Responsible for hijacked Foreign PolicyBy Dr Shahid Qureshi
People in Pakistan and rest of the world must be wondering why world’s only Muslim nuclear power behaves in so indifferent and reckless manner when it comes to protect its national interests and foreign policy which does not seems to exist. Well the answer is simple its leaders put their personal interests first than national interests.
Asif Zardari and his corrupt regime are undermining Pakistan’s national interests in a very sophisticated way. Appointment of corrupt, incompetent and compromised people on the top position is on top of his agenda. He has learnt to bypass the state system of governance that is how Hussain Haqani was able to issue visas to black water mercenaries from Washington and his close relative from UAE, Rehman Malik is reportedly running his dodgy businesses abroad and allegedly passing on classified information as well as signing secret agreements to harm Pakistani national interests. Some one said now, ‘Rehman Malik will either be promoted or diluted by President Zardari as he has started his own lobbying to become ‘Mr. Big’ in post Zardari era.
A senior journalist narrated an incident that during the USSR era a KGB agent defected to the USA. To the surprise of the KGB, they could not find anything against him. Few years later probably after the cold war one of his former colleagues met him in the USA and asked him, what were you doing, we could not find anything against you? The defected agent who was head of foreign posting department said, ‘I was just appointing corrupt and compromised agents nothing else’. Surely rest was easy.
The recent appointment of Hina Rabbani Khar as Foreign Minister of Pakistan seems like the same story. You just appoint an incompetent person the rest will happen automatically. Ms Khar was part of Musharaf and Shuakat Aziz’s treacherous regime. Former Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz is reportedly working for Indian billionaire steel magnet Lakshmi Mital and Zaradri’s old friend Javaid Pasha is also serving him too. Ms Khar is now part of the cancerous elite network and rent boys of Asif Zardari, consists of Rehman Malik, Hussain Haqqani, Wajid Shamsulhassan, Altaf Hussain and girls Abida Hussain, Kalsum Imam and Farah Isphani.
The whole leadership and ruling elite in Pakistan is corrupt to the bones. Let us suppose they all are blackmailed by foreign powers for whom they have or are working now and in the past. Surely this is a difficult situation for a politician, a general, a senior civil servant and a businessman. I would also agree with the statement that, ‘no one can ride on your back unless it is bent’. Following incident might help bent leadership of Pakistan.
“It was the former USSR ’s security agency KGB established one of the most sophisticated special services in the world, which trained female spies to seduce men and women.
There has been a book put out recently about sex spying. A girl named Vera narrated the story about KGB and how they recruited pretty girls, promising them that they would have all kinds of welfare imaginable, if they would agree to fulfil their civil duty and become sex agents.
The objects of sexual attack were examined thoroughly beforehand; it was requisite to learn their sexual preferences, in order not to miss anyone. The first contact with an object was supposed to be totally incidental, but it was all over with blackmail: they explained to a guy that he had no other way out, but to cooperate with the Soviet intelligence.
However, surprised happened sometimes too, like it was with the notorious case for seducing Indonesian President Ahmed Sukarno. He was known for his sexual passion.
That is why KGB sent a group of young girls to him during his visit to Moscow. Those girls got acquainted with Ahmed Sukarno in a plane, under the disguise of air hostesses, then he invited them to his hotel room in Moscow and arranged a grand orgy. The orgy was filmed by two candid cameras that were fixed behind mirrors. It seemed that the operation was just perfect. Before starting the blackmail, KGB invited Sukarno in a small private movie theatre and showed him the pornographic video, in which he was playing the main part. KGB agents were expecting him to get really frightened, that he would agree to cooperate with them at once, but everything happened vice versa: Sukarno fondly decided that it was a gift from the Soviet government, so he asked for more copies to take them back to Indonesia and show them in movie theatres. Sukarno said to flabbergasted agents that the people of Indonesia would be very proud of him, if they could see him doing the nasty with Russian girls”.
That is why KGB sent a group of young girls to him during his visit to Moscow. Those girls got acquainted with Ahmed Sukarno in a plane, under the disguise of air hostesses, then he invited them to his hotel room in Moscow and arranged a grand orgy. The orgy was filmed by two candid cameras that were fixed behind mirrors. It seemed that the operation was just perfect. Before starting the blackmail, KGB invited Sukarno in a small private movie theatre and showed him the pornographic video, in which he was playing the main part. KGB agents were expecting him to get really frightened, that he would agree to cooperate with them at once, but everything happened vice versa: Sukarno fondly decided that it was a gift from the Soviet government, so he asked for more copies to take them back to Indonesia and show them in movie theatres. Sukarno said to flabbergasted agents that the people of Indonesia would be very proud of him, if they could see him doing the nasty with Russian girls”.We are all human beings and do make mistakes in our lives but without being judgmental not everyone is brave enough like former Indonesian President not even Imran Khan a cricketer turned politician of Pakistan. Though Mr. Khan is getting alleged full support of the establishment in Pakistan but his chances becoming of something in Pakistan are bleak. He is a handsome man surrounded by women but probably still haven’t still learnt from his past mistakes? “He is hijacked and probably being blackmailed by a group of shrewd woman or women planted by MQM,” said an insider of his party in UK. His party in UK is already in pieces and being run like a family business with no accountability.
A senior journalist told Imran Khan, ‘don’t get blackmailed by the dirty tricks of your opponents including MQM-A and PML-N, about your past personal life as you have never claimed to be a saint’. Those who are being blackmailed should be brave and follow the example of former Indonesian President Ahmed Sukarno.
The recent appointment of Hina Rabbani Khar as foreign minister of Pakistan and then the suggestion that Foreign Office will be issuing visas to the US citizens sounds doggy and fishy. It is like match fixing sending a weak player to lose. Ms Hina Khar is seen as IMF sales woman in Pakistan, who will and supposes to protect harmful US policy towards Pakistan. The losses caused by US are more than $68 billion to Pakistan and so called aid it received is $22.87 billion from 1950 to 2010. Most part of that aid actually never arrived in Pakistan as it was paid to your defence and military complexes back in the USA.
Some insiders are saying although it is great to have peace with India but at what cost? The so called international community was too quick to pass UNSC resolution against Libya, holding referendum in Sudan and East Timor but UN and US have forgotten about the sufferings and miseries of the people in Indian occupied Jammu and Kashmir. UN and US have ignored 92685 killings, 115877 arrests, 15665 home demolitions, by Indian Security Forces, and 22675 widows and 107218 orphans? Kashmir is not a matter of land dispute or real estate. If Indians solve this long standing issue both countries can live like US and Canada . India should not worry too much about over inflated trickle down affect as historically links among the people are much stronger and will further improve.
It was reported that Indians were probably planning to do some kind of surgical strike with the blessings of US. The whole idea was dropped when Pakistan tested a short range missile ‘Nassar’ able to carry ‘smart and lighter nuclear warheads’ within 60 miles range.When a journalist asked a defence official’, ‘does Pakistan have ‘smart and lighter nuclear war heads’ which can be put on these short range missiles ‘Nasar’? Pakistani defence official reportedly said “what is the point of having a gun without a bullet and rest is a secret”.
In this way Pakistan is now able to make a surgical nuclear strike in the war zone direct on the military involved in the conflict instead of randomly
attacking Indian cities and civilians which are already in the Pakistani missiles range. Pakistan has never said, ‘it will not strike first and it will be stupid assurance from any one anyway’.
attacking Indian cities and civilians which are already in the Pakistani missiles range. Pakistan has never said, ‘it will not strike first and it will be stupid assurance from any one anyway’.Now what the Indians as occupiers and violators of UN resolutions need to do is to sit back and resolve the long standing issue of Kashmir with aspirations of the people of Kashmir and according to UN resolutions without playing any dirty tricks or politics. Surely the strong historical and geographical links with India will be further strengthened and both countries will have more money to spend on poverty elevation and education instead of buying arms.
"The Norway massacre: Is it a coincidence, is it another 9/11 or is it something that has been brewing for years now and nobody took notice of or saw it coming?"
"The termination of Bin Laden was not the end of this madness; rather it was only the beginning."
Dr. Ashraf Ezzat
- Oslo Bombing and old shadows of 9/11
Is it a coincidence that the Norway attacks came after almost ten years have passed since the similarly horrific attacks on the towers of the world trade center in new York back in 2001 or what has been known in contemporary history as the 9/11 attacks.
As the world was getting prepared to commemorate the 10th anniversary of the New York attacks and as the world was recovering from the 9/11 trauma and about to leave its heavy and gloomy memories behind and never look back again we wake up to this painfully reminder of 9/11.
Is it a coincidence, is it another 9/11 or is it something that has been brewing for years now and nobody took notice of or saw it coming?
Remembering 9/11
- 9/11 attacks in New York, 2001
I still remember the whole world shocked and grieved by the size and the magnitude of destruction and the killing of the 3000 innocent New Yorkers but as the towers were crumbling down like a house of cards a gigantic question mark instantly stood in its place amongst the falling debris and descending ashes begging an answer as to why and who did this atrocious mass murder and destruction.
A great part of the relief from grief and pain is to know the reason that threw you in the depth of tribulation and to discover who caused you this agonizing misery. The moment you reveal the mystery behind the abhorrent crime is the moment your tears start to flow down from their springs washing away some of the pain and the bitterness left inside.
This moment of transient relief and solace was endowed upon the grieving people of the United States when the hardly vigilant administration of former president Bush delivered the Americans and the whole world out of their misery and bewilderment and hastily announced that the 9/11 atrocities had been planned and carried out by a bunch of Muslim fanatics, not more than 20 perpetrators, who had been active members in an international terrorist organization that acted around the globe under the leadership of Osama Bin Laden, some cave dweller in Afghanistan, who used to be a CIA operative during the soviet war there and who only excelled in growing a beard and videotaping ranting speeches.
"You’re either with us or against us"
9/11 was an unprecedented terrorist operation, sophisticated like we have never seen before in modern times and a lot of honest and truth seeking experts of military, architecture, politics, engineering, firefighting, aviation and chemistry attested to the fact, and some of them even proved, that 9/11 attacks were carried out by some covert agencies backed up by on ground assistance.
[youtube Rg3tHNUh-6A 911 Explosive Evidence - Experts Speak Out Trailer]
In short, the experts and the intellectuals envisioned 9/11 as a false flag operation, one of the biggest ever till now, that meant to launch a worldwide anti- Muslim aggressive campaign that would only benefit the country that has been in conflict with the Arab and Muslim world for sixty years now and who knows for how many more years to come.
But the common people who don’t like sophisticated answers and brainstorming theories and who are used to the fast/junk food culture settled for the delivered to their doorsteps readymade- answer sent directly from the white house kitchen with the compliments of the Zionist chef and his neoconservative staff.
And that answer was eloquently summed up by the reckless former president bush, when he stated the rules of the America & allies’ new game with the axis of evil and announced with a smirky face and a sarcastic tone of voice "you're either with us, or against us" … thus giving the launching signal not only for his stupid war of terror but for an upcoming era of worldwide tide of fundamentalism.
The moment people around the world especially in the United States and Europe bought into this story, as they sat glued to their TV screens like hypnotized couch potatoes, is the moment this whole madness and islamophobia started.
- Former President Bush
The moment the people believed this cover-up and wicked to the bone story is the moment that gave the carte blanche for ten years of absolute political absurdity and military criminality … but most dangerously to the sprouting of religious fundamentalism and ideological terrorism.
The United States cluelessly pointed the finger at Bin Laden and his extremist interpretation of Islam nailing him for 9/11 but nevertheless let him on the loose for like ten years during which all the unbelievable political and military transgressions were committed.
Ten years of extreme right wing and Murdoch style mainstream media craze that kept hitting the target of tarnishing the Islam image irreparably amongst westerners- clearly exposing that this was the real tactical goal of the war on terrorism.
Ten years of meaningless military operations in Muslim countries that never posed a threat to the United States but what does it matter and why should anyone care as long as they were on the Israeli hit list.
Ten years during which the western public opinion has been fed with a constant and highly selective stories and headlines of Muslim suicide bombers, Bin laden fake videos and audiotapes, Muslim women wearing burqa in Afghanistan and banned from driving cars in Saudi Arabia, Ground Zero mosque hysteria, Iran nuclear overestimated threat, churches attacked in Egypt, Niqab banned in France and minarets in Switzerland, Hamas firing rockets at Israeli towns and school buses, Quran burned in America, al Qaeda affiliates in Iraq and the Arab peninsula, enforcement of sharia law and the eminent danger of the jihadists on the west, the perilous rise of political Islam in the Arab world and finally the official announcement of the failure of multiculturalism in Europe.
Where can we go from there?
- The Great Israel landgrab.
When the forces of globalization have swept across the world, when the giant corporations have controlled the media and intoxicated the socio-political environment with right wing extremism and flooded the world with firearms and violent video games that turned our young generations into addicts of adrenaline boosting scenes of cold blooded murder with automatic gun machines… where can we go from there?
When the politicians of the so called free world community stand impotent and helpless in front of the might of the Israeli piecemeal ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians and let this festering wound to grow bigger and smell fouler as it divides the world into two antagonistic and hopelessly incompatible camps … where can we go from there?
When we sharpen the human appetite for blood and revenge with all these false flag operations and Zionist-infiltrated media, when we drag the supposed to be civilized world into some eternal war that knew no frontiers and no tangible objectives in the name of fighting terror, and when those politicians who started this global war foolishly define it as a new crusade … where can we go from there.
- Bin Laden, when the story ends?
When we instill interfaith hatred, infuse an ambiance of vulnerability and build antagonistic egos in the size of cathedrals and mosques … where we can go from there.
When we ingrain those horrifying sketches of an enemy hiding explosives in his most intimate parts of his body, willing to blow himself up provided that he would not leave the world unless accompanied by a few westerners … and when we remove the faces of all Muslims and put Bin Laden’s instead … where can we go from there?
A new bin laden is born
And When it was finally time to terminate the world’s most wanted man, it only took the white house a small unit of special forces, and not the whole US led international troops, to raid on his hideout in Pakistan and give him the surprise of hislife time while he was feeding his chickensand watching the news of the American war on the terrorism in which he played no bigger role than the moron whom he and his so called mujahedeen had been played like puppets from afar by some remote control.
- Anders Behring Breivik
… And when the game was over, all it took was a small click on a button, a dignified- mafia style burial in the bottom of the sea … but as the CIA was doing its cleanup job after they dumped the Bin Laden they made, little did they know what future held for them. They had no idea as they were licking their fingers clean that somehow, somewhere; a new Bin Laden was born.
The termination of Bin Laden was not the end of this madness; rather it was only the beginning.
When the so called world community embarks on a war against some staged terrorism, when this world community is tricked into unjustified world conflict we are bound to end up with a precarious situation where we will wake up one day not only morally and economically bankrupt but with a genuinely horrific terrorist attack in one of the world’s quietest and most peaceful backyards.
- Norwegians in mourning
But this time it was not some cave dweller Muslim militant who suspiciously carried it out but the monstrous anti-hero this whole farcical war on terror has cruelly created.
It’s going to take the Norwegians a long time to figure out why this massacre took place on their land that annually tossed out to the world one of its Nobel peace prizes … but the long search will undoubtedly and eventually take them back to 9/11 mystery and the pathetic war on terrorism they foolishly took part in.
I think we can declare the war on terrorism has finally come to its fruition, now that the west is officially at war with Islam.
The Neocons& Zionist club has every right to rejoice, the world is being driven blindfolded into the dark abyss of intolerance and fundamentalism.
…. And as the mass murderer, Anders Behring Breivik has brazenly described his massacre “it is atrocious, but necessary”
… Where can we go from there … ?
For more articles by Dr. Ashraf Ezzat visit his website.
"The world is on the side of the strong, weak and submissive are always looked down upon." Raja MujtabaBy Sajjad Shaukat
Although all the small countries have been facing the unjust world order, reflected by the US-led privileged status quo of the affluent countries in the uni-polar system, yet Pakistan has become its special target because it is the only Islamic country which possesses nuclear weapons.
The prevalent global system tends to give a greater political and economic leverage to the most developed nations who could safeguard their interests at the cost of the weak countries. Whenever, any controversy arises, the UN Security Council enforces the doctrine of collective security against the small states, while the five big powers protect their interests by using veto. This shows discrimination between the powerful and the weaker. It is notable that in 2001, UN had permitted the United States to attack Afghanistan under the cover of right of self-defence. In 2003, UN became helpless regarding Anglo-American illegitimate invasion of Iraq. In case of the Indian occupied Kashmir, the issue still remains unresolved as UN resolutions regarding the plebiscite were never implemented because Washington supports the illegitimate stand of India due to its anti-China interests. Similarly, US-led NATO countries have attacked on Libya by setting aside the international law.
Since September 11, Pakistan which joined the US war on terror as the frontline state against terrorism, especially in relation to Afghanistan, Washington has always tried to apply coercive diplomacy by manipulating the multiple crises of this developing country.
The contradictory statements of the US officials which still continue, shows American duplicity with Pakistan. In this respect, sometimes, US has cajoled Islamabad with economic and military aid, sometimes pressurised the latter to take actions against the Taliban militants, sometimes accused Pak Army and its intelligence agency, ISI of close contacts with the Afghan Taliban, while blaming for cross-border terrorism in Afghanistan. On the other hand, in the past few weeks, cross-border attacks by heavily armed militants who entered Pakistan from Afghanistan and targetted the infrastructure of our country’s various regions have continued intermittently.
While, in the post-Osama episode, since the militants’ attack on Pakistan’s naval base in wake of perennial wave of terror-events in the country, US-led some western countries including India and Israel have intensified their campaign against the security of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons. In this regard, on June 9, the then American CIA Chief Leon Panetta expressed fears that there is a danger that Pakistani nuclear weapons could fall into wrong hands. On May 24, the head of NATO in Afghanistan, Anders Fogh Rasmussen also expressed similar thoughts.
In fact, CIA-led Indian RAW and Israeli Mossad which are already behind suicide attacks, bomb blasts and targeted killings in Pakistan have continuously been exploiting the killing of Osama Bin Laden. These elements are distorting the image of Islamabad in the comity of nations by indicating that other leaders of Al Qaeda have also taken shelter in Pakistan. Meanwhile, America has also increased drone attacks on Pakistan, which could also include Balochistan and other major cities of the country. At the same time, by setting aside the joint session of Pakistan’s Parliament, protesting the violation of the country’s sovereignty, recently, Obama repeatedly made it clear, “he was ready to order more assaults against any safe havens” of terrorists in Pakistan.
In fact, before leaving Afghanistan, US wants to shift Afghan war to Pakistan, which it has already started transferring. Under the pretext of Talibanisation of Pakistan and lawlessness in the country, which has collevtively been created by CIA, RAW and Mossad, US-led India and Israel are preparing ground to ‘denculearise’ Islamabad. Like ex-president Bush, high officials of the Obama Administration have also been stating that any plot to attack the US homeland and Europe would be planned in Pakistan’s tribal regions. In the recent past, while talking about the failed attempt of the Times Square bombing, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had warned that Pakistan would face “severe consequences” if a future terrorist attack on US soil was traced back to Pakistan. In this respect, America has already gained the favour of some western countries, showing Pakistan as a failed state.
Notably, renowned political thinkers, Hobbes, Machiavelli and Morgenthau opine that in international politics, deceit, fraud and falsehood become the principles of international morality. In their sense, strategic thinker, Thomas Schelling remarks about the US, “coercion to be an effective tool of foreign policy.” Kissinger also endorses politics of bargaining and pressure through threats, coercion and even violence as key elements of the US diplomacy. In this regard, diplomacy itself becomes the real tool of blackmailing. In these terms, American policy shows deliberate duplicity towards Pakistan
It is notable that despite Pakistan’s successful military operations against the Taliban militants and scarifies of country’s security forces including civilian casualties and collateral damage during war against terrorism, the US has continuously been pressurising Islamabad to take military action against the Haqqani group in North Waziristan. In this context, on June 28, Lieutenant General John Allen, the US commander in Afghanistan, blamed that Pakistan was keeping its options open by allowing Haqqani fighters based in North Waziristan to operate within its borders to kill the Americans in Afghanistan.
While Islamabad has already made it clear that army is engaged in other tribal areas, so it cannot attack the militants of North Waziristan. On June 9, Pakistan’s Chief of the Army Staff, Gen Ashfaq Parvez remarked about military operation in North Waziristan, “a well thought out campaign is under no pressure to carry out operations at a particular time…future operations, as and when undertaken, will be with political consensus…the people of Pakistan whose support the army has always considered vital for its operations against terrorists.” On June 7, Gen. Kayani again emphasised peoples’ backing for army.
However, in the recent past, Pakistan’s civil and military leadership has flatly refused to act upon American unnecessary demands. Knowing the American double game and its intentions to shift Afghan war to Pakistan, Islamabad sent home 120 US military trainers. In response, on July 10, America withheld $800 million in military assistance to Pakistan. On the other side, on July 13, Gen. Kayani during Corps Commanders’ Conference made it clear that the military could do without US assistance by depending on its own resources, while on the same day, Defence Minister Ahmed Mukhtar threatened to pull back troops from the Afghan border in response to US aid cuts.
At present, trust deficit exists between Islamabad and Washington owing to the ambivalent policy of the US towards Pakistan. In this context, on July 25, US Admiral Mike Mullen stated that US-Pakistan military-to-military ties were at a very difficult crossroads, allowing progress on that front was not yet clear, but like some other US high officials, he hoped that the two nations would soon find a way to reconcile those ties. An American official said, “we are committed to work with Pakistan on counter-terrorism.”
It is mentionable that in economic context, the world order shows greater disparities as the flow of capital and credit system including I.M.F and World Bank is also dominated by the US-led most developed countries—its result is an increase in the activities of the Multinationals which have shattered the economies of the poor developing states-particularly Pakistan. Besides, these developed countries blackmail the governments of the small states through financial pressure, while US especially blackmails Pakistan.
Every time, I.M.F sanctions loan to Pakistan after American green signal. Past experience proves that economic dependence on foreign countries always brings political dependence in its wake. While, at this critical juncture, our country has been facing precarious financial problem, US-led some western allies are compelling Islamabad to accept American undue demands which are, in fact, part of American shrewd diplomacy as the US, India and Israel are trying to weaken Pakistan for their secret strategic designs. In case of refusal, US can conduct full-fledged aerial strikes on Pakistan. There is also another option for the United States. With the help of some western powers, the US can impose economic sanctions on Pakistan or can declare the latter as defaulter in connection with the payments of debts so as to further destabilise the country.
No doubt, Pakistan has been facing the unjust world order in the unipolar world led by the US. Such a critical situation demands a strong sense of unity among our security forces, politicians and general masses in order to cope with foreign enemies.
An Analysis
This situation is potentially more dangerous then most American Jews realize. The Zionist hold over U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East has already cost the country dearly. It was at least part of the reason we were attacked on 9/11 and why we subsequently invaded Iraq.
By Prof Lawrence Davidson
Part I
The 27 July 2011 New York Times has a front page article about the upcoming September 13 special election for New York City’s Ninth Congressional District seat. The article opens a window on the political use of Israel as a campaign touchstone. The Ninth District, the most heavily Jewish District in the nation, is the one recently vacated by Democratic Representative Anthony Weiner who was, of course, a loyal supporter of Israel. Alas, he was also a man with a strong libido and no discretion. He was forced to step down after electronically sharing obscene pictures of himself with at least six women. The Democratic and Republican candidates who seek to fill this seat are not known for gross indiscretion in their private lives (though who knows what skeletons lurk in which closets), yet in their public pursuit of this Congressional seat they seem to be drawn, as by an irresistible political force, to follow Weiner’s lead and do obeisance at the alter of Zionism. Is this yet another form of folly?
Both candidates, Democratic Assemblyman David I. Weprin and his Republican opponent, Bob Turner (a retired cable television executive) are involved in a process of "one-upmanship on who is more pro-Israel." One would think that Turner would have no chance in such a competition seeing as how Weprin is an "Orthodox Jew who keeps a kosher home, observes the Sabbath, and has been to Israel at least eight times." Nonetheless, he is playing this game with some serious support. "On Monday [July 25], former Mayor Edward Koch, [a Jew and] a Democrat, endorsed the Republican candidate"on the basis that a Democrat, even one who is a strong supporter of Israel, can not be strong enough as long as President Obama holds the White House. Koch argues that only the election of a strong Republican supporter of Israel will "rebuke" the president for saying "that Israel’s pre-1967 border should be the basis for a peace agreement." Former Mayor Koch, apparently not just physically but also mentally 87 years old, seems not to care that a Republican candidate may end up supporting domestic positions that can ruin the United States. He is obsessed with a single issue, Israel.
You would think that this obsession with Israel and its 1967 borders is pretty crazy in an election for someone to represent the interests of parts New York City that have names like Queens, Kew Gardens, Flatbush and Sheepshead Bay. And aren’t there numerous other issues, vital to the health of the nation, such as the federal budget and deficit, the fate of Medicare and Social Security, etc. that ought to hold voters’ attention? So who cares about some foreign country approximately 6,000 miles away? Well, according to Cynthia Zalisky, the executive director of the Queens Jewish Community Council, it is not only Ed Koch who is obsessed. She tells us that "how the candidates feel about Israel and the president’s concept of the pre-1967 borders is going to resonate in this district." Donald Schwartz, an Orthodox Jewish activist from Kew Gardens agrees. He says that the Democratic candidate is not a sufficiently "fierce advocate" for Israel and his election would allow the President Obama to "take the Jewish vote for granted."
All of this should raise eyebrows. Just how many Jewish voters are we talking about? And, how do we know that most care about what the Zionist activists care about? Why should it always be assumed that the Jewish vote turns on the question of Israel? The New York Times article answers the first of the these questions. The Jewish voters in the ninth district are numerous. Almost half of the population is Jewish, many of them observant, and a significant number of them, 30 to 35%, regularly turn out to vote. Thus, as political consultant Jerry Skurnik puts it, "you can’t get wiped out in the Jewish vote and expect to win a district like this." Ok. But why assume most of those 30 to 35% of Jewish voters prioritize Israel when they vote, or are dissatisfied with President Obama on the issue of Israeli borders? You know, Mr. Weprin did endorse same sex marriage and that has upset some of the Orthodox community. Yet the New York Times really has its focus on the question of loyalty to Israel and takes it for granted that those Zionist activists who shout loudest know what the silent majority is thinking. On the other hand, maybe the Ninth is somehow special. Maybe Israeli settlements do top social security. It is depressing to think so, but it is possible.
Part II
Just for argument sake, let’s go with the notion that the Ninth District is indeed special. So lets say that the candidates do have to cater to specifically Jewish opinion to win this district, and that enough Jewish votes turn on the issue of Israel’s 1967 borders that candidates have to play the Zionist card to win. What should those who oppose kowtowing to Zionist influence (and there are organizations of anti-Zionist Jews out there) do about this? Here are three possible approaches:
1. Find a way to increase the non-Jewish voter turnout. The political party that can do this can probably destroy the formula set forth above by Jerry Skurnik.
2. Find a way to get as many of the Jewish voters as possible to shed the single issue picture painted of them by the Zionists. There is probably an undercurrent of resentment about this one dimensional representation. Someone should tap into it. To this end, we proceed to #3.
3. Find a way to form a Jewish, but non-Zionist, political cadre to compete for Jewish voter support within the Democratic Party in the Ninth District and others like it. Give the Democratic Jewish voters a democratic choice.
Number one is the least volatile of these efforts. The consequences of pushing numbers 2 and 3 really depend on just how deep the Zionist "Jewish activists" are entrenched. Depending on that question, one of two things could happen. If the Israeli obsession is in fact only skin deep, that is only an issue for a relatively small, albeit vocal, minority of Jewish voters, it should be overcome pretty easily by insisting on the greater importance of domestic concerns. Those issues, closer to home, will then come to the fore as candidate touchstones and Israel will recede to the lower end of the list of important factors. If, however, a notable percentage of the Ninth District’s Jewish voters are obsessed with Israel, then concerted efforts as described in 2 and 3 could result in blood in the streets.
Part III
Either way, something really should be done to challenge the prevailing assumption that Israel is the touchstone political issue for American Jewish voters. Whatever might be the case in the Ninth District, this level of concern for Israel is probably not true of Jews nationally. On a national level most U.S. Jews vote Democratic and probably do so regardless of the candidates position on Israel. In fact, my bet is that both political parties don’t really scramble for Jewish votes which, except for rare places like the Ninth District, are minuscule. What they scramble for is Jewish lobby money. And the Jewish lobby is not only obsessed with Israel, for all intents and purposes it functions as unregistered agent of that country. So to get the money you have to do your obeisance at the alter of Zionism.
This situation is potentially more dangerous then most American Jews realize. The Zionist hold over U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East has already cost the country dearly. It was at least part of the reason we were attacked on 9/11 and why we subsequently invaded Iraq. The Israel connection has alienated America from the entire Muslim world and helped encourage domestic racism in the form of Islamophobia. What happens if this orientation continues and results in more wars, more terrorist attacks and greater debilitation of the domestic budget? At some point the American public, looking for reasons for these disasters, may well focus on lobby influence and the prioritizing of the interests of a foreign land 6000 miles away. At that point it will not be just AIPAC that will pay the price. The Zionist insistence that all Jews support Israel, as untrue as it is, will have stereotyped American Jewry and anti-Semitism will quickly become a serious issue.
Therefore, it is in the best interests of the American Jewish community to shed the image of the single issue voter, to consciously begin to hold those Zionist activists at arms length, and to join with those groups, such as Jewish Voices for Peace, that reject any demand that they do obeisance at the alter of Zionism. Quite frankly, the leaders of Israel are fanatics, the true believers of the American Zionist lobbies are fanatics, and Ed Koch is a fanatic. Most American Jews are not fanatics and it is time they let the rest of the country know it.
The 27 July 2011 New York Times has a front page article about the upcoming September 13 special election for New York City’s Ninth Congressional District seat. The article opens a window on the political use of Israel as a campaign touchstone. The Ninth District, the most heavily Jewish District in the nation, is the one recently vacated by Democratic Representative Anthony Weiner who was, of course, a loyal supporter of Israel. Alas, he was also a man with a strong libido and no discretion. He was forced to step down after electronically sharing obscene pictures of himself with at least six women. The Democratic and Republican candidates who seek to fill this seat are not known for gross indiscretion in their private lives (though who knows what skeletons lurk in which closets), yet in their public pursuit of this Congressional seat they seem to be drawn, as by an irresistible political force, to follow Weiner’s lead and do obeisance at the alter of Zionism. Is this yet another form of folly?
Both candidates, Democratic Assemblyman David I. Weprin and his Republican opponent, Bob Turner (a retired cable television executive) are involved in a process of "one-upmanship on who is more pro-Israel." One would think that Turner would have no chance in such a competition seeing as how Weprin is an "Orthodox Jew who keeps a kosher home, observes the Sabbath, and has been to Israel at least eight times." Nonetheless, he is playing this game with some serious support. "On Monday [July 25], former Mayor Edward Koch, [a Jew and] a Democrat, endorsed the Republican candidate"on the basis that a Democrat, even one who is a strong supporter of Israel, can not be strong enough as long as President Obama holds the White House. Koch argues that only the election of a strong Republican supporter of Israel will "rebuke" the president for saying "that Israel’s pre-1967 border should be the basis for a peace agreement." Former Mayor Koch, apparently not just physically but also mentally 87 years old, seems not to care that a Republican candidate may end up supporting domestic positions that can ruin the United States. He is obsessed with a single issue, Israel.
You would think that this obsession with Israel and its 1967 borders is pretty crazy in an election for someone to represent the interests of parts New York City that have names like Queens, Kew Gardens, Flatbush and Sheepshead Bay. And aren’t there numerous other issues, vital to the health of the nation, such as the federal budget and deficit, the fate of Medicare and Social Security, etc. that ought to hold voters’ attention? So who cares about some foreign country approximately 6,000 miles away? Well, according to Cynthia Zalisky, the executive director of the Queens Jewish Community Council, it is not only Ed Koch who is obsessed. She tells us that "how the candidates feel about Israel and the president’s concept of the pre-1967 borders is going to resonate in this district." Donald Schwartz, an Orthodox Jewish activist from Kew Gardens agrees. He says that the Democratic candidate is not a sufficiently "fierce advocate" for Israel and his election would allow the President Obama to "take the Jewish vote for granted."
All of this should raise eyebrows. Just how many Jewish voters are we talking about? And, how do we know that most care about what the Zionist activists care about? Why should it always be assumed that the Jewish vote turns on the question of Israel? The New York Times article answers the first of the these questions. The Jewish voters in the ninth district are numerous. Almost half of the population is Jewish, many of them observant, and a significant number of them, 30 to 35%, regularly turn out to vote. Thus, as political consultant Jerry Skurnik puts it, "you can’t get wiped out in the Jewish vote and expect to win a district like this." Ok. But why assume most of those 30 to 35% of Jewish voters prioritize Israel when they vote, or are dissatisfied with President Obama on the issue of Israeli borders? You know, Mr. Weprin did endorse same sex marriage and that has upset some of the Orthodox community. Yet the New York Times really has its focus on the question of loyalty to Israel and takes it for granted that those Zionist activists who shout loudest know what the silent majority is thinking. On the other hand, maybe the Ninth is somehow special. Maybe Israeli settlements do top social security. It is depressing to think so, but it is possible.
Part II
Just for argument sake, let’s go with the notion that the Ninth District is indeed special. So lets say that the candidates do have to cater to specifically Jewish opinion to win this district, and that enough Jewish votes turn on the issue of Israel’s 1967 borders that candidates have to play the Zionist card to win. What should those who oppose kowtowing to Zionist influence (and there are organizations of anti-Zionist Jews out there) do about this? Here are three possible approaches:
1. Find a way to increase the non-Jewish voter turnout. The political party that can do this can probably destroy the formula set forth above by Jerry Skurnik.
2. Find a way to get as many of the Jewish voters as possible to shed the single issue picture painted of them by the Zionists. There is probably an undercurrent of resentment about this one dimensional representation. Someone should tap into it. To this end, we proceed to #3.
3. Find a way to form a Jewish, but non-Zionist, political cadre to compete for Jewish voter support within the Democratic Party in the Ninth District and others like it. Give the Democratic Jewish voters a democratic choice.
Number one is the least volatile of these efforts. The consequences of pushing numbers 2 and 3 really depend on just how deep the Zionist "Jewish activists" are entrenched. Depending on that question, one of two things could happen. If the Israeli obsession is in fact only skin deep, that is only an issue for a relatively small, albeit vocal, minority of Jewish voters, it should be overcome pretty easily by insisting on the greater importance of domestic concerns. Those issues, closer to home, will then come to the fore as candidate touchstones and Israel will recede to the lower end of the list of important factors. If, however, a notable percentage of the Ninth District’s Jewish voters are obsessed with Israel, then concerted efforts as described in 2 and 3 could result in blood in the streets.
Part III
Either way, something really should be done to challenge the prevailing assumption that Israel is the touchstone political issue for American Jewish voters. Whatever might be the case in the Ninth District, this level of concern for Israel is probably not true of Jews nationally. On a national level most U.S. Jews vote Democratic and probably do so regardless of the candidates position on Israel. In fact, my bet is that both political parties don’t really scramble for Jewish votes which, except for rare places like the Ninth District, are minuscule. What they scramble for is Jewish lobby money. And the Jewish lobby is not only obsessed with Israel, for all intents and purposes it functions as unregistered agent of that country. So to get the money you have to do your obeisance at the alter of Zionism.
This situation is potentially more dangerous then most American Jews realize. The Zionist hold over U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East has already cost the country dearly. It was at least part of the reason we were attacked on 9/11 and why we subsequently invaded Iraq. The Israel connection has alienated America from the entire Muslim world and helped encourage domestic racism in the form of Islamophobia. What happens if this orientation continues and results in more wars, more terrorist attacks and greater debilitation of the domestic budget? At some point the American public, looking for reasons for these disasters, may well focus on lobby influence and the prioritizing of the interests of a foreign land 6000 miles away. At that point it will not be just AIPAC that will pay the price. The Zionist insistence that all Jews support Israel, as untrue as it is, will have stereotyped American Jewry and anti-Semitism will quickly become a serious issue.
Therefore, it is in the best interests of the American Jewish community to shed the image of the single issue voter, to consciously begin to hold those Zionist activists at arms length, and to join with those groups, such as Jewish Voices for Peace, that reject any demand that they do obeisance at the alter of Zionism. Quite frankly, the leaders of Israel are fanatics, the true believers of the American Zionist lobbies are fanatics, and Ed Koch is a fanatic. Most American Jews are not fanatics and it is time they let the rest of the country know it.
“You have asked me to give a message. What message can I give you? We have got the great message in the Quran for our guidance and enlightenment.” M A Jinnah, April 1943By General (Retd) Mirza Aslam Beg
It is the responsibility of the Parliament, the Supreme Court, the Civil Society and the Armed Forces of Pakistan to correct the course, remaining within the limits of the Constitution and norms of democracy. There are two such examples of the recent past, where these institutions, respecting the popular will, served the cause of democracy.
One: The General elections of 18th February 2008 were planned by General Musharraf to achieve results similar to the elections of 2002. The popular will was against it and wanted to get rid of the military regime. Respecting the ‘will of the people’, the military high command refused to be a party to Musharraf’s Plan. Thus, the people were free to vote and democracy ushered in Pakistan.
Two: On the night of 15/16 March 2009 – the day of the Long March for the restoration of the judiciary, the COAS and the Prime Minister, sat together, and responded to the popular will and accepted their demand. The Chief Justice and the judges were restored to their positions and peace returned. This was a victory for democracy.
In both the cases, the COAS acted under Oath to “Uphold the Constitution of Pakistan, which embodies the Will of the People.” And yet, there are men who stand tall amongst the civil officials, like, Sohail Ahmad, Zafar Qureshi, Hussain Asghar and others, who have taken no such oath, but upheld the Constitution of Pakistan, on call of duty. A situation now exists, where the armed forces and the judiciary once again are on call, “to respond to the will of the people”, but the other institutions, such as, the Parliament, the political parties, the civil society and the media, though making lot of noises, haven’t yet come out in the open, as they did on 15th March 2009. When they do, the Prime Minister and the Armed Forces would stand with them. But calling upon the armed forces, to intervene now, means calling for military take-over. This was the danger I had warned in my article, titled “Our Wuthering Sovereignty”, published in national dailies on 15 May 2011:
“The Pakistani nation has had such high expectations from the democratic government to deliver a sovereign parliament, an independent judiciary and an above board accountability, which are the pillars of national sovereignty, but unfortunately these very institutions have been so methodically suppressed to render them ineffective. In fact, our national sovereignty has been debased and humiliated.”
Subsequently, I wrote, in ‘Waiting for the Command Decision’ published in national dailies on 19th June 2011:
“GHQ Declaration of 10th June, 2011, has passed-on the responsibility of ‘correcting the course’, to the government, which itself is responsible for creating this calamity. This declaration won’t help establish the civilian supremacy over the military. Rather it shirks responsibility and is a repeat of General Jehangir Karamat’s action of 1997, who failed to respond to the call of the Supreme Court that led to the assault on the Supreme Court and the political turmoil, that ended-up with Musharraf’s take over. This declaration, therefore falls short of achieving the main objective that is, establishing the supremacy of the civil authority over the military.”
Civilian supremacy over the military can be established only by a sovereign parliament and an independent judiciary. The armed forces, therefore must support the Parliament’s resolution, demanding cessation of drone attacks, which the Americans flouted and the parliament was helpless. The political parties also have the shared responsibility to help the military, establish the supremacy of the civilian rule and support the government, to build a sovereign parliament, an independent judiciary and the institutions to deliver above board accountability.
The most disturbing aspect of the present regime is the appalling state of affairs. No body knows, who is responsible for what. No foreign policy, to determine our relations with USA, India and Afghanistan. The fiscal policy is so wayward, as to precipitate resignation of the Governor of the State Bank of Pakistan. The state organs, such as the railways, the national airlines and the steel mills are bankrupt and on the verge of collapse. There are no clear-cut policies or plans to arrest this dangerous drift. The Parliament and the Politicians also show no urgency to arrest this drift, while the courts of justice are blatantly defied and humiliated; the process of accountability remains suspended and the Armed Forces are watching this dangerous drift, waiting for the worst to happen, similar to the Egyptian turmoil, which ultimately resulted into military take-over and a bigger chaos, so aptly described by an observer: “It is a revolution without cadres, with no party, no leaders, no precise ideology. The army has gone from ‘hero to hate’ mode. We are in a terrible mess now.”
Our present drift may also lead us into a “terrible mess”, if the parliament, the politicians and the civil society continue to watch the drift. It was in this scenario that I urged the Armed Forces to intervene, in support of the Supreme Court, to establish the rule of law. As a result, some heads in the top leadership may roll, but the parliament will continue to function, sanity will prevail and the government will complete its tenure. This is the way forward. The next elections therefore, would be crucial and must be fair and free. Should these elections be held under this very government, or under a care-taker government, is the moot point, to be discussed and decided. Fair and free elections would arrest this dangerous drift and usher the country into a new era of parliamentary democracy
After a long time we have a democratic order in Pakistan, which is no more threatened by the nexus – America, Army and Adaalat. It is a comforting sign of birth of a new order, as ordained by Allah: “The Good and the Evil cannot be equated, although, at times, the Evil may prevail, but ultimately Good will surmount.” (Al-Quran)
The smug faced and condescending S. M. Krishna must be smiling inwards that he got the better of his coy and suave counterpart. It has been India’s resolve to talk of developing and enhancing friendly relations through trade and tourism but let the core issue of Kashmir lie on the backburner.
By S. M. Hali
Prima facie, Pakistan’s youngest ever and first female Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar, emanated exuberance, poise and confidence and proffered correct diplomatic nuances, but it is debatable whether her debut sojourn to India as the Foreign Minister can be dubbed a success. Directly upon her arrival, the suave and well coiffured Ms. Khar took New Delhi by storm. However, it appears that the media showering accolades on her couture and style was actually a ploy. Irrelevant focus on her Jane Birkin handbag, Chanel sunglasses, her pearls and her diamond studded watch and rings led her to digress from the main concentration.
The 34 year young Hina Rabbani Khar or “HRK” to the Indian Twitterati, who were fawning over her, comparing her to India’s top hero “SRK” (Shah Rukh Khan) and other glitterati, was actually no match to the mild mannered but extremely experienced seventy-nine years old Indian counterpart S M Krishna. Despite the fact that she commenced her tour with a meeting with Kashmiri leaders from Indian Occupied Kashmir, who are fighting for their freedom, she made a pointed effort to avoid even once mentioning the “K” word during her ten minute long speech at the joint press stakeout at the Hyderabad House in New Delhi on July 27, following her formal talks with her Indian opposite number.
No wonder that the Pakistan-baiting and RAW sponsored South Asia Analysis Group (SAAG) gleefully reports: “Her softly-worded positive speech was in direct contrast to her high-profile predecessor Shah Mehmood Qureshi’s shrill remarks at a joint press conference with Krishna in Islamabad a year ago that wrecked the event. Khar’s non-mention of Kashmir in her speech was no oversight but a well-planned strategy by Pakistan as even the three-page Indo-Pak Joint Statement did not mention ‘the core issue of Kashmir’, though the document did acknowledge that the two sides discussed Jammu and Kashmir, among other subjects.”
The smug faced and condescending S. M. Krishna must be smiling inwards that he got the better of his coy and suave counterpart. It has been India’s resolve to talk of developing and enhancing friendly relations through trade and tourism but let the core issue of Kashmir lie on the backburner. Some analysts may see it as a victory of sorts that Ms. Khar got to talk to the Kashmiri leaders before her formal meet with the Indian External Affairs Minister and that India is willing to talk about Kashmir among other issues. However, such myopic analysts must see the broader picture that India gave mild concessions, without committing itself on a single major Confidence Building Measure. Even Syed Ali Gilani, who was allowed to travel to New Delhi to meet Ms. Khar at the Pakistani High Commission, was immediately put under house arrest on his return, indicating that the ordeal of the reign of terror for the Kashmiris continues unabated.
The Indian media commented critically on its own government’s gesture of permitting Ms. Khar to meet the Kashmiri leaders; they said that how would Ms. Khar feel if an Indian leader had gone on a formal visit to Pakistan and asked to meet Baloch insurgents before the formal talks. Ms. Khar, amidst all the adulation showered upon her, failed to notice two major developments, which were reported in the Indian media. Firstly, the Indian air force chief issued a really provocative statement a day before talks with no reference to the context that ‘in case Pakistan launches a nuclear attack on India’, it would face severe retribution.
Secondly, the Indian Defence Ministry announced that it was opting for 189 state-of-the-art fighter aircraft at a cost of $20 billion among other high ticket defence purchases. Both these statements spell out the real intentions of India, which is willing to make cosmetic concessions but not disturb the status quo on Kashmir and other burning issues like water and terror. On a separate note, Ms. Khar could have avoided the vulgar display of her riches through her couture and style; after all she was representing an impoverished country, where a majority of the population goes to sleep hungry, whose economy is tottering under the burden of debts and which some pessimists liken to a failing state. She was visiting India as a foreign minister and not an icon of the glitterati or show biz. Pakistan, at this critical juncture needs pragmatic leaders to bring it out of the morass we are in and not paragons of beauty and models for the catwalk flaunting their riches in the face of havenots.
The opening of Al Fatiha, with its address to the whole of mankind, psychologically stopped me in my tracks. It spoke of previous scriptures in a way which I both recognized, but also differed. It clarified many of the doubts I had about Christianity. It made me an adult as I suddenly realized that my destiny and my actions had consequences for which I alone would now be held responsible.Myriam Francois-Cerrah Embraces Islam
I embraced Islam after graduating from Cambridge. Prior to that I was a skeptical Catholic; a believer in God but with a mistrust of organized religion.
The Qur’an was pivotal for me. I first tried to approach it in anger, as part of an attempt to prove my Muslim friend wrong. Later I began reading it with a more open mind.
The opening of Al Fatiha, with its address to the whole of mankind, psychologically stopped me in my tracks. It spoke of previous scriptures in a way which I both recognized, but also differed. It clarified many of the doubts I had about Christianity. It made me an adult as I suddenly realized that my destiny and my actions had consequences for which I alone would now be held responsible.
In a world governed by relativism, it outlined objective moral truths and the foundation of morality. As someone who’d always had a keen interest in philosophy, the Qur’an felt like the culmination of all of this philosophical cogitation. It combined Kant, Hume, Sartre and Aristotle. It somehow managed to address and answer the deep philosophical questions posed over centuries of human existence and answer its most fundamental one, ‘why are we here?’
In the Prophet Muhammad, I recognized a man who was tasked with a momentous mission, like his predecessors, Moses, Jesus and Abraham. I had to pick apart much of the Orientalist libel surrounding him in order to obtain accurate information, since the historical relativism which people apply to some degree when studying other historical figures, is often completely absent, in what is a clear attempt to disparage his person.
I think many of my close friends thought I was going through another phase and would emerge from the other side unscathed, not realizing that the change was much more profound. Some of my closest friends did their best to support me and understand my decisions. I have remained very close to some of my childhood friends and through them I recognize the universality of the Divine message, as God’s values shine through in the good deeds any human does, Muslim or not.
I have never seen my conversion as a ‘reaction’ against, or an opposition to my culture. In contrast, it was a validation of what I’ve always thought was praiseworthy, whilst being a guidance for areas in need of improvement. I also found many mosques not particularly welcoming and found the rules and protocol confusing and stressful. I did not immediately identify with the Muslim community. I found many things odd and many attitudes perplexing. The attention given to the outward over the inward continues to trouble me deeply.
Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) said: 'Forgive him who wrongs you. Join him who cuts you off. Do good to him who does evil to you and speak the truth even if it be against yourself.' |
There is a need for a confident, articulate British Muslim identity which can contribute to the discussions of our time. Islam is not meant to be an alien religion, we shouldn’t feel like we’ve lost all trace of ourselves. Islam is a validation of the good in us and a means to rectify the bad. Islam is about always having balance and I think the Prophet's (peace be upon him) message was fundamentally about having balance and equilibrium in all that we do.
The Prophet's message was always that you repel bad with good that you always respond to evil with good and always remember that God loves justice so even when people are committing serious injustices against you, you have a moral responsibility and a moral obligation in front of God to always uphold justice and never yourself transgress those limits.
Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him) said: 'Forgive him who wrongs you. Join him who cuts you off. Do good to him who does evil to you and speak the truth even if it be against yourself.'
Islam's beauty really becomes to its own when it becomes manifest and it becomes manifest when you make it into a tool for the betterment of society, human kind and the world.
The ideal from an Islamic perspective is for ethics to become lived ethics, to become an applied body of values and not remain unfortunately as it often is cloistered in the mosque of somewhere which is some more divorced from reality.
Myriam Francois-Cerrah became popular when she was a child for acting in the 90's hit film 'Sense and Sensibility.' Now she is gaining more popularity for being one of a growing number of educated middle class female converts to Islam in Britain.
She has recently contributed to a series of videos on Islam produced in the UK titled (Inspired by Muhammad).
Courtesy On Islam
Posts
