Bismillah ar Rahman ar Rahim REALPakNationalists

August 5, 2010

Where is the outrage now?

Filed under: Media — Tags: , , , , , , — admin @ 8:35 am

Where is the Ghairat Brigade? Where are the nationalists? Where are the defenders of Pakistan’s honour when our very President is being insulted by the foreign media? Why they remain silent when the representative of the nation is being tarred by foreigners?

My blood began to boil today when I read in The News that foreign media is attacking our president. Of course, these hypocrites in the media are actually SUPPORTING ATTACKS ON PAKISTAN because they are not nationalists, they are not patriots – NO. They are hypocrites one and all.

وَإِذَا رَأَيْتَهُمْ تُعْجِبُكَ أَجْسَامُهُمْ وَإِنْ يَقُولُوا تَسْمَعْ لِقَوْلِهِمْ كَأَنَّهُمْ خُشُبٌ مُسَنَّدَةٌ يَحْسَبُونَ كُلَّ صَيْحَةٍ عَلَيْهِمْ هُمُ الْعَدُوُّ فَاحْذَرْهُمْ قَاتَلَهُمُ اللَّهُ أَنَّى يُؤْفَكُونَ

You do not have to be a supporter of Zardari, but a true patriot is a SUPPORTER OF PAKISTAN! And does not allow insults to our leaders by foreign medias.

Where is Shireen Mazari now? Where is Ahmed Quriashi? Where is the pride now? Where is the outrage now? It is silence from these hypocrites only.

REAL PAKISTANI NATIONALISTS WILL NOT REMAIN SILENT AS OUR PRESIDENT IS INSULTED BY FOREIGN MEDIA!!!

July 23, 2010

Ahmed Quraishi Calls Military "Humiliating" and "Incapable"

Filed under: Media,Taliban — Tags: , , — admin @ 9:15 am

It is no secret that Ahmed Quraishi hates America, but now he has started to insult the military too. His latest article on his web site is nothing but a long criticism of the military, calling it incompetent and weak. Why is Ahmed Quraishi trying to undermine the military at a time that we are under attack by jihadis and feeling tension from India?

Supposedly a complaint about trade deal, the real target of Ahmed’s slanderous article is the military. After criticising the deal by suggesting that it is against Pak interests, Ahmed Quraishi says “What’s more likely is that the Pakistani military was consulted before granting this concession to US, Afghanistan and, indirectly, India.” Also he says that the number of US military personnel in Pakistan “would not be possible without a nod from the Pakistani military”.

So now Ahmed Quraishi is saying that government and military both are working against Pak interest? What exactly does he think is Pakistan’s interest? Talibans?

Ahmed Quraishi goes on to say that “the Pakistani military is on board” with “humiliating concessions” and “self-defeating compromises”. He accuses the Pakistan military of being “incapable”.

This is the ‘super-patriot’ Ahmed Quraishi who is throwing these terrible insults at our own military? Or is it the ‘media Taliban’ Ahmed Quraishi. I think it is obvious which.

March 12, 2010

Did Army Snub Ahmed Quraishi, Shareen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood?

Filed under: Media — Tags: , , , , , , , — admin @ 10:31 am

Not invited

A few weeks ago, Army Chief Gen. Kiyani invited editors and columnists to a press briefing. Interestingly, Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood were not invited. Was this an intentional snub by the military brass to send a clear signal that these people do not speak for the military? Or was it just that these journalists are so irrelevant that the Army did not think to invite them?

Usually, if a reporter is truly close to the establishment, they are not only invited, they are given special access like a closed door briefing before the official briefing so that they can get background statements from the officials. These four not only got no invitation to a closed door briefing, they were not even invited to the regular press briefing!

Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood are well known for claiming to be unofficial experts on the Pakistani establishment – especially the military. They are always saying that they have spoken to high up sources, even when what they say turns out to be wrong. But it seems from this latest snub that they are not as connected as they claim to be.

Ahmed Quraishi and Shireen Mazari in particular tend to represent ‘old think’ on security issues. They support a military coup and for the military to cut iself off from allied powers and are opposed to the present democracy and the way that Gen. Kiyani is working with the government.

While each of them probably has some contacts from the military, it could be that their contacts may not be current military leaders. Also, it could be that their sources are actually retired military or ex-military who supported the Musharraf and Zia dictatorships and are filling their heads with false information rather than accurate information in attempt to disrupt the actual policies of the current military establishment.

If this is the case, it makes sense for them not to receive invitations to press briefings by the military brass. The military leadership would recognize them as working for elements that are opposing the actual plans and policies of Gen. Kiyani and his staff so they would refuse them any invitations.

None of these media personalities will reveal who their sources are, so we do not know if this is the case. It could be that sometimes their sources do not exist at all, but are simply invented in order to give their articles and talk shows some air of authority that is missing. But it seems very apparent that if they cannot even get an invitation to a public press briefing, they probably do not have sources that are very high up.

Was this a calculated snub? Is it because Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood do not represent the Army? Are Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood reflecting an old mindset from the past that the present establishment wants to distance itself from? Or does the military brass think that Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood are just too irrelevant to bother inviting them?

Whatever the answers are, one thing is made clear by the snub – Ahmed Quraishi, Shireen Mazari, Shaheen Sehbai, and Shahid Masood obviously do not speak for the military.

January 25, 2010

Conspiracy theorist Ahmed Quraishi resurfaces with new hypocrisy

Master Conspiracy theorist Ahmed Quraishi is back – one had not heard from him in a few months making one wonder if he had changed his principal occupation. After all, he has tried in the past to be an employee of Voice of America (VOA) and has also been a member of the American Political Consultants Association –both facts reported with full references by www.pakistanmediawatch.com

In his latest piece Ahmed Quraishi once again attempts to pit Pakistan against the United States, intentionally or inadvertently benefiting Pakistan’s real nemesis – India. He does so by bundling together unconnected stuff into an emotional argument without any citation of sources or proper facts.

Quraishi claims for the umpteenth time that there is a huge American conspiracy against Pakistan. Unlike what Quraishi and others like him are attempting to spin US Defense Secretary Robert Gates never “admitted” in any interview that Blackwater was operating in Pakistan. In reply to a question on whether private US security contractors were working in Pakistan all that Secretary Gates said was that security contractors were indeed operating in Pakistan and the US government would ensure that they abide by Pakistan’s laws.

What Ahmed Quraishi fails to mention is that these contractors – especially DynCorp – have been in Pakistan since Musharraf’s time. Musharraf, in case anyone forgets, was the object of admiration of people like Ahmed Quraishi who have been yearning for a military takeover of the kind that brought Musharraf to power in 1999.

As an all powerful, patriotism defining general, Musharraf is a ‘favorite’ of anti-democrats like Ahmed Quraishi and so Quraishi forgives or ignores all of Musharraf’s actions, focusing exclusively in creating hatred against elected Pakistani leaders and the United States. During Musharraf’s regime Ahmed Quraishi used to accuse everyone – lawyers, media, civil society – of being American agents while clarifying that Musharraf was pursuing an ‘independent foreign policy.’ What he – and others like him – never discussed then was that DynCorp International, a United States-based private military contractor (PMC) and aircraft maintenance company, was allowed by the Musharraf government to enter and work in Pakistan.

What the current civilian government is doing by allowing DynCorp to stay in Pakistan is only a continuation of international agreements undertaken under Musharraf. It is diffuclt to understand how even after allowing DynCorp to operate in Pakistan Musharraf followed an ‘independent foreign policy’ in Ahmed Quraishi’s eyes but by allowing DynCorp to stay the civilian government is kowtowing to Americans?

Mr Quraishi must explain this inherent contradiction in his argument – that is if there is any argument at all. Or is his real problem with elected, civilian rule whereas a dictatorship ruling with the help of secret services is the ideal of the anti-democrats.

Most of Quraishi’s article is a rant against the American media and think tank world for their supposedly anti-Pakistan views and lack of understanding of Pakistan’s security concerns. However, both the American media and the policy world are an assorted group and you find diverse views on every topic, not just US-Pakistan relations. There are pro-Pakistan voices in the U.S. too, which Pakistanis should cultivate rather than drive all Americans away and create more enemies for our country.

Also if Ahmed Quraishi can talk about Pakistan’s security and foreign interests from ‘a Pakistani angle’ why should the American media not discuss US foreign policy issues from an American angle? Why deny to others what you arrogate to yourself?

As always while attacking the American media and think tank world Ahmed Quraishi fails to mention that he had applied for a job with Voice of America and that he is a member of the American Association of Political Consultants.

The ‘senior Pakistani journalist’ Talat Hussain whom Ahmed Quraishi cites as someone ‘who is in the know of things’ is the same person who during Secretary Clinton’s visit to Pakistan in October 2009 made a “$640 million mistake” by wrongly citing how much aid U.S. gives to Kyrgyzstan. Also, Talat Hussain once worked for CNN and Time Magazine while his brother Riffat Hussain has worked in US think tanks but that does not disqualify them from being super-patriots while Talat Hussain (as quoted by Ahmed Quraishi) pokes fun at all those Pakistani journalists and civil society leaders who oppose the Taliban and seek good relations with the U.S.

What hypocrisy !!!

November 16, 2009

Quraishi's Coup Would Destroy Pakistan

In my recent post, Quraishi’s Coup: Who is he really working for?, I noted that the recent political unrest in Honduras clearly demonstrates that the Obama regime in the US will not allow a coup in Pakistan without serious consequences. Among these consequences, quite clearly, would be the cutting off of military supplies necessary for the defense of Pakistan.

On his blog this past Saturday, Ibrahim Sajid Malick further corroborates my analysis by noting that his own sources have confirmed that supporting a coup in Pakistan will mean the devastation of Pakistan’s ability to defend itself.

United States Central Command chief Gen David Petraeus and Chairman Senate Foreign Affairs committee Senator John Kerry on Monday October 19th held separate meetings with the Pakistan Chief of Army Staff Gen Ashraf Kayani and the outcome of those meetings were an immediate yanking of the anti-KLB campaign from Pakistani private TV channels. When Central Command chief Gen David Petraeus went to the GHQ he categorically told Gen Kayani to halt anti-KLB campaign. “Gen. Kayani was told in absolutely clear terms that the Obama administration will not tolerate another Honduras,” said a source very close to this conversation.

It is interesting that three of my sources mentioned Honduras while talking about the possible outcome of anti-KLB campaign in Pakistan.

On June 28th Honduran soldiers roused democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya from his bed at gunpoint and flew him to Costa Rica. The coup d’etat was the first in Central America in over a quarter century. The coup, led by the Honduran Gen. Romeo Vasquez, was condemned by the United States, the European Union, the United Nations, the Organization of American States and all of Honduras’ immediate national neighbors.

The Obama administration initially did not legally classify Zelaya’s ouster as a coup, which would automatically trigger a suspension of aid. However the administration subsequently suspended military cooperation with the country. Honduran controversy has been extremely embarrassing for the Obama administration which had come to power on the rhetoric that America should seize supporting tyrants and military dictators.

In Pakistan, Zardari administration was portrayed by the media as too deferential to the United States. Pakistani journalists who unconditionally support their Army started the campaign against KLB and coalesced anti-Western politicians, and Muslim fundamentalists — implausibly claiming that Pakistan’s sovereignty was undermined and the country could end up as a U.S. neo-colony. Some of it is untrue!

Mr. Malick’s sources go on to make my point exactly:

Gen. Kayani was assured that his military will get monies and equipment that he has asked for but if he pulled a fast one, the Obama administration would at once severe its ties with Pakistan army.

I kindly ask, once again, who it is that would benefit from such an outcome? Certainly not the US, who relies on Pakistan to help in the fight against Taliban. Certainly not Pakistan, who relies on the US to provide military funding, supplies, and training. Is there any other nation that would benefit from a Pakistan coup other than India? And by calling for such a coup, is Ahmed Quraishi acting as an Indian agent?

Who Does Ahmed Quraishi Work For?

Who Does Ahmed Quraishi Work For?

November 13, 2009

Quraishi's Coup: Who Is He Really Working For?

Ahmed Quriashi has graduated from conspiracy propagandist to seditionist, it seems. On his Facebook page, Quraishi has been posting semi-coherent rants calling for the military to overthrow the Pakistani government with force:

The American house of cards in Pakistan – Zardari, NRO, Malik-Haqqani and the famous Mush-BB deal – are all coming down. I urge Gen. Tariq Majeed and Gen. Kayani to ditch that deal and save the country from this US- and UK-imposed leadership. Not that the replacement is any better. But we’ll deal with that later. Get rid of CIA and MI6 agents in Islamabad first.

Ahmed Quraishi calls for coup in Pakistan

Ahmed Quraishi calls for coup in Pakistan

This is an explicit call for the violent overthrow of the Pakistani government, and an outright act of sedition by a member of the media. In fact, Mr. Media Taliban has taken this call for return to military dictatorship to the airwaves and tried, in a very clever way, to say that his plan is for the military to overthrow the democratically elected civilian government and replace it with…a civilian government. Presumably, this new government of Quraishi’s would be hand-picked by him.

In the course of his unhinged ranting, Media Taliban Ahmed Quraishi goes so far as to call Pakistan “a failure” and to suggest that we throw out the Constitution! Ahmed Quraishi cynically calls himself a “nationalist,” but he can never call himself a PATRIOT. No REAL Pakistani Patriot and Nationalist would so insult the legacy of Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah!

“Pakistan’s parliamentary system is a failure for the past 60 years…”

Ahmed Quraishi insults Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah

Ahmed Quraishi insults Quaid-i-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah

Let’s take a close look at Quraishi’s call for a coup d’etat. This is a ridiculous and dangerous proposition from the start.

One, after suffering under military dictatorship for so long, does Quraishi really believe that the military would overthrow the government just to walk away from power? Of course, Ahmed Quraishi, the man who has never met a dictator he didn’t like, would probably be more than happy to another Musharraf back in power.

Ahmed Quraishi receiving an award from Gen. Pervez Musharraf

Ahmed Quraishi receiving an award from Gen. Pervez Musharraf

Two, let’s put aside for a moment the fantasy world in which Ahmed Quraishi lives and examine this idea in the real world. What would happen to Pakistan if the military overthrew the democratically elected government? For a hint, we can look at the recent situation in Honduras. Following the coup d’etat there, Honduras became a global pariah, completely isolated from the world and under a state of emergency and riots. Do we really think things would be better in Pakistan?

Three, building off points One and Two, we can clearly see that this proposal of Mr. Quraishi is a trap for the military. As we clearly demonstrated in our post about Quraishi’s colleague Shireen Mazari’s suggestion that the military cut ties with the Americans, isolating the military will cripple Pakistan’s ability to defend itself. There is no question about this. For an example, we can again look at the recent coup in Honduras. Following the military’s overthrow of the democratically elected government, the US suspended military aid to Honduras.

The United States said on Wednesday it had suspended $16.5 million in military aid to Honduras following last month’s coup, and ousted President Manuel Zelaya demanded his rivals hand power back to him in 24 hours.

For all his anti-American rhetoric, one question keeps coming to mind. Who does Ahmed Quraishi work for?

Ahmed Quraishi appears as a member of the American Association of Political Consultants. He is an expert propagandist, of that there is no doubt. So the question remains, who is Quraishi’s American client? Who is he really working for?

Ahmed Quraishi's member profile for the American Association of Political Consultants

Ahmed Quraishi's member profile for the American Association of Political Consultants

Certainly Quraishi is not working for the Americans. He is clearly trying to force a wedge between the American and and Pakistani military. So then who is supporting him and giving him his talking points? To discover the answer, we must look at what other clients could be registered in America. Perhaps the answer is that powerful and crafty lobby in the US – India?

It’s time for Ahmed Quraishi to come clean about who his real masters are. He should open up his financial records for review by an independent investigation. Jamaati Quraishi has every right to his point of view, but the people also have every right to know who is representing when makes seditious claims for a coup d’etat!

Ahmed Quraishi Media Taliban

Ahmed Quraishi Media Taliban

November 3, 2009

If ignorance is bliss, Sumayya Chawla is the happiest woman on the planet.

Another scorcher from Sana! If you’re not reading Sana’s blog, please you must add it to your list!

If ignorance is bliss, Sumayya Chawla is the happiest woman on the planet.

In her fantastically ridiculous piece, Is Pakistani Media Awake?, she is unflinchingly absurd, demonstrating to us all she has somehow escaped any character trait remotely resembling reasonableness.

It would be wrong to deride a work without citing the offensive statements, so here, dear Reader, is a small sampling of her rock-filled dish:

The ‘tough love’ response of Mrs Clinton to this was something along the lines of  ‘ well I am sorry you feel that way but it wasn’t our intention, you don’t have to take the money you know, if you don’t want to’. What exactly is going on here? Why isn’t anyone telling madam secretary that your country is killing innocent Pakistanis, killing babies rather, as she was so keen on pointing out in her address to university students in Lahore. Why didn’t any of our esteemed journalists ask her why the US is busy killing and bombing Pakistanis if we are such great friends and allies? Why wasn’t it politely suggested to her that she perhaps should not have come to Pakistan as she wasn’t very welcome here. Why don’t we see a revolt in the Pakistani media against the freak show that was Clinton’s visit to Pakistan? Why didn’t the big shot media anchors boycott the interview with Hillary Clinton while more than a 100 Pakistanis were being blown up in Peshawar and hundreds more were fighting for their lives? If Mr. Zardari and his government are not human enough to feel any empathy for his fellow Pakistanis who suffered terribly in this outrageous attack, where was the Pakistani media, why didn’t they refuse to cover her visit due to a national tragedy?  If they are such torchbearers of truth, then how dare they sat in their suits and ties and conducted an interview that amounted to nothing in terms of expressing the real sentiments of the majority of the Pakistani public? American Govt. has taken off its gloves and is now openly hostile to the Pakistani state and people, so why in God’s name are we still walking on eggshells.

As a lit major, the grammatical errors were enough to knock me down. However, I shall put forth a Herculean effort to ignore them all because we’re dealing with the bigger issue of her thought process mirroring that of a two-year old.

Within her bewildering rhetorical questions, I see her tripping over her own points.

I shall answer with my very own attempt at the Socratic method:

Is there anything wrong with a nation granting aid to another nation, especially one with which its aims are so closely aligned? Exactly what was wrong with Secretary Clinton pointing out Pakistan was under no obligation to take the aid? And exactly why are you viciously against the aid going to schools, police officers, health clinics, etc? Did you want to match the funds of Kerry-Lugar and supply the country with assistance? (That would be awfully generous of you!) Are you as upset with other international aid groups and private donors who donate to charitable causes within Pakistan? If not, I highly recommend you buy a dictionary and look up the word “consistency,” it’s a great word, one of my favorites. Ms. Chawla, do you have sympathy for any of the people killed by extremists or is your screeching reserved specifically for all things related to drones? Can you so easily ignore the suicide bombings and drive-by assassinations of brigadiers? If so, the Pakistani public envies you a good deal. Exactly why should the media have boycotted the interview with Secretary Clinton? How is closing our eyes and covering our ears going to solve problems? (See, this is where I see a vast wilderness of immaturity where your rationality should be, Miss Chawla.) Any notion of a “biased-in-favor-of-President-Zardari” media culture in Pakistan can be immediately dismissed, for even the President’s most outspoken detractors admit the media is staunchly anti-Zardari. In this way, do you realize you have outdone the Ahmed Quraishis of Pakistan? I advise you to be careful though, Mr. Quraishi tries his best to outdo everyone else in his nonsensical vitriol, he may not appreciate playing second fiddle to you. Also, please respect the office of the President and address him as such…he was voted in democratically, and if you must kick and scream, take that up with the public that voted overwhelmingly for the PPP. You wrote “American Govt. has taken off its gloves and is now openly hostile to the Pakistani state and people.” Did you consciously disregard the Secretary’s statements of friendship? I shall include one: “I am well aware that there is a trust deficit. My message is that’s not the way it should be. We cannot let a minority of people in both countries determine our relationship.” Miss Chawla, it appears you do a wonderful job on inducing amnesia and forget all the hard work both Americans and Pakistanis have done, currently do, and will continue doing to foster better relations.

You ask if the media is awake…I have to answer that no, the media — and you! — are fast asleep at the wheel.

Being ignorant is not so much a shame, as being unwilling to learn. If you cannot or are not willing to learn, Miss Chawla, then the knowledgeable and well-versed in nuance among us have a task: to continuously point out the flaws in arguments like yours and offer a vision of a world not driven by hate or fear-mongering.

October 22, 2009

Are Pakistan’s Anti-US Hawks Indian Trojan Horses?

Are Pakistan’s anti-American hawks – those constantly attacking the Americans and standing against close ties between Pakistan and the United States – Indian Trojan Horses? After all, at a time when India’s close relations with Washington are bringing it billions of dollars in investment and trade, sophisticated defence equipment and a civil nuclear deal, Pakistan’s anti-American turn can only benefit India.

The term “Trojan Horse” dates back to the Greek civilization and basically means “any trick that causes a target to invite a foe into a securely protected bastion or place.” We now know that even Baitullah Mehsud was an Indian agent as he received lots of funds from the Indian intelligence agencies. But for years Pakistan’s Jihadis and their media advocates built Mehsud up as an anti-American hero.

Indian support for Mehsud is no surprise. As we proved in the first part of this series, only India stands to gain from the destabilization of Pakistan’s government and from worsening Us-Pakistan relations. The question for this part of the series, then, is who are the Pakistani anti-US hawks that are intentionally or inadvertently acting as Indian Trojan Horses?

A daarhi does not a patriot make.

The meddling by Indian intelligence service RAW in Afghanistan and support for the destabilizing religious militants there is also no secret. Of course they do not want to see a strong and independent Islamic republic in Afghanistan that has normal relations with Pakistan, and they know the most effective way of ensuring that Afghanistan is unstable – and by that effect, sapping Pakistan’s resources – is to support militants.

Likewise, it has been well documented that Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan and Baitullah Mehsud received substantial funding and support from RAW. And this should come as no surprise, really – after all, should Mehsudis prevail, it will be India that gains the most.

This use of religion to confuse and manipulate the ummah is a most diabolical act, but there are just as many civilian Trojan Horses also. Let us take a look at all those people who in the last one year have been attacking the attempts by the elected Zardari government to build better ties with United States.

Hypernationalists, Anti-Americanism, and India’s Prospering

Hypernationalists are often specifically targeted by intelligence agents who manipulate their passionate loyalties. We must not forget that, despite his support for Musharraf, Ahmed Quraishi’s anti-American rants created problems between the Americans and the Musharraf administration. Could it be that he is manipulated by India as what in intelligence parlance is known as “an unwitting agent?”

An inadvertent agent is often more valuable to intelligence agencies than intentional ones because they can easily pass lie detection devices and do not give themselves away so easily. After all, if Ahmed Quraishi believes he is being a nationalist, he will be more believable.

Let us also look at people like Hamid Gul and Shahid Masood. Again these people are well known anti-Indians, but their pitch has always been more anti-American. Why does Shahid Masood live in Dubai? Whom does he meet in Dubai? There are lots of Indians in Dubai and do any of them finance or influence him? Should that not be the subject of some analysis or concern in Islamabad?

Trojan Horses in Parliament?

Jamaat-e-Islami’s founder Maulana Maududi was opposed to the creation of Pakistan from the beginning and since independence the JI’s chief goal has been to grab power in the name of Islam. The overall effect of the Jamaat-e-Islami’s policies –whether in erstwhile East Pakistan or in Pakistan today—has been to weaken the Pakistani state? The Jamaatis constantly divide Pakistanis along religious lines. They make us think of each other as Kafirs or bad Muslims or unpatriotic. There is no difficulty visualizing that RAW is creating Trojan Horses from Jamaatis with the objective of not letting Pakistan live in peace.

If we turn to the Pakistan Muslim League (Q) are there any persons there who could be Trojan Horses? During Musharraf’s era they wanted to normalize relations with India and were content with being US surrogates. Both Tariq Azeem and Khurshid Kasuri who these days are screaming at the top of their lungs about the Kerry-Lugar bill were championing the opening of ties with India.

Pakistan Muslim League (N) is no better. Its hostility to the Pakistan army resulted in the 1999 coup d’etat and the party has no lost no opportunity to control the army or to put down the army top brass. While in power PML (N) initiated the bus diplomacy with India and even invited Indian Prime Minister Vajpayee to Pakistan against the wishes of the military. It maintained good relations with the United States. But out of power it is happy to push the anti-India, anti-US button as if destablising Pakistan is its real objective.

So what have these Trojan Horses tried to do?

One, engineer a clash between the civilian government and the military to make Pakistan unstable and weak.

Two, tried to also create a clash between US and Pakistan to ensure that India is not whipped by the superpower and US interests in America continue to expand while Pakistan’s ability to lobby the US continue to weaken.

Three, launched an attack campaign to discredit the reputation of those in the government who are well liked by Americans like President Zardari, Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi and Ambassador Husain Haqqani and others to make Pakistan appear weak and childish in front of the world. If the hawks are the only Pakistani faces for Americans, the US will continue to turn against Pakistan thereby strengthening the Indo-US relationship.

Four, it is very interesting that this debate on Kerry-Lugar is the first debate in Pakistan where there is no mention of India, only anti-Americanism. Since when have we heard so little about the RAW involvement in such an issue?

Trojan Horses weaken Pakistan

Pakistan has been a nuclear power for over 20 years and yet doesn’t seem to have obtained the security it sought. Why? This is because the Indian lobby and RAW has worked nonstop to interfere with our relations with other world powers. It was India that helped create a clash between Nawaz Sharif and the United States over the nuclear weapons program while making sure that India obtained a nuclear deal as well as supply of nuclear fuel. Today, this interference with Pakistan’s security continues through the manipulation of Kerry-Lugar debate by these Indian Trojan Horses.

REAL Pak Nationalists

Pakistanis know that in order to stand up to the Indian threat they need support – military and economic – from the Americans and need American understanding to make sure India does not throw its weight around in South Asia. Causing a clash between Pakistan and its oldest ally, United States, cannot be the work of true Pakistani nationalists. It has to be the work of Indian Trojan Horses who claim to be acting in Pakistan’s interest while actually undermining it.

October 19, 2009

How ironic is ironic?

Filed under: Uncategorized — Tags: , , , , — admin @ 11:37 am

Ahmed Quraishi’s article If fired, Haqqani threatens to unveil ‘reams’ of Pakistan’s secrets is a prime example of how this journalist is able to twist and manipulate facts in order to provoke hate and anger amongst the Pakistani community.  As the title of Quraishi’s article states, it seems that if Ambassador Haqqani were to be removed from his post, he would threaten to disclose Pakistan’s secrets.  Quraishi then tries to substantiate his argument by quoting the prestigious Foreign Policy magazine.

The article in the Foreign Policy magazine that Quraishi refers to, does not at all, state that Ambassador Haqqani will be opening up a Pandora’s Box.  It is highly unfortunate that Quraishi has yet again, through his writings, picked out sentences in order to sling mud on those he despises.  Ironically, in the same article Josh Rogin articulates

“Insiders point out that the aid conditions, which require the U.S. government to report on the Pakistani military’s efforts to combat terrorist groups in their midst, were available for all to see well in advance.  Moreover, they say, similar conditions were included in U.S. aid packages dating back to 2001, when President George W. Bush and President Pervez Musharraf were the respective leaders.  Ironically, it is Musharraf’s allies, now in the opposition, who are now harping on such conditions.”

It is rather “ironic” that Ahmed Quraishi who is an avid supporter of General Musharraf suddenly has a change of heart – from previously supporting such conditions – and is now cursing the very essence of the Kerry-Lugar Bill.  Why did Quraishi refuse to include the above excerpt in his article where he has written against the efforts of Ambassador Haqqani?

The sentence in Rogin’s article that Quraishi centered his editorial on is as follows

“sources also say that Haqqani has reams of documents that could embarrass the forces aligned against him and sacking him could open up a Pandora’s box of controversy that the government would not
appreciate, which he might do if forced to defend himself after being fired his article”

Firstly, any person holding an official government position has the ability to disclose state secrets.  It is rather obvious that over time, Ambassadors come across and read classified documents that may be harmful for the state, if shared with the public.  And secondly, to assume that Ambassador Haqqani would comprise Pakistan’s sovereignty by revealing “reams of documents” is a mere speculation that does not carry any weight.

Furthermore, Quraishi chose to not add a statement by the same source who stated, “most people don’t have the courage to tell the Pakistani people we need the United States”.  This clearly explains that strengthening Pak-US ties is essential not the opposite.  It is also regrettable that Quraishi failed to disclose that Rogin also articulated in his piece “his (Haqqani) U.S. ties are exactly what makes him an effective representative for Islamabad”.

Quraishi in his article also quotes a former US military officer who states “US officials do not know, that the problem is not the so-called ‘anti-American forces’ in Pakistan but the offensive language in the bill”.  If this is the case then Ahmed Quraishi, you as a journalist have failed to do your job correctly by not being able to clearly identify the problems associated with the Kerry-Lugar Bill.

By coming out in public and stating that the US is not aware of the situation in Pakistan in regards to the Kerry-Lugar Bill, Quraishi is only making a fool of himself.  The Foreign Minister of Pakistan is currently in Washington explaining the situation to none other than the Vice President of the United States and key members of the US Senate.  General Kayani has explained his reservations over the Kerry-Lugar Bill to the top US military commander Admiral Mike Mullen.  “US Ambassador to Pakistan Anne W Patterson and the US military leadership are playing important roles in sensitizing President Obama to the controversial clauses of the proposed US aid bill that has triggered a crisis-like situation in Pakistan”.  And yet Quraishi has the audacity to state that the US is not fully aware of the criticism and this is primarily due to Ambassador Haqqani misinforming the United States.

The main argument against the implementation of the Kerry-Lugar Bill in Pakistan is that the Bill threatens our national sovereignty. Today, Senator Kerry stated that the US Congress would “offer a new explanation and clarification” for those criticizing the Bill.  I fail to understand how Quraishi has the ability to write “the problem is that American policymakers have been badly misinformed” when the sponsor of the Kerry-Lugar Bill is coming out and addressing the issues arising out of the Bill.

Quraishi’s article is proof of the kind of deplorable and controversial style of journalism he has become accustomed to.  He has mastered the art of twisting facts around so brilliantly that many of us have lost sight of the truth and facts.  This article is not an attempt to defame Quraishi but rather a request to stop spreading rumours which play with the hearts and minds of Pakistanis.  My country has had enough of conspiracy theorists and it is time we enjoy the greatness of truth and accountability Quaid-e-Azam envisioned for us.

The ‘Blackwater in Pakistan’ Furore: Who Benefits from Spreading the Lies?

A massive furore has been created over the supposed presence of Blackwater in Pakistan by the likes of Ahmed Quraishi and Shireen Mazari and websites like Pakistan Spectator, Pakistan Ka Khuda Hafiz, Pak Alert and articles like ‘American NGO Covers for Blackwater in Pakistan’ or ‘Expel Blackwater and US Marines from Pakistan.’

Who is funding these people? Why are they driving this paranoia? And above all who is benefiting by this?

If their real goal was ‘protecting’ Pakistan’s national interests and Pakistani citizens then they would admit the truth: There is no Blackwater presence in Pakistan.

It is time to look at the facts. The government of Pakistan has repeatedly said that there is no Blackwater presence in the country. If there had been, why and how would the government hide it? After all
there are other security companies in Pakistan some of which are wholly or partly owned by international companies. Former Pakistan army officer and respected media figure Ikram Sehgal has partnered his SMS Security Company with Wackenhut. The government does not deny Wackenhut’s presence in Pakistan nor do the Conspiracy theorists raise a huge fuss about it. In fact Shireen Mazari probably attends dinner parties along with Ikram Sehgal.

Another security company is called DynCorp International, a United States-based private military contractor (PMC) and aircraft maintenance company. DynCorp provided teams for the U.S. military in major theaters, such as Bolivia, Bosnia, Somalia, Angola, Haiti, Colombia, Kosovo and Kuwait. DynCorp also provided much of the security for Afghan interim president Hamid Karzai’s presidential guard and trains much of Afghanistan’s and Iraq’s fledgling police force

DynCorp was given permission to work in Pakistan by the Musharraf administration. At the time former CENTCOM Commander General Anthony Zinni was a Dyncorp official.

The people who are screaming about Blackwater today had no problems with DynCorp entering Pakistan. Why? Because at that time it was Musharraf who had allowed DynCorp into the country. And all these crazy nut jobs – whether Ahmed Quraishi or Shireen Mazari or any other of their co-conspirators – are Musharraf worshippers. Ahmed Quraishi proudly displays a photo of him receiving a medal from Musharraf on his website. And in a recent poll of Pak Alert Musharraf was the leading choice of ‘Who Should be the President of Pakistan?’ indicating the inclinations and tendencies of those attracted to the anti-democratic conspiracy theory semi-Jihadist pro-Taliban gang represented by this noise-makers.

Shireen Mazari had no problems with any of the critical national security decisions made by Musharraf – including the arrival in Pakistan of DynCorp, the establishment of the US Air Force facilities at Jacobabad and the secret handing over of hundreds of Pakistanis to the CIA, acknowledged by Musharraf in his own book. Not only did Mazari never complain about Musharraf’s actions beginning in 2001 it but she served as Director of Institute of Strategic Studies during Musharraf’s rule for eight years –the longest anyone has held that position.

So, the matter begs the question – Why is everyone talking about Blackwater today when none of these screaming and shouting whackos had a problem with DynCorp and others for so many years? The answer might lie not in politics or national security but economics.

Rumors about the entry of Blackwater or potential entry into Pakistan have been started so as to block attempts by any other US military contractor from entering Pakistan. The bad publicity, press and media will ensure that no new company would want to enter paving the way for continued benefits for the companies that are already in the market.

There is a need to spell out the truth: the Gilani-Zardari has not allowed any new company to come in and the government which allowed American military contractors to come in was the Musharraf regime.

Websites like Pak Alert and Pakistan Spectator have 3 key aims –

* Help the business interests of the US security companies already in Pakistan and to keep them out of the media

* Hurt the Pakistani army and intelligence services (because these institutions are siding with the constitutional civilian government and refusing to play politics that benefits the conspiracy theorists)

* And hurt the civilian government.

True Pakistani patriots and democrats who believe in reason and do not want the nation to be brought down by these conspiracy theorists should fight back against them.

Powered by WordPress