BANGKOK: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, was in New York
this week to attend the UN General Assembly. As it turned out, he
embarked on a PR blitz, giving interviews freely and casually to the
international media. The highlight was his call for a `new world order`,
which would see the end of US bullying.
`God willing, a new
order will come and will do away with...everything that distances us,`
Ahmadinejad said on Tuesday. `All of the animosity, all of the lack of
sincerity will come to an end. It will institute fairness and justice.
He
said the world was losing patience with the current state of affairs.
`Now, even elementary school kids throughout the world understand that
the United States government is following an international policy of
bullying,` he said. `I do believe the system of empires has reached the
end of the road. The world can no longer see an emperor commanding it.
It
is not clear what Ahmadinejad`s idea of a new world order looks like.
But he predicts the end of the system of empires, now led by the United
States.
The current world order is being controlled by the
AngloSaxon alliance of the United States and the UK via the Washington
Concensus, which covers globalism, competitive exchange rates,
liberalisation, de-regulation, `democracy` and legal security for
property rights.
The international institutions have evolved since the Second World War to guard and enforce the Washington Consensus.
The
current world order is guided by the United Nations, the World Bank,
the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organisation, the US
Federal Reserve and the US Treasury Department, among others with the US
dollar as the anchor of the global financial system.
Former US
president George Bush senior envisaged a new world order while he was
president, though the United States was already the undisputed global
power. In 2009 Henry Kissinger, the former US secretary of state, gave a
TV interview, saying that the crisis in the Middle East would create an
opportunity for Barack Obama to push for a new world order. This
suggests that the United States, which already reigns supreme in the
current order, is not happy with the status quo and wants to push for a
new world order of complete globalism.
The situation in Europe
shows that we`re moving to a new order. Mass demonstrations in Greece
and Spain are taking place as the people are bitterly dissastisfied with
the state of their economies and the high rates of unemployment.
Greece, in particular, is being crucified as a warning to other
countries that resist the advent of the `federation of nation states` or
the `United States of Europe`. If any euro-zone countries do not
abandon their sovereignty, or let go of their control over fiscal policy
and banking, to join a `United States of Europe` they will be left to
decay in the cold as the euro takes flight from their banking systems.
Germany
is not likely to play this game. The mathematics says it all. Germany`s
annual tax collection is 1.2 trillion euros, but its share, or burden,
in bailing out other weak euro-zone states could run up to 2 to 3
trillion euros. The euro-zone crisis, which will need at least 4
trillion in bailout money for the time being, can`t be contained. That
is why the European Central Bank will be printing unlimited euros to
bail out the bankrupt sovereign states and the banking system.
The
`United States of Europe` and Obama`s new world order are from the same
mould. Germany will have no choice but to leave the euro zone because
it can`t afford to bail out the whole of Europe.
This brings us
back to Ahmadinejad`s version of a new world order, which is likely to
be shaped by China, Russia, India, Germany, Iran and other emerging
states. The Middle East is in turmoil. Once it is united, it is likely
to turn its back on a USled new world order to join the China-led new
world order.
We are at a crossroads of unprecedented historic
proportion, with two alliances of global powers at play to forge their
versions of a new world order. This could, unfortunately, have to be
determined by a war.
By arrangement with The Nation/ANN
Saturday, September 29, 2012
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Ahmadinejad slams West`s nuclear `intimidation`
UNITED NATIONS, Sept 26: Iran`s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on
Wednesday accused the West of nuclear `intimidation` in his final speech
to the UN General Assembly which was boycotted by the United States and
Israel.
But the Iranian president steered clear of the toxic remarks about Israel which have sparked mass walkouts at his previous seven appearances before the UN summit.
`Arms race and intimidation by nuclear weapons and weapons of mass-destruction by the hegemonic powers have become prevalent,` Ahmadinejad said in a rare outburst in the rambling 35 minute speech.
`Continued threat by the uncivilised Zionists to resort to military action against our great nation is a clear example of this bitter reality, he added in his only reference to Israel.
The Iranian government faces mounting international pressure over its nuclear drive, which western powers say hides a bid to develop a nuclear bomb.
Iran denies the charge but there has been mounting speculation that Israel could launch a military strike against Iran`s bunkered nuclear facilities.
President Barack Obama told the UN assembly on Tuesday that the United States will `do what we must` to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.
Foreign ministers from the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany will meet in New York on Thursday to discuss the increasingly tense nuclear showdown.
The United States boycotted the UN speech because of his attacks.
`Over the past couple of days, we`ve seen Mr Ahmadinejad once again use his trip to the UN not to address the legitimate aspirations of the Iranian people but to instead spout paranoid theories and repulsive slurs against Israel,` said Erin Pelton, spokeswoman of the US mission to the United Nations.
But the Iranian president steered clear of the toxic remarks about Israel which have sparked mass walkouts at his previous seven appearances before the UN summit.
`Arms race and intimidation by nuclear weapons and weapons of mass-destruction by the hegemonic powers have become prevalent,` Ahmadinejad said in a rare outburst in the rambling 35 minute speech.
`Continued threat by the uncivilised Zionists to resort to military action against our great nation is a clear example of this bitter reality, he added in his only reference to Israel.
The Iranian government faces mounting international pressure over its nuclear drive, which western powers say hides a bid to develop a nuclear bomb.
Iran denies the charge but there has been mounting speculation that Israel could launch a military strike against Iran`s bunkered nuclear facilities.
President Barack Obama told the UN assembly on Tuesday that the United States will `do what we must` to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.
Foreign ministers from the United States, Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany will meet in New York on Thursday to discuss the increasingly tense nuclear showdown.
The United States boycotted the UN speech because of his attacks.
`Over the past couple of days, we`ve seen Mr Ahmadinejad once again use his trip to the UN not to address the legitimate aspirations of the Iranian people but to instead spout paranoid theories and repulsive slurs against Israel,` said Erin Pelton, spokeswoman of the US mission to the United Nations.
US - 'do more' demands
`PLEASE, stop this refrain to do more, President Asif Ali Zardari said
in his speech to the UN General Assembly in a thinly veiled reference to
the US and the pressure it has put on Pakistan to squeeze the
sanctuaries that the Afghan Taliban, particularly the Haqqani network,
have on Pakistani soil. Whether the call to end the `do more` mantra
will fall on deaf ears will have much to do with the extent to which the
US and Pakistan can narrow their mutual trust deficit that is very real
and very acute. To be sure, Pakistan has some very legitimate
complaints when it comes to US demands concerning Afghanistan. The US
military in particular has been very stubborn and quick to blame
Pakistan for its failures or lack of success in Afghanistan.
To clamp down on the Haqqanis to satisfy the American timeline of 2014 without regard to the existing conditions or the potential for an unmanageable blowback in Pakistan is to pit a political imperative a dignified exit from Afghanistan against what should be a crucial strategic objectivehelping Pakistan remain stable and the containment of militancy.
There is, though, an unfortunate consequence of the push and push-back vis-à-vis the `do more` platitude: the debate over what should be done against militancy in Pakistan and when it should be done has in part become linked to the Pakistan-US relationship and the post-war future of Afghanistan. As opposed to focusing on whether or not what Pakistan has done to fight militancy is acceptable and a winning strategy, whether the country is less or more secure as a result of the state`s security policy, the question of our very real and critical fight against extremism has been entangled in the messy relationship with the US.
So ordinary Pakistanis are still confused about whether the fight against militancy is for Pakistan`s own survival or for the protection of ties with an unpopular US. The unhappy truth is, Pakistan is not winning the fight against militancy.
And the state needs to do more, much, much more.
But for Pakistan`s sake, not anybody else`s
To clamp down on the Haqqanis to satisfy the American timeline of 2014 without regard to the existing conditions or the potential for an unmanageable blowback in Pakistan is to pit a political imperative a dignified exit from Afghanistan against what should be a crucial strategic objectivehelping Pakistan remain stable and the containment of militancy.
There is, though, an unfortunate consequence of the push and push-back vis-à-vis the `do more` platitude: the debate over what should be done against militancy in Pakistan and when it should be done has in part become linked to the Pakistan-US relationship and the post-war future of Afghanistan. As opposed to focusing on whether or not what Pakistan has done to fight militancy is acceptable and a winning strategy, whether the country is less or more secure as a result of the state`s security policy, the question of our very real and critical fight against extremism has been entangled in the messy relationship with the US.
So ordinary Pakistanis are still confused about whether the fight against militancy is for Pakistan`s own survival or for the protection of ties with an unpopular US. The unhappy truth is, Pakistan is not winning the fight against militancy.
And the state needs to do more, much, much more.
But for Pakistan`s sake, not anybody else`s
The growing divide between east and west
PERHAPS the most important theme of the speeches delivered at the UN
General Assembly on Tuesday was the growing divisions between the West
and the Muslim world. Whatever their national perspective, Presidents
Ahmadinejad, Zardari and Obama all focused on the increasingly
complicated relations between the two sides.
The trouble stirred up in Muslim countries by a profane video on the Internet has highlighted the sensitive nature of these ties.
The Pakistani president, as expected, raised the issue at the UN forum, calling for criminalising such provocative acts by mischievous individuals.
The proof that the outrage of the Muslims had been registered by the US, where the anti-Islam video originated, was provided in a statement by President Barack Obama a few hours before Mr Zardari`s UN address. Mr Obama urged the people to reject hate material, but quite rightly added that the death and destruction that such rejection led to could not be justified.
The gap has widened over time when it comes to America`s love-hate affair with a number of Muslim countries. The Muslim world`s connection with the West is jeopardised by a host of serious problems, including doubts rooted in a past that has spawned suspicions about Americanmotives now. The countries in question have failed to evolve the necessary common language, based on the cultural and religious sensitivities of people on both sides, to address each other. Ever since 9/11 and more particularly the invasion of Iraq in 2003, these sensitivities have become more acute and have reached a point where the nightmare of a clash of civilisations may well turn out to be true if restraint and understanding are not shown at this stage. In looking after its own interests, the US has often adopted an actively aggressive path, with no consideration for the sentiments of the larger public in countries where it has either intervened militarily or interfered in domestic politics.
At the same time, the leadership in many of the Muslim countries, has failed to educate the populadon about the dangers of accepting the extremist narrative. In the current crisis they have been unable to convince their people that by reacting to provocative acts of individuals they are only deepening the divide. Though perceived as a powerless body, the United Nations still remains the right forum for raising issues of cultural and religious differences and for giving room to voices from all over. Without such a debate and interaction between countries, the chasm between the West and the Muslim world will only grow
The trouble stirred up in Muslim countries by a profane video on the Internet has highlighted the sensitive nature of these ties.
The Pakistani president, as expected, raised the issue at the UN forum, calling for criminalising such provocative acts by mischievous individuals.
The proof that the outrage of the Muslims had been registered by the US, where the anti-Islam video originated, was provided in a statement by President Barack Obama a few hours before Mr Zardari`s UN address. Mr Obama urged the people to reject hate material, but quite rightly added that the death and destruction that such rejection led to could not be justified.
The gap has widened over time when it comes to America`s love-hate affair with a number of Muslim countries. The Muslim world`s connection with the West is jeopardised by a host of serious problems, including doubts rooted in a past that has spawned suspicions about Americanmotives now. The countries in question have failed to evolve the necessary common language, based on the cultural and religious sensitivities of people on both sides, to address each other. Ever since 9/11 and more particularly the invasion of Iraq in 2003, these sensitivities have become more acute and have reached a point where the nightmare of a clash of civilisations may well turn out to be true if restraint and understanding are not shown at this stage. In looking after its own interests, the US has often adopted an actively aggressive path, with no consideration for the sentiments of the larger public in countries where it has either intervened militarily or interfered in domestic politics.
At the same time, the leadership in many of the Muslim countries, has failed to educate the populadon about the dangers of accepting the extremist narrative. In the current crisis they have been unable to convince their people that by reacting to provocative acts of individuals they are only deepening the divide. Though perceived as a powerless body, the United Nations still remains the right forum for raising issues of cultural and religious differences and for giving room to voices from all over. Without such a debate and interaction between countries, the chasm between the West and the Muslim world will only grow
UN & Balochistan
THIS is apropos of the news item `UN team spends busy day in Quetta` (Sept 16).
The controversial visit of UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances to evaluate the issue of missing persons` has brought Balochistaninto the spotlight as one of the most favourite playfields for hatching international conspiracies.
Earlier this year the US Congress Committee on Foreign Affairs, chaired by Dana Rohrabacher, held an unusual US congressional hearing on human rights abuses inBalochistan, blaming Pakistan`s intelligence agencies for enforced disappearances of Baloch people.
Responding sharply, Pakistan`s National Assembly condemned such a visit as a `threat to the country`s sovereignty` With an independent judiciary, an enlightened civil society, coupled with a vigorous media, the grievances of the Blaoch, be it political or economic, can be befittingly addressed to the entire satisfaction.
Pakistan is confronted with challenges of enormous magnitude that require unity, harmony andmutual respect among all segments of society and state institutions.
As cases of enforced disappearances are in the Supreme Court and the parliamentary committee is also looking into the matter, it is the duty of a mature and responsible media to avoid speculations about the episode.
Let us defeat all conspiracies hatched by our enemies and provide fair ground to the Supreme Court to decide the cases ofenforced disappearances.
INAM ULLAH KHAN Rawalpindi
The controversial visit of UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances to evaluate the issue of missing persons` has brought Balochistaninto the spotlight as one of the most favourite playfields for hatching international conspiracies.
Earlier this year the US Congress Committee on Foreign Affairs, chaired by Dana Rohrabacher, held an unusual US congressional hearing on human rights abuses inBalochistan, blaming Pakistan`s intelligence agencies for enforced disappearances of Baloch people.
Responding sharply, Pakistan`s National Assembly condemned such a visit as a `threat to the country`s sovereignty` With an independent judiciary, an enlightened civil society, coupled with a vigorous media, the grievances of the Blaoch, be it political or economic, can be befittingly addressed to the entire satisfaction.
Pakistan is confronted with challenges of enormous magnitude that require unity, harmony andmutual respect among all segments of society and state institutions.
As cases of enforced disappearances are in the Supreme Court and the parliamentary committee is also looking into the matter, it is the duty of a mature and responsible media to avoid speculations about the episode.
Let us defeat all conspiracies hatched by our enemies and provide fair ground to the Supreme Court to decide the cases ofenforced disappearances.
INAM ULLAH KHAN Rawalpindi
`Halt Nato supplies` mantra revived
SLAMABAD, Sept 26: Almost all the mainstream political parties decided
to stay away from a multi-party conference called by Hafiz Mohammad
Saeed`s controversial Jamaatud Dawa, leaving the forum for the
representatives of various Islamic parties and a few other rightwing
groups to evolve a `consensus` on what the strategy of Pakistan and the
rest of the Muslim world should be to deal with the United States on a
despicable video made by an American-based Coptic Christian on the Holy
Prophet (PBUH).
Invitation was extended to every top politician and political party, from Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf to PML-N`s Mian Nawaz Sharif, Imran Khan and leaders of the Awami National Party. But when the meeting started at a hotelin thefederal capital, it became quite evident that none of the mainstream parties and leaders wanted to be represented at a show where an extreme position was expected to be taken on the controversial video and other related issues.
And this is exactly what happened at the forum. Hardhitting speeches to denounce the United States and the West continued to echo throughout the meeting, with every prominent Islamic leader trying to beat the others in his call for taking extreme action against the US. If some called for expelling the American ambassador from the country, a few others threatened to block the Nato supplies for Afghanistan if, according to them, the US president decided against banning the video and punishing its producer.
Hafiz Saeed, whose organisation is on the list of banned groups in the US and remains on the watch-list of Pakistan government, was the most active of all. Primarily it was his show, and often during the course of the speeches he was seen moving from leader of one Islamic group to the other, apparently to make sure that a consensus was evolved on hard-hitting resolutions, not only against theUnited States but also to criticise leaders of many other Muslim countries for their `inaction` on the issue.
Other prominent leaders presented at the conference included JUI`s Maulana Fazlur Rehman, Jamaat-iIslami`s Syed Munawar Hasan, leader of his own faction of JUI Maulana Samiul Haq, Maulana Mohammad Ahmed Ludhianvi, former ISI chief General Hamid Gul, and many others.
In a declaration adopted at the end of what was called `Tahaffuze Hurmate Rasool conference`, prominent Muslim states like SaudiArabia, Turkey Egypt and others were asked to play their effective role in framing a law against blasphemy of all the holy Prophets including Muhammad (PBUH).
`This national consultative conference of leading religious political leaders demands of the Muslim countries` rulers to establish a Muslim United Nations, and a separate unified defence and economic system if the UN and Security Council refrain from framing anti-blasphemy law,` the declaration said.
Frustrated over the lack of extreme action by the Muslim countries, some of the speak-ers called upon the Muslim countries to pull out of the socalled global war against terror and use the `oil weapon` to get their demands met. They said American President Barrack Obama in his speech at UN General Assembly by refusing to ban the blasphemous film had laid the foundation for a `war of civilisations` At the same time some of the Islamic leaders threatened that if the Muslim rulers failed to heed their calls, the `Muhibbane Rasool` (lovers of Holy Prophet) would come out on the street and would not return to their homesuntil these countries were swept by Islamic revolution.
A demand to convene a conference of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation was also made to enable member countries to sit together and plan a unified strategy to counter blasphemous actions of the Western world. They said the OIC should demand the handing over of the blasphemer film-maker to them for trial and meting out punishment.
The speakers described restoration of Nato supplies without getting the drone attacks halted as a collective suicide.
Invitation was extended to every top politician and political party, from Prime Minister Raja Pervez Ashraf to PML-N`s Mian Nawaz Sharif, Imran Khan and leaders of the Awami National Party. But when the meeting started at a hotelin thefederal capital, it became quite evident that none of the mainstream parties and leaders wanted to be represented at a show where an extreme position was expected to be taken on the controversial video and other related issues.
And this is exactly what happened at the forum. Hardhitting speeches to denounce the United States and the West continued to echo throughout the meeting, with every prominent Islamic leader trying to beat the others in his call for taking extreme action against the US. If some called for expelling the American ambassador from the country, a few others threatened to block the Nato supplies for Afghanistan if, according to them, the US president decided against banning the video and punishing its producer.
Hafiz Saeed, whose organisation is on the list of banned groups in the US and remains on the watch-list of Pakistan government, was the most active of all. Primarily it was his show, and often during the course of the speeches he was seen moving from leader of one Islamic group to the other, apparently to make sure that a consensus was evolved on hard-hitting resolutions, not only against theUnited States but also to criticise leaders of many other Muslim countries for their `inaction` on the issue.
Other prominent leaders presented at the conference included JUI`s Maulana Fazlur Rehman, Jamaat-iIslami`s Syed Munawar Hasan, leader of his own faction of JUI Maulana Samiul Haq, Maulana Mohammad Ahmed Ludhianvi, former ISI chief General Hamid Gul, and many others.
In a declaration adopted at the end of what was called `Tahaffuze Hurmate Rasool conference`, prominent Muslim states like SaudiArabia, Turkey Egypt and others were asked to play their effective role in framing a law against blasphemy of all the holy Prophets including Muhammad (PBUH).
`This national consultative conference of leading religious political leaders demands of the Muslim countries` rulers to establish a Muslim United Nations, and a separate unified defence and economic system if the UN and Security Council refrain from framing anti-blasphemy law,` the declaration said.
Frustrated over the lack of extreme action by the Muslim countries, some of the speak-ers called upon the Muslim countries to pull out of the socalled global war against terror and use the `oil weapon` to get their demands met. They said American President Barrack Obama in his speech at UN General Assembly by refusing to ban the blasphemous film had laid the foundation for a `war of civilisations` At the same time some of the Islamic leaders threatened that if the Muslim rulers failed to heed their calls, the `Muhibbane Rasool` (lovers of Holy Prophet) would come out on the street and would not return to their homesuntil these countries were swept by Islamic revolution.
A demand to convene a conference of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation was also made to enable member countries to sit together and plan a unified strategy to counter blasphemous actions of the Western world. They said the OIC should demand the handing over of the blasphemer film-maker to them for trial and meting out punishment.
The speakers described restoration of Nato supplies without getting the drone attacks halted as a collective suicide.
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Ahmadinejad calls for structural overhaul of Security Council
UNITED NATIONS, Sept 25: Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has
called for a complete structural overhaul of the United Nations Security
Council in order to reflect the rule of law in international relations.
Iranian leader made the remarks at the 67th Session of the UN General Assembly on the `Rule of law` at the national and international levels on Monday night.
`The discriminatory privilege, the influential and imposed role of the Security Council as well as [the right of] veto and some of its owners are unacceptable and illegitimate and for that reason the Security Council is incapable of administering justice and main-taining a stable order and security in the world,` Ahmadinejad said.
He called upon all UN memberstates to reach an immediate agreement on a total overhaul of the Security Council in the interests of justice and the nations of the world.
Mr Ahmadinejad pointed fingers at `some veto holders who remain silent over the atomic bombs of the fake Zionist regime (of Israel) or support it, but at the same time hinder the scientific achievements of other nations.
Majority of the five permanent members the United States, Britain and France who wield veto power are allies of Israel, which is a nuclear power posing potential threat to Iran.
`By making false references to the UN Charter and by misusing[the concept of] liberty, they remain silent over insults to the sanctity of humanity and the divine Prophets or they lend support to offenders, infringe on the freedom of others, and allow insults against sanctity and people,` the Iranian President alleged, in an apparent reference to an incendiary anti-Islam film made in the US that triggered anti-US protests across the Islamic world.
Iranian leader made 10 proposals for the better observance of the rule of law in international relations. They include major amendments in the regulations governing the Security Council incorporating the interests of nations and ensuring principles of equality and justice, through the participation of all members of the General Assembly.
Iranian leader made the remarks at the 67th Session of the UN General Assembly on the `Rule of law` at the national and international levels on Monday night.
`The discriminatory privilege, the influential and imposed role of the Security Council as well as [the right of] veto and some of its owners are unacceptable and illegitimate and for that reason the Security Council is incapable of administering justice and main-taining a stable order and security in the world,` Ahmadinejad said.
He called upon all UN memberstates to reach an immediate agreement on a total overhaul of the Security Council in the interests of justice and the nations of the world.
Mr Ahmadinejad pointed fingers at `some veto holders who remain silent over the atomic bombs of the fake Zionist regime (of Israel) or support it, but at the same time hinder the scientific achievements of other nations.
Majority of the five permanent members the United States, Britain and France who wield veto power are allies of Israel, which is a nuclear power posing potential threat to Iran.
`By making false references to the UN Charter and by misusing[the concept of] liberty, they remain silent over insults to the sanctity of humanity and the divine Prophets or they lend support to offenders, infringe on the freedom of others, and allow insults against sanctity and people,` the Iranian President alleged, in an apparent reference to an incendiary anti-Islam film made in the US that triggered anti-US protests across the Islamic world.
Iranian leader made 10 proposals for the better observance of the rule of law in international relations. They include major amendments in the regulations governing the Security Council incorporating the interests of nations and ensuring principles of equality and justice, through the participation of all members of the General Assembly.
Humanity should reject hate video, says Obama
NEW YORK, Sept 25: US President Barack Obama urged the entire humanity
on Tuesday to reject a disgusting video which has sparked outrage
throughout the Muslim world but said that nothing justified `the death
and destruction` witnessed in Pakistan last week.
Mr Obama, who is criticised at home for favouring the Muslims and in the Islamic world for not arresting the producer of the offensive video, emphasised the need for a balance between the two positions.
In his speech to the 67th UN General Assembly, President Obama urged the international community to confront the root causes of rage exploding across the Muslim world.`It will not be enough to put more guards in front of an embassy; or to put out statements of regret, and wait for the outrage to pass, he said.
`We must speak honestly about the deeper causes of this crisis. Because we face a choice between the forces that would drive us apart, and the hopes we hold in common.
Describing the blasphemous video as `crude and disgusting`, Mr Obama said he wanted to make clear that the US government had nothing to do with it.
`I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well,` he said.
`We understand why people take offence to this video because millions of our citizens are among them,` said Mr Obama while noting that America was home to millions of Muslims.
But the US president also urged Muslims not to resort to violence while registering their protest.
`There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There is no video that justifies an attack on an embassy,` he said. `There is no slander that provides an excuse for people to burn a restaurant in Lebanon, or destroy a school in Tunis, or cause death and destruction in Pakistan.
Mr Obama referred to US Ambassador Christopher Stevens multiple times, noting that he worked tirelessly for promoting an understanding between the Arab and western worlds and gave his life for this cause.
Ambassador Stevens was killed during an attack on a US consulate in Libya earlier this month.`The attacks of the last two weeks are not simply an assault on America.
They are also an assault on the very ideals upon which the United Nations was founded,` Mr Obama said.
The US president explained to the Muslims what he could and could not do to suppress the hate message of the offensive video made in the United States by some Egyptians.
`I know there are some who ask why we don`t just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws: our Constitution protects the right to practise free speech, he said.
`Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offence. Like me, the majority of Americans areChristian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs,` he explained.
`As president of our country, and commander-in-chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day, and I will always defend their right to do so.
Mr Obama said that Americans had fought and died around the globe to protect the right of all people to express their views even views that they disagreed with.
`We do so because in a diverse society, efforts to restrict speech can become a tool to silence critics, or oppress minorities,` he explained.
`The strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, it is more speech the voices of tolerance that rally against bigotry and blasphemy, and lift up the values of understanding and mutual respect.
The US president also reiterated his pledge to withdraw combat troops from Afghanistan as scheduled and handing over their responsibilities to the Afghans.
`We have begun a transition in Afghanistan, and America and our allies will end our war on schedule in 2014. Al Qaeda has been weakened and Osama bin Laden is no more,` he said.
-Masood Haider and Anwar Iqbal
Mr Obama, who is criticised at home for favouring the Muslims and in the Islamic world for not arresting the producer of the offensive video, emphasised the need for a balance between the two positions.
In his speech to the 67th UN General Assembly, President Obama urged the international community to confront the root causes of rage exploding across the Muslim world.`It will not be enough to put more guards in front of an embassy; or to put out statements of regret, and wait for the outrage to pass, he said.
`We must speak honestly about the deeper causes of this crisis. Because we face a choice between the forces that would drive us apart, and the hopes we hold in common.
Describing the blasphemous video as `crude and disgusting`, Mr Obama said he wanted to make clear that the US government had nothing to do with it.
`I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well,` he said.
`We understand why people take offence to this video because millions of our citizens are among them,` said Mr Obama while noting that America was home to millions of Muslims.
But the US president also urged Muslims not to resort to violence while registering their protest.
`There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There is no video that justifies an attack on an embassy,` he said. `There is no slander that provides an excuse for people to burn a restaurant in Lebanon, or destroy a school in Tunis, or cause death and destruction in Pakistan.
Mr Obama referred to US Ambassador Christopher Stevens multiple times, noting that he worked tirelessly for promoting an understanding between the Arab and western worlds and gave his life for this cause.
Ambassador Stevens was killed during an attack on a US consulate in Libya earlier this month.`The attacks of the last two weeks are not simply an assault on America.
They are also an assault on the very ideals upon which the United Nations was founded,` Mr Obama said.
The US president explained to the Muslims what he could and could not do to suppress the hate message of the offensive video made in the United States by some Egyptians.
`I know there are some who ask why we don`t just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws: our Constitution protects the right to practise free speech, he said.
`Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offence. Like me, the majority of Americans areChristian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs,` he explained.
`As president of our country, and commander-in-chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day, and I will always defend their right to do so.
Mr Obama said that Americans had fought and died around the globe to protect the right of all people to express their views even views that they disagreed with.
`We do so because in a diverse society, efforts to restrict speech can become a tool to silence critics, or oppress minorities,` he explained.
`The strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, it is more speech the voices of tolerance that rally against bigotry and blasphemy, and lift up the values of understanding and mutual respect.
The US president also reiterated his pledge to withdraw combat troops from Afghanistan as scheduled and handing over their responsibilities to the Afghans.
`We have begun a transition in Afghanistan, and America and our allies will end our war on schedule in 2014. Al Qaeda has been weakened and Osama bin Laden is no more,` he said.
-Masood Haider and Anwar Iqbal
UN urged to address anti-Islam film
NEW YORK, Sept 25: Pakistan moved the United Nations on Tuesday to
immediately address the alarming situation created by an antiIslam video
and `bridge the widening rift to enable the comity of nations to be one
again` President Asif Ali Zardari, who announced this step in his
address to the 67th UN General Assembly began his speech with a strong
condemnation of the blasphemous video and urgedthe international
community not to remain silent to such provocations.
Although overshadowed by the dispute over the blasphemous video, the other issues that the president raised in his speech were equally important. He urged the international community to understand Paksitan`s concerns over drone attacks in Fata and to `stop the do more mantra` Speaking hours after US President Barack Obama condemned the video and the consequent violence, President Zardari too criticised those attacking innocent people in retalia-tion but reminded the world of its obligation to deal with this divisive issue as well.
`Before I take up my speech, I want to express the strongest condemnation for the acts of incitement of hate against the faith of billions of Muslims of the world and our beloved Prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him),` the president said.
`Although we can never condone violence, the international community must not become silent observers and should criminalise such acts that destroy the peace of the world and endanger world security by misusingfreedom of expression.
The president noted that the international community was asking a lot of questions of Pakistan these days but said he had not come to the UN to answer those questions.
`The people of Pakistan have already answered them. The politicians of Pakistan have answered them. The soldiers of Pakistan have answered them,` he said.
`We have lost over seven thousand Pakistani soldiers and policemen and over 37,000 civilians.
The Pakistani government, he said, had lost a minister, Shahbaz Bhatti, a governor, Sahnan Taseer,and many senior military and civilian officials in the war against terrorism.
`And I need not remind my friends here today, that I bear a personal scar... my wife Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto was martyred through the bullets and bombs of terrorists,` he said.
The president noted that terrorism and extremism had destroyed human lives in Pakistan, torn social fabric, and devastated the economy.
`Our economy, our lives, our ability to live in the shadow of our Sufi saints and our freedom-loving forefathers have been challenged,` he said.
The president, however, assured the world that Pakistan had responded forcefully to these challenges.
`We have responded. Our soldiers have responded. So I am not here to answer questions about Pakistan,` he said.
`I am here to ask some questions on behalf of my people. On behalf of the twoyear-old baby who was killed in the bombing at Lahore`s Moon Market on Dec 7, 2009.
`On behalf of Pervaiz Masih, a Christian Pakistani, who was killed with six others, trying to protect Muslim Pakistanis during a bomb attack on the Islamic University in Islamabad on Oct 20, 2009.
`On behalf of Mr Ghayoor, the Commandant of the Frontier Constabulary Police Force in Peshawar, who was martyred by militants on Aug 4, 2010.
`On behalf of traders and businessmen in Peshawar, Quetta, Lahore and Karachi, of the dozens of marketplaces that have been ravaged bymultiple bombings. Over and over and over again.
`And perhaps most of all, on behalf of my three children, whose mother Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto was also martyred by terrorists.
The president noted that no country and no people had suffered more in the epic struggle against terrorism, than Pakistan.
Drone attacks `Drone strikes and civilian casualties on our territory add to the complexity of our battle for hearts and minds through this epic struggle, he said.
`To those who say we have not done enough, I say in all humility: Please do not insult the memory of our dead, and the pain of our living. Do not ask of my people, what no one has ever asked of any other peoples. Do not demonise the innocent women, and children of Pakistan.
`And please, stop this refrain to do more.
The simplest question of all, he said, would be: `How much more suffering can Pakistan endure?`The president noted that Pakistan`s engagement with the United Nations had a long and glorious history as Pakistan had consistently been among the top UN peacekeeping troop contributors for many years. Mr Zardari said that Pakistan would continue to support the right of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to peacefully choose their destiny in accordance with the UN Security Council`s longstanding resolutions on this matter.
`Kashmir remains a symbol of the failures, rather than strengths of the UN system, he said.
While welcoming Pakistan`s election to the UN Security Council, the president said the UN system must become more democratic and more accountable. Reform should be based on consensus and democratic principles, he added.
Pakistan, he said, supported the rights of the Palestinian people and an independent Palestinian state and also favoured the admission of Palestine as a full member of the United Nations.
Although overshadowed by the dispute over the blasphemous video, the other issues that the president raised in his speech were equally important. He urged the international community to understand Paksitan`s concerns over drone attacks in Fata and to `stop the do more mantra` Speaking hours after US President Barack Obama condemned the video and the consequent violence, President Zardari too criticised those attacking innocent people in retalia-tion but reminded the world of its obligation to deal with this divisive issue as well.
`Before I take up my speech, I want to express the strongest condemnation for the acts of incitement of hate against the faith of billions of Muslims of the world and our beloved Prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him),` the president said.
`Although we can never condone violence, the international community must not become silent observers and should criminalise such acts that destroy the peace of the world and endanger world security by misusingfreedom of expression.
The president noted that the international community was asking a lot of questions of Pakistan these days but said he had not come to the UN to answer those questions.
`The people of Pakistan have already answered them. The politicians of Pakistan have answered them. The soldiers of Pakistan have answered them,` he said.
`We have lost over seven thousand Pakistani soldiers and policemen and over 37,000 civilians.
The Pakistani government, he said, had lost a minister, Shahbaz Bhatti, a governor, Sahnan Taseer,and many senior military and civilian officials in the war against terrorism.
`And I need not remind my friends here today, that I bear a personal scar... my wife Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto was martyred through the bullets and bombs of terrorists,` he said.
The president noted that terrorism and extremism had destroyed human lives in Pakistan, torn social fabric, and devastated the economy.
`Our economy, our lives, our ability to live in the shadow of our Sufi saints and our freedom-loving forefathers have been challenged,` he said.
The president, however, assured the world that Pakistan had responded forcefully to these challenges.
`We have responded. Our soldiers have responded. So I am not here to answer questions about Pakistan,` he said.
`I am here to ask some questions on behalf of my people. On behalf of the twoyear-old baby who was killed in the bombing at Lahore`s Moon Market on Dec 7, 2009.
`On behalf of Pervaiz Masih, a Christian Pakistani, who was killed with six others, trying to protect Muslim Pakistanis during a bomb attack on the Islamic University in Islamabad on Oct 20, 2009.
`On behalf of Mr Ghayoor, the Commandant of the Frontier Constabulary Police Force in Peshawar, who was martyred by militants on Aug 4, 2010.
`On behalf of traders and businessmen in Peshawar, Quetta, Lahore and Karachi, of the dozens of marketplaces that have been ravaged bymultiple bombings. Over and over and over again.
`And perhaps most of all, on behalf of my three children, whose mother Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto was also martyred by terrorists.
The president noted that no country and no people had suffered more in the epic struggle against terrorism, than Pakistan.
Drone attacks `Drone strikes and civilian casualties on our territory add to the complexity of our battle for hearts and minds through this epic struggle, he said.
`To those who say we have not done enough, I say in all humility: Please do not insult the memory of our dead, and the pain of our living. Do not ask of my people, what no one has ever asked of any other peoples. Do not demonise the innocent women, and children of Pakistan.
`And please, stop this refrain to do more.
The simplest question of all, he said, would be: `How much more suffering can Pakistan endure?`The president noted that Pakistan`s engagement with the United Nations had a long and glorious history as Pakistan had consistently been among the top UN peacekeeping troop contributors for many years. Mr Zardari said that Pakistan would continue to support the right of the people of Jammu and Kashmir to peacefully choose their destiny in accordance with the UN Security Council`s longstanding resolutions on this matter.
`Kashmir remains a symbol of the failures, rather than strengths of the UN system, he said.
While welcoming Pakistan`s election to the UN Security Council, the president said the UN system must become more democratic and more accountable. Reform should be based on consensus and democratic principles, he added.
Pakistan, he said, supported the rights of the Palestinian people and an independent Palestinian state and also favoured the admission of Palestine as a full member of the United Nations.
Tuesday, September 25, 2012
Drone strikes kill, maim and traumatize too many civilians, U.S. study says
Drone strikes kill, maim and traumatize too many civilians, U.S. study says
September 25, 2012 -- Updated 1435 GMT (2235 HKT)
A Pakistani man burns an American flag during a protest against U.S. drone attacks in Multan on February 9, 2012.
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
- A study by Stanford and NYU claims only about 2% of killed targets are "high-level"
- Innocent civilians are killed, maimed and traumatized by drone strikes, the report says
- Drones in Pakistan killed 176 children from 2004 to 2012, an independent group says
- Obama has said a target must meet "very tight and very strict standards"
The study by Stanford Law
School and New York University's School of Law calls for a
re-evaluation of the practice, saying the number of "high-level" targets
killed as a percentage of total casualties is extremely low -- about
2%.
The report accuses
Washington of misrepresenting drone strikes as "a surgically precise and
effective tool that makes the U.S. safer," saying that in reality,
"there is significant evidence that U.S. drone strikes have injured and
killed civilians."
It also casts doubts on
Washington's claims that drone strikes produce zero to few civilian
casualties and alleges that the United States makes "efforts to shield
the drone program from democratic accountability."
Drones in Action
The drone strike program
has long been controversial, with conflicting reports on its impact from
U.S. and Pakistani officials and independent organizations.
President Barack Obama told CNN last month that a target must meet "very tight and very strict standards."
In contrast to more
conservative U.S. statements, the Stanford/NYU report -- titled "Living
Under Drones" -- offers starker figures published by The Bureau of
Investigative Journalism, an independent organization based at City
University in London.
"TBIJ reports that from
June 2004 through mid-September 2012, available data indicate that drone
strikes killed 2,562 - 3,325 people in Pakistan, of whom 474 - 881 were
civilians, including 176 children. TBIJ reports that these strikes also
injured an additional 1,228 - 1,362 individuals," according to the
Stanford/NYU study.
Based on interviews with
witnesses, victims and experts, the report accuses the CIA of
"double-striking" a target, moments after the initial hit, thereby
killing first responders.
It also highlights harm
"beyond death and physical injury," publishing accounts of psychological
trauma experienced by people living in Pakistan's tribal northwest
region, who it says hear drones hover 24 hours a day.
"Before this we were all
very happy," the report quotes an anonymous resident as saying. "But
after these drones attacks a lot of people are victims and have lost
members of their family. A lot of them, they have mental illnesses."
People have to live with
the fear that a strike could come down on them at any moment of the day
or night, leaving behind dead whose "bodies are shattered to pieces,"
and survivors who must be desperately sped to a hospital.
The report concedes that
"real threats to U.S. security and to Pakistani civilians exist in the
Pakistani border areas now targeted by drones." And it acknowledges that
drone strikes have "killed alleged combatants and disrupted armed actor
networks."
But it concludes that
drone strikes, which are conducted by the CIA in a country not at war
with the United States, are too harmful to civilians, too sloppy,
legally questionable and do more harm to U.S. interests than good.
"A significant
rethinking of current U.S. targeted killing and drone strike policies is
long overdue," it says. "U.S. policy-makers, and the American public,
cannot continue to ignore evidence of the civilian harm and
counter-productive impacts of U.S. targeted killings and drone strikes
in Pakistan."
The study recommends
that Washington undertake measures to rectify collateral damage --
including making public detailed legal justification for strikes,
implementing mechanisms transparently to account for civilian
casualties, ensuring independent investigations into drone strike
deaths, prosecuting cases of civilian casualties and compensating
civilians harmed by U.S. strikes in Pakistan.
Nine months of research
went into the report, according to its authors, which included "two
investigations in Pakistan, more than 130 interviews with victims,
witnesses, and experts, and review of thousands of pages of
documentation and media reporting."
U.S. authorities have largely kept quiet on the subject of drone strikes in Pakistan.
However, the use of
armed drones to target and kill suspected terrorists has increased
dramatically during the Obama administration, according to Peter Bergen,
CNN's national security analyst and a director at the New America
Foundation, a Washington-based think tank that monitors drone strikes.
Obama has already
authorized 283 strikes in Pakistan, six times more than the number
during President George W. Bush's eight years in office, Bergen wrote
earlier this month. As a result, the number of estimated deaths from the
Obama administration's drone strikes is more than four times what it
was during the Bush administration -- somewhere between 1,494 and 2,618.
However, an analysis by
the New America Foundation says that the civilian casualty rate from
drone strikes has been dropping sharply since 2008 despite the rising
death toll.
"The number of civilians
plus those individuals whose precise status could not be determined
from media reports -- labeled 'unknowns' by NAF -- reported killed by
drones in Pakistan during Obama's tenure in office were 11% of
fatalities," said Bergen. "So far in 2012 it is close to 2%. Under
President Bush it was 33%."
The foundation's
analysis relies on credible media outlets in Pakistan, which in turn
rely on Pakistani officials and local villagers' accounts, Bergen said,
rather than on U.S. figures.
The drone program is
deeply unpopular in Pakistan, where the national parliament voted in
April to end any authorization for it. This, however, was "a vote that
the United States government has simply ignored," according to Bergen.
Obama told CNN's Jessica Yellin this month that the use of armed drones was "something that you have to struggle with."
"If you don't, then it's
very easy to slip into a situation in which you end up bending rules
thinking that the ends always justify the means," he continued. "That's
not been our tradition. That's not who we are as a country."
Obama also addressed his
criteria for lethal action in the interview, although he repeatedly
declined to acknowledge any direct involvement in selecting targets.
"It has to be a target
that is authorized by our laws. It has to be a threat that is serious
and not speculative. It has to be a situation in which we can't capture
the individual before they move forward on some sort of operational plot
against the United States," Obama said.
The rights organization
Reprieve, which said that with the help of a partner organization in
Pakistan it had facilitated access to some of the people interviewed for
the study, backed its findings.
"This shows that drone
strikes go much further than simply killing innocent civilians. An
entire region is being terrorized by the constant threat of death from
the skies," said Reprieve's director, Clive Stafford Smith.
"Their way of life is
collapsing: kids are too terrified to go to school, adults are afraid to
attend weddings, funerals, business meetings, or anything that involves
gathering in groups. Yet there is no end in sight, and nowhere the
ordinary men, women and children of North West Pakistan can go to feel
safe."
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Purchase of safety-related nuclear equipment Pakistan slams curbs by some countries
ISLAMABAD, Sept 18: Pakistan has conveyed its concern to the
International Atomic Energy Agency that a restrictive and discriminatory
export policy is being pursued by some countries about safety-related
quipment.
Addressing the IAEA General Conference in Vienna on Tuesday, Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission`s chairman Dr Ansar Parvez said Pakistan was disappointed to find restrictive and discriminatory export policy by some countries which did not auger well for the IAEA`s goal of encouraging worldwide enhancement of international proclaimed safety standards.
He said vendor countries would recognise that the present policy of restricting Pakistan`s access tonuclear power technology on an entirely discriminatory basis was not only unjust but also futile and counter-productive, and wholly against the spirit of cooperation and openness that had been such a distinguishing hallmark of the global nuclear power enterprise.
`We look forward to the beginning of a new and mutually beneficial era of non-discrimination, equitability and openness in the nuclear power domain. We feel that a wellregulated international exchange of personnel and technology at all levels is invaluable not for raising technical standards but also for fostering goodwill and mutual confidence amongst nations, which is one of the primary objectives of the IAEA,` he said.He said that under a special programme the IAEA was assisting Pakistan`s Nuclear Regulatory Authority in strengthening nuclear security regime in Pakistan through capacity building and establishment of nuclear security training centres and advanced physical protection labs.
During the past year, Pakistan has also been actively engaged in absorbing lessons of the traumatic Fukushima event. After carrying out extensive studies, the PAEC identifled a comprehensive set of safety retrofits to be carried out at our installations and have prioritised them. These enhancements are now in various stages of implementation.
The PAEC chairman said that Pakistan had been engaged in awide-ranging programme to harness application of nuclear technology for socio-economic development of the country in a variety of ways in health, agriculture, industry and energy sectors.
`The top-most priority has always been the harnessing of nuclear energy for the generation of electrical power. For several years now, our country has faced a severe electrical power shortage which has been hampering our economic growth. The nation`s accessible conventional energy resources are very limited and, therefore, the PAEC has an obligation to build nuclear power plants to help alleviate the energy shortage crises,` he said The PAEC chairman said three nuclear power plants were alreadyonline and had been performing well. Besides, another two nuclear power plants of 340MW each were under construction at Chashma and were expected to be commissioned by 2016 with Chinese assistance under a long-standing agreement.
The PAEC, he said, had been given a target by the government to have 8800MW of nuclear power installed by the year 2030.
`With no exception, all our nuclear power plants are under the IAEA safeguards. We are signatory to a number of international conventions and treaties pertaining to nuclear safety and security. Pakistan is fully committed to participate in related activities and programmes of the IAEA including the security and safety action plans,` he said.
Addressing the IAEA General Conference in Vienna on Tuesday, Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission`s chairman Dr Ansar Parvez said Pakistan was disappointed to find restrictive and discriminatory export policy by some countries which did not auger well for the IAEA`s goal of encouraging worldwide enhancement of international proclaimed safety standards.
He said vendor countries would recognise that the present policy of restricting Pakistan`s access tonuclear power technology on an entirely discriminatory basis was not only unjust but also futile and counter-productive, and wholly against the spirit of cooperation and openness that had been such a distinguishing hallmark of the global nuclear power enterprise.
`We look forward to the beginning of a new and mutually beneficial era of non-discrimination, equitability and openness in the nuclear power domain. We feel that a wellregulated international exchange of personnel and technology at all levels is invaluable not for raising technical standards but also for fostering goodwill and mutual confidence amongst nations, which is one of the primary objectives of the IAEA,` he said.He said that under a special programme the IAEA was assisting Pakistan`s Nuclear Regulatory Authority in strengthening nuclear security regime in Pakistan through capacity building and establishment of nuclear security training centres and advanced physical protection labs.
During the past year, Pakistan has also been actively engaged in absorbing lessons of the traumatic Fukushima event. After carrying out extensive studies, the PAEC identifled a comprehensive set of safety retrofits to be carried out at our installations and have prioritised them. These enhancements are now in various stages of implementation.
The PAEC chairman said that Pakistan had been engaged in awide-ranging programme to harness application of nuclear technology for socio-economic development of the country in a variety of ways in health, agriculture, industry and energy sectors.
`The top-most priority has always been the harnessing of nuclear energy for the generation of electrical power. For several years now, our country has faced a severe electrical power shortage which has been hampering our economic growth. The nation`s accessible conventional energy resources are very limited and, therefore, the PAEC has an obligation to build nuclear power plants to help alleviate the energy shortage crises,` he said The PAEC chairman said three nuclear power plants were alreadyonline and had been performing well. Besides, another two nuclear power plants of 340MW each were under construction at Chashma and were expected to be commissioned by 2016 with Chinese assistance under a long-standing agreement.
The PAEC, he said, had been given a target by the government to have 8800MW of nuclear power installed by the year 2030.
`With no exception, all our nuclear power plants are under the IAEA safeguards. We are signatory to a number of international conventions and treaties pertaining to nuclear safety and security. Pakistan is fully committed to participate in related activities and programmes of the IAEA including the security and safety action plans,` he said.
Monday, September 17, 2012
Iran warns to hit Hormuz, US bases, Israel if attacked
TEHRAN, Sept 16: The head of Iran`s powerful Revolutionary Guards on
Sunday warned of retaliation against the Gulf`s strategic Strait of
Hormuz, US bases in the Middle East and Israelif his country was to be
attacked.
General Mohammad Ali Jafari, speaking in a very rare news conference in Tehran, also said that he believed Iran would abandon the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty should it be targeted for military action.
The warnings underlined the high tensions surrounding Iran and its disputed nuclear programme, which Israel has threatened it could seek to disrupt with air strikes, with or without US help.
Jafari said the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow channel at the entrance of the Gulf through which a third of the world`s traded oil passes, would be a legitimate target for Iran should it be attacked.
`This is a declared policy by Iran that if war occurs in the region and the Islamic republic is involved, it is natural that the Strait of Hormuz as well as the energy (market) will face difficulties,` he said.
Jafari suggested that US military bases such as those in Bahrain, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia would also be fair game for retaliation by Iranianmissiles or proxy forces.
`The US has many vulnerabilities around Iran, and its bases are within the range of the Guards` missiles. We have other capabilities as well, particularly when it comes to the support of Muslims for the Islamic republic,` he said.
He added that Tehran believed Israel was unsuccessfully trying to push the United States to take part in military action against Iran`s nuclear facilities.
`I do not think the attack would be carried out without US permission,` he said.
However if Israeli jets or missiles did strike Iran, `nothing of Israel will be left, considering its size,` he warned.
`I do not think any part of Israel will be untouched given our missile capabilities.
Thus, our response (warning of annihilatory retaliation) is in itself a deterrent.
Jafari said that his personal opinion was that, in case of attack, Iran would leave the NPT which is meant to prevent states developing nuclear weapons while permitting atomic energy generation.
`In case of an attack, Iran`s obligations will change. My assessment is that Iran may leave the NPT but it would not mean a dash towards a nuclear bomb because we have a religious edict from the supreme leader` against atomic weapons, he said.-AFP
General Mohammad Ali Jafari, speaking in a very rare news conference in Tehran, also said that he believed Iran would abandon the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty should it be targeted for military action.
The warnings underlined the high tensions surrounding Iran and its disputed nuclear programme, which Israel has threatened it could seek to disrupt with air strikes, with or without US help.
Jafari said the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow channel at the entrance of the Gulf through which a third of the world`s traded oil passes, would be a legitimate target for Iran should it be attacked.
`This is a declared policy by Iran that if war occurs in the region and the Islamic republic is involved, it is natural that the Strait of Hormuz as well as the energy (market) will face difficulties,` he said.
Jafari suggested that US military bases such as those in Bahrain, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia would also be fair game for retaliation by Iranianmissiles or proxy forces.
`The US has many vulnerabilities around Iran, and its bases are within the range of the Guards` missiles. We have other capabilities as well, particularly when it comes to the support of Muslims for the Islamic republic,` he said.
He added that Tehran believed Israel was unsuccessfully trying to push the United States to take part in military action against Iran`s nuclear facilities.
`I do not think the attack would be carried out without US permission,` he said.
However if Israeli jets or missiles did strike Iran, `nothing of Israel will be left, considering its size,` he warned.
`I do not think any part of Israel will be untouched given our missile capabilities.
Thus, our response (warning of annihilatory retaliation) is in itself a deterrent.
Jafari said that his personal opinion was that, in case of attack, Iran would leave the NPT which is meant to prevent states developing nuclear weapons while permitting atomic energy generation.
`In case of an attack, Iran`s obligations will change. My assessment is that Iran may leave the NPT but it would not mean a dash towards a nuclear bomb because we have a religious edict from the supreme leader` against atomic weapons, he said.-AFP
US-Israeli gap on Iran nukes widens
WASHINGTON, Sept 16: The gap between Israel and the United States on
Iran widened on Sunday as Benjamin Netanyahu warned that Tehran was 90
per cent toward a nuclear weapon and insisted on a `red line` from
Washington.
The Israeli leader, speaking on two US political talk shows, pressed the need for a categorical bar on Iran, saying such a safeguard had averted nuclear calamity with Russia during the Cold War and could do so again.
The United States says all options against Iran, including military action, remain on the table, though top officials have rejected the need for so-called `red lines,` implying that they amount to political grandstanding.
To CNN and in a second interview with NBC`s `Meet the Press` both aired Sunday Netanyahu maintained that telling Iran there is a definite line it must step back from would serve as a pre-emptive and effective deterrent.
`If they know there`s a point, a stage in their enrichment or other nuclear activities that they cannot cross because they`ll face consequences, I think they will actually not cross it,` he told CNN`s `State of the Union,` programme.
`It`s important to put a red line before them and that`s something we should discuss with the United States.
The Israeli prime minister said Iran was moving rapidly to complete enrichment of the uranium needed to produce a nuclear bomb. `In six months or so they`ll be 90 per cent of the way there,` he said.
But his call for a change of tack andstiffer warnings from Washington was rejected by Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the United Nations.
Although Rice maintained there was `no daylight` between US and Israeli policy, her comments on the timescale of Tehran`s nuclear ambitions jarred with Netanyahu`s judgment, and contradicted her claim of seamless unity.
`We think that there`s still considerable time for this pressure to work,` Rice said, refusing to acknowledge the red lines argument and insisting that sanctions were working.
`Their economy is beginning to buckle. Their oil production is down 40 per cent. Their currency has plummeted 40 per cent in the last year.
But she added: `This is not an infinite window, and we`ve made very clear that the president`s bottom line is Iran will not have a nuclear weapon.
The United States maintains that it will not allow Iran to develop an atomic bomb, but it favours and has pursued a policy of tough sanctions and diplomatic arm twisting, rejecting the need for other measures.
Israel has consistently said a nucleararmed Iran would pose an existential threat to the Jewish state and has wielded the threat of military action.
Major western powers agree with Israel that Tehran is using its civilian nuclear programme as a cover for building atomic weapons capability, a charge the Iranians have repeatedly denied.With relations between Netanyahu and President Barack Obamaalready viewed as frosty, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta on Friday highlighted the policy split further when he rejected Israel`s demand for red lines.
`The fact is, look, presidents of the United States, prime ministers of Israel or any other country leaders of these countries don`t have, you know, a bunch of little red lines that determine their decisions,` Panetta said.
`What they have are facts that are presented to them about what a country is up to, and then they weigh what kind of action is needed to be taken in order to deal with that situation,` he told Foreign Policy magazine.
`I mean, that`s the real world. Red lines are kind of political arguments that are used to try to put people in a corner.
The White House was last week forced to deny a report that Obama had refused to meet Netanyahu in New York later this month, and said the two spoke by telephone on Tuesday and were united in their stance toward Tehran.
With Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney accusing Obama of being a poor friend to Israel, Netanyahu has denied that he is guilty of political meddling ahead of US elections on November 6.
Rice said in a separate interview with `Fox News Sunday` that US-Israeli relations were `stronger than ever,` and reiterated that the only reason Netanyahu and Obama would not meet at the upcoming UN General Assembly in New York was because their schedules did not match.-AFP
The Israeli leader, speaking on two US political talk shows, pressed the need for a categorical bar on Iran, saying such a safeguard had averted nuclear calamity with Russia during the Cold War and could do so again.
The United States says all options against Iran, including military action, remain on the table, though top officials have rejected the need for so-called `red lines,` implying that they amount to political grandstanding.
To CNN and in a second interview with NBC`s `Meet the Press` both aired Sunday Netanyahu maintained that telling Iran there is a definite line it must step back from would serve as a pre-emptive and effective deterrent.
`If they know there`s a point, a stage in their enrichment or other nuclear activities that they cannot cross because they`ll face consequences, I think they will actually not cross it,` he told CNN`s `State of the Union,` programme.
`It`s important to put a red line before them and that`s something we should discuss with the United States.
The Israeli prime minister said Iran was moving rapidly to complete enrichment of the uranium needed to produce a nuclear bomb. `In six months or so they`ll be 90 per cent of the way there,` he said.
But his call for a change of tack andstiffer warnings from Washington was rejected by Susan Rice, the US ambassador to the United Nations.
Although Rice maintained there was `no daylight` between US and Israeli policy, her comments on the timescale of Tehran`s nuclear ambitions jarred with Netanyahu`s judgment, and contradicted her claim of seamless unity.
`We think that there`s still considerable time for this pressure to work,` Rice said, refusing to acknowledge the red lines argument and insisting that sanctions were working.
`Their economy is beginning to buckle. Their oil production is down 40 per cent. Their currency has plummeted 40 per cent in the last year.
But she added: `This is not an infinite window, and we`ve made very clear that the president`s bottom line is Iran will not have a nuclear weapon.
The United States maintains that it will not allow Iran to develop an atomic bomb, but it favours and has pursued a policy of tough sanctions and diplomatic arm twisting, rejecting the need for other measures.
Israel has consistently said a nucleararmed Iran would pose an existential threat to the Jewish state and has wielded the threat of military action.
Major western powers agree with Israel that Tehran is using its civilian nuclear programme as a cover for building atomic weapons capability, a charge the Iranians have repeatedly denied.With relations between Netanyahu and President Barack Obamaalready viewed as frosty, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta on Friday highlighted the policy split further when he rejected Israel`s demand for red lines.
`The fact is, look, presidents of the United States, prime ministers of Israel or any other country leaders of these countries don`t have, you know, a bunch of little red lines that determine their decisions,` Panetta said.
`What they have are facts that are presented to them about what a country is up to, and then they weigh what kind of action is needed to be taken in order to deal with that situation,` he told Foreign Policy magazine.
`I mean, that`s the real world. Red lines are kind of political arguments that are used to try to put people in a corner.
The White House was last week forced to deny a report that Obama had refused to meet Netanyahu in New York later this month, and said the two spoke by telephone on Tuesday and were united in their stance toward Tehran.
With Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney accusing Obama of being a poor friend to Israel, Netanyahu has denied that he is guilty of political meddling ahead of US elections on November 6.
Rice said in a separate interview with `Fox News Sunday` that US-Israeli relations were `stronger than ever,` and reiterated that the only reason Netanyahu and Obama would not meet at the upcoming UN General Assembly in New York was because their schedules did not match.-AFP
Hate film: let`s not fall into the trap
DHAKA: Once again a depraved and dangerous game is being played, one
with the aim of increasing religious tensions across the globe. This
time it`s a film that seeks to defame the religion of Islam.
Predictably, too many Muslims have reacted with fierce intensity, and
with deadly consequence. Angry demonstrators have attacked American
embassies in Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen. In Benghazi, Libya, the
American ambassador, three other embassy officials, and several Libyan
security staff members were tragically killed.
One should deplore and condemn both the audacious bigotry of the film-maker as well as the inexcusable violence of the protesters. The protesters cannot counter the fraudulent claims of the obscure film, Innocence of Muslims no matter how profane and bigoted it is with behaviour that itself harms the image of Islam everywhere. Ironically, the world came to know about this film only after American embassies were attacked and the ambassador to Libya was killed. By engaging in violence, the overzealous Muslims are falling into the very trap set up by the bigots.
The Islamophobic campaign is nothing new in America. It is even worse in Europe. The film made by Sam Bacile (who it now appears is actually Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a California man who was convicted in 2009 of bank fraud) is not the first effort to denigrate Islam, nor will it be the last.
There have been countless attempts by Islamophobes to incite a fierce reaction in the Muslim community. In some cases, the provocateurs succeeded in eliciting a violent response. On other occasions, their hate-mongering plots faded into obscurity, especially when Muslims decided to ignore them or chose to counter/correct them through dialogue and other civil means. The results were predictably positive: the challenges soon turned into opportunities where Muslims were able to present the truth of Islam to their fellow citizens.
Those who seek to inflame passions will continue their incitements, hoping that Muslims will take the bait. They can then say: `See how violent the Muslims are.` The incitements will remain unabated; but Muslims must stop reacting and instead respond to the evil with something that is civil and intelligent and put the bigotry to shame. In fact, the Quran itself commands Muslims to `repel evil with what is better` (Surah 41: Verse 34). The Quran also says: `O you who believe! Be steadfast in the cause of Allah, bearing witness in equity; and let not a people`s enmity incite you to act otherwise than with justice. Be always just, that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah. Surely, Allah is aware of what you do` (Surah 5: Verse 9).
The overzealous Muslims, who claim to be defending the honour of the Prophet (PBUH) by attacking the embassies and committing acts of destruction and even murder, need to reflect on how the Prophet (PBUH) would have responded to a provocation like Sam Bacile`s film. The Prophet (PBUH) was a man of patience, peace, and mercy. Even though he was attacked and insulted many times throughout his life, he responded with a highminded and measured perspective, always inclined to compassion and forgiveness, and never acted out of revenge or in a violencedriven way. Engaging in wanton acts of violence and senseless killing can only serve to defile his sublime legacy in the minds of those who don`t know him. Muslims in the MiddleEast and around the world must remember this: We honour the Prophet (PBUH) by following his example of tolerance and patience in the face of hostility.
It is also important for Muslims to recognise that the actions of a person who reviles or mocks the Prophet (PBUH), or even goes so far as to insult or ridicule God Himself, is responsible for his or her own actions. There is no justification for collective blame, whether of the perpetrator`s national, religious, or political group, or of the government of the nation he resides in (let alone the ambassador or other embassy officials or staff).
Regrettably, many Muslims across the world have little or no idea as to how American democracy functions and its society operates.
They think the American government is behind, complicit in, or endorsing any Islambashing action or statement broadcast from its soil. This is a serious misperception and myth about America that must be dispelled and debunked at every opportunity.
It is true and unfortunate that some biased individuals and organisations are stirring up hatred against Islam and Muslims with unrelenting persistence. The film that is centre stage in the current turbulence is a manifestation of exceeding ignorance and the most ignoble foolishness in its scandalous attack against the Prophet (PBUH), Islam, and Muslims. It aims to tarnish the image of Islam and spoil the relations between Muslims and nonMuslims. However, there are huge numbers of people in America who have condemned this film, and among them are leaders of various faiths, especially Christianity and Judaism.
Some non-Muslim academics have even called for Sam Bacile`s arrest.
Muslims must think deeply before reacting tempestuously. For overreacting to such provocations will only make things worse. Resorting to violence shouldn`t be an option at any time.
The maker and sponsors of the hate film have undoubtedly put forth a piece of propaganda promoting the worst kind of bigotry; still, this should never be an excuse to commit any act of violence against a person or any destruction of property.We are certainly not suggesting that Muslims stop defending the Prophet (PBUH). But the best way to defend the Prophet (PBUH) is by conveying to people who he really was, and by emulating his sublime character. We cannot become emotionally overblown and act irrationally every time an Islamophobe insults Islam. We should act with utmost maturity and deal with caution, care and prudence.
The Prophet (PBUH) is loved and respected by hundreds of millions of people around the world, and no one can take this veneration from our hearts. So we should not fall into the trap of those who wish to incite our anger and instill hatred in the minds and hearts of nonMuslims. Indeed, there is no God-conscious faith or love for the Prophet (PBUH) in reacting in a brutal and destructive way.As we mourn the loss of lives, we call on Muslims around the world to `repel evil with what is better`. That might entail ignoring a provocation, like the film in question, that is ugly in its purpose but supremely foolish in its content. It might require in presenting a reasoned argument as to why some anti-Islam talking point is erroneous. In all cases, however, repelling evil with what is better demands speech and behaviour that is wise and judicious, with sober awareness that everything we do and say has consequences. If only `Sam Bacile` had observed such prudence.
By arrangement with The Daily Star/ANN
One should deplore and condemn both the audacious bigotry of the film-maker as well as the inexcusable violence of the protesters. The protesters cannot counter the fraudulent claims of the obscure film, Innocence of Muslims no matter how profane and bigoted it is with behaviour that itself harms the image of Islam everywhere. Ironically, the world came to know about this film only after American embassies were attacked and the ambassador to Libya was killed. By engaging in violence, the overzealous Muslims are falling into the very trap set up by the bigots.
The Islamophobic campaign is nothing new in America. It is even worse in Europe. The film made by Sam Bacile (who it now appears is actually Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, a California man who was convicted in 2009 of bank fraud) is not the first effort to denigrate Islam, nor will it be the last.
There have been countless attempts by Islamophobes to incite a fierce reaction in the Muslim community. In some cases, the provocateurs succeeded in eliciting a violent response. On other occasions, their hate-mongering plots faded into obscurity, especially when Muslims decided to ignore them or chose to counter/correct them through dialogue and other civil means. The results were predictably positive: the challenges soon turned into opportunities where Muslims were able to present the truth of Islam to their fellow citizens.
Those who seek to inflame passions will continue their incitements, hoping that Muslims will take the bait. They can then say: `See how violent the Muslims are.` The incitements will remain unabated; but Muslims must stop reacting and instead respond to the evil with something that is civil and intelligent and put the bigotry to shame. In fact, the Quran itself commands Muslims to `repel evil with what is better` (Surah 41: Verse 34). The Quran also says: `O you who believe! Be steadfast in the cause of Allah, bearing witness in equity; and let not a people`s enmity incite you to act otherwise than with justice. Be always just, that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah. Surely, Allah is aware of what you do` (Surah 5: Verse 9).
The overzealous Muslims, who claim to be defending the honour of the Prophet (PBUH) by attacking the embassies and committing acts of destruction and even murder, need to reflect on how the Prophet (PBUH) would have responded to a provocation like Sam Bacile`s film. The Prophet (PBUH) was a man of patience, peace, and mercy. Even though he was attacked and insulted many times throughout his life, he responded with a highminded and measured perspective, always inclined to compassion and forgiveness, and never acted out of revenge or in a violencedriven way. Engaging in wanton acts of violence and senseless killing can only serve to defile his sublime legacy in the minds of those who don`t know him. Muslims in the MiddleEast and around the world must remember this: We honour the Prophet (PBUH) by following his example of tolerance and patience in the face of hostility.
It is also important for Muslims to recognise that the actions of a person who reviles or mocks the Prophet (PBUH), or even goes so far as to insult or ridicule God Himself, is responsible for his or her own actions. There is no justification for collective blame, whether of the perpetrator`s national, religious, or political group, or of the government of the nation he resides in (let alone the ambassador or other embassy officials or staff).
Regrettably, many Muslims across the world have little or no idea as to how American democracy functions and its society operates.
They think the American government is behind, complicit in, or endorsing any Islambashing action or statement broadcast from its soil. This is a serious misperception and myth about America that must be dispelled and debunked at every opportunity.
It is true and unfortunate that some biased individuals and organisations are stirring up hatred against Islam and Muslims with unrelenting persistence. The film that is centre stage in the current turbulence is a manifestation of exceeding ignorance and the most ignoble foolishness in its scandalous attack against the Prophet (PBUH), Islam, and Muslims. It aims to tarnish the image of Islam and spoil the relations between Muslims and nonMuslims. However, there are huge numbers of people in America who have condemned this film, and among them are leaders of various faiths, especially Christianity and Judaism.
Some non-Muslim academics have even called for Sam Bacile`s arrest.
Muslims must think deeply before reacting tempestuously. For overreacting to such provocations will only make things worse. Resorting to violence shouldn`t be an option at any time.
The maker and sponsors of the hate film have undoubtedly put forth a piece of propaganda promoting the worst kind of bigotry; still, this should never be an excuse to commit any act of violence against a person or any destruction of property.We are certainly not suggesting that Muslims stop defending the Prophet (PBUH). But the best way to defend the Prophet (PBUH) is by conveying to people who he really was, and by emulating his sublime character. We cannot become emotionally overblown and act irrationally every time an Islamophobe insults Islam. We should act with utmost maturity and deal with caution, care and prudence.
The Prophet (PBUH) is loved and respected by hundreds of millions of people around the world, and no one can take this veneration from our hearts. So we should not fall into the trap of those who wish to incite our anger and instill hatred in the minds and hearts of nonMuslims. Indeed, there is no God-conscious faith or love for the Prophet (PBUH) in reacting in a brutal and destructive way.As we mourn the loss of lives, we call on Muslims around the world to `repel evil with what is better`. That might entail ignoring a provocation, like the film in question, that is ugly in its purpose but supremely foolish in its content. It might require in presenting a reasoned argument as to why some anti-Islam talking point is erroneous. In all cases, however, repelling evil with what is better demands speech and behaviour that is wise and judicious, with sober awareness that everything we do and say has consequences. If only `Sam Bacile` had observed such prudence.
By arrangement with The Daily Star/ANN
Six injured as anti-film protesters try to march on US consulate
KARACHI, Sept 16: At least six people protesting against the anti-Islam
film were injured when police fired teargas shells and used water canons
to stop a procession from marching on the American consulate here on
Sunday evening. Three police vans, a bus and a petrol station were
torched during violence.
The participants of the march organised by the Imamia Students` Organisation and Majlis Wahdat-iMuslimeen managed to reach the consulate on M.T. Khan Road from the Numaish intersection.
Although police had placed containers on the road and beefed up security around the consulate and also fired into the air to disperse the crowd, `amid shelling, some youngsters managed to scale the wall of the consulate and hoist flags,` an ISO activist said.
A police kiosk near the consulate was also set ablaze.
Police rounded up around 20 protesters.
A spokesman for the US consulate, Richard Silver, told AFP: `There has been no damage or injury to any of our personnel at the consulate.
Reuters adds: Around 1,000 protesters began throwing stones and police responded with teargas and by firing into the air, police official Fayyaz Laghari said. Two policemen were also injured.
One person was killed when unknown people opened fire during a protest in Hyderabad, police said.
The participants of the march organised by the Imamia Students` Organisation and Majlis Wahdat-iMuslimeen managed to reach the consulate on M.T. Khan Road from the Numaish intersection.
Although police had placed containers on the road and beefed up security around the consulate and also fired into the air to disperse the crowd, `amid shelling, some youngsters managed to scale the wall of the consulate and hoist flags,` an ISO activist said.
A police kiosk near the consulate was also set ablaze.
Police rounded up around 20 protesters.
A spokesman for the US consulate, Richard Silver, told AFP: `There has been no damage or injury to any of our personnel at the consulate.
Reuters adds: Around 1,000 protesters began throwing stones and police responded with teargas and by firing into the air, police official Fayyaz Laghari said. Two policemen were also injured.
One person was killed when unknown people opened fire during a protest in Hyderabad, police said.
Second lab report `confirms` virus, bacteria infection Imported sheep being culled
KARACHI, Sept 16: Sindh government officials decided on Sunday to cull
more than 21,000 imported Australian sheep and the process of lcilling
the animals and burying them started late in the night in Razzakabad
area amid tight security. The government took the decision after reports
from a second laboratory also confirmed that the animals were diseased.
The culling began in the presence of livestock and local government officials.
`We have culled about 150 sheep so far. The step has been taken after the animals were found suffering from highly contagious diseases. Infections could spread in our environment if the animals were allowed to live,` Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, representing the livestock department at the site near the private farm in Razzakabad where the animals had been kept, said.
The animals, he said, were being buried in a 15-foot deep ditch after being slaughtered.Referring to the latest report submitted by the Tandojam Central Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, provincial Livestock and Fisheries Secretary Syed Abid Ali Shah said it showed that the sheep had got footand-mouth disease, besides having bacterial infection as had earlier been indicated in a lab report by the Sindh Poultry Vaccine Centre.
`There is no option lef t but to cull all animals in public interest because two laboratory reports have confirmed that they are diseased.
Preparations are under way for the culling that will begin soon,` he said, adding that the remains would be buried deep at the same place.
Citing international reports, Mr Shah said the animals were also infected with an exotic (parapox) virus which caused orf disease.
`That means these animais are a grave risk to public health because we don`t have this virus in our environment right now, nor the lab facilities required to detect it.
`The spread of new viruses is a major health hazard across the world which is why developed countries have stringent rules and regulations to protect their environment,` he said.
Replying to a question about a report from an Islamabad laboratory whichreportedly is negative, he said: `The reports of our laboratories are important since we are the ones who are going to face the health and environmental consequences if these animals are allowed to be slaughtered and consumed.
`Besides, the whole world has seen that the sheep were rejected in Bahrain.
Regarding action against the quarantine department officials who had provisionally allowed release of the animals without carrying out proper checks in a government quarantine, he said the department functioned under the federal government and was not `under his jurisdiction`.
`In fact, it doesn`t fall in our responsibilities to check imported animals. It is the domain of the federal government.
`The provincial department had to intervene on reports that the animals are diseased,` he explained.
He said the federal department officials had declared the private farm a temporary quarantine probably because the place at their disposal could not accommodate such a large number of animals.
According to Mr Shah, the quarantine department had been told that the animals were diseased and needed to be culled immediately.`The decision is a big step taken by the government, the official said.
The Sindh Poultry Vaccine Centre`s tests had found presence of salmonella and actinomyces bacteria in 100 per cent samples from the Merino sheep. Of the samples, 44 per cent tested positive for E. coli.
According to the centre`s report, the oral swabs were found positive for highly contagious actinomyces which is responsible for causing lumpy jaw disease in sheep.
E. coli and salmonella bacteria may cause food poisoning and dysentery in humans if meat of infected animals is consumed.
The sheep were recently offloaded with the approval of the Port Qasim Authority.
Parts of the same consignment, of about 35,000 sheep, were also delivered to Qatar and Oman.
The authorities in Bahrain rejected the shipment from the Wellard Rural Exports on account of the animals` sickness.
According to media reports, the consignment was brought to Karachi instead of being taken back to Australia.
It was bought here by a meat company and the sheep were being kept at its farms in Razzakabad area of Malir with other animals meant for slaughter.
The culling began in the presence of livestock and local government officials.
`We have culled about 150 sheep so far. The step has been taken after the animals were found suffering from highly contagious diseases. Infections could spread in our environment if the animals were allowed to live,` Dr Abdul Hafeez Shaikh, representing the livestock department at the site near the private farm in Razzakabad where the animals had been kept, said.
The animals, he said, were being buried in a 15-foot deep ditch after being slaughtered.Referring to the latest report submitted by the Tandojam Central Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory, provincial Livestock and Fisheries Secretary Syed Abid Ali Shah said it showed that the sheep had got footand-mouth disease, besides having bacterial infection as had earlier been indicated in a lab report by the Sindh Poultry Vaccine Centre.
`There is no option lef t but to cull all animals in public interest because two laboratory reports have confirmed that they are diseased.
Preparations are under way for the culling that will begin soon,` he said, adding that the remains would be buried deep at the same place.
Citing international reports, Mr Shah said the animals were also infected with an exotic (parapox) virus which caused orf disease.
`That means these animais are a grave risk to public health because we don`t have this virus in our environment right now, nor the lab facilities required to detect it.
`The spread of new viruses is a major health hazard across the world which is why developed countries have stringent rules and regulations to protect their environment,` he said.
Replying to a question about a report from an Islamabad laboratory whichreportedly is negative, he said: `The reports of our laboratories are important since we are the ones who are going to face the health and environmental consequences if these animals are allowed to be slaughtered and consumed.
`Besides, the whole world has seen that the sheep were rejected in Bahrain.
Regarding action against the quarantine department officials who had provisionally allowed release of the animals without carrying out proper checks in a government quarantine, he said the department functioned under the federal government and was not `under his jurisdiction`.
`In fact, it doesn`t fall in our responsibilities to check imported animals. It is the domain of the federal government.
`The provincial department had to intervene on reports that the animals are diseased,` he explained.
He said the federal department officials had declared the private farm a temporary quarantine probably because the place at their disposal could not accommodate such a large number of animals.
According to Mr Shah, the quarantine department had been told that the animals were diseased and needed to be culled immediately.`The decision is a big step taken by the government, the official said.
The Sindh Poultry Vaccine Centre`s tests had found presence of salmonella and actinomyces bacteria in 100 per cent samples from the Merino sheep. Of the samples, 44 per cent tested positive for E. coli.
According to the centre`s report, the oral swabs were found positive for highly contagious actinomyces which is responsible for causing lumpy jaw disease in sheep.
E. coli and salmonella bacteria may cause food poisoning and dysentery in humans if meat of infected animals is consumed.
The sheep were recently offloaded with the approval of the Port Qasim Authority.
Parts of the same consignment, of about 35,000 sheep, were also delivered to Qatar and Oman.
The authorities in Bahrain rejected the shipment from the Wellard Rural Exports on account of the animals` sickness.
According to media reports, the consignment was brought to Karachi instead of being taken back to Australia.
It was bought here by a meat company and the sheep were being kept at its farms in Razzakabad area of Malir with other animals meant for slaughter.
Friday, September 14, 2012
hate film against Islam
WASHINGTON, Sept 13: The US military chief, Gen Martin Dempsey, has
telephoned a Florida pastor, Terry Jones, urging him to withdraw his
support for a hate film which has stirred violent protests across the
Muslim world.
`This was a brief call in which Gen Dempsey expressed his concerns over the nature of the film, the tensions it could inflame, and the violence it could cause,` a senior US official told a briefing in Washington.
In his call to Mr Jones on Wednesday, Gen Dempsey also asked him `to consider withdrawing his support for the film, Mr Jones did hear the general`s concerns, but he was non-committal, the official added.
Mr Jones is known in the Muslim world as the pastor who organised a group burning of Islamic books two years ago.
Meanwhile, investigations by US media outlets, and Dawn, revealed that the producers drastically altered the film after it was made, turning it into ahate message against Islam and the Muslims.
The original film was not about Islam or the Prophet (PBUH), but about a man called George who lived 2,000 years ago.
The film `Innocence of Muslims` stirred violent protests in several Muslim countries and in Libya it led to the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three of his colleagues.
Actors who participated in the film told various media outlets that the producers hid their real intentions from them. Some actors showed copies of the original script which clearly identified the main character as George.
Cindy Lee Garcia, an actress from Bakersfield, California, told a website called Gawker that the script she was given was titled simply Desert Warriors.
`It was going to be a film based on how things were 2,000 years ago,` she said. `It wasn`t based on anything to do with religion. It was just on how things were run in Egypt. There wasn`t anything about Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) or Muslims or anything, she said.
Watching the 14-minute trailer posted on Youtube also makes it clear that defamatory contents were added later, using a technique called voice over, which is used for suppressing the original voice and replacing it with someone else`s.
The violent reaction also caused a media frenzy in the United States where a number of journalists are now trying to determine who made this film, what was their intention and, above all, who posted its Arabic version on the internet.
Bacile or Nakoura: Initially, a man who identified himself as Sam Bacile, an Israeli Jew, claimed he produced the controversial film. But investigations showed that Sam Bacile was a fictitious character.
Investigations by the Associated Press news agency concluded that Sam Bacile does not exist, but is a persona used by a convicted Coptic Egyptian fraudster,Nakoula Bassely Nakoula.
On Thursday morning, a US lawenforcement official confirmed that Nakoula was behind the anti-Muslim film.
US federal court papers filed in a 2010 criminal prosecution against him said Nakoula had used numerous aliases in the past, including Nicola Bacily and Erwin Salameh.Nakoula pleaded no contest in 2010 to federal bank fraud charges in California and was ordered to pay more than $790,000 in restitution.
He was also sentenced to 21 months in federal prison and ordered not to use computers or the Internet for five years without approval from his probation officer.
Nakoula had Coptic and evangelical associates in the shooting of the film, including Steve Klein, an extremist Christian, who has helped train paramilitary militias at a California church. He also conducts protests outside abortion clinics, Mormon temples and mosques.
Bacile claimed raising $5 million forthe film but investigations showed that it was a low budget film and some of the actors were not even paid.
Investigations also revealed that the film was never screened anywhere in America, although Bacile claimed showing it in a virtually empty auditorium in Hollywood.
However, the man who apparently started the riots in the Arab world is another Egyptian Coptic, Morris Sadek.
He helped translate the film into Arabic and also forwarded the Arabic version to various Egyptian television channels.
He also promoted the film on his Website.
Besides the motives and true origin of the producers, the US media is also asking questions about the timing of this hate project.
There are also questions about the execution of the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. US officials told reporters they believed it was not a mob attack but a planned assault by an armed group.
`This was a brief call in which Gen Dempsey expressed his concerns over the nature of the film, the tensions it could inflame, and the violence it could cause,` a senior US official told a briefing in Washington.
In his call to Mr Jones on Wednesday, Gen Dempsey also asked him `to consider withdrawing his support for the film, Mr Jones did hear the general`s concerns, but he was non-committal, the official added.
Mr Jones is known in the Muslim world as the pastor who organised a group burning of Islamic books two years ago.
Meanwhile, investigations by US media outlets, and Dawn, revealed that the producers drastically altered the film after it was made, turning it into ahate message against Islam and the Muslims.
The original film was not about Islam or the Prophet (PBUH), but about a man called George who lived 2,000 years ago.
The film `Innocence of Muslims` stirred violent protests in several Muslim countries and in Libya it led to the death of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three of his colleagues.
Actors who participated in the film told various media outlets that the producers hid their real intentions from them. Some actors showed copies of the original script which clearly identified the main character as George.
Cindy Lee Garcia, an actress from Bakersfield, California, told a website called Gawker that the script she was given was titled simply Desert Warriors.
`It was going to be a film based on how things were 2,000 years ago,` she said. `It wasn`t based on anything to do with religion. It was just on how things were run in Egypt. There wasn`t anything about Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) or Muslims or anything, she said.
Watching the 14-minute trailer posted on Youtube also makes it clear that defamatory contents were added later, using a technique called voice over, which is used for suppressing the original voice and replacing it with someone else`s.
The violent reaction also caused a media frenzy in the United States where a number of journalists are now trying to determine who made this film, what was their intention and, above all, who posted its Arabic version on the internet.
Bacile or Nakoura: Initially, a man who identified himself as Sam Bacile, an Israeli Jew, claimed he produced the controversial film. But investigations showed that Sam Bacile was a fictitious character.
Investigations by the Associated Press news agency concluded that Sam Bacile does not exist, but is a persona used by a convicted Coptic Egyptian fraudster,Nakoula Bassely Nakoula.
On Thursday morning, a US lawenforcement official confirmed that Nakoula was behind the anti-Muslim film.
US federal court papers filed in a 2010 criminal prosecution against him said Nakoula had used numerous aliases in the past, including Nicola Bacily and Erwin Salameh.Nakoula pleaded no contest in 2010 to federal bank fraud charges in California and was ordered to pay more than $790,000 in restitution.
He was also sentenced to 21 months in federal prison and ordered not to use computers or the Internet for five years without approval from his probation officer.
Nakoula had Coptic and evangelical associates in the shooting of the film, including Steve Klein, an extremist Christian, who has helped train paramilitary militias at a California church. He also conducts protests outside abortion clinics, Mormon temples and mosques.
Bacile claimed raising $5 million forthe film but investigations showed that it was a low budget film and some of the actors were not even paid.
Investigations also revealed that the film was never screened anywhere in America, although Bacile claimed showing it in a virtually empty auditorium in Hollywood.
However, the man who apparently started the riots in the Arab world is another Egyptian Coptic, Morris Sadek.
He helped translate the film into Arabic and also forwarded the Arabic version to various Egyptian television channels.
He also promoted the film on his Website.
Besides the motives and true origin of the producers, the US media is also asking questions about the timing of this hate project.
There are also questions about the execution of the attack on the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya. US officials told reporters they believed it was not a mob attack but a planned assault by an armed group.
Attack on Iran to unite Muslim world against US, Israel: experts
NEW YORK, Sept 13: A US or Israeli attack on Iran`s nuclear facilities
could derail the Islamic Republic`s suspected weapons programme for four
years at most, but it would alienate and unite the Muslim world,
against Israel, and US, according to a report.
The report released on Thursday by the `Iran Project`, a bipartisan group of former national security officials and foreign policy specialists, discusses the military pros and cons of a strike on Iran`s nuclear facilities and outlines the lessdiscussed political fallout of any such attack.
Air raids, commando assaults and computer network attacks `would destroy or severely damage many of Iran`s physical facilities and stockpiles`, according to the New York based group.
`But in our judgment complete destruction of Iran`s nuclear programme is unlikely and Iran would still retain the scientific capacity and the experience to start its nuclear programme again.
Military effectiveness notwithstanding, the report concluded that `one of the most serious but difficult to quantify costs of military action against Iran could be damage to US reputation and standing` `If Iran`s nuclear programme is attacked by the US or Israel in the absence of an international mandate or amultinational coalition, support for maintaining sanctions against Iran could be substantially weakened,` the report said.
But getting a mandate from the United Nations Security Council for an attack on Iran would be impossible.
High-profile signatories The report is more noteworthy for the former US officials listed among its signatories, including former Central Intelligence Agency Deputy Director Paul Pillar; former US Central Command commanders Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni and Admiral William Fallon.
Other signers of the report include former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and former Democratic Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia; retired US Ambassador Thomas Pickering; George W. Bush-era Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft.
Iran may retaliate by attempting to close the Strait of Hormuz, an action that would `rattle global markets and cause a significant spike in oil prices`.
`Destabilising forces` An assault would `introduce destabil-ising political and economic forces in a region already experiencing major transformations`, the report said. A US strike may provoke worldwide anger among Muslims and enhance Al Qaeda`s ability to recruit new members.
The report reiterates conclusions previously outlined by US officials, including Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen, about the limited effectiveness of a military attack on Iran.
A US air strike involving stealth B-2 bombers dropping 30,000-pound precision-guided penetrating bombs `carried out to near perfection` could delay Iran`s programme by up to four years. A unilateral strike by Israel `with its more limited capabilities, could delay Iran`s ability to build a bomb by up to two years,` the report said. An Israeli airstrike `is unlikely to succeed in destroying or even seriously damaging` the deeply buried Fordo enrichment facility and the stockpile of near-weaponsgrade enriched uranium there.
The `lack of a high-confidence military option against Fordo is a key reason why Israeli government officials believe they must take action to destroy Iran`s supply of low-enriched uranium and damage Iran`s ability to produce more centrifuges before Fordo becomes fully operational`, the report said.
The report released on Thursday by the `Iran Project`, a bipartisan group of former national security officials and foreign policy specialists, discusses the military pros and cons of a strike on Iran`s nuclear facilities and outlines the lessdiscussed political fallout of any such attack.
Air raids, commando assaults and computer network attacks `would destroy or severely damage many of Iran`s physical facilities and stockpiles`, according to the New York based group.
`But in our judgment complete destruction of Iran`s nuclear programme is unlikely and Iran would still retain the scientific capacity and the experience to start its nuclear programme again.
Military effectiveness notwithstanding, the report concluded that `one of the most serious but difficult to quantify costs of military action against Iran could be damage to US reputation and standing` `If Iran`s nuclear programme is attacked by the US or Israel in the absence of an international mandate or amultinational coalition, support for maintaining sanctions against Iran could be substantially weakened,` the report said.
But getting a mandate from the United Nations Security Council for an attack on Iran would be impossible.
High-profile signatories The report is more noteworthy for the former US officials listed among its signatories, including former Central Intelligence Agency Deputy Director Paul Pillar; former US Central Command commanders Marine Corps General Anthony Zinni and Admiral William Fallon.
Other signers of the report include former Republican Senator Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and former Democratic Senator Sam Nunn of Georgia; retired US Ambassador Thomas Pickering; George W. Bush-era Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft.
Iran may retaliate by attempting to close the Strait of Hormuz, an action that would `rattle global markets and cause a significant spike in oil prices`.
`Destabilising forces` An assault would `introduce destabil-ising political and economic forces in a region already experiencing major transformations`, the report said. A US strike may provoke worldwide anger among Muslims and enhance Al Qaeda`s ability to recruit new members.
The report reiterates conclusions previously outlined by US officials, including Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Michael Mullen, about the limited effectiveness of a military attack on Iran.
A US air strike involving stealth B-2 bombers dropping 30,000-pound precision-guided penetrating bombs `carried out to near perfection` could delay Iran`s programme by up to four years. A unilateral strike by Israel `with its more limited capabilities, could delay Iran`s ability to build a bomb by up to two years,` the report said. An Israeli airstrike `is unlikely to succeed in destroying or even seriously damaging` the deeply buried Fordo enrichment facility and the stockpile of near-weaponsgrade enriched uranium there.
The `lack of a high-confidence military option against Fordo is a key reason why Israeli government officials believe they must take action to destroy Iran`s supply of low-enriched uranium and damage Iran`s ability to produce more centrifuges before Fordo becomes fully operational`, the report said.
karachi - raging inferno - time to act
SEVERAL inquiry teams have been set up, suo motu notice has been taken
and glib promises made about the payment of compensation. At the
provincial and federal levels, officialdom has loudly reiterated that
those found responsible will face that favourite of governmental red
herrings, `stern action`. More than 250 people died when a garment
manufacturing unit in Karachi`s SITE area turned into a raging inferno;
the horror faced by most of the workers in their last moments does not
bear thinking of. Can we nurse hopes that their lives were not lost
entirely in vain? Could future researchers on labour reform in Pakistan
look back at this tragedy as the turning point that caused the sluggish
administration to wake up to its responsibilities towards enforcing
labour and safety standard laws? Sadly, if the past is taken as an
indicator, the chances are slim. It is in the manner of things in
Pakistan that each new tragedy, each preventable accident even those as
heartbreaking as this one is met with promises of good intentions to fix
the system, only to be forgotten within days and weeks as the lethargy
returns.
Whether it is a road accident that could have been prevented by more stringent tests for road-worthiness, a CNG cylinder explosion that could have been averted had installationand manufacturing taken place under honest governmental oversight, or a building that collapsed because the construction codes were not enforced, the administration`s response is to wait it out until some new outrage forces it to the back of society`s memory.
In cases involving the industrial lobby, groups that have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo and these are comprised of individuals for whom such tragedies have a monetary, not human, dimension find the state to be quite compliant and unwilling to improve working conditions for the voiceless labour force. The state`s predilection towards capitulating is quite clear: since the late 1990s, different administrations in Punjab and Sindh bowed before the industrialist lobby and barred inspectors from entering the factory premises to check if safety and other standards mandated by the law were being met. And while Punjab overturned the ban early this year, the dysfunction of the labour inspection system is evident from the similar tragedy that befell workers of a Lahore unit on the same day. The labour inspection system is an essential first step from where workers` rights issues can be addressed.
Will the government ever find the will to stand up in support of the rights and safety of the millions that are its raison d`être?
Whether it is a road accident that could have been prevented by more stringent tests for road-worthiness, a CNG cylinder explosion that could have been averted had installationand manufacturing taken place under honest governmental oversight, or a building that collapsed because the construction codes were not enforced, the administration`s response is to wait it out until some new outrage forces it to the back of society`s memory.
In cases involving the industrial lobby, groups that have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo and these are comprised of individuals for whom such tragedies have a monetary, not human, dimension find the state to be quite compliant and unwilling to improve working conditions for the voiceless labour force. The state`s predilection towards capitulating is quite clear: since the late 1990s, different administrations in Punjab and Sindh bowed before the industrialist lobby and barred inspectors from entering the factory premises to check if safety and other standards mandated by the law were being met. And while Punjab overturned the ban early this year, the dysfunction of the labour inspection system is evident from the similar tragedy that befell workers of a Lahore unit on the same day. The labour inspection system is an essential first step from where workers` rights issues can be addressed.
Will the government ever find the will to stand up in support of the rights and safety of the millions that are its raison d`être?
Doctors need to follow WHO guidelines
OUR doctors go on strike sometimes because of demands for an increased
salary package, sometimes against transfers of senior doctors by the
government and sometimes against the `objectionable` behaviour of the
deceased`s family who put the blame on doctors on duty for their alleged
negligence. Ultimately, it is the patients who suffer in all such
cases.
To my surprise, hardly any doctors` association or society demanded an inquiry or investigation whenever a patient dies owing to professional negligence. Every day hundreds of deaths are reported but their causeisnever putin the record.Scores of deaths as a result of failed deliveries due to dose-related errors are blamed on malnutrition or poor maternal health.
A huge number of deaths because of drug-drug interaction, adverse drug interaction and drug-food interactions areblamed on deaths due to allergic reactions.
A lot of deaths of traumatised emergency cases occur because patients` guardians are directed to shift the patients to a teaching hospital without giving the patients first aid. Millions of children are being prescribed and subsequently administered with indiscriminate antibiotics, knowing the fact that they are getting resistant against microbes, making it problematic to cure diversified infections with limited antibiotics in the near future.
Why don`t medical professionals display degrees at the place of their practice to end the issue of quackery? Unfortunately, the clinching argument presented by the medical fraternity is: doctors, being a highly prestigious class of society, should not be made liable to such inquiries as it puts stress on their moral high ground.But equally important is that until this doctors-dominated healthcare system is made conscious of accountability, deaths would continue to occur unreported.
Why aren`t internationally practised standards of medical care put into practice? Why induction of professional drug experts (pharmacists) is opposed which can stop deaths due to drug-related errors.
Why isn`t the practice of generic prescription allowed to be exercised, which can end prescription of fake or adulterated drugs? Why is the establishment of drug information centre opposed both at policymaking and district level, cobbling of which can save millions of lives at home by providing retaliatory measures next to snake bite, acid burning, allergic reactions, heart attacks, electric shocks and drugrelated complications?Massive deaths can be prevented each year just by overhauling the healthcare system not in a way demanded by doctors, but in accordance with the WHO guidelines and internationally practised standards, in which accountability guarantees professional outcome.
DR ZAIB ALI SHAHERYAR Lahore
To my surprise, hardly any doctors` association or society demanded an inquiry or investigation whenever a patient dies owing to professional negligence. Every day hundreds of deaths are reported but their causeisnever putin the record.Scores of deaths as a result of failed deliveries due to dose-related errors are blamed on malnutrition or poor maternal health.
A huge number of deaths because of drug-drug interaction, adverse drug interaction and drug-food interactions areblamed on deaths due to allergic reactions.
A lot of deaths of traumatised emergency cases occur because patients` guardians are directed to shift the patients to a teaching hospital without giving the patients first aid. Millions of children are being prescribed and subsequently administered with indiscriminate antibiotics, knowing the fact that they are getting resistant against microbes, making it problematic to cure diversified infections with limited antibiotics in the near future.
Why don`t medical professionals display degrees at the place of their practice to end the issue of quackery? Unfortunately, the clinching argument presented by the medical fraternity is: doctors, being a highly prestigious class of society, should not be made liable to such inquiries as it puts stress on their moral high ground.But equally important is that until this doctors-dominated healthcare system is made conscious of accountability, deaths would continue to occur unreported.
Why aren`t internationally practised standards of medical care put into practice? Why induction of professional drug experts (pharmacists) is opposed which can stop deaths due to drug-related errors.
Why isn`t the practice of generic prescription allowed to be exercised, which can end prescription of fake or adulterated drugs? Why is the establishment of drug information centre opposed both at policymaking and district level, cobbling of which can save millions of lives at home by providing retaliatory measures next to snake bite, acid burning, allergic reactions, heart attacks, electric shocks and drugrelated complications?Massive deaths can be prevented each year just by overhauling the healthcare system not in a way demanded by doctors, but in accordance with the WHO guidelines and internationally practised standards, in which accountability guarantees professional outcome.
DR ZAIB ALI SHAHERYAR Lahore
PTI Economic policy and lawa and order
MUHAMMAD Jalal Awan has mentioned in his letter (Sept 6) the example of
Malaysian growth after Mahatir Mohamad`s reforms. I want to point out
that all developed or rapidly growing nations, including Malaysia, did
not face militancy in their cities during the development and so the
example of Asian Tigers is not relevant.
I don`t agree with Asad Umar`s idea that economic development can be achieved in the presence of militancy.
Until 1977 Pakistan was among the fastest developing economies of the world. Institutions like PIA and the BCCI bank were among the world`s top ranking organisations, and human development index was rapidly growing changing the economicconditions of citizens.
After the start of the Afghan war in 1979, Pakistan gave refuge to over four million Afghans who brought weapons, drugs and militant ideology with them and destroyed the social fabric of the peaceful and tolerant Pakistani society.
By the 1990s the country was gripped by sectarian violence and hundreds of doctors, teachers and other innocent citizens were killed by Islamic militants across the country.
After the 9/11 attacks in New York, Taliban militants fled Afghanistan and brought the war into Pakistani cities.
According to the Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies, since 2007 Taliban militants have been blasting onaverage more than one bomb every day somewhere in Pakistan. Various government and military officials have presented the figure of 30,000 innocent civilians killed by the Islamic extremists during last 10 years.
As a result, Pakistan`s economy has critically suffered because of the deteriorating law and order situation.
Textile Minister Makhdoom Shahabuddin mentioned in January this year that 40 per cent of the textile industry and over 200,000 power looms have been moved to Bangladesh.
In my opinion the PTFs economic policy could be a very nice document; but its implementation will be difficult in the war-waged country.
IRFAN HUSSAIN London
I don`t agree with Asad Umar`s idea that economic development can be achieved in the presence of militancy.
Until 1977 Pakistan was among the fastest developing economies of the world. Institutions like PIA and the BCCI bank were among the world`s top ranking organisations, and human development index was rapidly growing changing the economicconditions of citizens.
After the start of the Afghan war in 1979, Pakistan gave refuge to over four million Afghans who brought weapons, drugs and militant ideology with them and destroyed the social fabric of the peaceful and tolerant Pakistani society.
By the 1990s the country was gripped by sectarian violence and hundreds of doctors, teachers and other innocent citizens were killed by Islamic militants across the country.
After the 9/11 attacks in New York, Taliban militants fled Afghanistan and brought the war into Pakistani cities.
According to the Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies, since 2007 Taliban militants have been blasting onaverage more than one bomb every day somewhere in Pakistan. Various government and military officials have presented the figure of 30,000 innocent civilians killed by the Islamic extremists during last 10 years.
As a result, Pakistan`s economy has critically suffered because of the deteriorating law and order situation.
Textile Minister Makhdoom Shahabuddin mentioned in January this year that 40 per cent of the textile industry and over 200,000 power looms have been moved to Bangladesh.
In my opinion the PTFs economic policy could be a very nice document; but its implementation will be difficult in the war-waged country.
IRFAN HUSSAIN London
Celebrating Eid: Hijri calendar
THIS is with reference to letters by Sohail Sultan and Nafees Najmi (Sept 1) on the subject of moonsighting. This year too, as usual, Eid was celebrated on different days. The Central Ruet-iHilal Committee met, gazed through their telescopes and announced that the moon was not sighted.
The Peshawar divisional committee requested them to wait as they were getting witnesses, but the central committee rejected their plea by saying that there was no possibility of appearance of the moon on that day. If that was the case, one wonders what was the purpose of their meeting. What were they looking for through the telescopes? Moonsighting is not a religious function. In fact, it was the only method available, in the absence ofother means of communication, to determine whether a lunar month had started or not.
Making of a calendar is a mathematical exercise and does not fall in the domain of religious scholars.
In the absence of an official Hijri calendar, scholars have assumed the responsibility of issuing fatwas on whether the moon has risen or not.
Astronomy is a precise science.
Astronomical calculations are carried out up to seventh place of decimal to determine the exact position of a celestial body. The sun, the moon and all celestial bodies move along their orbits with precision. This is the law of nature as is evident from the following verses of the Holy Quran: `It is He Who appointed the sun to give radiance, and the moon to givelight, assigning it phases so you would know the number of years and the reckoning of time. Allah did not create these things except with truth. We make the signs clear for the people who know.` (10:5).
`He has made the sun and the moon subservient, each one running for a specified time.` (31:29-30).
`And We have decreed set phases for the moon.` (36:39-40).
`The sun and the moon both run with precision.`(55:5).
The most appropriate way to settle the controversy on moonsighting is to dissolve all the Ruet-i-Hilal committees and follow the Hijri calendar which specifies the exact dates of beginning and end of every lunar month.
FAQIR AHMAD PARACHA Peshawar
The Peshawar divisional committee requested them to wait as they were getting witnesses, but the central committee rejected their plea by saying that there was no possibility of appearance of the moon on that day. If that was the case, one wonders what was the purpose of their meeting. What were they looking for through the telescopes? Moonsighting is not a religious function. In fact, it was the only method available, in the absence ofother means of communication, to determine whether a lunar month had started or not.
Making of a calendar is a mathematical exercise and does not fall in the domain of religious scholars.
In the absence of an official Hijri calendar, scholars have assumed the responsibility of issuing fatwas on whether the moon has risen or not.
Astronomy is a precise science.
Astronomical calculations are carried out up to seventh place of decimal to determine the exact position of a celestial body. The sun, the moon and all celestial bodies move along their orbits with precision. This is the law of nature as is evident from the following verses of the Holy Quran: `It is He Who appointed the sun to give radiance, and the moon to givelight, assigning it phases so you would know the number of years and the reckoning of time. Allah did not create these things except with truth. We make the signs clear for the people who know.` (10:5).
`He has made the sun and the moon subservient, each one running for a specified time.` (31:29-30).
`And We have decreed set phases for the moon.` (36:39-40).
`The sun and the moon both run with precision.`(55:5).
The most appropriate way to settle the controversy on moonsighting is to dissolve all the Ruet-i-Hilal committees and follow the Hijri calendar which specifies the exact dates of beginning and end of every lunar month.
FAQIR AHMAD PARACHA Peshawar
Wednesday, September 12, 2012
Bin Laden raid doctor Shakil Afridi speaks out
The Pakistani doctor involved in the US search for Osama Bin Laden has been quoted as saying he was unaware of his role in the al-Qaeda chief's death.
Shakil Afridi reportedly told Fox News from jail in Peshawar that after the 2011 killing he had been kidnapped and tortured by Pakistani intelligence.He also reportedly said the ISI agency regarded the US as its worst enemy.
But Dr Afridi's lawyer told the BBC he was not confident about the authenticity of the interview.
Samiullah Afridi said his client was kept under "very strict security", and was even prevented from seeing his family and lawyers for months at a time.
"How a journalist can set up an interview with him in jail is beyond my comprehension," the lawyer said.
Prison officials contacted by the BBC were taken by surprise by reports of the interview, but did not rule out that a phone could have been smuggled into his cell.
Continue reading the main story 
The Fox News interview raises many questions. Dr Afridi's lawyer wonders how a journalist could set up a phone interview with him in a maximum security prison cell. A jail official speculates that if anyone could smuggle a phone to him, it could only be one of the close relatives that visited him in jail twice in August.
But many ask why the relatives - a brother, two sisters and a cousin - would undermine their own rather hard-won right to meet him periodically after an initial ban?
The question is did Dr Afridi actually say the things he's reported to have said in the interview? If so, why, given that this could translate into further problems for him and his family?
One explanation is that Dr Afridi believes he's in a desperate situation, and that keeping the story alive may be his best defence.
Analysis
But many ask why the relatives - a brother, two sisters and a cousin - would undermine their own rather hard-won right to meet him periodically after an initial ban?
The question is did Dr Afridi actually say the things he's reported to have said in the interview? If so, why, given that this could translate into further problems for him and his family?
One explanation is that Dr Afridi believes he's in a desperate situation, and that keeping the story alive may be his best defence.
The doctor is alleged to have used a fake hepatitis B vaccination campaign to try to obtain DNA samples of Osama Bin Laden's family.
He was sentenced to 33 years in jail in May for funding and supporting a militant group, but correspondents say it is generally acknowledged he is being punished for helping the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).The interview was published on the eve of the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on the US, and came as current al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri confirmed the death of another senior figure in the network, Abu Yahya al-Libi, in a US drone strike in Pakistan's tribal areas earlier this year.
Meanwhile, Zawahiri's brother Mohamed has told CNN he is prepared to negotiate peace between the West and Islamists.
Zawahiri, who spent 14 years in jail in Egypt, is said to have the respect of the new Egyptian government but claims to be ideologically close to his brother.
'Like a dog' Speaking from Peshawar Central Jail, Dr Afridi said he had not realised that the CIA was targeting Bin Laden.
"I didn't know about a specific target apart from the work I was given to do," he told Fox.
"I was aware that some terrorists were residing in that compound, but I didn't know whom. I was shocked. I didn't believe I was associated with his killing."
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote
Shakil AfridiThey said: 'The Americans are our worst enemies, worse than the Indians'”
He said that the CIA had advised him to flee to Afghanistan.
However, he was scared to cross the volatile border region and did not think it was necessary to escape because he did not consider himself to be involved in Bin Laden's death, he said.Dr Afridi was arrested at a checkpoint at Hayatabad on 22 May last year, 20 days after Bin Laden's death.
After this he says he was blindfolded for eight months and handcuffed for a year in a prison beneath the ISI headquarters in Islamabad.
"I had to bend down on my knees to eat with only my mouth, like a dog," he said.
During interrogations he was tortured with cigarette burns and electric shocks, he said, as the ISI rebuked him for helping the US find Bin Laden.
"They said: 'The Americans are our worst enemies, worse than the Indians,'" he added.
Dr Afridi also said fellow inmates had told him that they had been advised to make things up to prevent interrogation by visiting CIA officers.
Bin Laden's killing in Abbottabad triggered a rift between the US and Pakistan "That doesn't mean the bulk of the people feel the same way," he said.
'Respect and love' Dr Afridi said that he himself was "proud" to work with the CIA and would help the US again, despite the torture and psychological abuse he said he had suffered.
"I have a lot of respect and love for your people," he said.
There has been no official response to Dr Afridi's allegations, but the Pakistani authorities have always insisted that they treated him the way any country would someone found working for a foreign spy agency.
In his comments to the BBC, Dr Afridi's lawyer said that if the comments were genuine they would "certainly add to [Dr Afridi's] difficulties in coming days".
But he said neither he nor Dr Afridi's family could confirm the interview had taken place or offer any comment on it.
Bin Laden's killing created a crisis in relations between the US and Pakistan, whose government was seriously embarrassed as it emerged that the al-Qaeda leader had been living in Pakistan.
Islamabad felt the covert US operation was a violation of its sovereignty.
Both US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have said Dr Afridi's arrest was a mistake, and called for his release.
Allegation on ISI by Dr. Afridi
IN an already enigmatic case, a mysterious piece of reporting has appeared that carries potentially disruptive implications for Pakistan`s most tortuous bilateral relationship. The interview of the jailed Dr Shakil Afridi that has been published on the Fox News website and is highly critical of the ISI prompts many questions: where and how was it carried out? How did the reporter gain access to the doctor? When Dr Afridi spoke to the reporter, was he aware that he would be quoted in a widely available interview, and did he do so willingly despite knowing he would still be at the mercy of Pakistani police and intelligence the next day? Knowing the answers to these is important because, for one, the fate of Dr Afridi has become a point of disagreement between Pakistan and the US, and the authenticity and reliability of such sensitive reporting on the issue needs to be established. Second, Dr Afridi appears to make broad claims about the ISI`s strategies, tactics and militant links, and it is unclear what qualifies him to do so.A domestic audience may be able to determine how much is speculation and how much fact, but internationally, his words will be taken as further evidence of Pakistani duplicity whether or not they are rooted in actual knowledge of the ISI`s links and actions.
Much of this could have been avoided if Dr Afridi had had access to a fair and transparent judicial process. Instead, carried out under the Frontier Crimes Regulation and charging him with crimes that had nothing to do with the Abbottabad raid, his trial has only given rise to suspicions at home and abroad thatthe goalofthe Pakistani authorities is to detain him one way or another. It has also raised legitimate questions about why they want to do so despite Dr Afridi being either unaware of his role in the plot or, even if he was aware, helping to capture an enemy of both Pakistan and the US. Sadly, it is Pakistan`s own dubious treatment of Dr Afridi that has left it vulnerable to the further accusations that this interview will lead to.
Much of this could have been avoided if Dr Afridi had had access to a fair and transparent judicial process. Instead, carried out under the Frontier Crimes Regulation and charging him with crimes that had nothing to do with the Abbottabad raid, his trial has only given rise to suspicions at home and abroad thatthe goalofthe Pakistani authorities is to detain him one way or another. It has also raised legitimate questions about why they want to do so despite Dr Afridi being either unaware of his role in the plot or, even if he was aware, helping to capture an enemy of both Pakistan and the US. Sadly, it is Pakistan`s own dubious treatment of Dr Afridi that has left it vulnerable to the further accusations that this interview will lead to.
Balochistan Missing persons
`IS ... [Pakistan] a banana republic?` So went the angry rhetoric to which a PML-Q senator resorted in the National Assembly while criticising the recent arrival of a delegation of the UN Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. By his own account, Mohammed Raza Hayat Hiraj fears that the team`s report might be used to highlight the views of the `one per cent` separatists of Balochistan. However, he needs reminding that the euphemistically named but very serious issue of `forced disappearances` has been with us for several years now. Repeated efforts and appeals from human rights organisations, the families of the disappeared and even organs of the state have failed to produce any meaningful answers as to who, within what agency, is indulging in unlawful detentions and how those thought to be in illegal custody canberecovered.The unhappy fact is that too often, suspected `kill-anddump` victims turn out tobe those thought to have been made to forcibly `disappear`. While Balochistan appears to be the main theatre of operations of such transgressions, there are indications that similar tactics are being employed elsewhere too.
The missing persons issue is already being investigated by the Supreme Court and a parliamentary committee on national security. If the country`s security forces are not involved, as they have repeatedly affirmed, then there`s nothing to hide. The UN committee ought to be given full access and support at every level of the administration. This murky issue needs to be cleared up. At the international level, it casts an ugly shadow over Pakistan, which already has a poor human rights record, while at the national level it erodes public faith in a security apparatus thatis stretched to the limit trying to contain threats from myriad quarters, and which needs every drop of support it can muster.
The missing persons issue is already being investigated by the Supreme Court and a parliamentary committee on national security. If the country`s security forces are not involved, as they have repeatedly affirmed, then there`s nothing to hide. The UN committee ought to be given full access and support at every level of the administration. This murky issue needs to be cleared up. At the international level, it casts an ugly shadow over Pakistan, which already has a poor human rights record, while at the national level it erodes public faith in a security apparatus thatis stretched to the limit trying to contain threats from myriad quarters, and which needs every drop of support it can muster.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Monday, September 10, 2012
How laughing can kill
THE way my grandad died was so unusual that it still lingers in the
national psyche 37 years on. He was watching the infamous Battle Of Ecky
Thump episode of The Goodies [1970s BBC comedy show], laughing
uproariously, when he collapsed and died.
Doctors assumed he`d had a massive heart attack and my grandma was comforted that his final minutes were so happy, even sending a letter of thanks to The Goodies. As far as we were concerned, the story ended there.
Decades later, his strange death has come to light again this time because I nearly died four months ago. I was sitting talking to my husband, Mick, when I started to slur, then slumped over and began to wheeze strangely. Mick rang the emergency services and was told to start CPR.
The paramedics arrived and discovered that my heart had stopped.
I was rushed to hospital but I had been clinically dead for 55 minutes and it wasn`t looking good. My heart was restarted in ER and my body temperature lowered with ice packs to help recovery. The medical team warned my family that my chances of afull recovery were slim. If I did survive, I could be braindamaged.
Incredibly, when I was brought round three days later, I was fine. I found it hard to grasp that I had nearly died the whole incident seemed surreal. My family were more in shock; they had seen me dead and had been badly frightened.
The doctors wanted to understand why my heart should stop for no reason and started to investigate. They were particularly interested in my family history, and when they heard about my grandad`s death, they realised that it was likely we both suffered from Long QT syndrome, an abnormality in the heart`s electrical system that can cause it suddenly to stop. It can go undetected for years or, as in my grandfather`s case, never be identified; people with it can just drop dead and you never know why.
After the diagnosis, I had an operation to fit an ICD next to my heart to pace its beat and shock it if it should stop again. Having this safety net is a huge comfort it hasn`t needed to restart my heart since, but I have felt itregulate the pace, which was weird: an odd, fluttery feeling in my chest.
The next step was to get to the bottom of why it happened. With Long QT, a variety of triggers can cause the heart to stop beating. One is feeling intense emotion for my grandad, it seems the prolonged laughing fit was his trigger. Exercise and a sudden startle such as jumping into cold water can also be factors and when my parents heard this, their blood ran cold I swam competitively for my county during my teens, a sport that ticks two trigger boxes. I feel lucky that I had a normal, lively childhood; it would have been miserable to have had to curtail my energy.
I won`t know my exact trigger until the results of the genetic test come back in six months, and possibly not even then, which is slightly alarming because of the wide range of things it could be. I`m supposed to avoid swimming alone, rollercoasters and scuba diving.
I`m not afraid to watch a scary movie or have a good cry, though, because the ICD will look after me, and although my life has had toregulate the pace, which was weird: an odd, fluttery feeling in my chest.
The next step was to get to the bottom of why it happened. With Long QT, a variety of triggers can cause the heart to stop beating. One is feeling intense emotion for my grandad, it seems the prolonged laughing fit was his trigger. Exercise and a sudden startle such as jumping into cold water can also be factors and when my parents heard this, their blood ran cold I swam competitively for my county during my teens, a sport that ticks two trigger boxes. I feel lucky that I had a normal, lively childhood; it would have been miserable to have had to curtail my energy.
I won`t know my exact trigger until the results of the genetic test come back in six months, and possibly not even then, which is slightly alarming because of the wide range of things it could be. I`m supposed to avoid swimming alone, rollercoasters and scuba diving.
I`m not afraid to watch a scary movie or have a good cry, though, because the ICD will look after me, and although my life has had tochange, it also has to go on.
What concerns me more is that, because mine is an inherited condition, my daughters Ellie, aged three, and Amelie, nearly one, may also be affected. They have both had ECGs to monitor their hearts and although Amelie wriggled too much for a conclusive result, doctors think that Ellie may have the syndrome. She has been put on beta-blockers, which will hopefully protect her. I want her to be able to have a normal childhood, so we don`t wrap her in cotton wool, but I watch her like a hawk when she plays on her trampoline or enters a race for her nursery`s sports day.
It`s hard not to worry when a balloon pops at a children`s party, though could that be Ellie`s trigger? Having Long QT in the family is scary, but in a bittersweet way I see what happened to my grandad as the start of protecting future generations. I find it very sad that he should die without the correct diagnosis, but also so grateful that his death helped piece together the mystery of our family`s condition.• The Guardian, London
Doctors assumed he`d had a massive heart attack and my grandma was comforted that his final minutes were so happy, even sending a letter of thanks to The Goodies. As far as we were concerned, the story ended there.
Decades later, his strange death has come to light again this time because I nearly died four months ago. I was sitting talking to my husband, Mick, when I started to slur, then slumped over and began to wheeze strangely. Mick rang the emergency services and was told to start CPR.
The paramedics arrived and discovered that my heart had stopped.
I was rushed to hospital but I had been clinically dead for 55 minutes and it wasn`t looking good. My heart was restarted in ER and my body temperature lowered with ice packs to help recovery. The medical team warned my family that my chances of afull recovery were slim. If I did survive, I could be braindamaged.
Incredibly, when I was brought round three days later, I was fine. I found it hard to grasp that I had nearly died the whole incident seemed surreal. My family were more in shock; they had seen me dead and had been badly frightened.
The doctors wanted to understand why my heart should stop for no reason and started to investigate. They were particularly interested in my family history, and when they heard about my grandad`s death, they realised that it was likely we both suffered from Long QT syndrome, an abnormality in the heart`s electrical system that can cause it suddenly to stop. It can go undetected for years or, as in my grandfather`s case, never be identified; people with it can just drop dead and you never know why.
After the diagnosis, I had an operation to fit an ICD next to my heart to pace its beat and shock it if it should stop again. Having this safety net is a huge comfort it hasn`t needed to restart my heart since, but I have felt itregulate the pace, which was weird: an odd, fluttery feeling in my chest.
The next step was to get to the bottom of why it happened. With Long QT, a variety of triggers can cause the heart to stop beating. One is feeling intense emotion for my grandad, it seems the prolonged laughing fit was his trigger. Exercise and a sudden startle such as jumping into cold water can also be factors and when my parents heard this, their blood ran cold I swam competitively for my county during my teens, a sport that ticks two trigger boxes. I feel lucky that I had a normal, lively childhood; it would have been miserable to have had to curtail my energy.
I won`t know my exact trigger until the results of the genetic test come back in six months, and possibly not even then, which is slightly alarming because of the wide range of things it could be. I`m supposed to avoid swimming alone, rollercoasters and scuba diving.
I`m not afraid to watch a scary movie or have a good cry, though, because the ICD will look after me, and although my life has had toregulate the pace, which was weird: an odd, fluttery feeling in my chest.
The next step was to get to the bottom of why it happened. With Long QT, a variety of triggers can cause the heart to stop beating. One is feeling intense emotion for my grandad, it seems the prolonged laughing fit was his trigger. Exercise and a sudden startle such as jumping into cold water can also be factors and when my parents heard this, their blood ran cold I swam competitively for my county during my teens, a sport that ticks two trigger boxes. I feel lucky that I had a normal, lively childhood; it would have been miserable to have had to curtail my energy.
I won`t know my exact trigger until the results of the genetic test come back in six months, and possibly not even then, which is slightly alarming because of the wide range of things it could be. I`m supposed to avoid swimming alone, rollercoasters and scuba diving.
I`m not afraid to watch a scary movie or have a good cry, though, because the ICD will look after me, and although my life has had tochange, it also has to go on.
What concerns me more is that, because mine is an inherited condition, my daughters Ellie, aged three, and Amelie, nearly one, may also be affected. They have both had ECGs to monitor their hearts and although Amelie wriggled too much for a conclusive result, doctors think that Ellie may have the syndrome. She has been put on beta-blockers, which will hopefully protect her. I want her to be able to have a normal childhood, so we don`t wrap her in cotton wool, but I watch her like a hawk when she plays on her trampoline or enters a race for her nursery`s sports day.
It`s hard not to worry when a balloon pops at a children`s party, though could that be Ellie`s trigger? Having Long QT in the family is scary, but in a bittersweet way I see what happened to my grandad as the start of protecting future generations. I find it very sad that he should die without the correct diagnosis, but also so grateful that his death helped piece together the mystery of our family`s condition.• The Guardian, London
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)