CROCODILE TEARS OF OPPOSITION PARTIES ON KERRY LUGAR BILL.

Dr. Khurrum Shaukat Yusafzai .

There are some Political parties, who are Allergic to discuss the Kerry Lugar Bill in Parliament. For example PML-N, and Q. These parties are mostly Punjab based. They are Reluctant to pay any Agricultural Taxes since 1947, and would pass Bills Unanimously in their Provincial Assemblies but would raise hue and cry on Kerry Lugar Bill .  I term such hue and Cry as Crocodile Tears.

While Shaukat Tarin Finance Advisor is warning that, we would have to take more loans from IMF. This delay will cause the People of NWFP and FATA to suffer more, after all they delay is Civilian Aid, which will make hospitals, Schools and other Infrastructure, which have been Destroyed after the War on terror was Shifted Deliberately from Afghanistan to Pakistan to help America meager Forces . While the Military Aid is without any Conditions which enables the Army to Fight the War on Terror with a Predominant Military Strategy which is ditto Copy of George Bushes Strategy .

The Alternate Strategy of Social work through Hospitals, Schools and Jobs has conditions that is making flow of money difficult for this . while one bomb Blast occurs every 48 hours in tiny Province of NWFP and every 72 Hours in FATA and only 16 has occurred in Punjab in 2009.  The lack of funds in NWFP for salaries of Police and extra cops is making lives of people Miserable. The Attitude of Punjab based parties is mind Boggling .

It shows the How they are fighting this war with a Failed Military Strategy  , and lack of Social Strategy because of Paucity of Funds.

The Shreef talk about Ghairat (Honor), while they are Neck deep in Illegal Cartels of Wheat, Sugar and now Hamza the junior Shareef ( Son of Shabaz Shareef ) , is involved in Chicken Cartels after his export to Gulf Countries of Chicken and Eggs. This is causing Inflation and Shortage of Essential Goods for Pakistanis. The Shareef should look into their Gariabans (Inner Self) and see how they are making our Life Miserable.

While they Talk about, Messaq Jumboriate , they are tiptoeing around the Army Generals when Chaudhry Nisar and Shabaz Shareef met like Thieves with Army Chief and they had to say, we are not meeting Indians to hide their Embarrassment.

Why as PML-N is not bringing the matters into Parliament like Gen Mushraff Trail of Treason, and Other Maters of national importance. it shows their true Faces that they are nothing but an undemocratic , un –Serious parties, who are just the Extension of Establishment in Guise of Democrats and do only their Biddings.

Even PML-N Parliamentary members were making Noise like bad boys to be scolded by Deputy Speaker, to behave.

Well We as Pakistani also think so and request the PML to behave too, and not make unnecessary noise like bad boys and rather go to the Parliament and do its job for which it is, being paid and discuss the Bills there instead of Shedding Crocodile Tears. They should be paying Agriculture taxes too as responsibilty to State of Paksitan too .
Email : Khurrumuk@gmail.com

Buying Peace With the Taliban

Barack Obama ready to pay Afghan fighters to ditch the Taliban

Christina Lamb in Washington

The Obama administration is considering outbidding the Taliban to persuade Afghan villagers to lay down arms as it struggles to find a new approach to a war that is fast losing public and congressional support.

Despite five war councils in two weeks, President Barack Obama has so far failed to come up with a strategy for the conflict that may define his presidency. Fierce infighting continues between his own generals and advisers.

Obama has been handed three options by General Stanley McChrystal, commander of the US forces in Afghanistan. These range from 20,000 to 60,000 more troops, which would almost double the US military presence. McChrystal is said to favour an increase of 40,000 men, without which he warns the mission will fail.

The White House is uneasy about sending so many on top of an extra 21,000 already dispatched this year, fearing this could escalate the war which has already claimed the lives of 241 American soldiers this year.

Obama’s delay in coming to a decision has led generals to warn that the Taliban will see it as lack of resolve and take advantage. The Taliban stepped up attacks last week with a bomb in Kabul, which killed 17 people, and an onslaught against a US military post in which eight Americans died.

Anthony Zinni is one of a number of retired generals who have taken to the airwaves insisting more troops should be sent. “The risk if you take too much time is you look like you’re dithering and both our allies and enemies will wonder if we’re really committed,” he warned.

The president is reportedly frustrated that the debate has become polarised between those who want to send more troops and their critics, who say it would lead to another Vietnam. They advocate more reliance on drones and special forces.

Leslie Gelb, president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, argues that the president has only himself to blame. “It was Obama who insisted in March and again last month that this was a ‘war of necessity’ and must be fully resourced rather than looking at what we really have at stake in Afghanistan.”

One official said the key emphasis in the White House meetings had been to identify options that would prepare the way for American troops to leave. Apart from training more Afghan troops, the focus has shifted to accepting a political role for the Taliban, while also trying to weaken them by winning some over.

Afghans are known for changing sides back and forth during their long years of war — there is an old saying that “you can rent an Afghan but never buy one” — and battles have often been decided by defections rather than combat.

Paying Taliban foot-soldiers to switch sides could spare US lives and save money, say its advocates. A recent report by the Senate foreign relations committee estimated the Taliban fighting strength at 15,000, of whom only 5% are committed idealogues while 70% fight for money — the so-called $10-a-day Taliban. Doubling this to win them over would cost just $300,000 a day, compared with the $165m a day the United States is spending fighting the war.

The tactic was used to good effect in Iraq where the US government put 100,000 Sunni gunmen on its payroll for about $300 a month each.

Some experts disagree. Gilles Dorronsoro from the Carnegie Institute insisted: “You cannot break an insurgency that strong with money. It’s not a mercenary force — it’s a very powerful movement.”

More troops, say McChrysal’s allies, could tip the balance of power away from the insurgents and give the population the confidence needed to switch sides.

McChrystal had his knuckles rapped for failing to go through the chain of command when he described advocates of a focused attack on Al-Qaeda as “short-sighted”. He was told to cancel a trip to Washington to brief Obama.

One serving general close to McChrystal told The Sunday Times he has been taken aback by the White House’s attitude. “It surprised a lot of us — we thought the policy decision was made to come down on the counter-insurgency course of action.”

The source described as “crazy” the idea that “we can just cut deals with the Taliban without having to do anything”.

He added: “At the moment you can’t recruit from Pashtun communities or their families will be killed, so we need to first improve security.”

The Pentagon insists that not sending more troops would signal a lack of resolve and give the enemy the opportunity to regain the initiative.

Obama has scheduled further talks for this week. But it has not gone unnoticed among his generals that among the works of art chosen by the Obamas to hang in the White House is Edward Ruscha’s painting about indecision, I Think I’ll … The picture superimposes phrases such as “maybe … yes”, “maybe … no” and “wait a minute” on top of a blood-red sunset.

Turkey Excludes Israel from “Anatolian Eagle” Exercise, Day Before Event

Joint military drills with Turkey postponed: Israel army

HELD AL-QUDS: Turkey’s “Anatolian Eagle” joint aerial exercise has been postponed this year because of Ankara’s decision to exclude Israel, the Israeli army said in a statement on Sunday.

“The exercise Anatolian Eagle which was planned to take place in Turkey from October 12 to 23 has been postponed until further notice,” it said in a statement.

“The exercise has been postponed as a result of Turkey’s decision to change the list of participating countries, thus excluding Israel. This decision came several days before the start of the exercise,” it said, without giving further details.

The exercise was to involve Turkish, Israeli and several other NATO air forces.

The Israeli media said the decision to postpone the exercises came after the United States pulled out once Turkey had excluded Israel.

Israeli public radio said that this year’s manoeuvres were to include practicing aerial attacks in Turkish airspace near borders with Syria, Iraq and Iran.

Local media speculated that the decision would bring to a new low relations between Israel and Turkey, which took a sharp downturn during the Jewish state’s war in Gaza at the turn of the year which Ankara heavily criticised.

In early September, Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu cancelled a visit to Israel over what media reports said was a refusal to let him visit the Hamas-run Gaza Strip.

Turkey is Israel’s principal ally in the region and both countries have close economic ties following a military cooperation agreement in 1996 and the two countries regularly participate in joint military exercises.

Ten-Year News Blackout In Japan Over A-Bomb Fallout Coverage

Weekly Report/ History: ’10-year vacuum’ silenced atomic bomb fallout coverage

BY CHIHIRO KATO

THE ASAHI SHIMBUN

Barely six weeks after the August 1945 atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, even the most careful newspaper reader in Japan found that media coverage of the events was nonexistent.

This was primarily due to an edict by the General Headquarters of the Allied Powers in Japan (GHQ) on Sept. 19, 1945, that banned media coverage of the bombings and their aftermath.

Even after the ban was lifted in 1952, the Japanese media continued a policy of self-censorship, depriving the Japanese people of the opportunity to learn of the extent of devastation caused by the bombings on Aug. 6 and Aug. 9, respectively.

It is a period that came to be called the “10-year vacuum” in reporting.

Some attempts were made during that time to describe what the A-bomb survivors endured.

One was “Genbaku no ko” (Child of the atomic bomb), published in 1951 by Iwanami Shoten, which focused on the plight of children from the two devastated cities. The book became a long-time best-seller.

Another instance was the Aug. 6, 1952, issue of the photo magazine Asahi Graph.

In a special section, the magazine published never-before-seen photos of Hiroshima and Nagasaki taken soon after the bombs were dropped. The magazine sold an unprecedented 700,000 copies.

According to Hiroko Takahashi, assistant professor of history at the Hiroshima Peace Institute of Hiroshima City University, “It had the effect of drastically revising the image of the atomic bombs that the United States had tried to establish during the occupation.”

Most of the images were taken by Eiichi Matsumoto and Hajime Miyatake, photographers for The Asahi Shimbun who entered the two cities days after the atomic bombs were dropped.

Prints of photos they had taken in Hiroshima were confiscated, and they were ordered to burn all negatives of film shot in the western city. However, they secretly kept some of the film.

According to a 50-year history of the publishing department at the Asahi, there was heated debate among the magazine’s editorial staff over whether images of the survivors’ terrible suffering should ever be publicized.

The editor in chief, Tadasu Izawa, decided to publish them.

“Closing our eyes will not reduce the destructive power of the atomic bombs at all,” he said at the time.

Then, in 1954, an event occurred that triggered a wide public outcry against atomic bombs.

A fishing boat, the No. 5 Fukuryu Maru, was showered by deadly radioactive fallout from the testing of a hydrogen bomb at the Bikini Atoll by the United States.

The Yomiuri Shimbun published an exclusive story in its morning edition of March 16, 1954.

The Asahi followed up in its evening edition that day with reports that University of Tokyo doctors had confirmed radiation illness among the crew and that high levels of radiation had been detected in the fish caught by the boat and brought to the Tsukiji fish market in Tokyo.

Because of the delay in its reporting, the Asahi decided to establish a science news department.

The shock of this third case of radioactive fallout affecting innocent people triggered strong reactions among Japanese.

Women in Tokyo’s Suginami Ward began a petition drive calling for a ban on atomic and hydrogen bombs. That led, the next year, to the first international conference seeking such a ban and to the formation of the Japan Council against Atomic and Hydrogen Bombs.

However, the homegrown “ban the bomb movement” soon split amid ideological clashes during the Cold War.

While Japan’s media called for a national unification of such efforts, it continued to struggle to find the proper approach to covering the fallout from nuclear weapons.

In 1965, the Hiroshima-based Chugoku Shimbun won a Japan Newspaper Publishers and Editors Association prize for a long-running series published on the 20th anniversary of the atomic bombings.

The series “became an opportunity for establishing a separate genre devoted to coverage of the bombings,” according to Satoru Ubuki, a professor of Japanese history at Hiroshima Jogakuin University.

From the 1970s, there was a trend away from focusing only on Japan as a victim of nuclear war to also include what Japan did as an aggressor during World War II.

In the summer of 1973, at the height of the Vietnam War, Asahi’s Hiroshima edition ran a series that focused on Hiroshima’s role as a military center from which soldiers had been dispatched to battle since the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895.

A-bomb exhibits at Hiroshima museums began to include documents attesting to the city’s aggressor role.

Press coverage gradually expanded to include A-bomb survivors living in China and the Korean Peninsula, as well as residents in the South Pacific who suffered from radioactive fallout along with others exposed to radiation at nuclear power plants.

At an international symposium on nuclear issues held in Hiroshima in 1977 sponsored by nongovernmental organizations, participants agreed the term hibakusha should be used worldwide for anyone exposed to nuclear radiation.

In the 1980s, as the anti-nuclear movement spread in Europe amid moves to deploy medium-range nuclear missiles there, Pope John Paul II and the secretary-general of the United Nations visited Hiroshima.

Such developments further expanded the international angle in Japan’s coverage of nuclear issues.

And then, in April 1986, Chernobyl’s devastating nuclear power plant accident in the Ukraine region of the Soviet Union vividly demonstrated that the dangers of the nuclear age were not limited to war.

The Asahi’s editorial of May 16, 1986, roundly criticized General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev for not speaking about the accident on television until 19 days after it occurred and urged faster disclosure of information.(IHT/Asahi: October 10,2009)

Rare film documents devastation at Hiroshima

more about “Nuclear Files: Library: Media Gallery…“, posted with vodpod

HIROSHIMA , Japan (CNN) — Rare footage of the aftermath of the atomic bomb attack on Hiroshima has now been made available to the world — three years after it was discovered by accident in a Tokyo film vault.

The film gives new insight into the horrors suffered by the people of Hiroshima in the weeks following the world’s first A-bomb attack. The bomb, dropped by a U.S. plane on August 6, 1945, caused the deaths of an estimated 80,000 people.

The film, with three hours of unedited footage, was discovered in a Tokyo film vault in 1993. Since then, historians at the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, which documents the destruction of the bomb, have been studying it frame by frame.

The black-and-white film was shot around the city center during a Japanese Education Ministry fact-finding mission a month after the bombing.

It shows a landscape of total devastation. People are walking around among piles of rubble and trees stripped bare of their branches. It also shows doctors treating victims of the blast — babies with burns covering their entire bodies and men whose skin had melted from their heads.

Months later, Japan’s Allied occupiers ordered the film confiscated, branding its images a military secret. But a member of the Japanese film crew that filmed the aftermath made a copy and hid it in the film vault — apparently fearing that Americans would destroy the original.

“A female staff member found this footage while cleaning out this messy archive,” explained Taiji Shirai of the Nippon Eiga Shinsa LTD, as he pointed to shelves of film reels in disarray.

Historians and curators at Hiroshima’s Peace Memorial Museum who saw the film knew they had stumbled upon a major find. After studying the film for three years they released a 1,000-page commentary called “A Scorched Earth Chart — Hiroshima 1945″

“This documented footage is very meaningful,” said Minoru Ohmuta of the Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation. “People now know what precisely happened and where. The unedited footage just showed Hiroshima without any specification. We have come to confirm the things that actually happened at certain places.”

Lest anyone doubt the destruction caused by the bomb dropped on Hiroshima 51 years ago, the film provides proof of one of the darkest days in world history.

Originally posted by CNN.

Azerbaijan condemns Turkish pact

Azerbaijan has criticised an agreement between Turkey and Armenia, saying it raises doubts about regional stability.

The Azerbaijani foreign ministry said Turkey should not have normalised ties without a deal over the disputed enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh.

During the war there in 1993, Turkey closed its border with Armenia out of solidarity for Azerbaijan.

Azerbaijan’s government wants Armenia to withdraw troops from Nagorno-Karabach and return land.

Turkey and Armenia signed a historic accord on Saturday, paving the way for the opening of their shared border.

Gritted teeth

On Sunday, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said the opening of his country’s border with Armenia would be tied to progress on the disputed region.

“We want all the borders to be opened at the same time,” Mr Erdogan was quoted as saying by AFP news agency.

“But as long as Armenia has not withdrawn from Azerbaijani territory that it is occupying, Turkey cannot have a positive attitude on this subject.”

BBC South Caucasus correspondent Tom Esslemont says the rapprochement between Azerbaijan’s best friend and most bitter rival was never going to be plain sailing in Baku.

On Friday, the Azerbaijani foreign ministry spokesman told the BBC there was a chance that the Turkish-Armenian protocols might never be ratified by Turkey’s parliament and that he could not comment until they had.

But a foreign ministry statement, circulated to Azerbaijan’s media after the agreement was signed on Saturday, said the move to open the borders would “call into question the regional peace and security architecture”.

A timetable for normalising relations between Turkey and Armenia was agreed in April, after a century of hostility between the two neighbours.

American Arrogance Will Be Shattered by Pakisani Ghairat (Dignity and Honor)

[Pakistan will be America's downfall.  The proud people there will not allow American infiltration of their society by mercenary groups like Blackwater and Dyn Corp.  Backdoor attempts to sneak heavy armaments into Pakistan's major cities, especially in NWFP, will backfire, causing the anti-American rage to build exponentially. Increased Predator attacks, or new attempts by American military forces to cross the border, or to launch operations from secret facilities in Pakistan, will be met by much more than the limited firepower of a few thousand militants, such incursions would set-off self-defense alarms in the minds of every Pakistani male, in every home and military facility.  American arrogance is about to be shattered by Pakistani Ghairat ( Dignity and Honor ).]

Angels and Demons: In an Age of Political Promiscuity!

Dr. Haider Mehdi

Like Henry Ford of 1922 (Ford Motor Company, Detroit) who wanted to control every facet of his factory workers’ lives, the present American Ambassador in Islamabad wishes to prevail on every aspect of Pakistan’s political life. It is obvious that the US Ambassador perceives that this country of brown people is fortunate to have her amidst them, a true representative of the most “exceptionally virtuous nation” on Earth, guiding and enlightening Pakistanis in all sorts of political and moral etiquettes – and yet this ungrateful nation complains of her political and professional conduct – most recently on a minor infraction (as she perceives it) of writing a letter to the editor of a major newspaper in a futile attempt to influence its editorial policy.

But the problem is that the Ambassador’s self perception is far from accurate; it is simply deeply flawed. The public in this country does not accord such a heavenly attribute as “the exceptionally virtuous nation” to America nor does it welcome the growing political and military US presence here. Quite the contrary, the majority of Pakistanis consider the US a major threat to their country and to the entire region’s peace and political stability. The fact of the matter is that most Pakistanis would like to see the US pack up its military-political establishment and completely stop its domestic and foreign policy intervention in their country.  There are no doubts or questions about the public sentiment towards America.

The American Ambassador’s self-perception of the US role in Pakistan is simply not acceptable to the vast majority of this country’s citizens and it will not be workable here. The quicker the Americans understand this, the better it is for them – the less the political bloodshed. The American Ambassador would be well advised to stay in her own space and place.  And it is absolutely certain that any transgression on her part will be met with massive public disapproval.

Let us be even more candid and blunt in our analysis on the nature of the contemporary US-Pakistan alliance.

Today’s Pakistan is at peril; a pernicious state of existence. This alarming situation is because of the ever-expanding and massively profane American interference and intervention in its domestic and foreign affairs. The irony is that the incumbent PPP leadership in Islamabad, instead of curbing the American mania, is in fact encouraging an insidious full-scale US political, military and socio-economic meddling in its affairs; Americans are being offered a free hand to do whatever pleases them. It is in this context that the American Ambassadors audacity in writing a letter to a newspaper’s editor accusing a prominent and respected Pakistani columnist of a serious crime must be seen and examined.

The said issue is not about the newspaper’s editorial flaw or the handling of the matter – that has turned out to be satisfactory. Neither is there an issue about the respected columnist’s professionalism or political judgment.

The Ambassador’s said transgression is a serious matter – a major concern at the center of Pakistan’s political spectrum.  It is an issue of national importance and requires calling in question the Ambassador’s political and ethical conduct.  After all, a top foreign diplomat cannot be allowed naked aggression or an obtrusive attack against this country’s intellectual freedom to conduct a national policy debate.  What the Ambassador has done is an attempt to gag the independence, inherent right and journalistic prerogative of this country’s media to openly confront foreign intervention in the political policy-making of this country,  Unquestioningly, the Ambassador’s transgression is a blatant undertaking to silence the opponents of American foreign policy in Pakistan – a conduct of unprofessional diplomacy and an act of undemocratic assault launched against the fundamentals of freedom of expression in this country. A truly libelous diplomatic incursion on the part of the top American diplomat in Islamabad.

American institutional racism, explicit and covert, is projected in US foreign policy as the “exceptional virtuous nation” incapable of doing any wrong, and politically, philosophically and morally superior to all nations and all of humanity – indisputably deserving supremacy as the American prerogative to behave and conduct itself as it deems fit. The US claims preeminence over the rest of humankind, especially over the dark and brown colored people of the entire world. Hence, who the hell are these Pakistanis to question the American Ambassador’s judgment on a matter of freedom of expression? The Ambassador knows what is best for Pakistan (or so the American Ambassador believes)!

“The US government and a significant percentage of the US population believe that the US has the right to invade, bomb and occupy other peoples who have raised no hand against us but are demonized with lies and propaganda,” wrote Paul Craig Roberts, an eminent critic of the American foreign policy. Roberts goes further: “Americans have lost their ability for introspection, thereby revealing their astounding hypocrisy to the world.”

Ambassador Patterson, we the Pakistani nation know why the US is here and why it is expanding its tentacles all over Pakistan and the entire region. We are aware of the precise nature of geopolitical control of the immense hydrocarbon resources of the Caspian Basin that the US has planned for decades and now is the process to consolidate through war and political-economic occupation.

We are aware of George W. Bush’s premeditated war of “energy imperialism” unleashed against Afghanistan for future American control of Central Asian Islamic States.

We are aware of the history of the US unbridled proxy war for the interests of Unocal, Enron and other American- British companies.

We are aware of the American tactics – we know of Hamid Karzai, John J. Maresca (first US Ambassador to Afghanistan) and Zalmay Khalilzad (second American ambassador to Afghanistan) – all of them being the former Unocal consultants.

We are aware of the Musharraf-Karzai pipeline agreement of February 8, 2002, as an initial step in Afghanistan’s invasion and the plans for future energy control in this region.

We are aware of the growing number of American bases in Afghanistan, Iraq, Bulgaria, Turkey and Kuwait – and of course in Pakistan now. We are aware that your war in Afghanistan and Pakistan is an evil and a wicked war disguised under the pretext of a so-called “global war on extremism.”

We are fully aware of your intentions, plans and modus-operandi.

We are also aware that we live in an age of angels and demons – the demons masquerade as angels and angels denounced as demons. We know that we are being demonized at the alter of your vested interests.

As for her latest newspaper transgression, Ambassador Patterson will be well-advised and better off practicing her diplomatic witchcraft somewhere else than in Islamabad. In Pakistan, the Ambassador’s superfluous “sorcery” is in violation of global diplomatic and democratic norms!

The most suitable response to the said act of diplomatic indecency is for the Pakistani government to ask President Obama to recall the Ambassador!

After all, this is exactly what the American media would demand had an event remotely similar to this happened in the US – and justifiably so!

The fact is that entire Pakistani public is fuming at your ardent keenness to so publically humiliate and colonize this nation! Mind it: it is not Henry Ford’s Detroit of 1922!

Go home, Ambassador…!

The writer is a professor, political analyst and conflict-resolution expert.

Source :
http://www.opinion-maker.org/navigation.do?mode=showArticles&id=953

The Father of Dimona and the Anti-Christ, “By Peace he shall destroy many.”

“Very few leaders if at all were able to change the mood of the entire world in such a short while with such profound impact. You provided all of humanity with fresh hope, with intellectual determination, and a feeling that there is a Lord in heaven and believers on earth,” Peres, himself a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, wrote to Obama.

“Under your leadership, peace became a real and original agenda. And from Jerusalem, I am sure all the bells of engagement and understanding will ring again. You gave us a license to dream and act in a noble direction,” the president concluded

Pakistan and India Victims of CIA

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RAW Targets Pak Army Headquarters

By Sajjad Shaukat

Pak’s great game: Evict India from Afghanistan through terror

Chidanand Rajghatta, TNN 11 October 2009, 12:13am IST