Books and Documents

Islam,Terrorism and Jihad (29 Nov 2008 NewAgeIslam.Com)

Can we Trust Pakistani commitment to fight Jihadi Terrorism?


Like his predecessors for a long time, and like several heads of government and the state of Pakistan, Pakistani foreign minister Yousaf Raza Qureshi has reiterated Pakistan’s determination to wipe out terrorists. Using a language meant to reassure India, the visiting minister says, “They [terrorists] have no face. They have no colour, no class, no creed, no religion, no nothing. They are barbarians. They are inhuman and we have to collectively eliminate them.” Qureshi has continued his visit reassuring India of every possible cooperation. Both President Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani have made assurance calls to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

But the question before us is: Can we trust Pakistan? Promises like this have been made before. But the factories of terror in Murdike and elsewhere continue to churn out terrorists. No action is taken against terrorists who claim to be fighting only against India. It seems while Islamabad will fight against terrorists who fight against Pakistani state or the US interests, it will leave alone organisations like Lashkar-e-Tayyaba that fight against India alone. Mr. Qureishi says his government practises no such discrimination.

Can we trust them? asks Sultan Shahin, Editor, NewAgeIslam.com in this debating forum free for all its readers to participate.

Pak will cooperate with India at every level: Qureshi

Atishay Abbhi / CNN-IBN

Published on Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 00:40, Updated on Sat, Nov 29, 2008 at 01:00 in World section

NEIGHBOURHOOD STANCE: Pakistani foreign minister Yousaf Raza Qureshi has continued his visit reassuring India of every possible cooperation.

New Delhi: Once the operation to flush out the terrorists from the Mumbai hotels are over, the focus will shift to the investigations.

As it happens, the Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi is in India in New Delhi and he said India shouldn't blame Pakistan and called for a united stand on terror.

Qureshi said, “Today India is mourning. Yesterday Pakistan was mourning and tomorrow, we don't know who that will be. Let us share our problems. There should not be any blame game. Pakistan is willing to cooperate with India at every level.”

Just couple of hours after the Pakistani foreign minister’s statement, it was anything but peace.

Terrorists unleashed every piece of artillery in the heart of Mumbai to carry out the most coordinated terror attack in India and with all the evidence stacking up pointing towards the Pakistani link, where do India-Pakistan relations go from here?

Some of the men behind the attack, according to initial reports, are Pakistani nationals trained in maritime terrorism in Karachi by Lashkar-E-Toiba (LeT).

An angry India conveyed to Pakistan that it has all the evidence pointing towards the Pakistani link.

External affairs minister Pranab Mukherjee said, “The preliminary information we have received so far points to the certainty that some of Pakistani elements are involved in the activity. We ask Pakistan to arrest these people and put an end to these things.”

Meanwhile Qureshi says, “They have no face. They have no colour, no class, no creed, no religion, no nothing. They are barbarians. They are inhuman and we have to collectively eliminate them.”

Attacks in Mumbai have once again landed India and Pakistan in an embarrassing face-off.

The new lull in the relation has cemented the fear of the failure the joint Anti-terror mechanism.

Apparently, Pakistan is feeling the heat not just from India but around the world.

It is now making efforts to prove itself and is sending ISI chief to India to help in investigations.

Qureshi has continued his visit reassuring India of every possible cooperation.

Both president Zardari and prime minister Yousaf Raza Gillani have made assurance calls to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.

However, the PM without naming Pakistan, warned that the neighbour may have to pay a price if it continues allowing its territory to be used against India.

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/islam,terrorism-and-jihad/can-we-trust-pakistani-commitment-to-fight-jihadi-terrorism?--/d/1029


  • Where are the Maulanas? Give a reply to this!

     Sex In Paradise 


    By Ali Sina


    When the popular CBS documentary program '60 Minutes' aired the interview with a Palestinian terrorist who claimed that those who blow themselves killing many Israelis will go to Paradise and receive 70 houris, Muslims were outraged and as Joyse M. David on August 23, 2001 reported they claimed that the story of 70 Houris promised to those who fight and die in the name of Allah for killing the infidels is ‘fabricated’.   

    Davis writes: “The documentary by reporter Bob Simon examined the militant Islamic organization Hamas, which has claimed responsibility for dozens of suicide bombings against Israel. Muslim leaders charge that the report presented false stereotypes of Muslims and defamed their religion.” 

    She quotes the Muslims “scholar” Dr. Maher Hathout a member if the Islamic Center of Southern California, who said, "There is nothing in the Koran or in Islamic teachings about 70 virgins or sex in paradise. This is ridiculous, and any true Muslim knows that,". 

    I agree with Dr. Hathout that this is ridiculous, but I disagree with him when he says that there is nothing in the Quran or in Islamic teachings about the 70 virgins or sex in Paradise. If Dr. Hathout is truly an Islamic scholar he should have at least read the Quran. There are several references to the houris in Quran with details. Because I know Muslims always say that their critics quote “out of the context” I am going to quote the verses of the Quran speaking of the houris with the preceding and succeeding verses. 

    In Surah 44, Muhammad first describes the hell quite vividly. 

    43    Surely the tree of the Zaqqum, 

    44    Is the food of the sinful 

    45    Like dregs of oil; it shall boil in (their) bellies,

    46    Like the boiling of hot water.

    47    Seize him, then drag him down into the middle of the hell;

    48    Then pour above his head of the torment of the boiling water:

    49    Taste; you forsooth are the mighty, the honorable:

    50    Surely this is what you disputed about.

    After giving this dreadful description of the hell and the tortures preferred by Allah the Prophet promises lots of goodies to those who became Muslims.

    51    Surely those who guard (against evil) are in a secure place, 

    52    In gardens and springs; 

    53    They shall wear of fine and thick silk, (sitting) face to face; 

    54    Thus (shall it be), and We will wed them with Houris pure, beautiful ones.    

    In Surah 52 there is another description of the heaven and hell:

    17    Surely those who guard (against evil) shall be in gardens and bliss 

    18     Rejoicing because of what their Lord gave them, and their Lord saved them from the punishment of the burning fire.

    19    Eat and drink pleasantly for what you did, 

    20    Reclining on thrones set in lines, and We will unite them to large-eyed beautiful ones. 

    21    And (as for) those who believe and their offspring follow them in faith, We will unite with them their offspring and We will not diminish to them aught of their work; every man is responsible for what he shall have wrought. 

    22    And We will aid them with fruit and flesh such as they desire.

    23    They shall pass therein from one to another a cup wherein there shall be nothing vain nor any sin.

    Amazingly this paradise promised by the holy prophet satisfies even the paedophiles. 

    24 And round them shall go boys of theirs as if they were hidden pearls. 


    Also in Surah 76:19 Allah promises fresh youths to Muslim men. 

    And round about them shall go youths never altering in age; when you see them you will think them to be scattered pearls.


    Again in Surah 56 the Prophet gives the glad tidings of the paradise to his followers and says:

    59    And besides these two are two (other) gardens:

    60    Which then of the bounties of your Lord will you deny?

    61    Both inclining to blackness.

    62    Which then of the bounties of your Lord will you deny?

    63    In both of them are two springs gushing forth.

    64    Which then of the bounties of your Lord will you deny?

    65    In both are fruits and palms and pomegranates.

    66    Which then of the bounties of your Lord will you deny?

    67    In them are goodly things, beautiful ones.

    68    Which then of the bounties of your Lord will you deny?

    69    Pure ones confined to the pavilions.

    70    Which then of the bounties of your Lord will you deny?

    71    Man has not touched them before them nor jinni.

    72    Which then of the bounties of your Lord will you deny?

    73    Reclining on green cushions and beautiful carpets.

    74    Which then of the bounties of your Lord will you deny?

    75    Blessed be the name of your Lord, the Lord of Glory and Honor!   

    In Surah 56  , there is promise of houris as well as youths that never age for the gratification of Muslim men. 

    11    These are they who are drawn nigh (to Allah), 

    12    In the gardens of bliss.

    13    A numerous company from among the first,

    14    And a few from among the latter.

    15    On thrones decorated, 

    16    Reclining on them, facing one another.

    17    Round about them shall go youths never altering in age, 

    18    With goblets and ewers and a cup of pure drink; 

    19    They shall not be affected with headache thereby, nor shall they get exhausted,

    20     And fruits such as they choose, 

    21    And the flesh of fowl such as they desire. 

    22    And pure, beautiful ones, 

    23    The like of the hidden pearls: 

    24    A reward for what they used to do.


    I believe this should suffice to prove that not only Allah promises "virgin houris" to the righteous Muslims but also “never-aging boys” as white as pearls.

    There are also several hadith that confirm sex in paradise. Hadith are the sayings of the Prophet. The following are few of them


    Sahih Bukhari Volume 6, Book 60, Number 402

    Narrated Abdullah bin Qais:

    Allah's Apostle said, "In Paradise there is a pavilion made of a single hollow pearl sixty miles wide, in each corner of which there are wives who will not see those in the other corners; and the believers will visit and enjoy them. And there are two gardens, the utensils and contents of which are made of silver; and two other gardens, the utensils and contents of which are made of so-and-so (i.e. gold) and nothing will prevent the people staying in the Garden of Eden from seeing their Lord except the curtain of Majesty over His Face."   


    The modern Muslim apologists try to present Islam as a religion of peace yet it is not hard to find many hadiths that call for war and promise great rewards in the other world and in this one to the Mujahid who takes the arm and fights for Allah.

    Bukhari V. 4, B 52, N 46

    Narrated Abu Huraira:

    I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "The example of a Mujahid in Allah's Cause-- and Allah knows better who really strives in His Cause----is like a person who fasts and prays continuously. Allah guarantees that He will admit the Mujahid in His Cause into Paradise if he is killed, otherwise He will return him to his home safely with rewards and war booty."


     Bukhari V. 4, B 52, N 48

    The Prophet said, ...  "Paradise has one-hundred grades which Allah has reserved for the Mujahidin who fight in His Cause,


     Bukhari V. 4, B 52, N 72

    Narrated Anas bin Malik:

    The Prophet said, "Nobody who enters Paradise likes to go back to the world even if he got everything on the earth, except a Mujahid who wishes to return to the world so that he may be martyred ten times because of the dignity he receives (from Allah)."

    Narrated Al-Mughira bin Shu'ba: Our Prophet told us about the message of our Lord that "Whoever amongst us is killed will go to Paradise." Umar asked the Prophet, "Is it not true that our men who are killed will go to Paradise and their's (i.e. those of the Pagan's) will go to the (Hell) fire?" The Prophet said, "Yes."


    The Hadiths like these abound and there are also many verses of Quran the glorify Jihad (holy wars). As it is clear these wars were not defensive but were offensive wars. See how Muhammad prepared his followers to attack the lands that had nothing to do with Islam. 

    Bukhari V. 4, B 52, N 48

    Narrated Khalid bin Madan:

    Um Haram informed us that she heard the Prophet saying, "Paradise is granted to the first batch of my followers who will undertake a naval expedition." Um Haram added, I said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Will I be amongst them?' He replied, 'You are amongst them.' The Prophet then said, 'The first army amongst' my followers who will invade Caesar's City will be forgiven their sins.' I asked, 'Will I be one of them, O Allah's Apostle?' He replied in the negative."


    Therefore it is safe to say that the essence of Islam is expressed in the following hadith. 

     Bukhari V. 4, B 52, N 73

    Narrated 'Abdullah bin Abi Aufa:

    Allah's Apostle said, "Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords."


    More articles from Ali Sina can be found at www.golshan.com and http://free.freespeech.org/rationalthinking

    By Shagufta -

  • Taliban’s Swift Justice


    Friday, 23 January 2009.



    ISLAMABAD, Pakistan—It was during a visit to Peshawar that I met a senior police officer. He narrated a story which was brow-raising. He told of a person from Bannu who lent Rs. 40,000 [approx. U.S. $500] to a man he knew, who promised that he would return it within a specified time. He told the borrower that he had saved up the said amount to help pay for his children's education. When the agreed time lapsed, he asked him to return the amount. The borrower started making excuses and after a few months he flatly refused and challenged the lender to do what ever he could. There is a Pukhtu word for it ‘Laas Da Azaad De’.

    The man went from pillar to post to seek justice but with no result. The police proved incapable as the borrower was a powerful man with strong connections. When he tried to knock on the door of the court for justice he was dismayed to hear that it would take months for the case to come to a hearing and years to reach a final judgment. After all that, the chances were that the verdict would go against him as he was up against powerful people. To top it off, he was told he had to pay Rs 1000 upfront every time he wanted to put his case forward for a hearing. This amount did not include the amount he was going to pay the lawyers. When he calculated it, the approximate amount turned out to be more than the actual amount he was going to seek justice for.

    At the end of every day, he would go back home heart broken; cursing his luck to be living in a country where there was no justice for the middle or poor classes. He tried to persuade the borrower by pleading with him, explaining how desperately he needed the money for his children’s education. He even offered a discount or to split the amount into installments, but all in vain. It was like hitting a brick wall. He felt dejected, helpless and powerless to see his children suffering just because he came from a stratum of a society pushed against the wall. 

    One evening, he heard a knock on the door. He opened it and saw two strangers with bushy beards standing outside. Thinking they were there to collect charity, he asked with irritation what they wanted. They told him that they saw him crying in the mosque and on enquiry they were told that someone was refusing to pay his money back. With a surprised look on his face, he asked them who they were.

    “We are local Taliban,” they said. Then they asked if he would let them have his side of story. He saw a ray of hope and ushered them in. After listening to his story, the Taliban told him that the borrower had committed an un-Islamic act, and if he wanted they could persuade him to return the said money. “We want your permission”. His heart jumped with flickering optimism and immense joy and without any hesitation, he gave them his consent. Before they left the premises they asked for 72 hours.

    According to the police officer, the Taliban went to the influential man and told him it was un-Islamic not to pay the amount he had borrowed from the man. They threatened that if he did not pay the debt back within 48 hours; he would bear the consequences. They also told him how Taliban had previously dealt with people like him. Shivers went through the spine of the ‘powerful’ man as he knew what their threat meant. With a dry mouth, frightened face and shaking body he nodded his head in agreement, promising he would return the amount. The next day, he went to the house of the lender and paid back the full amount he had refused up until then. He apologized for the delay and requested him to tell the Taliban not to harm him or his family and to let them know that he had returned the money. The Taliban never went back to ask whether he got the money back, but they must had been watching the development. From that day on, according to the police officer, that man became a strong supporter of Taliban. Could anyone blame him?

    Another related story about quick and effective justice comes from the Bugti tribe of Balochistan. According to electronic media, a man named Nazim Ali was refused his share in a dispute. According to him, he spent a lot of money to get justice from the court but failed because of corrupt practices. So he went to the tribal chief who referred him to the Jirga. The Jirga decided that he should walk on fire and if he was telling the truth he will not be burned. Nazim Ali agreed to it and in front of onlookers he walked on red hot coal. After the walk, people saw that his soles were not burned. The chief decided in his favour and he was given his due share.

    There are countless other stories of parallel justice systems running in Pakistan in the present day. These systems seem to be nippy and effective satisfying their poor clients. Some are Taliban style, others tribal style, sharing one commonality; they are swift, just and not stained with corruption.

    In my discussions with different walks of people living in the troubled parts of FATA and NWFP the vast majority agreed that the justice provided by Taliban is fair and quick. They might not agree with other activities related to Talibanization such as discouraging western education, burning of schools, gender discrimination etc; but they do appreciate the provision of justice served at the doorsteps with efficiency, audacity and honesty. Swift justice is the major achievement which attracts the poor people of Pakistan to Taliban.

    Dr. Ayub can be reached at turi555AThotmail.com

    By Gulzar -

  • Date:      Wed, 17 Dec 2008 01:58:05 +0000 [07:28:05 AM IST]

    From:    Dr A R Mookhi

    To:          Sultan Shahin <Editor@NewAgeIslam.com>


    I t is strange that the sports people are still considering playing cricket with Pakistan. How can our team of eleven contemplate playing cricket in Lahore within weeks of their team of ten invading our country to kill our people so mercilessly? The outrage of the players as well as sports authorities is nowhere near the outrage expressed by general public especially Muslims of India at the atrocity of their coreligionists. Not to let the killing Pakistanis be buried on the soil of India is a bold and extraordinary decision Muslims of India have taken with such spontaneity must be matched by the nation as a whole. There should be no cricket with Pakistan. Not in Pakistan. Not even on a neutral soil.


    Until Pakistan government succeeds in demolishing the terror machines on their soils, India should have nothing to do with that nation. The peace process may be suspended. All confidence building measures may be put on hold. There should be a pause button on all trade initiatives, people to people contacts, cultural exchanges and all dialogues. All borders should be sealed. Excepting the engagement of armed forces India should declare itself at war with Pakistan. Pakistan either curbs terrorism or asks India or UN to help them do so. As Pranab Mukherjee rightly said on the floor of the parliament “We are ready to help them.”


    Dr A R Mookhi

    Sushama, Dadabhai Road,

    Santacruz west, MUMBAI 400054 171208

    By Dr A R Mookhi -

  • Crisis May Shift India’s Political Landscape By SOMINI SENGUPTA Published: November 28, 2008



    MUMBAI, India — At midmorning on Friday, as Indian troops continued to comb through the devastated Oberoi hotel, an unexpected guest appeared on the sidewalk: Narendra Modi, a Hindu nationalist from the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party and arguably India’s most incendiary politician.

    Speaking before a row of television cameras, he said the central government had failed to tackle a growing terrorism threat and he found fault with a speech by India’s prime minister a day earlier. “The country expected a lot from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh,” he said, “but his address to the nation was disappointing.”

    The appearance of Mr. Modi — who has been barred from entering the United States for violations of religious freedom — signaled how the two-day siege of Mumbai had instantly turned into political ammunition for coming national elections. After a string of attacks across Indian cities earlier this year, Mr. Modi’s party, also known as the B.J.P., pledged to make national security its main campaign issue. This week’s audacious attacks on the country’s commercial capital, and their timing, gave the party an additional boost.

    Five state elections are under way, with the city-state of Delhi going to the polls on Saturday. National balloting is expected to be held next spring.

    It was only four years ago that the Bharatiya Janata Party, then leading a coalition government, was routed in national elections, partly because of at least two high-profile terrorism episodes during its tenure: a suicide attack on the Indian Parliament building in 2001 and the hijacking of an Indian Airlines plane to Kandahar, Afghanistan, in 1999.

    Mr. Singh and his Congress Party hoped to ride a booming economy and rising prosperity to victory next year despite a steady series of bombings and other violence in recent months. And that had seemed a sensible course: studies of previous national elections have shown economic issues to be the most important concern for the average voter, said Yogendra Yadav, a political analyst with the Center for the Study of Developing Societies in Delhi.

    But Mr. Yadav said he doubted that pattern would stand up after this latest assault. In an intensely competitive political landscape, small margins can make a big difference, which is why he argued that the terrorist threat would inevitably figure more centrally in the next national elections.

    Mr. Singh’s administration would have to be seen as doing “something fast, something visible,” he said, to shake off the perception that it is weak on national security. The Congress Party “has to be seen to be doing something which directly addresses the widely shared popular perception that the country is being attacked from outside, that it is under aggression,” Mr. Yadav said.

    On Friday, front-page advertisements appeared in several newspapers in Delhi showing blood splattered against a black background and the slogan “Brutal Terror Strikes At Will” in bold capital letters. The ads signed off with a simple message: “Fight Terror. Vote B.J.P.”

    There were also advertisements that were cast as an appeal from Atal Bihari Vajpayee, a prime minister in the last B.J.P.-led coalition government. They cited the loss of lives in Mumbai and concluded, “We must elect a government that can fight terror tooth and nail.”

    Nor did the party’s president, Lal Krishna Advani, lose any time in pointing fingers at the coalition government of Mr. Singh, accusing it of a “nonserious approach” that allowed suspected terrorists to sail onto the shores of Mumbai this week.

    Kapil Sibal, a veteran of the Congress Party, swiftly hit back, accusing Mr. Modi of placing his party’s interests above those of the nation and calling the B.J.P. advertisements “a matter of national shame.” In a telephone interview on Friday night, Mr. Sibal would not say whether recent terrorist attacks — including this week’s, the most spectacular and the most frightening — would have any bearing on his party’s election prospects. He called it “not relevant.”

    That now may be wishful thinking. Terrorism may be grievously relevant to the fortunes of the ruling party, under whose watch Indian cities have suffered a string of attacks — six of them in six months, killing roughly 375 people in all. After each one, the prime minister has issued a sobering statement calling for calm. After each one, the B.J.P. has pounced on the government as being soft on terrorism.

    Mr. Singh’s government had lately hit back at the Bharatiya Janata Party with evidence that its supporters, belonging to a range of radical Hindu organizations, had also been implicated in terrorist attacks. Indeed, in a bizarre twist, the head of the police antiterrorism unit, Hemant Karkare, killed in the Mumbai strikes, had been in the midst of a high-profile investigation of a suspected Hindu terrorist cell. Mr. Karkare’s inquiry had netted nine suspects in connection with a bombing in September of a Muslim-majority area in Malegaon, a small town not far from Mumbai.

    Several B.J.P. leaders, including Mr. Modi, had criticized the crackdown as a political vendetta. On Friday Mr. Modi, the chief minister of neighboring Gujarat State, announced financial rewards for the families of police officers killed this week in the antiterrorism operations, including Mr. Karkare.

    On Friday, Mr. Advani went so far as to say that intelligence agencies had been “diverted to nail so-called Hindu terror,” allowing the gunmen who struck Mumbai to “plot away undetected.”

    The political fencing hides more fundamental problems: a feeble, often corrupt criminal justice system, in which suspects, whether of terrorism or common crimes, are regularly killed in skirmishes with law enforcement authorities rather than tried in courts of law. Faith and democracy also complicate the Indian battle against terrorism, as political parties compete for the loyalty of Hindu and Muslim voters.

    The B.J.P. has pressed for the resurrection of a tougher antiterrorism law that was in place during its administration. That measure allowed for longer periods of preventive detention and enabled confessions extracted by the police to be used in court. Its critics said it was an unfair and ineffective tool used too often to round up innocent people, largely Muslims, and it was repealed in 2004 by Mr. Singh’s administration.

    In a nationally televised address on Thursday, the day after the siege on Mumbai began, Mr. Singh clearly sought to convey that his government was in charge and capable of acting swiftly. He promised to “strengthen the hands of our police and intelligence authorities,” restrict financing to suspect organizations, check the “entry of suspects into the country” and get tough on Pakistan, which the Indian government has accused of providing sanctuary to militants who attack on Indian soil. It was not clear how he would do any of these things, nor whether his words would persuade voters to trust his party with another five-year term.

    Friday’s newspapers scolded politicians as failing to act together in the interests of national security. “It is time we stop our political parties from using terror — Hindu or Muslim — to fuel their popularity when they are fueling a fire that can consume India,” read a front-page editorial in The Hindustan Times.

    The Indian Express, in its front-page editorial, suggested that “if a tragedy like this cannot make both sides — in fact the entire political class — make amends, we have no right to call ourselves a great nation, democracy, civilization.”

    Mr. Yadav’s 2005 public opinion poll on sources of insecurity in India found that terrorism ranked far lower than common crimes and communal riots. Moreover, his studies showed that terrorism resonated far more with urban voters than rural ones.

    That is another reason the siege of Mumbai could give Mr. Singh cause for concern. Political redistricting this year has made the urban voter far more important nationally than ever before.

    By Aamir Mughal -


    Sirf Baar baar dahshat gardi ko condemn karne se hamaari zimmedaari poori nahi ho jaati hai, hamey dahshat gardi ke peeche kaun log hain, aur Islaam ko badnaam karne ke peeche kaun andaruni dushman  hain, aur kaisee unki soch hai, usko pahchanne aur uski mazammat karne ke saath saath, aisee soch waale logon ko zamane ke saamne laake, unko Islaam se kharij karne ki zarurat hai.

    Jaisa ke  mohtarma Farah khan Ali ne farmaya ki ek Aaam Arabi mohtarma Osama Bin Laden ko kos kaat rahi thin,kyon  ki uski wajah se Islam ka naam Dahshat gardi se jodaa jaane lagaa,  to mai yahan pe ek kadam aage jaake ye kahunga,  ki Osama Bin Laden to sirf ek chehra hai jisse ham sab pahchante han magar uss chehrey ke peeche kaun si soch hai, usse pahchaaney ki zarurat hai,  aur wo hai  WAHABIAT/ Salafi / ahle hadith (sab ek hain)   jisne ki saare Afghanistan ko tabha barbaad  kar diya,Iraq me apni jaden failane ki pur zor koshish kari,  Wahabiat aur dahshat gardi ek hee zahreeley Darakht  ki do shaakhen hain  aur jab tak Wahabiat panpegi tab tak dahshat gardi ko kaabu karna mushkil hai. Ye ek mahez eitefaak nahi hai, ki abb tak jahan jahan bhi dahshat gardi samne aayee, ya fir dahshat gard pakde gaye wo saare ke saare Talibani soch ke Waahaabi hee hain, aur unme ek bhi Sunnat jaamat ya fir shia hazraat ya fir Islam ke kisi aur firkey  ka shaks nahi pakdaa gaya hai, To aayen aur ek zubaan ho ke, ek hauslaa hoke, Wahabiat ke asli chehre yaani dahshat gardi ki doctrine wale soch ke logon ko pahchaan ke unka social boycott karen aur Islaam ke daman ko paak Karen.

     Aise hi chupey huwye, dahshat gardi se hamdardi rakhne wale Wahabi hamarey Jaan se Pyaarey Mulk Hindustan ki sar zameen pe bhi apnay na paak Iraade dhakey chupey alfazon me failaa rahe hain, uska ek namuna Peace Tv waale Zakir  Naik ka ye kahna “ki agar Osama bin Laden America se ladh raha hai to Zakir Naik uske saath hain aur iss eitebaar  se harr Musalman ko dahshat gard hona chahiye”,  koyee Zakir naik ya fir wo jis Osama Bin Laden ki Himayet kar rahe hain, usse ye pooche ki in jaise Islam ke dushmano ko  Islaam ka thekedaar kisne banaya? aur ye kaun hotey hain apne zaati mafaad ke liye Islaam ka naam istemaal karne waale? Aaj  mai Hindustan ki awaam se aur Sarkaar  dono se hee ye guzarish karunga ki Zakir Naik ne jo Osaama ki himayet ki hai uski jaanch karaye, aur agar elzaam sahi sabit ho,  to Peace Tv ko bina waqt zaya kiye ban kiya jaye aur is Peace Tv Channel ke akhrajaat kahan se purey hote hain aur kaun is channel ki funding karta hai iski bhi jaanch karayee jaye  aur gunah sabit hone pe aise logon ko Duniya ke saamne laayen aur Inko inki sahi jagah yaani saamaaj se jitna bhi door ho sake kar diya jaaye. Isi me hamarey mulk aur hamare mazhab dono ki bakaa hai.



    By Aslam Khan Barailvi -


    The terrorists who came from across the border would not have been able to carry out the attacks without local support. It's time for Indian Muslims to come out of self-denial and introspect.

    It's time for Indian Muslims to identify the forces within the community both men and institutions who could have given birth to the minds that would have lent support to the terrorists.

    It's time for Indian Muslims to instead of opposing, tell the government to come down heavily on organizations like Tableeghi Jamaat and investigate institutions like IRF who are promoting the radical ideology of the Talibans which gives birth to terrorists.

    It's time for Indian Muslims to come out openly against a television channel like Peace TV which glorifies a tyrant like Yazid and supports Osama Bin Laden the biggest symbol of terrorism.

    Zakir Naik, the most popular face of Peace TV, who was in the news recently after some Muslim organizations issued Fatwas against him, when asked about his views on Osama, openly came out in his defence and said Osama stood for Peace and was against killing of innocents. What a joke?

    Peace TV is causing the greatest damage to the Muslim community by polluting the minds of young educated Muslims in the name of peace, with its chief architect Zakir Naik telling all Muslims to become terrorists.

    Let us ourselves cleanse the community of organizations like IRF and others; and people like Zakir Naik and his Peace TV which are damaging the minds of the Muslim youth in the name of peace, before the government does the same.

    I feel people like Mr. Sultan Shaheen, Mr.S A H Rizvi, Mr.Mubashir, Dr.Mansoor Ilahi, Mr.SAF Rizvi, Mr.Jamsheed Basha and Dr.Sarkar Haider who have been vocal against forces damaging the Muslim community should come forward and take the lead in a campaign against Peace TV.


    By Hasan Iqbal -


    The other battle

    in New Delhi


    The Congress and the BJP began a slanging match in less than 24 hours after the crisis began.

    At the J.J.Hospital in Mumbai on November 28, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi beside a person injured in the terror attack.

    IMMEDIATE political reactions to the terror attack in Mumbai revolved around one word: unity. Initially, leaders of all political parties said repeatedly that the issue of terrorism was beyond petty politicking and that politicians of all hues would “stand united in this hour of crisis”. But the assurances did not last even 24 hours. By the time the battle of the security forces against the terrorists had entered the second day, the two mainstream political parties of the country, the ruling Congress and the principal opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), were engaged in a war of words.

    Diverse instruments of propaganda, including public statements, newspaper advertisements and announcements about rewards to security personnel, were used in this political war. At one level, the propaganda contest reflected not only the rivalry between the two parties but also a struggle for prominence within the BJP.

    The first strike came from the BJP’s self-professed “face against terror” Narendra Modi, the Chief Minister of Gujarat. Reaching Mumbai as the battle of the security forces entered the second day, he said he could not hold himself back in Ahmedabad though he was advised against visiting the trouble-torn city at that juncture. On arrival, he announced a reward of Rs.1 crore to the families of all “martyred security personnel” and lashed out at the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government at the Centre for its poor preparedness in preventing terrorist attacks and shoddy reaction once the attack had taken place.

    Criticising the Prime Minister specifically, Modi said he was disappointed with Manmohan Singh’s address to the nation after the terrorist attack. “For the first time, terrorists from Pakistan have attacked us from the sea. I had warned the Union government some time ago that Pakistan could use boats seized from Indian fishermen in terrorist activities,” he said.

    Modi’s salvo

    Modi’s statement clearly indicated that his warnings were not taken seriously and acted upon by the Union government. He demanded strong action against Pakistan, in accordance with the principles of the United Nations, for violating maritime norms.

    Modi’s salvo was followed up by the BJP’s Prime Minister-designate, Lal Krishna Advani, who charged the UPA government with having a “non-serious approach” to intelligence gathering. He said the government’s overall approach to terrorism was one of “pussyfooting” and that it had consistently refused “to arm the security agencies with appropriately tough anti-terror laws”. The reference, obviously, was to the BJP’s demand to bring back the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA).

    Advani added a new dimension to the BJP’s criticism of the UPA’s anti-terror policy by saying that the preoccupation of the intelligence agencies with Hindutva terror had helped the terrorists go ahead with their plot in a totally undetected manner. This was a direct reference to the Mumbai Anti-Terrorism Squad’s (ATS) ongoing investigations into the Malegaon blasts, which was allegedly perpetrated by a group of “Hindutva terrorists”.

    Like Modi, Advani also targeted Manmohan Singh. According to him, the Prime Minister had initially indicated that they would travel to Mumbai together, but “just before leaving for Mumbai, I was told the Prime Minister had changed his mind and would follow a little later”. Advani said that he was told that he would be informed about the venue of a meeting in Mumbai but received no information thereafter.

    The Congress condemned the principal opposition party of playing cheap politics in the middle of a national crisis. The counter-attack was led by the party’s spokesperson M. Veerappa Moily and the Union Minister for Science and Technology Kapil Sibal.

    Sibal said the BJP had exposed its true colours when it sought to convert a human tragedy of massive proportions into a political opportunity. “They had themselves said that the nation should present a united picture during such times of crisis, but it has been proved beyond doubt that they pay only lip service to such ideals,” he said.

    He added that the statements by Advani and Modi showed not only their lack of political maturity but also their lack of national commitment.

    Moily alleged that Modi and Advani were indulging in a competitive anti-government campaign with the basic objective of establishing their supremacy within the BJP and the larger Sangh Parivar. “Modi wants to have a shot at becoming the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate in the next Lok Sabha elections itself while Advani wants to hold on to his designated position. The competitive statements are essentially about that,” he told Frontline.

    According to Moily, the rewards announced by Modi were a sham. “The compensation announced by the Chief Minister to Gujarat policemen after the 2002 Akshardham attack are yet to be paid and here you have Modi using the same ploy once again and trying to win accolades from the rank and file of the security forces as well as the people,” he said.

    Moily also expressed surprise at Modi’s so-called inability to hold himself back in Ahmedabad. “Here is a man who was barely 200 metres away when the Akshardham temple was attacked by terrorists but took 12 hours to reach there,” Moily pointed out.

    Minister of State for Home Sriprakash Jaiswal said “certain political parties have been targeting the Mumbai ATS for the last one month and that this is a factor that would be probed in future investigations”. He said that it should be noted that three senior ATS officers had died in the fight with the terrorists.

    Vote-bank politics

    Many of the points made by the leaders of the two parties found reflection in the newspaper advertisements they brought out in no time. The BJP advertisement, which had a blood-splattered look, had the following slogan: “Brutal Terror Strikes at Will. Weak Government. Unwilling and Incapable. Fight Terror. Vote BJP.”

    The Congress countered this with an advertisement that sought to remind the people that terrorist attacks had happened during the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance (NDA) regime too. It made references to the Kandahar hijack (1999), and the attacks on the Red Fort (2000) and Parliament House (2001). The final line of the advertisement referred to the Mumbai attacks too and stated that all these were part of a larger terrorist game plan to wreck India, which should be foiled on the strength of resolute and united people’s power.

    Beyond the sloganeering, the assessment within both parties was that the climate created by the terrorist act would benefit the BJP in the Assembly elections in Delhi and Rajasthan, which were due on November 29 and December 4 respectively. According to a senior BJP leader of Uttar Pradesh, the party’s assessment was that the Mumbai terror attack had exposed the UPA government as one that was unprepared to face the threat of terrorism. “This perception is gaining ground in urban constituencies of Delhi and Rajasthan. This is accentuated by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s inability to remove Shivraj Patil despite the latter’s poor performance as Home Minister,” he said. He said the Mumbai attacks had nullified whatever electoral advantage the Congress had gained by highlighting the Hindutva terror issue.

    Informal estimates

    Many Congress leaders agreed with this assessment in private. According to them, informal estimates within the party were that there would be a shift of 2 to 3 per cent votes in favour of the BJP on account of the Mumbai attacks. “We are trying our best to overcome the negative effects, especially by trying to highlight the strong message sent by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to Pakistan and asking the chief of the ISI [Inter-Services Intelligence] to come to India. However, it remains to be seen how far it would be successful in an electoral sense,” said a senior South Indian leader, who has been active in the elections, to Frontline.

    In his view, the party will have to do some serious stocktaking after the polls, if it were to prevent serious political damage on account of its poor management of internal security. “Undoubtedly, it is time to do some serious shake-up, particularly at the top of the Home Ministry. It has proved time and again over the past two years that it is completely inept at handling issues of internal security, and it is proving to be extremely costly in political terms,” he said.

    Clearly, the message of unity that was sent out in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks by the government and the opposition lost all its value in about 24 hours. Thankfully, other political forces such as the Left parties, the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) and the Samajwadi Party (S.P.), did not join in the politicking and add to the unseemly spectacle.

    By Aamir Mughal -

  • from Shama Zaidi
    to Sultan Shahin <editor@newageislam.com>
    date 2 December 2008 13:36

    subject Informed Comment : India: Please Don't Go Down the Bush- Cheney Road

    shama zaidi has sent you a link to a blog:

    Blog: Informed Comment
    Post: India: Please Don't Go Down the Bush- Cheney Road
    Link: http://www.juancole.com/2008/11/india-please-dont-go-down-bush-cheney.html

    By Shama Zaidi -


    Pakistan media declare war on Indian counterparts

    Nirupama Subramanian

    Indian media accused of not demanding for evidence

    "They are overcommitted to projecting India as a success story"

    ISLAMABAD: The escalating tensions between India and Pakistan over the Mumbai attacks have led to the declaration of hostilities in unexpected quarters – Pakistani media has declared a virtual war on Indian media for its "knee-jerk" finger-pointing across the border, and its unquestioning acceptance of the Indian government's "Pakistan-link" theory.

    Most Pakistanis are angry and upset about the Indian allegations, which they believe are "unsubstantiated". Even the Indian government, whose highest officials have made the allegation in unambiguous terms, have not come in for as much flak as the messenger, the assumption being that governments will say what they have to, but it is the duty of the media to question.

    Leading the charge against the India media are the Pakistani television channels, with panel discussions shows devoted exclusively to the coverage of the Mumbai attacks by the Indian media.

    Even on talk shows about the impact of the attacks on the relations between the two countries, among the first questions that anchors are shooting off are: "Do you think the India media should have pointed a finger at Pakistan within such a short time, and without any evidence? Why do we see this knee-jerk response every time some terrorist incident takes place in India?"


    One of the big successes of the peace process since 2004 was the greater understanding and camaraderie between the media of the two countries, thanks to frequent interactions. But the smoke and gunfire of Mumbai has overshadowed even that.

    Top Pakistani journalists are asking why the Indian media, more specifically the electronic media, have been so willing to accept the government theory that the attackers came from Pakistan. Top Pakistani journalists are asking why the Indian media, more specifically the electronic media, have been so willing to accept the government theory that the attackers came from Pakistan.

    They are dismissive of reports in the Indian press that the terrorists had links with Lashkar-e-Taiba, or that they landed in Mumbai in a boat from Karachi. Instead, they are asking why these reports are not demanding the government for evidence of these allegations.

    "Too nationalistic"

    On Dawn News, three top guns of the Pakistani media – anchors Hamid Mir, Talat Hussain and Nasim Zehra – dissected the coverage in an hour-long programme that was aired both on Saturday and Sunday.

    Their scathing conclusion – Indian media are "too nationalistic", "smug", they told "lies" or at best "half-truths", "did not ask questions", resorted to "clichés" and have perfected the art of projecting Pakistan as the enemy.

    A similar programme aired on Geo TV on Sunday. The feeling is widespread in the Pakistan journalistic community that the Indian media are responsible for the current tensions between the two countries and for pushing the Indian government to take on its neighbour even if it means launching a military strike. The India media have been accused of not even looking at other possibilities, such as the involvement of an Indian group in the attacks.

    The new evidence in the Samjhauta Express firebombings pointing a finger at a Hindutva militant group has come up repeatedly as one reason why the Indian media should have been less "hasty" in arriving at its conclusions.

    On the whole, Pakistanis — as evident from public phone-ins to talk shows — are even questioning if the entire ghastly episode was not all engineered by Indian intelligence agencies working in connivance with the U.S. to "defame" Pakistan with the intention of dismembering it.

    "[The] Indian media is overcommitted to projecting India as a success story. They are not used to reporting state failures. They are used to reporting India as a country where nothing bad happens, its Army as the best thing in the world. It projects its heroes as supermen, taller than the Himlayas…So the gap between what the Indian media are committed to reporting, and the crass state failure they had to do report [in Mumbai], they ended up filling it with lies," Mr. Hussain, a top-rated anchor with Aaj TV, told Dawn News.

    On the same programme, Mr. Mir, who anchors Geo's flagship show Capital Talk, asked why the Indian media were not asking hard questions of the Indian government.

    "When Pakistani forces say they have killed five Al-Qaeda, when they say Rashid Rauf has been killed in a drone attack, Pakistani media are asking them questions — show us the bodies. But Indian media are not asking important questions.

    "There are 500 nautical miles between Karachi and Gujarat, and the Indian media are saying the terrorists came in boats from Karachi. Why are they not questioning the failure of their intelligence agencies?"

    Mr. Mir said the Indian media had to take responsibility of the sharp downslide in the relations between the two countries.

    At a press conference, Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi too accused the Indian media of "irresponsible" conduct.

    Giving himself credit for having stayed on in India for three days after the Mumbai incidents began, he said he had "engaged with their political leadership, engaged their intelligentsia, faced their media," to explain Pakistan's point of view.

    In response to his appeal for "national unity" and his declaration that the country must "hope for the best and plan for the worst", at least one Punjabi television channel started playing national songs from the 1965 and 1971 wars, including Noorjehan's famous song dedicated to soldiers, "Merey watan key sajheeley jawanon".


    |-| /\ $ /\  |\|

    ICT Professional,
    Human Scientist

    +92 - 321 5393145

    By |-| /\ $ /\ |\| -

  • On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 8:03 PM, Ashraf Mohamedy  wrote:

    Dear Friends,

    Assalamualaikum (Peace be on  You),

    The tone and tenor of reporting could indeed lead to another confrontation between the neighbours. The biggest beneficiary of this fear psychosis will be the country selling Rs. 10,000 crores of weaponry to us! Something 'we – the people' should seriously  think about!

    Who is responsibe for the terror strike, the media, the government, intelligence failure, the pimps involved in the arms trade or some over-zealous 'insiders' who wish to un-do the negative publicity created by the Late Hemant Karkare.

    Why does Rice have to visit india to when just 200 people have been killed? Did the SoS visit us when thousands were killed in Gujarat? Do Indian ministers visit the US whenever there is a terror strike there? Or is this visit a timely sales call for the next big order, just in case our neighbours choose to attack us?

    Several questions of this nature need answers. I agree with those who challenge the role of the media in India. Our folks accept every statement from the authorities, hook, line & sinker, without questioning them. Why do they forget the freedom of expression so rightfully available, when the fingers are pointed at the so called 'Muslim terrorists'.

    They question Ram Gopal Verma's presence at Taj! They even question the fact that NSG commandos were brought in a BEST bus, but have made it a habit to pass the bigger, more pressing questions for such trivia!

    Enough is enough is the refrain today, but change will happen only if we start asking the right questions, to the right people at the right time. The time is NOW!



    By Ashraf Mohamedy -



    Excerpts from a Diplomatic Gathering in 80s

    ""The Soviet Foreign Minister, Gromyko, speaking in New Delhi on February 12, 1980 had warned that, "If Pakistan continues to serve as a puppet of imperialism in the future; it will jeopardize its existence and its integrity as an independent state." The United States, too, could in certain circumstances accept the dismemberment of Pakistan as it did in 1971. Henry Kissinger, the US Secretary of State during President Nixon's administration, had said: "In my conversation with Ambassador Jha I reiterated my constant theme that we considered Indian and American long term interests as congruent .... I emphasized that the United States did not insist that East Bengal remain part of Pakistan. On the contrary, we accepted autonomy as inevitable and independence as possible. A war was senseless; Bangladesh would come into being by the spring of 1972 if present procedures were given a chance. We differed over method, not aim."On October 7, I told WSAG meeting that if India would accept an evolutionary process, it would achieve most of its objectives with our assistance. If they would co-operate with us we could work out 90 per cent of their problems, like releasing Mujib or attaining some degree of autonomy for Bangladesh, and these steps would lead eventually to their getting it all." With the return of a Republican administration and keeping United States global interests in mind, it would be prudent to assume that should the US interests in the future be better served by sacrificing Pakistan or a part of it, Henry Kissinger's successors would not hesitate to do so. Pakistan must, therefore, strive to keep itself together by weakening those forces that are pulling it apart and this cannot be done by force of arms. The use of strong arm methods has shown that the situation did not, to say the least, improve."


    A renowned Writer Robert D Kaplan had predicted in Mid and Late 90s that several countries are not going to survive and India and Pakistan are amongst those countries. Such theories are launched off and on by the power that be [The USA, IMF and WORLD BANK]to prepare the children of the lesser god for more miseries.

    Read the articles of Robert D Kaplan on Baluchistan and India.

    Dr Abul Maali Syed's book The Twin era of Pakistan:

    Democracy and Dictatorship. Written in 1992, the book predicts an independent Balochistan in 2006. Dr Syed begins his book by saying 'Who would have believed that Balochistan, once the least populated and poorest province of Pakistan, would become independent and the third richest oil-producing country after Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.' This may not be a serious venture, but it should be nevertheless worrying especially if one reads it along with the US National Intelligence Committee that spoke of Pakistan as a failed State in 2015.

    The Lawless Frontier By Robert D. Kaplan Atlantic Monthly  September, 2000


    This past April in Quetta, the bleached-gray, drought-stricken capital of the Pakistani border province of Baluchistan, I awoke to explosions and gunfire. In search of the violence, my translator, Jamil, and I jumped into a four-wheel-drive Toyota and raced through the section of town inhabited by Pashtoon tribesmen. Suddenly we were surrounded by Pakistani soldiers, who forced us out of the car and pointed assault rifles in our faces. While they searched us, I saw two other soldiers with automatic weapons run along a high wall a few feet from where we stood. Shots rang out from inside the adjacent compound. By 11:00 a.m. five people had been killed and twenty wounded, and a large cache of weapons had been confiscated in a raid on the Pashtoonkhwa Milli Awami (Pashtoon National People's Party), a group supporting an Independent "Pashtoonistan" created out of Pakistani territory. The party stood accused of murders and kidnapping. Security forces claimed victory, but reports later circulated that party members had filtered back into the area with weapons. 


    THE COMING ANARCHY by Robert D. Kaplan

    How scarcity, crime, overpopulation, tribalism, and disease are rapidly destroying the social fabric of our planet

    The Atlantic Monthly, February 1994


    Pakistan's problem is more basic still: like much of Africa, the country makes no geographic or demographic sense. It was founded as a homeland for the Muslims of the subcontinent, yet there are more subcontinental Muslims outside Pakistan than within it. Like Yugoslavia, Pakistan is a patchwork of ethnic groups, increasingly in violent conflict with one another. While the Western media gushes over the fact that the country has a woman Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, Karachi is becoming a subcontinental version of Lagos.

    In eight visits to Pakistan, I have never gotten a sense of a cohesive national identity. With as much as 65 percent of its land dependent on intensive irrigation, with wide-scale deforestation, and with a yearly population growth of 2.7 percent (which ensures that the amount of cultivated land per rural inhabitant will plummet), Pakistan is becoming a more and more desperate place. As irrigation in the Indus River basin intensifies to serve two growing populations, Muslim-Hindu strife over falling water tables may be unavoidable.

    "India and Pakistan will probably fall apart," Homer-Dixon predicts. "Their secular governments have less and less legitimacy as well as less management ability over people and resources." Rather than one bold line dividing the subcontinent into two parts, the future will likely see a lot of thinner lines and smaller parts, with the ethnic entities of Pakhtunistan and Punjab gradually replacing Pakistan in the space between the Central Asian plateau and the heart of the subcontinent. None of this even takes into account climatic change,  which, if it occurs in the next century, will further erode the capacity of existing states to cope. India, for instance, receives 70 percent of its precipitation from the monsoon cycle, which planetary warming could disrupt.



    By Aamir Mughal -

  • Aftermath of Terrorism : Pakistan should show it in deeds.

    When all fingers points to Pakistan that its citizens were involved in the terrorists attacked carried out in Mumbai at post Taj Mahal Hotel, Obreo-Trident Hotel and Nariman House, the visiting  Pakistani Foreign Minister Yousuf Reza Quereshi, minced no words to condemn the mayhem as barbaric, inhuman, dastardly and act of insanity. He denied Pakistani hand in it but promised to work closely with the Indian counter part to fight the menace of terrorism, as they are also facing the same problem at home. Mr. Quereshi, it is no time for mere rhetorics but demonstration through deeds. As demanded by India, Pakistan should first demolish all the training apparatus in Pakistan, destroy all the factories of terror that churn out terrorists from its borders, take action to wipe out the hide outs of the terrorists from Afghan-Pakistani borders, which is the epicentre of Al-Qaida, handover Dawood Ibrahim, the kingpin of 1993 bombing in Bombay and whose complicity in the present attack is also not ruled out altogether. Will Qureshi and his govt would hand over the chief of Lakshare Touiba, who openly threatened such attacks in future in India?

    Can we trust Pakistan? Certainly we can't and Pakistan cannot be believed for its words unless it is demonstrated in deeds. The recent attack has not only left hundreds dead and wounded but also would leave a deep imprint on the psyche of the people of Mumbai and India. It would also put a question mark on the futue peace process between India and Pakistan. Certainly bumpy roads are ahead for Pakistan and India as well. The people  killed in the mayhem were not only Indians but also foreigners including some from Britain, US, Israel, Japan and others. This extra-ordinary and unprecedented but well orchesterated attack by Fidayeen did internationalise the whole issue. It is possible that the intelligence might of these countries would join the Indian intelligence agencies to unearth the real players behind the sordid drama of killing and destruction, though India has refused Mosad help in the beginning itself. But the U-turn made by Pakistani authorities in not sending its ISI Chief to India to assist the Indian intelligence, put a question mark on their future commitments to fight the menace jointly.

    When Indian Foreign Minister informed of the Pakistani elements involvement in the dastardly act, Pakistani Foreign Minister cried foul and pleaded Pakistan innocense. He said, "“They have no face. They have no colour, no class, no creed, no religion, no nothing. They are barbarians. They are inhuman and we have to collectively eliminate them.” This is not enough Mr. Qureshi. Answer the question, why Pakistani authorities have not raided the house of Ajmal, the terorist caught in Mumbai so far to unearth the details? This and more questions, Pakistani Foreign Minister and his President must answer soon.

    But the real victim of the incident would be Indo-Pak detente and future peace process.  This certainly would add to the fear of failure of the promised joint anti-terror mechanism.

    Though sympathy and assurance of cooperation are pouring in from all over the world, including that from President Zardari and Premier Gilani, our Prime Minister warned the neighbour of dire consequences if it continues to send such terrorists to India in future. Pakistan would be well advised to take this threat seriously and act fast to restore the confidence of international community that it is sincere in cooperating with India.

    It is good thing that Shivraj Patel has owned the moral responsibility just now and tendered his resignation from the Union cabinet. Though it is little late but nevertheless a right decision in the wake of the criticism of intelligence failure that led to terrorists attack. The new Home Minister, who is all likely to be Chidambaram, has a job cut out for him and restore the confidence of the people. He has to restructure the entire internal security and intelligence apparatus besides taking a number of steps to safeguard the country and insulate it well from future attack. All the best to P. Chidambaram.  

    By A.M. Jamsheed Basha, Chennai, India. -

  • Assalam Alaikum warehmatullahi barakat

    Sorry Mr Basha You are a Great Tamashaaa
    Try to Understand. You are true in your qoutation but qoutation is not True yaaaaaaaaaar.
    Here Syeda Farheen is 100% ture.

    You are using Ibn tamiyia for your quotation. Maaz Allah.
    He was a great munafiq. I think You dont know about tamiya laanati. Read About Tamiya in light of truth of Sunni scholar.
    Because you are sunni muslim with refernce of syeda farheen.
    Now 'I m ardent fan of farheen's qoutation'.

    Acording to Miss Syeda Farheeen fatima
    ""(And Mr Basha what You think ownself You are political colimnnist, that is good but you are not a Islamic (history) political columnist. .
    Who all men donot understand Ahle bait and his sacrifices for Islam, who are totally misguided and corrupt in Islamic qreed, you are misguided by some unislamic historians.
    So dont say You are sunni, because you, Zakir naik, Ibn timmiya (lanati) and his follower are wahabi,
    “Ibn timiya is a first man who had said that "who man thinks to go to Mazar only he is mushrik specialy Mazare muqaddaus of Prophet Muhammad sallalllahu wasssaalam."

    After this fatwa, all ullema of that time use takfir for timiya lanati. And after that abdul wahab najdi had say like that. Waht you think only you know history. You are corrupt for your comment own yazid. sorry to all for my critics.)""

    By A sunni -

  • Pak-India ties: time to tread carefully

    The Mumbai standoff with the terrorists went into its third day on Friday with remnants of the attackers ensconced in the buildings they had occupied along with hostages, including symbolically the Nariman House Jewish centre. The death tally had gone up to 125 with 9 foreigners killed too. India is jolted and commentators are calling it India’s 9/11, the same way Pakistan called the attack on the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad Pakistan’s 9/11. In the middle of this the Indian prime minister, in a nation-wide address, said that “neighbouring nations would have to face a cost if they allowed their territory to be used to launch attacks on India”, a thinly veiled reference to Pakistan. This shows the domestic pressure he has to face, especially from the BJP and other rightwing groups who have already accused his government of being soft on the Muslims. But the statement does threaten to throw a spanner in the works of the normalisation process. For its part Pakistan has already condemned the attacks and warned that “jumping to a conclusion” won’t help either side.
    It is clear that Pakistan has not “allowed” its territory to be used by Al Qaeda. In fact, it is under attack from Al Qaeda and its many affiliate groups. The last time Al Qaeda attacked inside Pakistan was when an Arab suicide-bomber blew up the Danish embassy in June this year. In September, another suicide attack destroyed the Marriott Hotel in Islamabad amid comment that it could have also targeted the Americans staying there. In Pakistan speculation was widespread about the involvement of “foreign” elements, but finally the case was cracked when on November 22, 2008 an arrested Pakistani confessed in a court that the plan to attack the Marriott had been hatched inside Afghanistan in a province used earlier by Al Qaeda for the Danish embassy blast.
    The Indian prime minister’s phrase “allowed their territory to be used” brings India into the category where the US leads by holding Pakistan accountable for its lack of sovereign hold over its own territory. Pakistan’s territory was used for the 9/11 action, and today the main bone of contention are the cross-border raids being carried out from Pakistani territory against the NATO forces in Afghanistan. But India should be careful about joining this club as it would take away the option of “cooperating” with the present government in Islamabad on the rising tide of terror in the two countries.
    Very thin evidence linking speed boats — and at least two “captured” Pakistani cargo ships going to Karachi off the coast of Indian Gujarat — to the terrorists positioned in the hotels in Mumbai threatens to produce a new bilateral crisis. Pakistan has issued statements from the president and the prime minister in a tone that clearly indicates sympathy and collaboration. President Zardari who took the risk of crossing the traditional nuclear “red line” by offering not to exercise its “first use” option will be put on the backfoot if hostile rhetoric now rising in India takes over. As Indian commentators speculated about Lashkar-e-Tayba and Jaish-e-Muhammad, Karachi in Pakistan was experiencing a deadly standoff between the police and what is known as Afghani Gang in Sohrab Goth, the latter liberally using hand grenades. There are reports of Talibanisation in Karachi that have divided instead of uniting the political forces there.
    Pakistan faces the spread of Taliban and Al Qaeda elements southwards into the settled areas as CIA drones operate in the Tribal Areas. There is insurgency in Balochistan which is steadily killing persons suspected of being against Baloch nationalism. Equally there is the calamity of an earthquake in the province which Pakistan is finding it difficult to tackle. Relations with the US are tense over the drone attacks and Pakistan needs cooperation with its regional neighbours to avoid becoming isolated while its economy needs to be helped out of its current trough of depression. Above all, it needs understanding from India while it stands ready to share intelligence with it on the latest Mumbai bombing.
    Recent events have not helped. India has been accusing Pakistan’s intelligence of having attacked the Indian embassy in Kabul with a suicide-bomber while Pakistan has alleged Indian hand in the Balochistan insurgency and even terrorism emanating from the Tribal Areas. This has been a blind continuation of allegations that began in 2001 when the Indian parliament was attacked, triggering Indian troop deployment along the border with Pakistan. This kind of “jurisprudence” is being pulled out again to explain the latest attack. “Analysis” emanating from the West about the Mumbai attack having the signature of Al Qaeda in combination with some Pakistani Islamic group has not helped either.
    Pakistan needs to activate friendly diplomacy instead of “replying” to the allegations being made by upset Indians over the media. The past may have been problematic but the present clearly shows both countries afflicted by the same disease. Both need to cooperate and must stop their “proxy” war in Afghanistan. The cue for this must come from the friendly statements made earlier by President Zardari, expressing Pakistan’s willingness to move rapidly on a course of normalisation with India. *
    Second Editorial: Whither cricket?
    Just as India had arisen in the world as the most attractive arena for international cricket contest, a terrorist operation in Mumbai seems to have delivered it a setback. Pakistan had succumbed earlier to the same phenomenon. No cricket team from the main cricket-playing nations has visited Pakistan since a threat to life became palpable, causing the loss of billions of rupees to the Pakistan Cricket Board. Unwillingly, Pakistan has accepted India as an alternative arena for the Champions League with a cut in profits. Now India faces the same situation.
    The “cash-rich” Twenty20 Champions League has been postponed and the Indian Board has accepted England’s request to prune the ODIs and allow only the two tests. The lucrative Champions League had fallen to the share of Pakistan, only to be taken away after a spate of kidnappings and rumours of attacks in Karachi. Now there is talk of moving cricket out of South Asia. The Dubai and Sharjah grounds are not good enough and everyone concerned will have to sustain the damage of curtailed earnings.

    By kahkashan fatima -

  • It's War
     This nation is under attack. The scale, intensity and level of orchestration of terror attacks in Mumbai put one thing beyond doubt: India is
    effectively at war and it has deadly enemies in its midst. Ten places in south Mumbai were struck in quick succession.
    As in the case of the demolition of New York's World Trade Center in 2001, Mumbai's iconic monuments such as the Taj Mahal Hotel, the Oberoi Trident and Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus have come under attack. The number of people killed in multiple attacks is 101 and counting, which includes foreigners and senior policemen. At least 300 have been injured.
    The terrorists who carried out the attacks are well supplied, armed to the teeth and extremely well motivated. The question now is whether the nation can show any serious degree of resolve and coordination in confronting terror. This war can be won, but it will require something from the political class, from security forces and from ordinary people. It's time now to move beyond pointing fingers at one another or resorting to cliches such as 'resilient Mumbai'. It's also time to end the habit of basing one's stand on terrorism on the particular religious affiliation of terrorists, criticising or exonerating them using their religion a point of reference. Terrorists have no religion. Political bickering on this issue is divisive; what India needs now is unity.
    While Mumbai also witnessed multiple attacks which brought the city to a halt in 1993, this one is different in two respects. One, it is unfolding in slow motion with the world media as witness, which makes for maximum psychological impact. Two, foreigners have specifically been targeted. Sites frequented by them have been chosen for attack and Britons, Americans and Israelis appear to have been singled out.
    This kind of attack on India's financial capital is intended to send the message that India isn't a safe place to do business. The Indian economy and its links with the world are under attack. On the plus side, there have been unprecedented outpourings of sympathy and offers of cooperation from world governments. All the more reason to make the attacks on Mumbai a transformative moment. There has been talk of beefing up India's poor infrastructure. Security must now be seen as an essential element of infrastructure, as vital as power, water or transport.
    Both L K Advani and Rajnath Singh have said it's time to rise above politics, which is welcome. An announced joint visit to Mumbai by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and leader of the opposition Advani would send a signal of political unity. Beyond that the PM, in consultation with senior opposition leaders, must draw up a consensus plan about how to deal with contingency situations as well as upgrade India's security culture.
    A host of institutions have been built since the 1980s when India first encountered terrorism. New agencies, special cells and commando units have come up since then. But how well do we run them, how well resourced are they and is there proper coordination among them to maximise and collate information? According to the home ministry, terrorists sneaked in from the Arabian Sea. They may have sailed past the naval headquarters to blast their way into the city. However, it took a while before the National Security Guards and naval commandos in the city were pressed into action. What explains such delay? Was it a multiplicity of commands or plain bureaucratic lethargy? The point is even in circumstances when personnel and infrastructure are available, planning and execution are shockingly poor.
    Constitutional experts must put their hands together to see whether under existing laws any special, but temporary, powers can be given to the security agencies. All major political parties should be taken into confidence to see what urgent steps can be taken to prevent the nation from sinking deeper into chaos. There is a pressing need to restructure India's security architecture. A federal agency to deal with terrorism has been suggested by this newspaper and now by the PM. A coordinated effort to process information gleaned by state and central agencies should help to transform randomly collected information into actionable intelligence.
    The government should immediately work on an internal security doctrine that demarcates the role of various security wings and a clear command structure to deal with terrorism. This should include contingency plans for various scenarios which lay out in advance how to respond to them. Tougher laws, in consultation with the opposition, may also be needed to control terror.
    It's incumbent on all chief ministers to remain on alert and maintain calm in their states. Unnecessary repercussions from the Mumbai incidents need to be avoided at all costs. Election campaigning needs to be kept at a minimum to avoid stretching security too thin. The political class must ensure that communalism of all varieties is kept out of politics.
    Besides terrorists coming in from the Arabian Sea, their looking for Americans, Britons and Israelis give the signal that the attack on Mumbai is a spillover from the larger war on terror. Al-Qaeda is, for the first time, feeling the pressure in its Pakistani sanctuaries as it is under Pakistani and American attack. But South Asian borders are notoriously porous. Al-Qaeda affiliated organisations such as Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami (HuJI) have struck deep roots in Bangladesh.
    To tackle terror in India it is urgently necessary to stabilise Pakistan and Bangladesh. And, India should seek international help now to upgrade its own security apparatus, but also to stabilise the entire region stretching from Afghanistan to Bangladesh. There is no time to waste.

    By kahkashan fatima -

Compose Your Comments here:
Email (Not to be published)
Fill the text
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.