Youth Awareness












The Bharati (aka Indian) Chief of Army staff is new in his position and has had a “eureka moment”. He is already showing his ignorance and incompetence. He has raised controversy internally, and now he has made waves externally.

New Delhi: Kicking up a storm in the ranks, Army chief General Deepak Kapoor has ensured the promotion of his protege, northern army commander Lt Gen PC Bhardwaj, as the next vice chief of army staff. The appointment is against tradition, under which the senior most of the Lieutenant Generals is appointed vice chief, and is being dubbed as an attempt to scuttle the chances of Lt Gen VK Singh of becoming the army chief in March 2010.

As per tradition, Singh, chief of the Kolkata-based eastern command, should have been made vice chief.DNA first reported the standoff, following which the defence ministry suggested a third alternative.But Kapoor had his way. Kapoor has his way, Bhardwaj named next vice chief of army staff, Josy Joseph / DNAWednesday, September 2, 2009 3:34 IST

Stung by the reports by real Bharati scientists who say that the Pokhran II explosions were a fizzle, he is now trying to change the subject beyond the 24 hour news stories. General Kapoor’s epiphany has woken him from his slumber to realize that the Pakistani nuclear program is India-specific. As Forest Gump could see “Well Gollee!–where have to been this past decade?”.

If General Deepak Kapoor had an IQ higher than single digits, the timing of the Pakistani explosions would have given him a hint. Didn’t it occur to General Kapoor that the Pakistani nuclear explosions were a direct response to Bharat’s explosions in 1998.

Doesn’t General Kapoor have any aids that could inform him that his maniacal statement about the Pakistani nukes border on pure insanity.

If General Kapoor didn’t know up till now, let us inform him that the Pakistan Nuclear and missile program is Bharat specific. It is not directed against any other country in the world. Maybe a picture would help.

The range of Pakistan’s India-centric missiles. The Pakistani missile program is helping it develop a space program.

A day after TIMES NOW reported details of a scientific report by top US defence experts on Pakistan’s secret nuclear expansion, Army Chief General Deepak Kapoor has slammed Pakistan saying the country is “going well beyond” the degree of minimum credible deterrence required for protection.

“There is a difference between having a degree of deterrence which is required for one’s own protection, and going beyond that degree of deterrence. If news reports of them (Pakistan) having 70-90 atomic bombs are correct then I think they are going well beyond the so-called requirement of deterrence even, that is something which is of concern to all of us,” Gen Kapoor told reporters today.

…a US scientific federation report reveals that Pakistan could be using these funds to ramp up its nuclear stockpile.

The report also suggests that Pakistan is now shifting its base from uranium to plutonium as fuel to power its nuclear weapons, in a bid to make its nuclear warheads lighter with a larger range – allegedly with assistance from China. This, along with giving Pakistan an alternative to uranium-based arsenal, will also make it easier to transport the weapons to other countries.

While the incumbent Zardari government is mum on the issue, the earlier Musharaf government has responded defensively. But what is worrying the international community and India is the fact that Pakistan’s growing arsenal includes a number of weapons specifically targetting India. Times Now. Army chief slams Pak for ‘secret nuclear expansion’ 2 Sep 2009, 1311 hrs IST

Here is another map for General Kapoor’s edification.

It is pedagogical to note the timing of General Kapoor’s epiphany. It has occurred at a time when the Bharati defense establishment is best by huge corruption issues. The Bharati military industrial complex is awash in a sea of incompetence. General Kapoor’s rhetoric against Pakistan is nothing new. The tirade is typical of the usual vitriol against Pakistan. A few years ago the Bharati establishment tried its level best to get international sanctions imposed on Pakistan. The effort failed and Bharati agents in Swat have been exterminated. The remnants will be cleared.

Now on the eve of the passage of the US Aid package to Pakistan, the Bharati establishment and media is propping up old dead skeletons.

——————————————————————————————————————————–

Facebook
Create your like badge




The Federal Minister of Railways, Mr. Ghulam Ahmed Bilour is the worst Railway Minister in the history of South Asia and  most probably the world. It was on his watch that the Pakistan Railways has lost more money than ever before. His incompetence is not limited to Railways, he is a failed politician too.


He can make a lot of excuses and has no solutions. If things are bad, he should have held a conference of local and international experts and come up with solutions two years ago. He didn’t. because when he took over the Railways were fine. His absence from the scene and horrid management has brought it to the brink. He has time to interfere in the politics of other provinces, and doesn’t have time to pay attention to his own job.

It is amazing that Mr. Gilani has not yet fired the man.

In describing the railways he said that the British had given South Asia a good railway system and Pakistan had not maintained it. Duh! The Railways was just fine even under the guidance of Sheikh Rashid–admittedly not the brightest crayon in the box.

Even during his time, he added several trains and juggled the schedule and ordered about 300 brand new engines from China. To hide is ineptitude Ghulam Ahmed Bilour tries to blame the Chinese engines for the malaise that he finds himself in.

Federal Minister for railways Ghulam Ahmed Bilour said the recent floods in the country have damaged the railways system immensely. However rehabilitation work is being done on it.

Talking to media after addressing the passing out ceremony in Lahore Bilour said that in the past railways have been badly neglected and on top of that recent floods in the country have completely destroyed the system, but we are hopeful and will soon put railways back on the tracks.

While talking to the media he stressed the need to prioritize railways as its considered the back bone of any nation, he also said that work had been done for motorways in the past but nothing positive for railways and due to which the system is collapsing .

The federal minister also said that although we are facing huge problems but we are striving to put railways back on its feet, as it will be a big deficit for the economy if the system collapsed. We are trying our best to make it a profitable institution and for that we need to buy new engines.

Mr. Ghulam Ahmed Bilour blames the current state of the Pakistan Railways on bad parts from China. It is amazing that Mr. Ghulam Ahmed Bilour did not get on a plane and head to China to resolve the issue with the manufacturers of the engines. Railway insiders say that Mr. Ghulam Ahmed Bilour doesn’t have a clue about the Railways or anything. Mr. Bilour has run the Railways into the ground because he did not enforce regular maintenance on the engines and did nothing to find out what is profitable for the grid. The Railways still has billions of Dollars of assets which can be leveraged to purchase new bogeys and engines.

Mr. Bilour represents the corruption of the heads of about 10 major departments. To stop the bleeding drastic steps have to be taken to turn the organizations around. Just spending $1 Billion on the Rialways will not solve anything. The Railways have always been an asset for Pakistan and Mr. Bilour is to blame for its sorry state of affairs.

Mr. Ghulam Ahmed Bilour should be fired immediately and replaced with a professional engineer that knows how to run a professional organization.




By STANLEY FISH

A few weeks ago, the Cardozo School of Law mounted a conference marking the 20th anniversary of Employment Division v. Smith (1990), a case in which the Supreme Court asked what happens when a form of behavior demanded by one’s religion runs up against a generally applicable law — a law not targeted at any particular agenda or point of view — that makes the behavior illegal. (The behavior at issue was the ingestion of peyote at a Native American religious ceremony.) The answer the court gave, with Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority, was that the religious believer must yield to the law of the state so long as that law was not passed with the intention of curtailing or regulating his or anyone else’s religious practice. (This is exactly John Locke’s view in his “Letter Concerning Toleration.”)

“To make the individual’s obligation to obey . . . a law contingent upon the law’s coincidence with his religious beliefs” would have the effect, Scalia explains, of “permitting him, by virtue of his beliefs, ‘to become a law unto himself.’” And if that were allowed, there would no longer be a single law — universally conceived and applied — but multiple laws each of which was tailored to the doctrines and commands of a particular faith. In order to have law in the strong sense, Scalia is saying, you can have only one. (“No man can serve two masters.”)

The conflict between religious imperatives and the legal obligations one has as a citizen of a secular state — a state that does not take into account the religious affiliations of its citizens when crafting laws — is an old one (Scalia is quoting Reynolds v. United States, 1878); but in recent years it has been felt with increased force as Muslim immigrants to Western secular states evidence a desire to order their affairs, especially domestic affairs, by Shariah law rather than by the supposedly neutral law of a godless liberalism. I say “supposedly” because of the obvious contradiction: how can a law that refuses, on principle, to recognize religious claims be said to be neutral with respect to those claims? Must a devout Muslim (or orthodox Jew or fundamentalist Christian) choose between his or her faith and the letter of the law of the land?

In February 2008, the Right Reverend Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, tried in a now-famous lecture to give a nuanced answer to these questions by making what he considered a modest proposal. After asking “what degree of accommodation the laws of the land can and should give to minority communities with their strongly entrenched legal and moral codes,” Williams suggested (and it is a suggestion others had made before him) that in some areas of the law a “supplementary jurisdiction,” deriving from religious law, be recognized by the liberal state, which, rather than either giving up its sovereignty or invoking it peremptorily to still all other voices, agrees to share it in limited areas where “more latitude [would be] given in law to rights and scruples rooted in religious identities.”

Williams proceeded immediately to surround his proposal with cautionary safeguards — “no ‘supplementary’ jurisdiction could have the power to deny access to the rights granted to other citizens or to punish its members for claiming those rights” — but no safeguards would have satisfied his many critics, including Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who declared roundly that there is only one common law for all of Britain and it is based squarely on “British values.”

Prompted by Williams’s lecture and the responses it provoked, law professors Rex Ahdar and Nicholas Aroney have now put together a volume, to be published in 2011, under the title “Shari’a in the West,” a collection of learned and thoughtful essays by some of the world’s leading scholars of religion and the law. The volume’s central question is stated concisely by Erich Kolig, an anthropologist from New Zealand: “How far can liberal democracy go, both in accommodating minority groups in public policy, and, more profoundly, in granting official legal recognition to their beliefs, customs, practices and worldviews, especially when minority religious conduct and values are not congenial to the majority,” that is, to liberal democracy itself?

This is exactly the question posed by John Rawls in a preface to the second edition of “Political Liberalism,” his magisterial account and defense of liberal political principles: “How is it possible for those affirming a religious doctrine that is based on religious authority . . . also to hold a reasonable political conception that supports a just democratic regime?” The words to stumble on are “reasonable” and “just,” which at once introduce the requirement and indicate how hard, if not impossible, it will be to meet it: “reasonable” means confirming to rational, not religious, principles; “just” means respecting the equality of all, not just male or faithful, individuals.

With these concepts as the baseline of “accommodation,” accommodation is going to fall far short of anything that will satisfy the adherents of a religion that “encompasses all aspects of public and private law, hygiene, and even courtesy and good manners” (A. A. An-Na’im). In liberal thought these areas are the ones in which the individual reigns supreme and the value of individual choice is presupposed; but, as Ann Black explains, “Muslims do not conceptualize Islam in terms of the Westernized sociological categorization of religion which places the individual at the centre of all analyses.”

And so, perhaps predictably, the essays in Shariah in the West tack back and forth between the uneasy alternatives Williams names in his lecture — “an assumption on the religious side that membership of the community . . . is the only significant category,” and on the other side secular government’s assumption of a “monopoly in terms of defining public and political identity.” These assumptions seem to be standing obstacles to the ability of secular Western states to think through the problem presented by growing Muslim populations that are sometimes militant in their demand to be ruled by their own faiths and traditions.

On the one hand, there is the liberal desire to accord one’s fellow human beings the dignity of respecting their deepest beliefs. On the other hand, there is the fear that if those beliefs are allowed their full scope, individual rights and the rule of law may be eroded beyond repair. It would seem, at least on the evidence of most of these essays, that there is simply no way of “finding a viable path that accommodates diversity with equality” (Ayelet Shachar), that is, accommodates tolerance of diverse religious views with an insistence that, in the last analysis, the rights of individuals cannot be trumped by a theological imperative. No one in this volume quite finds the path.

Except perhaps theologian and religious philosopher John Milbank who puts forward, the editors tell us, “the striking argument that only a distinctly Christian polity — not a secular postmodern one — can actually accord Islam the respect it seeks as a religion.” The italicized phrase is key: the respect liberalism can accord Islam (or any other strong religion) is the respect one extends to curiosities, eccentrics, the backward, the unenlightened and the unfortunately deluded. Liberal respect stops short — and this is not a failing of liberalism, but its very essence — of taking religious claims seriously, of considering them as possible alternative ways of ordering not only private but public life.

Christianity, says Milbank, will be more capable of deeply respecting Islam because the two faiths share a commitment to the sacred and to a teleological view of history notably lacking in liberalism (again, this is not a criticism but a definition of liberalism): A “Christian polity can go further in acknowledging the integral worth of a religious group as a group than a secular polity can.” Christianity can acknowledge the worth of Islam not merely in an act of tolerance but in an act of solidarity in the same way that Christian sects can acknowledge each other. If you are a Catholic, Milbank explains, “and you do not agree with the Baptists you can nevertheless acknowledge that, relatively speaking, they are pursuing social goals that are comparable with, and promote a shared sense of human dignity” as defined by a corporate religious identity. Liberalism can acknowledge individual Muslims or individual Baptists or individual Catholics, but the liberal acknowledgment detaches these religious believers from their community of belief and turns them into citizens who are in the things that count (to liberalism) just like everyone else.

“Liberal principles,” declares Milbank, “will always ensure that the rights of the individual override those of the group.” For this reason, he concludes, “liberalism cannot defend corporate religious freedom.” The neutrality liberalism proclaims “is itself entirely secular” (it brackets belief; that’s what it means by neutrality) and is therefore “unable to accord the religious perspective [the] equal protection” it rhetorically promises. Religious rights “can only be effectively defended pursuant to a specific and distinctly religious framework.” Liberal universalism, with its superficial respect for everyone (as long as everyone is superficial) and its deep respect for no one, can’t do it.

If that is so, then the other contributors to this volume are whistling “Dixie,” at least with respect to the hope declared by Rawls that liberalism in some political form might be able to do justice to the strongly religious citizens of a liberal state. Milbank’s fellow essayists cannot negotiate or remove the impasse he delineates, but what they can do, and do do with considerable ingenuity and admirable tact, is find ways of blunting and perhaps muffling the conflict between secular and religious imperatives, a conflict that cannot (if Milbank is right, and I think he is) be resolved on the level of theory, but which can perhaps be kept at bay by the ad-hoc, opportunistic, local and stop-gap strategies that are at the heart of politics.

Facebook
Create your like badge



{October 30, 2010}   Democracy is the best revenge

Corruption is rampant in the land of the pure, but dont worry democracy is here!

The pillars of the state are at loggerheads with each other, but dont worry democracy is here!

Karachi is burning, but dont worry democracy is here!

Food inflation is at its peak, but dont worry democracy is here!

The Flood effectees have been forgotten, but dont worry democracy is here!

The world wants us to tax the rich, but dont worry democracy is here!

No Police and law and order in the rural areas, but dont worry democracy is here!

India diverts water from the rivers of Kashmir, but dont worry democracy is here!

Power outages / load-shedding are crippling the industry, but dont worry democracy is here!

The govt. education system is bankrupt, but dont worry democracy is here.

No dams to store water, but dont worry democracy is here!

Fake degrees wallas are reigning supreme, but dont worry democracy is here!

No justice for the poor, but dont worry democracy is here!

The govt is bankrupt, cant pay its bills, but dont worry democracy is here!

According to the govt, all is well in the land of the pure, but dont worry democracy is here!
The world wants our nukes, but dont worry democracy is here!

There is no democracy in the political parties, but dont worry democracy is here!

We pay lip-service to defend our sovereignty, but dont worry democracy is here!

The WoT is sapping the country and economy, but dont worry democracy is here!

and finally…..if we dont change ourselves, we would be long gone, and then we dont need to worry about democracy!
Long-Live Pakistan & its People!
——————————————————————————————————–

Facebook
Create your like badge



{October 30, 2010}   They let us down

By:  S Khalid Husain

The country’s destiny at independence was in the hands of politicians who formed the first governments of Pakistan. They were all indirectly elected members of the first Constituent Assembly which was to frame the new country’s constitution, and hold general elections after its passage.

But they failed to produce a constitution for more than eight years.

Their Indian counterparts, who faced a far more complex challenge, produced a constitution in less than three. The completion of Pakistan’s first constitution in 1956 came from a prime minister who took office in 1955, and who was not from among politicians but was a former bureaucrat. Pakistani politicians’ failure to give a constitution to the country in the first few years, which would have led to general elections, was a bad beginning for democracy.

When someone fails to measure up to a task, others have to move in to “complete” it. To make up for the failure of the politicians of that time, many of whose descendents grace the present parliament, the bureaucracy got dragged in, particularly after the assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan in October 1951.

In 1947, there was none capable among the politicians to be the country’s finance minister, and there has not been one to this day. The Quaid-e-Azam brought in Ghulam Mohammed, who was in the Nizam’s service in Hyderabad, to make him the first finance minister of the new state. The politicians’ ineffectiveness paved the way for him to become an all-powerful governor general in October 1951. He was followed by another bureaucrat, Iskander Mirza.

All the above is a dismal reflection on the calibre and character of politicians. If the politicians had been equal to handling the challenges of leadership, with minds that could grasp issues and with commitment less to their own interests and more to the country’s, the bureaucrats’ entry into politics would have been precluded, and the army would have remained in the barracks.

In their roles as rulers, the bureaucrats, and subsequently the army, proved to be less corrupt and less ineffective than politicians.

However, ruling the country is not the role of the bureaucracy or the army and, in time, both floundered. It was back to the politicians then, who continued their merry ways and, as a result, it got back to the army. The politicians/army seesaw since 1958 has become as popular in the country’s political park as the seesaw itself is in a children’s park.

The politicians must enjoy seesawing with the army. If they didn’t, they would not create conditions which invite army intervention. The way to prevent this is not to bite, but take care of, the hand that feeds: the voters.

Once in power, the politicians abandon the people and embark upon an agenda of personal gains and self-preservation.

The personal gains-agenda of politicians has consistently earned Pakistan a position of honour in the list of the most corrupt countries in the world. It has also reduced a country of great potential to a state of penury. Self-preservation for politicians is not banking on the support of the people, whom the politicians regard as spent cartridges once the voters have voted.

Self-preservation for politicians is to achieve control over all that they survey – institutions, the opposition, the media, and any others that can be a threat to their rule. There has been no letup in this fixation of the politicians, despite the number of times they have had to bite the dust because of it.

A sad example of all the above is the first PPP government, which came to power in December 1971. It is rightly credited for the 1973 Constitution promulgated on Aug 14 of that year.

However, on the same day, and within hours of its promulgation, the PPP government orchestrated the issuance of a gazette notification by President Fazal Ilahi Chaudhry. The notification validated the continuation of the emergency declared by a military dictator on Nov 23, 1971, when the country was at war, under which all fundamental rights had been suspended and made non-justiciable in any court. The state of emergency continued to the last day in office of the PPP government. The country, from living under martial law, moved to living under the equally abhorrent state of emergency. It was then back again to martial law.

Through several amendments in the constitution within a year of the document’s coming into force, which set a record for the number of amendments in such a short period, the press was muzzled, the judiciary enfeebled, preventive detention made easier, and the Quaid-e-Azam’s guidelines on state and religion discarded.

The Federal Security Force raised by the PPP government protected the interests of the government and the ruling party, like the National Guards in Saudi Arabia which protect the Royal family’s interests.

“Special treatment” was meted out not only to opponents but also to critics within the party, like former foreign secretary J A Rahim, a party stalwart and author of the PPP manifesto. In the end this bungling force led by devious police officers and the enfeebled judiciary, which promptly legitimised the PPP government’s overthrow by a military dictator, became the root of the tragedy that overtook the party’s leader and his family.

As in 1947, the country’s destiny today is in the hands of its politicians. They have to lead the country out of the swamp into which it has been led; of this they have been the prime cause. The present situation is despairing. There are radicals knocking at the door, while the politicians indulge in talks on mergers and alliances, which is all old brew, and not even in a new bottle.

In the meanwhile, the “spent cartridges” persevere with their wretched lives. A hundred and eighty million people buying and selling whatever for a day to day survival, or begging and spending, creates enough economic activity to keep the country plodding.

The write is a former corporate executive. Email: husainsk@cyber. net.pk

——————————————————————————————————————————————————


<!– Facebook Like Badge START –><div style=”width: 100%;”><div style=”background: #3B5998;padding: 5px;”><img src=”http://www.facebook.com/images/fb_logo_small.png&#8221; alt=”Facebook”/><img src=”http://badge.facebook.com/badge/156567611049289.100001796886323.1928874001.png&#8221; alt=”” width=”0″ height=”0″/></div><div style=”background: #EDEFF4;display: block;border-right: 1px solid #D8DFEA;border-bottom: 1px solid #D8DFEA;border-left: 1px solid #D8DFEA;margin: 0px;padding: 0px 0px 5px 0px;”><div style=”background: #EDEFF4;display: block;padding: 5px;”><table cellspacing=”0″ cellpadding=”0″ border=”0″><tr><td valign=”top”><img src=”http://www.facebook.com/images/icons/fbpage.gif&#8221; alt=””/></td><td valign=”top”><p style=”color: #808080;font-family: verdana;font-size: 11px;margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px;padding: 0px 8px 0px 8px;”><a href=”http://www.facebook.com/people/Agahi-Nojawanan/100001796886323&#8243; target=”_TOP” style=”color: #3B5998;font-family: verdana;font-size: 11px;font-weight: normal;margin: 0px;padding: 0px 0px 0px 0px;text-decoration: none;” title=”Agahi Nojawanan”>Agahi Nojawanan</a> likes</p></td></tr></table></div><div style=”background: #FFFFFF;clear: both;display: block;margin: 0px;overflow: hidden;padding: 5px;”><table cellspacing=”0″ cellpadding=”0″ border=”0″><tr><td valign=”middle”><a href=”http://www.facebook.com/pages/Youth-Awareness/156567611049289&#8243; target=”_TOP” style=”border: 0px;color: #3B5998;font-family: verdana;font-size: 12px;font-weight: bold;margin: 0px;padding: 0px;text-decoration: none;” title=”Youth Awareness”><img src=”http://www.facebook.com/profile/pic.php?oid=AQBKJ9512LCTLmUAFUJyDdUrteLhBqFQKYDc2rrmtMyknuHagjbOeiuWYHp6B34ditY&size=square&#8221; style=”border: 0px;margin: 0px;padding: 0px;” alt=”Youth Awareness”/></a></td><td valign=”middle” style=”padding: 0px 8px 0px 8px;”><a href=”http://www.facebook.com/pages/Youth-Awareness/156567611049289&#8243; target=”_TOP” style=”border: 0px;color: #3B5998;font-family: verdana;font-size: 12px;font-weight: bold;margin: 0px;padding: 0px;text-decoration: none;” title=”Youth Awareness”>Youth Awareness</a></td></tr></table></div></div><div style=”display: block;float: right;margin: 0px;padding: 4px 0px 0px 0px;”><a href=”http://www.facebook.com/badges/like.php&#8221; target=”_TOP” style=”color: #3B5998;font-family: verdana;font-size: 11px;font-weight: none;margin: 0px;padding: 0px;text-decoration: none;” title=”Create your like badge”>Create your like badge</a></div></div><!– Facebook Like Badge END –>

Facebook
Create your like badge




By: ثوبیہ عمران

دو نوجوان  سیدنا عمر  رضی اللہ عنہ  کی محفل میں داخل ہوتے ہی محفل میں بیٹھے ایک شخص  کے سامنے جا کر کھڑے ہوجاتے ہیں اور اسکی طرف انگلی کر کے کہتے ہیں یا عمر ؓ یہ ہے وہ شخص!سیدنا عمر ؓ  ان سے پوچھتے ہیں ، کیا کیا ہے اس شخص نے؟یا امیر المؤمنین، اس نے ہمارے باپ کو قتل  کیا ہے۔کیا کہہ رہے ہو، اس نے تمہارے باپ کو قتل کیا ہے؟ سیدنا عمرؓ پوچھتے ہیں۔سیدنا عمر ؓ اس شخص سے مخاطب ہو کر پوچھتے ہیں، کیا تو نے ان کے باپ کو قتل کیا ہے؟وہ شخص کہتا ہے : ہاں امیر المؤمنین،  مجھ سے قتل ہو گیا ہے انکا باپ۔کس طرح قتل کیا ہے؟ سیدنا عمرؓ پوچھتے ہیں۔یا عمرؓ، انکا باپ اپنے اونٹ سمیت میرے کھیت میں داخل ہو گیا تھا، میں نے منع کیا، باز نہیں آیا تو میں نے  ایک پتھر دے مارا۔ جو سیدھا اس کے سر میں لگا اور وہ موقع پر مر گیا۔پھر تو قصاص دینا  پڑے گا، موت ہے اسکی سزا۔  سیدنا عمرؓ کہتے ہیں۔

 

نہ فیصلہ لکھنے کی ضرورت، اور فیصلہ بھی ایسا اٹل کہ جس پر کسی بحث و مباحثے کی بھی گنجائش نہیں، نہ ہی اس شخص سے اسکے کنبے کے بارے میں کوئی سوال کیا گیا ہے، نہ ہی یہ پوچھا گیا ہے کہ تعلق کسقدر  شریف خاندان  سے ہے، نہ ہی یہ پوچھنے کی ضرورت محسوس کی گئی ہے کی تعلق کسی  معزز قبیلے سے تو نہیں، معاشرے میں کیا رتبہ یا مقام ہے؟ ان سب باتوں سے بھلا سیدنا عمر ؓ کو مطلب ہی کیا ہے!! کیوں کہ معاملہ اللہ کے دین کا ہو تو عمر ؓ پر کوئی اثر انداز نہیں ہو سکتا اور نہ ہی کوئی اللہ کی شریعت کی تنفیذ کے معاملے  پر عمرؓ کو  روک سکتا ہے۔ حتی کہ سامنے عمرؓ کا اپنا بیٹا ہی کیوں نہ  قاتل کی حیثیت سے آ  کھڑا ہو، قصاص تو اس سے بھی لیا جائے گا۔

 

وہ شخص کہتا ہے ا ے امیر المؤمنین: اس کے نام پر جس کے حکم سے یہ زمین و آسمان قائم کھڑے ہیں مجھے صحراء میں واپس اپنی بیوی بچوں کے پاس  جانے دیجیئے تاکہ میں انکو بتا آؤں کہ میں قتل کر دیا جاؤں گا۔ ان کا اللہ اور میرے سوا کوئی آسرا نہیں ہے، میں اسکے بعد واپس آ جاؤں گا۔

سیدنا عمر ؓ کہتے ہیں: کون تیری ضمانتدے گا کہ تو صحراء  میں جا کر واپس بھی آ جائے گا؟

مجمع پر ایک خاموشی چھا جاتی ہے۔ کوئی بھی تو  ایسا نہیں ہے جو اسکا  نام تک بھی جانتا ہو۔ اسکے قبیلے، خیمےیا  گھر  وغیرہ کے بارے میں جاننے کا معاملہ تو بعد کی بات ہے۔کون ضمانت دے اسکی؟ کیا یہ دس درہم کے ادھار یا  زمین کے ٹکڑے  یا کسی اونٹ کے سودے  کی ضمانت کا معاملہ ہے؟  ادھر تو ایک گردن کی ضمانت دینے کی بات ہے جسے تلوار سے اڑا دیا جانا ہے۔

اور کوئی ایسا بھی تو نہیں ہے جو اللہ کی شریعت کی تنفیذ کے معاملے پر عمرؓ سے اعتراض  کرے، یا پھر اس شخص کی سفارش کیلئے ہی کھڑا ہو جائے۔ اور کوئی ہو بھی نہیں سکتا جو سفارشی بننے کی سوچ سکے۔

 

محفل میں موجود  صحابہ پر ایک خاموشی سی چھا گئی ہے، اس صورتحال سے خود عمر ؓ  بھی متأثر ہیں۔ کیوں کہ اس شخص کی حالت  نے سب کو ہی حیرت میں ڈال کر رکھ دیا ہے۔ کیا اس شخص کو واقعی قصاص کے طور پر قتل کر دیا جائے اور اس کے بچے بھوکوں مرنے کیلئے چھوڑ دیئے جائیں؟  یا پھر اسکو بغیر ضمانتی کے واپس جانے دیا  جائے؟  واپس نہ آیا تو مقتول کا خون رائیگاں جائے گا!

 

خود سیدنا   عمرؓ  سر جھکائے افسردہ بیٹھے ہیں  ہیں اس صورتحال پر، سر اُٹھا کر التجا بھری نظروں سے نوجوانوں کی طرف دیکھتے ہیں، معاف کر دو اس شخص کو۔

عمرؓ ایک بار پھر مجمع کی طرف دیکھ کر بلند آواز سے پوچھتے ہیں ، اے لوگو ، ہے کوئی تم میں سے جو اس کی ضمانت دے؟

ابو ذر غفاری ؓ اپنے زہد و صدق سے بھر پور بڑھاپے کے ساتھ کھڑے ہو کر کہتے ہیں میں ضمانت دیتا ہوں اس شخص کی!

سیدنا عمرؓ کہتے ہیں ابوذر ، اس نے قتل کیا ہے۔چاہے قتل ہی کیوں نہ کیا ہو، ابوذر ؓ اپنا اٹل فیصلہ سناتے ہیں۔عمرؓ: جانتے ہو اسے؟ابوذرؓ: نہیں جانتا اسے۔عمرؓ: تو پھر کس طرح ضمانت دے رہے ہو؟ابوذرؓ: میں نے اس کے چہرے پر مومنوں کی صفات دیکھی ہیں، اور مجھے ایسا لگتا ہے یہ جھوٹ نہیں بول رہا، انشاء اللہ یہ لوٹ کر واپس آ جائے گا۔عمرؓ: ابوذرؓ دیکھ لو اگر یہ تین دن میں لوٹ کر نہ آیا تو مجھے تیری جدائی کا صدمہ دیکھنا پڑے گا۔امیر المؤمنین، پھر اللہ مالک ہے۔ ابوذر اپنے فیصلے پر ڈٹے ہوئے جواب دیتے ہیں۔سیدنا عمرؓ سے تین دن کی مہلت پا کر وہ شخص رخصت ہو جاتا ہے، کچھ ضروری تیاریوں کیلئے، بیوی بچوں کو الوداع کہنے، اپنے بعد اُن کے لئے کوئی راہ دیکھنے، اور اس کے قصاص کی ادئیگی کیلئے قتل کئے جانے کی غرض سے لوٹ کر  واپس آنے کیلئے۔

 

اور پھر تین راتوں کے بعد، عمر ؓ بھلا کیسے اس امر کو بھلا پاتے، انہوں نے تو ایک ایک لمحہ گن کر کاٹا تھا، عصر کے وقت  شہر میں  (الصلاۃ جامعہ) کی منادی پھر جاتی ہے، نوجوان اپنے باپ کا قصاص لینے کیلئے بے چین اور لوگوں کا مجمع اللہ کی شریعت کی تنفیذ دیکھنے کے لئے جمع ہو چکا ہے۔

ابو ذرؓ بھی تشریف لاتے ہیں اور آ کر عمرؓ کے سامنے بیٹھ جاتے ہیں۔

 

کدھر ہے وہ آدمی؟ سیدنا عمرؓ سوال کرتے ہیں۔

مجھے کوئی پتہ نہیں ہے یا امیر المؤمنین، ابوذرؓ مختصر جواب دیتے ہیں۔

 

ابوذرؓ آسمان کی طرف دیکھتے ہیں جدھر سورج ڈوبنے کی جلدی میں معمول سے سے زیادہ تیزی کے ساتھ جاتا دکھائی دے رہا ہے۔

محفل میں ہو کا عالم ہے، اللہ کے سوا کوئی نہیں جانتا کہ آج کیا  ہونے جا رہا ہے؟

 

یہ سچ ہے کہ ابوذرؓ سیدنا عمرؓ کے دل میں بستے ہیں، عمرؓ سے ان کے جسم کا ٹکڑا  مانگیں تو عمرؓ دیر نہ کریں کاٹ کر ابوذرؓ کے حوالے کر دیں، لیکن ادھر معاملہ شریعت کا ہے، اللہ کے احکامات کی بجا آوری کا ہے، کوئی کھیل تماشہ نہیں ہونے جا رہا، نہ ہی کسی کی حیثیت یا صلاحیت کی پیمائش ہو رہی ہے، حالات و واقعات کے مطابق نہیں  اور نہ ہی زمان و مکان کو بیچ میں لایا جانا ہے۔ قاتل نہیں آتا تو ضامن کی گردن جاتی نظر آ رہی ہے۔

 

مغرب سے چند لحظات پہلےوہ شخص آ جاتا ہے، بے ساختہ حضرت عمرؓ کے منہ سے اللہ اکبر کی صدا نکلتی ہے، ساتھ ہی مجمع بھی اللہ اکبر کا ایک بھرپور نعرہ لگاتا ہے۔

 

عمرؓ اس شخص سے مخاطب ہو کر کہتے ہیں اے شخص، اگر تو لوٹ کر نہ بھی آتا تو ہم نے تیرا کیا کر لینا تھا، نہ ہی تو کوئی تیرا گھر جانتا تھا اور نہ ہی کوئی تیرا پتہ جانتا تھا!

 

امیر المؤمنین، اللہ کی قسم، بات آپکی نہیں ہے بات اس ذات کی ہے جو سب ظاہر و پوشیدہ کے بارے میں جانتا ہے، دیکھ لیجئے میں آ گیا ہوں، اپنے بچوں کو  پرندوں کے چوزوں کی طرح  صحراء میں تنہا چھوڑ کر، جدھر نہ درخت کا سایہ ہے اور نہ ہی پانی کا نام و نشان۔ میں قتل کر دیئے جانے کیلئے حاضر ہوں۔ مجھے بس یہ ڈر تھا کہیں کوئی یہ نہ کہہ دے کہ اب لوگوں میں سے وعدوں کا ایفاء ہی اُٹھ گیا ہے۔

سیدنا عمرؓ نے ابوذر کی طرف رخ کر کے پوچھا ابوذرؓ، تو نے کس بنا پر اسکی ضمانت دے دی تھی؟

ابوذرؓ نے کہا، اے عمرؓ، مجھے اس بات کا ڈر تھا کہیں کوئی یہ نہ کہہ دے کہ ابلوگوں سے خیر ہی اٹھا لی گئی ہے۔

سید عمرؓ نے ایک لمحے کیلئے توقف کیا اور پھر ان دو نوجوانوں سے پوچھا کہ کیا کہتے ہو اب؟

نوجوانوں نے روتے ہوئے جواب دیا، اے امیر المؤمنین، ہم اس کی صداقت کی وجہ سے اسے معاف کرتے ہیں، ہمیں اس بات کا ڈر ہے کہ کہیں کوئی یہ نہ کہہ دے کہ اب لوگوں میں سے عفو اور درگزر ہی اُٹھا لیا گیا ہے۔

سیدناؓ عمر اللہ اکبر پکار اُٹھے اور آنسو انکی ڈاڑھی کو تر کرتے نیچے گر رہے تھے۔۔۔۔

اے نوجوانو! تمہاری عفو و درگزر پر اللہ تمہیں جزائے خیر دے۔اے ابو ذرؓ! اللہ تجھے اس شخص کی مصیبت میں مدد پر جزائے خیر دے۔اور اے شخص،  اللہ تجھے اس وفائے عہد و صداقت پر جزائے خیر دے۔اور اے امیر المؤمنین، اللہ تجھے تیرے عدل و رحمدلی پر جزائے خیر دے۔

 

محدثین میں سے ایک یوں کہتے ہیں، قسم ہے اس ذات کی جس کے قبضے میں میری جان ہے، اسلام اور ایمان کی سعادتیں تو عمرؓ کے کفن کے ساتھ ہی دفن ہو گئی تھیں۔



———————————————————————-
Youth Awareness

Promote your Page too



{October 27, 2010}   Deserving National Hero ?

ڈاکٹر عبدالقدیر خان ہمارے قومی ہیرو ہیں اور جو کچھ ہو جائے انکی خدمات کو تو فراموش نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ مگر ان قومی ہیروز سے بھی انتہائی بڑی بے وقوفیاں ہو جاتی ہیں اور اسکی سزا ملک کو بھگنی پڑتی ہے۔

مسئلہ یہ ہے کہ ڈاکٹر صاحب سمجھتے ہیں کہ یہ ٹیکنالوجی حکومت کی ہے اور نہ انکے باپ کی بلکہ سرے سے ہی پاکستان کی نہیں ہے، بلکہ یہ ٹیکنالوجی انکی ہے۔ اسی ذہنیت کی وجہ سے انہوں نے ملک کے قانون کی خلاف ورزی کرتے ہوئے آگے جسے چاہی بیچ دی۔

ذیل کی ویڈیو دیکھئیے (5 منٹ کے بعد) جہاں ڈاکٹر صاحب اپنے جرم کے دفاع میں کہہ رہے ہیں:

یہ ٹیکنالوجی نہ انکی تھی، نہ انکے باپ کی تھی اور نہ یہ پاکستان کی تھی میری ٹیکنالوجی تھی، میں نے انہیں مفت دی تھی ، میں نے انکو فری میں الاٹ کی تھی۔ اس لیے یہ کیس نہیں جیت سکتے تھے۔ “۔

ڈاکٹر صاحب دوسروں کو چپ رہنے کا مشورہ دے رہے ہیں۔ مگر بہتر ہوتا کہ ڈاکٹر صاحب خود خاموشی اختیار کریں۔

ڈاکٹر صاحب کی خدمت اتنی بڑی ہے کہ اس بے وقوفی اور اسکے بعد اسکے بے وقوفانہ دفاع کے باوجود وہ قومی ہیرو ہی کے مرتبے پر فائز ہیں۔ مگر خدا کے واسطے ڈاکٹر صاحب آپ کی یہ بات پاکستان کے لیے نقصان کا باعث ہے۔

 




{October 27, 2010}   What is wrong with the ANP?

ANALYSIS: What is wrong with the ANP? —Farhat Taj

The ANP fell on its knees during the signing of the Swat peace deal with the terrorists. ANP circles have anonymously claimed that suicide bombers were sent to the top leaders to force them to sign the peace deal. If they refused, they would have been killed on the spot

It has been quite a few days now since the top leaders of the Pakhtun nationalist party, the Awami National Party (ANP), have been issuing strange statements. The party chief, Asfandyar Khan, described NATO’s pursuit of terrorists into FATA as a “clear violation of international law and a blow to Pakistan’s sovereignty”. The party’s provincial president, Afrasiab Khattak, condemned the US drone attacks on terrorists in FATA and claimed that innocent tribespersons were being killed in the drone strikes. ANP’s senior provincial minister, Bashir Bilour, also condemned the US drone strikes and NATO incursions into FATA in pursuit of the terrorists who retreated into their safe havens in FATA following attacks in Afghanistan. Above all, the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly condemned NATO incursions and the US drone attacks.

This is certainly not the ANP expressing itself with free will and consent. This is an ANP speaking under duress. The Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) is forcing the ANP leaders to issue such statements. The Americans have put intense pressure on the Pakistani generals through relentless drone attacks that have considerably damaged their strategic assets, the jihadis that the ISI has been keeping in FATA for terrorism in Afghanistan. It seems the Pakistan generals cannot face the US and NATO forces in Afghanistan on their own. They simply force unarmed Pakhtun civilians through extreme torture and violence to associate themselves with the Taliban so as to feign the front of an indigenous Pakhtun resistance to the designs of NATO and US forces in Afghanistan. This pattern of utmost coercion was implemented all over FATA whereby everyone — tribal leaders, the ulema, government servants, community elders, teachers, healthcare workers — who might have the courage to challenge the ISI’s managed chaos in FATA were target killed. In the garb of fake military operations, vast areas of FATA were extracted from the writ of the state and put under the writ of the terrorists. The same pattern was gradually extended to the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province. The strange statements coming from the ANP leadership must be seen in this context.

This is strange because the ANP is clearly speaking with two tongues. The ANP is a signatory of the Peshawar Declaration, signed in February 2010, which categorically supports the drone strikes in FATA and holds the Pakistani military establishment responsible for terrorism in Afghanistan and Pakistan, especially in FATA. Moreover, due to its ethnic, tribal and political affiliations with people in FATA, the ANP knows very well that the drone strikes are precisely killing the terrorists, and the people in the drone-hit areas welcome them. Privately, the ANP leaders support the drone attacks. They hold the Pakistani generals responsible for terrorism and violence in FATA and Afghanistan. They want the terror centres in FATA, under the auspices of the ISI, to be destroyed and they do not mind if the US or NATO forces do so since the Pakistani generals do not seem to be interested in giving up their jihadi adventures from the soil of FATA.

Should the ANP be forgiven for speaking with two tongues under duress? It is not the first time the ANP has succumbed to such pressures. The ANP fell on its knees during the signing of the Swat peace deal with the terrorists. ANP circles have anonymously claimed that suicide bombers were sent to the top leaders to force them to sign the peace deal. If they refused, they would have been killed on the spot and so they had to sign the deal even if they were not prepared for it.

Moreover, under pressure from the military establishment, the ANP government has stopped supporting the anti-Taliban lashkars all over Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, lashkars that the provincial government initially supported with enthusiasm. The lashkar leaders accuse the ANP of abandoning them. “They (the ANP government) have ditched us in the middle of an ocean,” said one leader of the Adezai anti-Taliban lashkar in an interview with me.

The saddest part is that the ANP compliance under duress is obliterating the precious difference between the nationalist ANP and pro-Taliban religious parties like the Jamaat-e-Islami (JI). For example, the ANP stands for provincial autonomy. So does the JI. The ANP demands more share in the electricity royalty for Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. So does the JI. The only difference is that the JI supports the ISI-sponsored jihad in Afghanistan and denounces all international efforts to cleanse Afghanistan of jihadi gangs, whereas the ANP stands for the opposite. Through these recent statements against the drone attacks, the ANP appears just like the JI. This is certainly a success of the ISI’s agenda to present all Pakhtuns to the wider world as pro-Taliban, pro-jihad and religious extremists, who are against the international community’s efforts against jihad in FATA and Afghanistan. Can the anti-Taliban Pakhtun afford an ‘Islamic’ ANP even if it is under duress?

The anti-Taliban Pakhtun need an ANP that is a firm embodiment of anti-Taliban, anti-religious extremism and one that is pro-civilisation. By and large, the ANP has been so and, no doubt, the party has greatly sacrificed through the blood of its elected leaders, workers and their close relatives. The challenge at hand, however, is colossal and demands more blood from the ANP. The ANP must now stand up to the occasion, come what may.

It is expected of the ANP leaders to resist this intimidation and blackmail. Of course, this means more assassinations among the leading ANP families and even the killing of top party leaders. The top party leaders must be ready for such an eventuality. If they are not, they should step aside and leave the party leadership to those among the ANP who might be willing to firmly resist all intimidation and blackmail even at the cost of personal sacrifices. These recent statements and the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Assembly resolution show that the current ANP leadership is either too soft or compromised to lead the anti-Taliban Pakhtun.

The writer is a PhD Research Fellow with the University of Oslo and currently writing a book, Taliban and Anti-Taliban




Originally posted by Hamza Malik on Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Pervez Musharraf is the former military ruler of Pakistan. He wasn’t a politician, he was a general. By his own admission in his autobiography, he wasn’t exactly a servile officer. But then, that’s the kind of character you want in a man who has to get down and do the dirty business of taking tough decisions. Day after day, I seem to be moving towards an increasingly pro Musharraf stance because he charms better than Nawaz Sharif, is more articulate when need be than Benazir Bhutto, and is utterly brutal and savage when time calls for it.

This is the reason why politicians have started shuddering at the thought of Musharraf coming back to Pakistan. Sure the people at the bottom of the social spectrum will hate him and will spit every time his name is mentioned because they have always been downtrodden and Musharraf did not help them just like all the other rulers. But the urban middle class, the major stakeholders in the country’s affairs were affected by his policies. This is the reason why Musharraf continues to draw support everyday across the whole spectrum of politically inclined sages from the Pakistan’s middle class.

He represents change, and perhaps is the only viable alternative available to the majority against the current ruling elite both at the center and at the provincial level. Pervez Musharraf does not hide behind a façade of fake morality or words. Just listen to how he has responded to Talal Bugti. I can bet for sure that had it been Zardari or Nawaz Sharif, they would’ve chickened out and let their henchmen do the talking and then made a deal with Bugti himself. But I suppose that is why they’re politicians.

I also read up on Musharraf’s party’s manifesto. His party’s manifesto, quite unlike other parties’ manifestos states the problems, and then states their solutions. There is no use of fancy, flashy words and there are no fake promises. Unlike the PPP, Musharraf’s party actually explains how they will get “Rotti, Kapra aur Makaan.”

But then, there are certain aspects of Musharraf’s behavior and past that simply cannot be ignored. He subverted the constitution when it suited him, and he let 42 people die in Karachi because of his ego. He made the judiciary a laughing stock and he paralyzed the media when it went against him. So how do you trust such a man to do the right thing? The answer is you don’t. Rather, you expect him to come up with brilliant points to counter your arguments. Musharraf does that with blinding ferocity, and pinpoint precision.

He is also a shrewd man and that is why he has been such a sensational hit with all the urban Pakistanis. His image comes across as cool, hip and modern whereas the the PML – N and the PPP come across as lethargic, corrupt and arrogant idiots. Choosing between the two sides in this political enigma is fairly easy. To quote an old man:

It’s not about the facts; it’s about what you can prove. It’s not about your personality; it’s about your image perception.
On those counts Musharraf fares admirably. So does this mean I drop my demand for him to be tried in court for treason? Well, no. But I do expect him to go inside the court, and rip it to pieces with his cool arguments and his awesome statements.

This is the reason why we need democracy to flourish, because it gives a person like Musharraf (who appears to genuinely care about the crises engulfing Pakistan) a fighting chance to make a difference. After all, we have been decrying that the 335,000 plus fan following he’s got on Facebook is hogwash. But if these 335,000 urban, educated, middle class, people go out to vote for Musharraf’s party in the elections, then these hogwash Facebook fans will have changed the course of Pakistan’s history.



{October 27, 2010}   مذہبی انتہا پسندی

By : Syed Kashif Ali

 



et cetera
%d bloggers like this: