confrontations of the PPP and the PML (N) of the 1990s still haunt this nation one way or the other. They all must bear this in mind.
____________________________________________________________

The Froniter Post

Thank You For Reading

‘Obama, compulsive liar on Afghan war'

2012-05-03T08:13:00.000+01:00

Bombs instead of a gun salute. Five explosions rocked Kabul right after US President Obama`s surprise visit to Afghanistan. Obama and his Afghan counterpart Hamid Karzai sealed a deal that allows a limited US continent to remain in Afghanistan after a planned troop withdrawal in 2014.
_________________________________________________________________

The United States and Afghanistan have signed an agreement to extend the US presence in the war-torn country to another decade beyond 2014.

President Obama's surprise visit to Kabul, yesterday on the eve of Osama Bin Laden's death anniversary, bought news of a strategic agreement signed with Afghan President Hamid Karzai. To the Taliban, a signal was thus relayed, that in the aftermath of the US pull-out, the field would not be left open for them and that the US would continue its backing of the Kabul regime it installed. Clearly, such an agreement will make the Taliban most uncomfortable. The historic aversion to foreign domination or control, that is inherent in the Afghans, seems only to be watered down in the persona of the President. For the rest of the many tribes and political groups in Afghanistan, an agreement with even a superpower, will not dim their appetite for throwing off any shackles they feel they may have acquired in the last ten years, after the invasion of their country. The withdrawal of combat forces, leaving behind ‘advisers’ who could come to the aid of the Afghan security forces in case of need, as the agreement envisages, would be deeply resented. The strategic partnership would, therefore, keep the fires of insurgency alive, taking the dream of peace and reconstruction of the devastated land farther from realisation. The Taliban’s recent coordinated attack at 10 sensitive spots, including Parliament, is enough to make the claim of having tamed the menace of militancy nothing but self-deception.
The elements, hostile to the presence of foreign troops on their soil, and that include not only Pashtuns, but also a large segment of other ethnic groups brought up in the culture of independence, are only waiting in the wings for the drawdown to take place. Some expectation arose of President Obama also paying a visit to Islamabad, since he was in the neighbourhood. However, no such visit materialised. Disappointing, given the fact that Pakistan's relations with the US are hardly at their calmest. In such a period, when Pakistan's parliament has presented unanimous recommendations for relations with the US to be structured according to the will of the people, Nato supplies are suspended and resentment of the US for being overly-gratifying to Pakistan's neighbours to the East and the West are at their highest, President Obama's presence was perhaps more needed in Islamabad than Kabul.
For an ally who has been asked time and again to do more, lost $70 billion in the war that the US drew it into, sacrificed over 40,000 to the cause, suffered instability and mayhem in the resulting aftermath - it is a pity that President Obama and his team continue to so dedicatedly ignore Pakistan and its legitimate expectations of the US. In such a case, will the US continue to be surprised at why Pakistan is no longer in love with it?
_______________________________________________________________

Thank You For Reading

Obama Addresses US From Afghanistan

2012-05-02T09:11:00.003+01:00

After landing in Afghanistan under cover of darkness, US President Barack Obama has had a packed schedule, having signed an agreement with Karzai involving American troops after 2014, addressed US troops stationed in Bagram, and then addressing the American people.
_______________________________________________________________

“My fellow Americans, we have traveled through more than a decade under the dark cloud of war. Yet here, in the pre-dawn darkness of Afghanistan, we can see the light of a new day on the horizon. The Iraq War is over. The number of our troops in harm’s way has been cut in half, and more will be coming home soon. We have a clear path to fulfill our mission in Afghanistan, while delivering justice to al Qaeda."

Despite signing the "Enduring Strategic Partnership Agreement between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the United States of America" with Afghan President Karzai, which facilitates the presence of US troops in Afghanistan beyond the 2014 withdrawal, the US commander-in-chief stressed the transition of power away from America in Afghanistan.

"International troops will continue to train, advise and assist the Afghans, and fight alongside them when needed. But we will shift into a support role as Afghans step forward. As we do, our troops will be coming home. Last year, we removed 10,000 U.S. troops from Afghanistan. Another 23,000 will leave by the end of the summer. After that, reductions will continue at a steady pace, with more of our troops coming home. And as our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014 the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country.”

President Obama ended the address by shifting his speech to the home front before once again emphasizing the end of combat presence in Afghanistan.

______________________________________________________

Thank You For Reading

First anniversary of Operation Geronimo

2012-05-02T08:07:00.000+01:00

This May 2, instead of contemplating the ways and means of rekindling the blame game that will only strengthen the terrorists, Washington and Islamabad should bury the hatchet, and while respecting Pakistan´s sovereignty combine resources to common enemy.
_____________________________________________________________________

The first anniversary of Operation Geronimo is a moment to reflect for all Pakistanis, including the government, the armed forces and security agencies. While the operation was a success in eliminating Osama bin Laden (OBL) by the US Navy SEALs, but it targeted Pakistan’s sensitivities. Whereas on the one hand, the US State Department, Pentagon and the CIA have been chest-thumping about targeting their number one enemy: OBL; on the other hand, their deriding of the erstwhile ally, Pakistan, left a bad taste. (This tirade continued despite the fact that the Pakistani Parliament took cognisance of the “presence” of OBL in Abbottabad and the possibility of intelligence failure on the part of security agencies.) The US clandestine mission, more or less, was successful because the security apparatus in Pakistan was not expecting an attack from its ally in the war on terror. Relations between the CIA and ISI had been souring since the Raymond Davis affair, but in the decade following 9/11, Pakistan had gone the whole nine yards in apprehending over 600 Al-Qaeda operatives.

Under these circumstances, the CIA/Pentagon’s deliberate sidelining of Pak Army/ISI in its “get Osama” mission due to security concerns is difficult to comprehend. The US President did inform his Pakistani counterpart after the successful completion of the mission, but, at the same time, Pakistan was chastised for allegedly “harbouring” OBL.

After the briefing to a joint session of the Pakistani Parliament by the army, air force and ISI Chiefs; the rap on their knuckles by the legislators; and the formation of a judicial commission to inquire into the May 2 episode, the hatred against Pakistan should have reduced. However, it reached a crescendo culminating in the November 26, 2011, Nato attack on the Salala checkpost at the Pak-Afghan border increasing the trust deficit between Washington and Islamabad. Some collateral damage owing to the fog of war may be condoned, but this particular attack involving the US forces, appeared to be premeditated and deliberate since it continued for over 150 minutes and resulted in the loss of 24 Pakistani soldiers and officers’ lives.

Revisiting the origin of Operation Enduring Freedom - the official name used by the American administration for the Afghan war - one is struck by the fact that Pakistan bore the brunt of the operations, but is paying heavily for the failures of US forces. To begin with, the culpability of OBL being the real perpetrator of the 9/11 attack may have some credence, but the handling of the case contravenes all norms of justice and fairplay. In response to the US President’s demand of the Afghan government to hand over OBL for trials as a war criminal, the Taliban demanded to examine the evidence against him stating that if he was implicated in the heinous crime, they would be willing to hand him over to a neutral third party for trial. A trigger-happy George Bush, hell-bent upon exacting revenge for the 9/11 tragedy, became oblivious of local Afghan traditions of hospitality, as well as the demands of international justice, and attacked Afghanistan.

Incessant bombing and the USA’s use of reprehensible weapons, like the daisycutter bombs, mowed down innocent Afghan women and children and unseated the Taliban regime, but failed to eliminate them. Pakistan had proposed that the US bring them to the dialogue table, rationalising that they would be willing to negotiate the terms of peace. Alas, submerged in the ecstasy of “triumph”, the US did not consider this option then. After surviving the heavy bombing of Tora Bora, the Taliban reorganised and waged a series of guerrilla campaigns creating serious problems for Nato, Isaf and the US and forcing the alliance to seek dialogue with the militants now.

The Taliban and Al-Qaeda, meanwhile, turned upon Pakistan to punish it for its US alliance. Suicide bomb attacks and assaulting military and civilian installations became the order of the day; Pakistan has to-date sacrificed over 40,000 lives and lost over $69 billion in the ongoing war on terror. To add insult to injury, despite cooperating and handing over nearly 600 Al-Qaeda and Taliban operatives to the US, Pakistan is criticised by it for “not doing enough.”

This May 2, instead of contemplating the ways and means of rekindling the blame game that will only strengthen the terrorists, Washington and Islamabad should bury the hatchet, and while respecting Pakistan’s sovereignty combine resources to combat a common enemy.
________________________________________________________

By S M Hali
The writer is a political and defence analyst.
Email: sultanm.hali@gmail.com

Thank You For Reading
_________________________________________________________

Hidden crisis in Saudi Arabia

2012-04-29T11:31:00.000+01:00

Since March last year, a hidden movement has gathered pace in the oil-rich kingdom of Saudi Arabia. For the first time in decades, ordinary citizens in large numbers are demanding reform in public in the Arab monarchy. This is considered phenomenal because no public gatherings of any kind are allowed in Saudi Arabia.
_______________________________________________________________

It all began early last year when the "Islamic Awakening" started. Activists inspired by the revolutions taking place in Tunisia and Egypt decided to start a movement of their own.

In January 2011, protesters took to the streets, demonstrating against the government corruption. The protests were not organized at first and happened sporadically in different cities including the capital Riyadh and the main western port city of Jeddah. But, in February things changed. Activists, using the social site Facebook, called for nationwide mass rallies on March 11 dubbing it the "Day of Rage." In Riyadh, only one person showed up as the Saudi government had the whole capital on lock down. His name was Khaled al-Johani. He was detained since then and became known on twitter and Facebook as the "only brave man in Saudi Arabia."

Human rights group Amnesty International later learned that four others had also been arrested on the same day. In a frightening statement, the London-based group said "the fact that we have only just found out about four of these men gives us real concern that there are others swept up in arrests around the time of last year's demonstrations who we are yet to find out about."

At around the same time frame, the protests of another front became known. In the oil-rich Eastern Province, thousands of people--mainly from the minority Shia sect of Islam---began to come to the streets, calling for equal representation in key offices, reform, and the release of the prisoners. As their movement began to grow and infuriated by their government's decision to send hundreds of military vehicles to Bahrain to help the regime crackdown on pro-democracy protesters, they called for the Saudi government to withdraw its troops from the tiny Persian Gulf kingdom. When the Saudi government started to feel the pinch, its security forces opened life fire on the protesters, killing several in different incidents. Since then, the protesters began to rally on an almost daily basis.

The government in Riyadh blames the unrest on what it calls foreign agents-an indirect reference to Iran--- trying to stir up the unrest, the same excuse it used before invading and occupying Bahrain. The leader of the group Sheikh Ali Salman criticized Riyadh's allegations during a Friday mass rally outside the capital Manama a few weeks ago. Salman said "Saudi Arabia's occupation of Bahrain only makes the situation worse." He went on to say "Iran has nothing to do with the revolution in Bahrain."

Human Rights Watch reported a while back that more than 160 people calling for reform have been arrested in Saudi Arabia since January of 2011. The Saudi-based Human Rights First Society reported that the detainees have been subjected to torture---mental and physical.

Surprisingly in a theocratic strict monarchy, women are not sitting back from the reform movement. Last summer, female activists organized a campaign calling on all women drivers to take behind the wheel and violate a Saudi law which prohibits women from driving vehicles. The main event took place on June 17 and infuriated the government. At least 70 women have been arrested in that month alone for driving.

A few weeks ago in the southern tourist city of Abha, hundreds of women protesters staged a sit-in at their university, protesting against injustice and inequality. They were brutally attacked by the moral police. Over 50 of the women were injured and taken to a hospital. The incident sparked outrage across the country with male and female students taking to the streets in Abha, Riyadh and the holy city of Medina.

Saudi citizens for the first time are showing their anger at the government and asking for change.

Riyadh knows this very well. Therefore its actions of playing the counter-revolution party in the region also aim to illustrate the horror of a revolution in their country. The government-controlled media only cover the negative aspects of the pro-democracy movements sweeping the Arab world.

This comes while Saudi Arabia is playing a key role in containing the uprising and helping Arab regimes suppress the revolutions in their countries.

It seems evident that as the US and its western allies continue to turn a blind eye on the main violators of human rights in the Middle East and one of many in the world; the Riyadh government will only feel more confident to do as it wants and what it sees is right. Apparently no western country wants to upset one of its biggest weapons customer and oil providers in the region. It’s clear that the winds of change are right on the borders of Saudi Arabia. With the ongoing revolutions in Yemen and Bahrain and the uprising movement in Jordan, the Saudis abroad and inside the Arab kingdom are watching closely as the fate of their freedom might depend on the outcome of those revolutions happening around them.
_________________________________________________________

Islam Times

Thank You For Reading

Karachi Police,Eye on Lyari

2012-04-29T09:30:00.002+01:00

Lyari gangsters showed stiff resistance to security forces operation using rifles, rocket launchers and hand grenades. Exchange of fire continued throughout the day and 11 people were killed in clashes.

Policemen entering the Lyari area for participation in the operation against criminals, here on Saturday

Violence continues unabated in the trouble-torn Lyari locality of Karachi, as security forces continue their operation against elements described as gangsters. By Saturday evening violence in Lyari had claimed more than fifteen lives in two days, including those of a local PPP leader and the SHO of the Civil Lines police stations. PPP’s Malik Muhammad Khan had been gunned down on Thursday while leading a protest against the conviction of the prime minister by the Supreme Court. Several other people, including at least three police officers, were injured as fierce battles ensued between security personnel and ‘gangsters’ in which heavy weaponry including rockets were used. Also, PPP leader Nabeel Gabol escaped injury after a grenade was lobbed at his convoy on Friday as he was returning from Malik’s funeral. As the violence seems to be spiralling out of control leaving a trail of death and destruction, the security forces and government officials say the operation is succeeding. However, the precise truth behind these statements is difficult to assess at the moment given that Lyari, for now, is a virtually ‘no go’ zone. The situation may prove difficult to douse easily, mainly because the ‘gang war’ situation is further complicated by the involvement of political factors. Various gangs in Lyari are backed by different political parties and, indeed, have been nurtured by them through the years.

Police personnel in civilian dress taking part in an operation against criminals in Lyari area of Karachi

Lyari area of Karachi gave the look of a war theatre on Friday as strong contingents of Police, Frontier Constabulary and the Crime Investigation Department’s anti terrorists cell launched the search operation in the troubled locality. Heavily armed men posted stiff resistance to well equipped law enforcement personnel who made an attempt to advance into the narrow and deep lanes for search and crackdown on the gangsters.

Horrifying scenes were witnessed as unidentified men threw hand grenades and fired rockets at law enforcement agencies during the operation, injuring policemen and civilians. Criminals atop high rises continued incessant firing using latest weapons. The scenes of fighting shown on TV shocked the people and they are openly questioning where is the writ of the Provincial and Federal Governments. The operation was launched in the PPP strong hold after President Asif Ali Zardari presided over a meeting in Karachi that exclusively discussed the law and order situation in Lyari. The President gave directions to the Chief Minister and the IG Police that law and order in Lyari must be maintained at all costs without fear or favour. Lyari has become a den of criminals and crime zones have cropped up with the passage of time. They have established their strong holds and the common citizens worried about their security are unable to resist them. Arms and narcotics are being smuggled into the lawless Lyari and the gangs are not ready to surrender their areas of influence to the security forces. This situation is damaging the image of Pakistan as a lawless country. Karachi city is already plagued by target killings, kidnapping for ransom and political parties lust for grabbing more and more areas under their influence. Senior PPP leader Nabil Gabol, having strong following in Lyari was also made target by miscreants when his car was attacked but he fortunately escaped unhurt. The business centre of the country has been made hostage by the law breakers and we would urge the political leadership and particularly the Interior Minister to take the situation very seriously and the clean up operation be taken to the logical conclusions otherwise it would go out of control.
___________________________________________________________

Thank You For Reading

Lyari Gangsters vs Karachi Police

2012-04-28T08:34:00.000+01:00

According to SP Nasir Aftab, the police went into the narrow lanes of Lyari around 3am to arrest Rashid Bengali, who is wanted in numerous criminal case, but faced tough resistance from armed men. "The encounter went on for 45 minutes but we failed to arrest Bengali".

“We will not let them escape this time,” said SSP Aslam Khan, referring to members of the banned Peoples Amn Committee (PAC) who are on the run. “One by one, we’ll get all of them and we will wipe them out!”
____________________________________________________________

A Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) official and a policeman were among eight killed in latest violence in the Lyari area of Karachi, as gangsters and law enforcers again fought pitched battle on Friday.The gunbattles were still going on in Layari as the report was being filed. Gangsters were targeting both police and general public, as they retaliated to the police operation.The criminal elements were using grenade launchers and other sophisticated weapons against police and Frontier Corps (FC) personnel, who tried to gain access to the congested parts of Lyari; however, Rangers are not taking part in the action.Sindh IGP Mushtaq Shah, City Police Chief Officer DIG Akhtar Hassan Gorchani and Pakistan People Party (PPP) leader Nabeel Gabol reached Lyari to monitor the situation. But gangsters also targeted Gabol near Mira Naka, as they lobbed hand grenades to eliminate the MNA, but he narrowly escaped the attack.Mushtaq Shah told media police were facing tough resistance, but hoped to control the situation by deploying additional contingents of law enforcers.He said the retaliation proved that gangsters were acting in collaboration with outlawed terrorist organisations. Operation was launched in the morning to wipe out the criminal elements from the area, but witnesses said police could not manage to get inside Lyari.Heavy contingents of police had been seen from Ghas Mandi to Cheel Chowk while the remaining neighbourhoods were free for the gangsters. The action was started after the killing of PPP former Naib Nazim Khan Muhammad during a rally organised by the PPP against the Supreme Court verdict.Sources privy to the matter said gangsters were hell-bent to stay in the area because police had planned to resettle Arshad Papu and Ghaffar Zikri gang in Lyari against Baba Ladla group.A cousin of former Naib Nazim, Malik Mushtaq, was killed in Chakiwara when he was going to offer funeral prayer of slain Khan. Gunmen also shot injured Inspector Idrees Bangash, as police tried to intercept them.In Kalakot, a FIA official Ghulam Dastagir, while on his way to home, was gunned down near Lyari Degree College. Asif Usman and Abdul Ghani Baloch were killed in the same area.At Love Lane Bridge, located within the Pak Colony Police Station’s precincts, armed men killed Constable Abdul Hameed when police reached the spot to disperse the residents who were protesting the Lyari operation.Two more people, Fida Hussain and Sohail Shafiq, were killed in Kumaharwara.Police claimed to have killed Naeem Lahoti, a close associate of Baba Ladla with a head money of Rs 0.5 million, during exchange of fire and arrested Shah Jahan Baloch.Following the killing of Lahoti, tension gripped the areas of Afshani Gali, Nawa Lane, Singo Lane, Shah Baigh Lane, Mira Naka, Lee Market and Cheel Chowk, where criminals were resorting indiscriminate fire.Gangsters were also attacking general public to divert the police attention. Grenade attacks in Agrataj Colony and Baghdadi wounded five and two persons respectively. Police claim that they arrested around two dozen gangsters while managed destroyed the dens of Mulla Nisar and Taj Muhammad alias Taju.Hospital sources confirmed the arrival of eight bodies and 25 injured.
_________________________________________________________

Thank You For Reading