In the past few weeks there has been a buzz spreading around Pakistan’s digital world talking about the recent fame surrounding the TV show personality Zaid Hamid who conducts a show on TV One called Brasstacks. It should be mentioned that brasstacks is reportedly a paid-for show which has started airing barely a few months back and has developed a very strong following amongst the masses. Admittedly Zaid Hamid is quite eloquent in his show and is well versed in his explaining his innumerable concepts of ranging from economic terrorism by the Zionists to other such issues which are poised at him even Islamic issues
I too have been guilty of occasionally catching a glimpse of his show and did even carry his five part series on Economic Terrorism. All seemed well until a close associate contacted me via facebook sharing his concerns about Zaid Zaman Hamid and revealed his suspicious association with Yousuf Ali, a self proclaimed prophet from Lahore in the 1990’s. Zaid Zaman was purportedly the right hand man of Yousuf Ali and was fondly referred to as his Hazrat Ali. Zaid Zaman was instrumental in spreading the message of prophecy far across Pakistan, to develop a large cult like following in Lahore, Karachi and Islamabad mostly due to Zaid Zaman’s excellent communication skills.
Yousuf Ali had been preaching his divine revelation to his followers for quite many years when finally a handful defected and braved to testify against him in the Lahore High Court which ultimately gave Yousuf Ali, a death sentence on charges of Blasphemy. Yousuf Ali was then confined to Kot Lakhpath jail and in 2001 was shot dead by a fellow prisoner. Throughout the legal proceedings one witness after another testified to the fact that Zaid Zaman was a key figure in the promotion of Yousuf Ali’s Kazzab movement. I have been told that there even does exists an analog video of Zaid Zaman standing beside Yousuf Ali while he addressed his followers in Lahore. Somehow the fact that Zaid Zaman was a key figure in this movement is generally a foregone conclusion, as there are one too many eye witnesses and more importantly numerous had testified the fact which may even be present in the records of Lahore High Court, including Zaid Zaman’s testimony to the honorable judge, all records are securely preserved in the archives of Tahaffuz-e-Khatm-e-Nabuwwat in Karachi.
The Zaid Zaman Hamid storm actually started with the email from Naufil Shahrukh, a close friend whom I have known since 1990, the email at first in the form of a private message on Facebook but soon propagated online and published on Dictatorship Watch, verbatim
If you guys remember the Pakistan false prophet, Yousuf Ali, who was arrested and sentenced to death by the Lahore High Court and then murdered in Kot Lakhpat jail by a fellow prisoner – this guy Zaid Hamid was known as Zaid Zaman at that time and was the Khalifah of that Kazzab. Zaid is still leading that cult which belongs to the Firqah Batinyah of Sufism and they have a different aqeedah altogether which they only profess within their inner core. Many of my personal friends fell prey to his charisma in the 1990s, some of them reverted back to Hidayah and were instrumental in filing a case against Yusuf Ali which ultimately lead to his death sentence and the cult members dispersed for a few years.
The time line of events that he narrates in his letter are erringly accurate and when Naufil mentioned to me later pointing out the common friends who fell prey to this cult one does weigh in a sigh of relief to have been spared of the poison. The most logical reason as to why our neighborhood was penetrated to such an extent can be attributed to the fact that Zaid Hamid hailed from our locality. Off the friends who willingly embraced Yousuf Ali’s prophecy was Ryzwan Tayyab who very soon featured himself as a militant leader of the movement and after the collapse of this movement has retreated into a cocoon of severe depression irreparably damaging his family around him. Ryzwan was also involved in actually issuing death threats to the few journalists who were critically investigating Yousuf Ali back in those days.
The resurfacing of Zaid Hamid after 15 years of hibernation is interesting, he catapults himself in 2006 as a security threat analyst frequently publishing PDF based Pakistan threat reports for a subscription fee of Rs. 25,000 but within a span of a two years mustered up enough finances to launch a self sponsored TV show which started transmission in the early months of 2008, suspiciously timed around the fall of the Pervaiz Musharraf’s regime. The sudden shot to fame on TV is being compared to the launch of Dr. Shahid Masood’s End of Time series, which too was based on an eloquent anchor with one too many theories to present.
Off the numerous people stepping forth to expose Zaid Hamid the must read narration is of a two year email correspondence between Zaid Hamid and Abidullah Jan. It gives an insight onto Zaid Zaman when he first started sharing his BrassTacks Security reports, slowly moving into becoming a much sought after personality. What was interesting to read was when in the early months of 2007 Zaid Zaman approached Abidullah Jan struggling to stay afloat and requested Abid to help promote his security reports to a wider audience “I am in need of some clients to stay afloat as I am being squeezed by the government’s men for being too open and ruthless”. Zaid Hamid a few months later, after the 3rd Nov Martial Law appeared on a couple of pro-Musharraf TV shows on PTV with Ahmed Qureshi. Then suddenly out of the blue he is able to muster up enough finances to launch a self sponsored show on TV One. Watching a person flutter from being financially strapped and haunted by ‘government’s men’ to appearing on a pro-Musharraf show, then having catapulting into his own show seems all too suspiciously the work of some ‘hidden hands‘
If coincidence was anything to go by, I also noted that around this time emerged Zaid Hamid’s articles on a very staunch pro-Musharraf proponent Ahmed Quraishi who continues to wage an online battle with the Anti-Musharraf sect. When today I inquisitively launched a witch hunt for Zaid Hamid on the website I was surprised to see that quite a few of Zaid Hamid’s editorials were missing for example the January 29th article which should have led to the page has been removed from the website sometime after September 5th 2008 [as indicated by the Google Cache] and this is not the only article missing of the series, I wonder why the sudden cover up after September 5th by Ahmed Quraishi.
The only acknowledgment of any link with Yousuf Ali came from an email shared with me privately where Zaid Hamid Alhamdolillah, i have nothing to do with Yousuf or his beliefs or any other people like him.
Lest I be charged of taking this message out of context I share with you the entire section of the email so people may understand his response fully
In the last 30 years of my life, In search of truth and to study this world and its ideologies, Allah took me to many places and I met many people. I have traveled with Iranian revolution, have faught in Afghan Jihad, have gone out with Tablighi Jmaat, spent time with Jamaat Islami, have met hundreds of people including Dr. Israr, Ahmad deedat, Yusuf Islam, Anne Marrie schimmel and so on and so forth. Have also been with sufi groups in Pakistan, Turkey, Madina and Cyprus. I have also seen the western society, its civilization from a close range. Whatever I speak and do today, is the result of these experiences in life but with the mercy of Allah, He protected his humble slaves and keeps them in His infinite mercy and guidance. He showed me the world and people, but kept me away from their harm and made me benefit from any khair they had.
I also met and studied many objectionable people who were controversial but in the end Allah kept me away from them. It was all learning experiences. Alhamdolillah, i have nothing to do with Yusuf or his beliefs or any other people like him
Though he puts forth a convincing argument but it seems yet again that he refuses to acknowledge his association with Yousuf Ali to categorically say that he has “nothing to do with Yousuf or his beliefs” is this admittance of his association or denial of the fact?
Proponents of Zaid Hamid continue to plead his innocence even today as Pakistan First blog, which has been previously labeled to have a strong pro-Musharraf tilt, shared an article by Asif Shiraz who writes Zaid Hamid: As I knew him
I first met Zaid hamid at the youthful age of 17, when the emotions were high, and the search for truth pristine and innocent. A friend had told me about Zaid Hamid, and I was anxious to meet him: I was not disappointed. Our first meeting was a blast. I enjoyed Zaid sahib’s charismatic talk on many different issues, especially his passion about Islam and his knowledge on a diverse set of subjects. Although it’s been many years now, I still remember highlights of that conversation: Quotations from Iqbal, recollection of glorious events from the lives of the Sahaba, and discussion of the relevance of having truth faith “Yaqin”. Not once on that day, nor ever afterwards in these fifteen years, have I ever heard anything from Zaid Hamid which is incongruent to ideas present in mainstream religious teachings of Ahl-e-Sunnah wal-jamaat. No mention of any “cult ideology”, and no reference to anyone claiming “prophethood” whatsoever. He is a firm believer in Khatme-e-Nabuwat and the finality of Prophet Muhammad(sm). In fact, Zaid Hamid is the only person whom I have met, who lives in a rented home, but still spends a handsome chunk of his earnings every year to pay a visit to the blessed cities of Hijaz-e-Muqaddas. It is nothing other than Zaid Hamid’s love and devotion to the Prophet(sm) that he has visited Masjid-e-Nabwi more than 10 times. After the first initial meeting, I have been in touch with Zaid Hamid off and on for many years, until I moved to Chaklala Scheme III becoming his neighbor and an even closer friend.
Asif Shiraz does admit in his article that he is now a neighbor of Zaid Hamid but surprisingly fails to disclose that he is an employee of BrassTacks as proclaimed by him in this Facebook message (Screen capture) whilst a little investigation also sheds some light that Mr. Asif Shiraz incidentally happens to be the Administrative domain contact for Zaid Hamid’s website Brasstacks.biz (screen capture)
It is sadly Asif Shiraz’s attempt to stand up for his boss only goes to discredit Zaid Zaman. To analyze Zaid Hamid’s Brasstacks TV show one should read the two articles published in The News by Fasi Zaka September 18th The Pakistan Report and on 25th September published a follow up titled Hate Speech – II
My concern here remains is that Zaid Zaman is appearing on public TV and continues to eloquently preach his philosophy to the public at large, had if this individual remained as private entity, then we would have had no right to question his beliefs, but once he dons the public forum, then I feel it is the right of the people to know the facts. Generally as a free society we cannot stop him from sharing his opinion with the public at large but it is our right to question his logic and any underlying issues that may tarnish his analysis as he chooses to present to the public, and in the same pretext its important to then question his association with the self proclaimed prophet a notion strictly prohibited in the religion of Islam.
The mystery surrounding this controversy seemingly gets worse with every passing day, could it be a mere propaganda, could it be his attempt to cover up his past, or does he simply choose ignore and hopefully forget, but more importantly does he still believe in the prophecy, so many questions, all shall remain a mystery until he alone chooses to address the propaganda and clarify his position once in for all
Comments
667 responses to “Who is Zaid Zaman Hamid? Brasstacks or Yousuf Kazzab Prophecy?”
@dr jawad Khan
Please provide us with correct links if you do again I never get anywhere with your pasted links.
JazakAllah
@drJawadKhan
Also:
“this matter is not simple as it seems but little
bit complicated.there are some religious and honest witnesses with high integrity and credibility who testified against yousuf kazzab and zaid zaman hamid.”
1. What do you mean by “this matter”
2. what is “complicated”
3. who are the witnessed?
4. Is matter of Zaid Hamid being guilty so very simple?
I hope I am not pointing fingers at someone!
@ Arshad
you said” (Nobody ever came before in the way Zaid Hamid did talking against banking before ”
When BCCI bank was Closed by zionists agent and till now, I have heard and know many scholars speaking against interest based banking system. the only thing different from Zaid is, zaid is backed and funded by ISI / Army and host a show which hourly fees is 1.5 million rupees. Others scholars do not have that kind of money.
I have heard Iran current president also speaking against zionist system openly in USA on cnn.
You said lal masjid walay kidnap people ,
yes they kidnap famous prostitute Aunty Shamim and yes they kidnapped prostitute massager Chinese people. Although they released prostitues after some time. I myself do not support these actions as one should not take law into ones hand. But Zaid Hamid real master Musharraf abducted Dr. Afia and 600 other persons and uptill now they are not released. Musharraf killed 400 female students in Jamia Hafsa and your ZZ hamid supported Musharraf on his actions. Shame on ZZ Hamid
Zaid put list of his bank clients only to attract other bank clients as all the business houses do that to show its crebility and increase its customers.
Well ZZ hamid is a typical loser and confused.
In NED he became member of Jamiat then he became spokemen of Hikmatyar , then he rebelled and joined Ahmed Shah masoosd( agent of India) then he abonden Jihad and joined False prophet “Yousaf Kazzab” . After Yousaf Kazzab death now he is become spokesman of ISI/Army and has joined Musharraf ranks.
Like Shahid masood he will also sell his soul after getting the right money.
I cannot believe that people of PAKistan has so mcuh time to waste on such ….. topics
niether supporting nor opposing ZZ hamid
will give our country a bit of benefit
@Arif
I haven’t heard Irani president talk about “Usury”.
So you are saying that Zaid Hamid is not a credible person because:
1. He may be associated with yousuf ali and following his cult!
2. He supported brutal force by Musharraf regarding Lal Masjid!
That leaves atleast me with one question?
Who is really fighting for Islam?
Is it Osama Bin Laden?
@Arif
Sorry. I guess to questions!
May Allah forgive us. Ameen
@Arif
Sorry. I guess two questions!
May Allah forgive us. Ameen
@ Bios,
1.I WONDER IF A TAKFIRI 5TH COLUMN LIKE YOU ALREADY
KNOW THE BENEFICIARIES OF BRASSTACKS & ZAID HAMID
AS IF YOU PREPARE THEIR BALANCE SHEET, AND RECEIVE
SPECIAL ” ILHAAM ” FROM YOUR PEER-E-TASMA-PA.
2. IT SEEMS THAT MY ” CHITTARS ” ON YOUR GUNJA HEAD ON
ISLAMABADOBSERVER WERE NOT ENOUGH, PERHAPS YOU NEED
A DETAILED ” CHITTROL ” I WILL, INSHALLAH, FURNISH YOU.
3. THE SHAMFUL ATTITUDE ONE CAN OBSERVE IN YOUR COMMENT
THAT YOU ARE SUFFERING FROM A BASIC COWARDICE (BUZDILI)
BY NOT EVEN PRONOUNCING THE NAME OF KHABISSE MUSHARRAF.
GO AND SEE, WHAT I AM DOING TO YOUR OTHER REINCARNATED
ZAFAR IQBAL & CO. ON ISLAMABADOBSER “VATORY”
4. MAD FANATICS AND EXTREMISTS AMATEURS LIKE YOU HAVE
TOTALLY RUINED ISLAM TODAY. TUM LOG BHOOT PARIT KAY
PICHAY DORNAY WALAY PAGAL LOG HO, TUM KO HAR TARAF
ANDHERA DEKHAEI DETA HAY. ALLAH WASTAY KA BER AUR BUGHZ
RAKHTAY HO DILON MEIN, HASAD KI AAG MEIN JALTAY HO.
SHAITAN KAY SIRF AIK WASWASSAY NE TUM SAB KO AGAY
LAGAYA HOWA HAY, AKHBARON KAY DAFTARON KAY CHAKKAR
LAGATAY HO, KEH KEHIEN SAY SHAITANI MAWAAD MIL JAIEY
TO USAY FULAN FULAN KAY KHELAAF ISTEMAAL KER KAY,
USSAY SOOLI PAR CHARHAOO, AUR SAWAB-E-DAREINE KAMAOO,
UMMAYYAD KI TARIKH BHARI PARI HAY, JAO APNAY APP KO
WAHAN TALASH KARO, YAQEENAN WHAN KHARAY NAZAR AOGAY.
SUNO !! LAAL MASJID KA SARKARI VERSION KIA HAY ?
MALOOM HAY TUMKO ? KIA USKO MAANTAY HO ?
KIA US ESTABLISHMENT KAY TAMAM FAISALY, REPORTS,
TAJZIAY MAANTO HO ? KIA TUM MUSHARRAFF ESTABLISHMENT
KA KHEL NEHEIN KHEL RAHAY. ?
to be contd……..
I don’t know who is osama bin laden ?? What ever he is labelled for has always benefited USA.
but I know ZZ Hamid is a lair and he has made a new cult/ sect in Islam
@ who, on this flipping planet does’nt know OBL,
every fucking Neocon knows who he is ! Its not only
OBL benefiting USA, there are others, why do they want
Zaid Hamid to shut his mouth, because he makes you
discover who is doing what, so he is a liar, every
Pakistani believes every day in a Kaazib Prophet,
24 hours, IS USA NOT THE MAHADEV OF MUSHARRAF, ZARDAR,
PPP, FAZLU, ANP TAKFIRIS, SECULARS, AND NAZIR NAJI
A PAINDOO INDIAN AGENT ON PTV, BHUTTO’S MUJAWAR AT
GARHI KHUDDA BUKSH, ETRNAL CHAMCHA, KAFGIR, KARCHA.
AND WHAT IS THE NEW CULT/SECT CALLED
” TAKFIRION KAY TALIBANI DUBBAY PEER “
@ IT IS IN WHOES INTEREST THAT ZAID HAMID SHOULD
BE SILENCED ? ONLY BATILANS WANTS IT. I HAVE SEEN HIS
COUPLE OF VIDEOS, OUTSPOKEN, CLEAR,
EXCELLENT, TO THE POINT, NO FURO'AAT, NO BAK BAK,
STRAIGHT TO THE TARGET, AND IT DISTURBS THE RELIGIOUS
POLITICAL, FINANCIAL, M A F I A.
MAULVIS ARE AGAINST HIM BECAUSE HE DOES NOT LOOK LIKE
A WEHSHI MULLAH, WITH 12 FOOT BEARD LIKE THE CHARACTER
OF DONKEY DIRECTOR OF KHUDA KE LIAY.
@ YOU GUYS BETTER STOP THIS ABU-LAHAB'S SYMPHONY AND
ABU-JEHAL'S INVESTIGATIONS.
DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY.
Abay Yeh Rafay Kashmiri Pagal Hai Dr. Mubeen Akhter Kai Pass Le Aaon Isay. Ilaj Ki Zaroorat Hai Isko. Warna Zaid Hamid kai baray mein itna sb kuch Anay kai baad koi pagal he usay support karskta hai yeh pher boht hi bara….
zaid hamid after failing to clear his position on yusuf kazzab has agreed to one of his contacts to come to karachi in november to have a public manazira with the people who have exposed his ugly face. he knows everyone of them personally but is lying repeatedly that he doesn’t. now a reminder had been sent to him to confirm the dates of his arrival. no reply so far…
@ Khanlala, talkhaba, lone Ranger,
Ap loggon ki qalai khul gai hay , Ap MQM kay
terrorist ho.
Apney Dr Mubeen Akhter ko meray pass PINDI lao
mein uska ilaaj bilmisle karon ga, keh sari Doctori
bhol jaiy ga.
Ab Zaid Hamid ki Karachi anay ki “AFWAH ” urra rahay
ho, pehlay arif ko to pakro, keh reha hay keh !
wo OBL ko janta hi nehien ?
Mein apka ilaaj janta hon.
I wanna add something here. I think we are in Islamic dark ages like Europe was in it dark ages around 500 to 600 yrs ago!
Please don’t ask me to explain if you don’t understand what I mean already because I can’t its just my opinion after reading some pages here and listening to people here and there.
Ok let me try. Does burning witches on suspicions and not listening to them from his own mouth remind any of you of something. This is the best I can do.
@ Rafay Kashmiri.
First read the full line and then comment.
I Said I don’t know OBL because I don’t know him personally , what ever we have heard about him is through unreliable and biased western media. And What he is balmed for has always benefitted USA and muslims have become victims of terror
But I know zaid personally through his 5 former associate , two are still with him and 3 have left after reliazing that Zaid is a lair.
Zaid hamid master musharraf was the biggest terrorist of Pakistan. He single handley killed so many pakistanis and sold so many pakistanis (as admiited in his book also)
ohh bhayoon … yeh sab bakwas kab band ho gae…
Some one probably Mr. Khan Lala or someone was bringing forward concrete evidence in five days.. damn its more than a month now…
where are the evidence .. um only talking about the evidence that Mr.Lala was supposed to bring forward…
I also heard someone saying that wife of ZZH or Yousaf Kazab will address a press conference .. where is that.. ?
Now please again label me as a Kafir,munkir or his damn follower…
I would simply say that Zaid hamid is the great guy. We need such leaders in our government instead of corrupt regime of zardari and nawaz sharif. His TV programs are eye opener for all Pakistanis which is unbearable for enemies of Islam and Pakistan. Thats why they are spreading false propoganda against him. Inshallah they will not succeed.
Uptill now he did’nt say anything unislamic or odd which is not acceptable to any muslim. So why should we believe on this propoganda.
People of Pakistan should open their eyes and see what is happening in our country and get rid of these corrupt group of politicians who are CIA and RAW funded.
Inshallah nothing will happen to our country.
Asalam-o-Alaikum All,
I’ve been seing these sorts of discussions on different blogs. If any body is doing to expose the truth, may Allah bless him/her & for others who Allah guide them to right right path.
People say Zaid Hamid is not answering to their question that he was associated to Yousaf Kazab or not?? So kindly tell me if he says
“Curse of Allah, angels and momineen be on those liars who claim to be “prophets” after Sayyadna Khatim un Nabiyyeen Muhemmed Rasul Allah (saw). ”
what does it means. Does’nt it means for all liars whether yousaf or Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadyani I neglect them. Then wat is the issue of keep on mentioning Yousaf.
Its simple maths you say anyone it contains everything in it?? Right Enlight me if I am wrong??
Now problem is whether he is right on this claim or not?? Only Allah knows the hearts & time will prove that.
Just remember wen Mirza Qadyani started everybody praised him coz he was having manazars with Christians scholars. But once he proclaimed to be Mehdi/Jesus, did everybody beleived him. The answer is BIG NO!
Uptil now I did not see any thing bad coming from Zaid’s mouth related to Islam or Pakistan(On Pakistan people might differ to me on that).
For now offcourse I follow him. But the day he turns out to be something like Qadyani. He would definately be treated like Qadyani.
The best thing is proofs, I’ve seen some documents or some testimonials by people. But for a bohtan like this u need solid proofs so it would be better somebody would publish the damn vidoes in which he is said to be khalifa or defending yousaf in court. End of story!
And Allah knows the Best
Wasalam
I would like to add couple more things here:
1. Just because Maulana of Lal Masjid wanted Pakistan to be an “Islamic state” was not a good reason to use “Brutal” force against them. And by the way this is what Hindus did to the Sikhs and their golden temple.
2. Zaid hamid in one on his new videos points out that Mullah Omar is a Jehadi.
May Allah give us courage to Fight for Islam! Ameen!
@ arif,
the world has read your
comment of 10th nov. @2.27 am
the same world can compare your above and the answer
you gave to me. its amazing !!!
just re-read your statement : you say
” but I know Zaid personally ”
” through his 5 former associates ”
“two are still with him and 3 left after
realizing that Zaid is a liar ”
@ Arshad Khan, can I request you to be impartial and
please explain to me, arif Bhai’s above statement, is it
valid ?? thanks
@ Mouhammed Naeem Sahib,
fair enough, what you have said, very
balanced conclusions, jazaakullah
@ Monia,
very encouraging views for all of us, thanks
@ Ali,
I second your demand !!
I wonder if anyone will ever answer your genuine
authentic and realistic queries, very good to remind,
thanks.
@Rafay Kashmiri
I am not gonna side with Mr. Zaid Hamid or Mr. Arif. Before I was kind of defending Zaid Hamid. Until we get some valid issues resolved! Because I believe if we truly want to help Islam and Pakistan we must go about doing it in “Islamic way”.
Lets just analyze the statement Not Arif or Zaid!
“But I know zaid personally through his 5 former associate , two are still with him and 3 have left after reliazing that Zaid is a lair.”
Only thing I see wrong with this statment is that:
when you say personally to me it means you have atleast talked to the person. The one person you claim to personally know. But that wouldn’t be truly saying that you know him or her. Other than that I don’t see anything wrong with it
I hope it is sufficient.
Thanks
The Great Game Continues
By Dr. Sachithanandam Sathananthan, a Visiting Research Scholar at the Jawaharlal Nehru University School of International Studies, read the following paper for the Ph.D. degree at the University of Cambridge
There is great euphoria among Pakistani liberals over the presumed ‘return to democracy’. They are yet to discover Late Neo-colonialism. The manoeuvres against Musharraf bear uncanny resemblances to organised ‘people’s power’ the CIA unleashed during ‘colour revolutions’ and upheavals against Hugo Chavez.
The widely expected victory for Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Asif Ali Zardari in the presidential election brought to a high point the tortuous process of regime change in Pakistan. Anyone who has followed the ‘colour revolutions’ that installed pro-American rulers in Georgia (Rose Revolution, 2003), Ukraine (Orange Revolution, 2004) and Kyrgyzstan (Tulip Revolution, 2005) could surely not have missed the tell tale signs.
The earliest foreboding surfaced in the backroom manoeuvres by United States (US) and British intelligence services to engineer panic about the security of Pakistan’s nuclear assets. It was a repeat of the duplicitous hysteria they generated over non-existent weapons of mass destruction that Iraq allegedly possessed. A carefully worded article, co-authored by former State Department officials Richard L. Armitage and Kara L. Bue, signalled the shift in US policy. After formally acknowledging then President Pervez Musharraf’s many achievements, the authors continued: ‘much remains to be accomplished, particularly in terms of democratization. Pakistan must…eliminate the home-grown jihadists…And…it must prove itself a reliable partner on technology transfer and nuclear non-proliferation.’ And the denouement: ‘We believe General Musharraf…deserves our attention and support, no matter how frustrated we become at the pace of political change and the failure to eliminate Taliban fighters on the Afghan border.’ Translation: Musharraf has to go.
Almost simultaneously a 2006 country survey in The Economist, titled ‘Too much for one man to do’, began on a jingoistic overkill: ‘Think about Pakistan, and you might get terrified. Few countries have so much potential to cause trouble, regionally and worldwide’. The following year a Carnegie Endowment report faulted western governments that ‘contribute to regional instability by allowing Pakistan to trade democratisation for its cooperation on terrorism’. Senior US State Department officials repeatedly accused Musharraf of ‘not doing enough’ to combat Islamists within Pakistan and prevent their infiltration across the Durand Line into southern Afghanistan.
Sensing the way wind was blowing, then PPP Chairperson Benazir Bhutto redoubled efforts to convince Washington and London that, if she were to become Prime Minister, she would gladly do their bidding. She underscored her enthusiasm to serve and ensured her party was fully responsive to America’s Late Neo-colonialism. She summoned senior party members to Dubai on 9 June 2007 for a ‘briefing’ by a team from the US Democratic Party’s National Democratic Institute (NDI), ostensibly on the subject of elections in Pakistan. The ruling Republican Party’s International Republican Institute (IRI) had conducted the previous four ‘briefings’ in June and September 2006 and March and April 2007. Benazir leaned towards the Democratic Party in the last one no doubt as a hedge against the party’s possible victory at the forthcoming US Presidential Election.
Even a cursory knowledge of US Imperialism’s standard operating procedure is sufficient to surmise at least some among the IRI and NDI officers were covert intelligence operatives; and that their ‘briefings’ went beyond ‘tutelage of natives’. Rather they have been grooming the PPP as America’s satrap.
Benazir’s predilection to collaborate with the West has its roots in the Bhutto family’s micro political culture. Her grandfather, Shah Nawaz Bhutto was a minor comprador official in the British colonial regime. The British rewarded his ‘loyal’ services with the title Khan Bahadur and later appointed him President of a District Board and still later elevated him to knighthood.
Her father Zulfikar Ali Bhutto’s populist programmes did not dilute that legacy, which left a lasting impression on Benazir; she firmly believed the path to political power in Pakistan meanders through the Embassy of the United States, the current neo-colonialist.
She promised to offer the International Atomic Energy Agency access to Dr Abdul Qadeer Khan to ’satisfy the international community’, an euphemism for the major powers; and to allow the US-led International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan to operate inside north-western Pakistan. By the time Benazir visited the Senate in September 2007, she had convinced the Bush Administration of her unswerving loyalty; for ’she received a standing ovation from a select gathering of US lawmakers, diplomats, academics and media representatives. This contrasted sharply with her previous visits to the US capital when she received little attention.’ To deepen ‘Washington’s renewed interest in her, Benazir cautioned that supporting Musharraf was ‘a strategic miscalculation’ and pleaded ‘the US should support the forces of democracy’, which, of course, refers to her PPP.
So, President George W Bush enabled Benazir’s return from exile by arm-twisting Musharraf to promulgate the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO). The NRO of 5 October granted amnesty to politicians active in Pakistan between 1988 and 1999 and effectively wiped the slate clean of corruption charges for Benazir and her husband Asif Zardari. Three weeks later Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made it appear the Bush Administration wished to bring together ‘moderate’ forces, implying a scenario in which Musharraf and Benazir would join forces as President and Prime Minister respectively; and Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte corroborated Rice: ‘Our message’, he intoned, ‘is that we want to work with the government and people of Pakistan’.
However, Musharraf saw through the US Administration’s transparent ploy to lull him into believing it would not remove him and install Benazir in his place. So, he swiftly invited Nawaz Sharif, leader of the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), back from exile in Saudi Arabia to counter Benazir. But he could not consolidate his position, especially because he mishandled the judiciary, and was compelled to resign on 18 August 2008.
In a nutshell, the reason for ‘Washington’s renewed interest’ in Benazir is Musharraf’s firm opposition to US Late Neo-colonialism, to its manoeuvres to occupy, pacify and ravage Pakistan. In the 19th century British colonialism waged the ‘war on piracy’ on the high seas ostensibly to bring ‘the light of Christian civilization’. But the British were the most successful pirates, as Spanish and Portuguese historians would gladly confirm. The ‘war on piracy’ was the duplicitous justification trotted out to dominate lucrative maritime trade routes that were in the hands of Chinese, Arab and Tamil maritime empires and to invade kingdoms and/or countries essential to control trade and plunder resources. During most of the 20th century heroic anti-colonial movements and anti-imperialist wars rolled back much of colonial rule, which in some instances however morphed into neo-colonialism. Indonesia after Sukarno, Iran after Mosaddeq and Chile after Allende are well known examples.
The ‘war on terror’ and ‘promoting democracy’ are the 21st century equivalents of the 19th century British gobbledygook. American Late Neo-colonialism purveys them as moral justification and uses as political cover for intervening and, where necessary, invading resource-rich and strategic countries to overthrow nationalist leaders, install puppet regimes and savage the countries’ wealth. And of course the US is by far the most powerful terrorist force.
It succeeded in Iraq (for now); but the CIA-organised regime change could not dislodge Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez, who rejected the neo-colonialist 1989 Washington Consensus and supported alternative nationalist economic models.
Politically challenged Pakistani liberals — a motley crowd that includes members of human rights and civil liberties organisations, journalists, analysts, lawyers and assorted professionals — are utterly incapable of comprehending the geo-strategic context in which Musharraf manoeuvred to defend Pakistan’s interest. So they slandered him an ‘American puppet’, alleging he caved in to US pressure and withdrew support to the Afghan Taliban regime in the wake of 9/11 although in fact he removed one excuse for the Bush Administration to ‘bomb Pakistan into stone age’, as a senior State Department official had threatened.
Nevertheless American discomfort with Musharraf’s government was palpable by late 2003, after he dodged committing Pakistani troops to prop up the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq. When he offered to cooperate under the auspices of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC), naïve Pakistani media and analysts lunged for his jugular, condemning him once again for succumbing to US demands. But in fact he nimbly sidestepped American demands: he calculated that diverse ideological stances of the 57 Muslim member-counties would not allow the OIC to jointly initiate such controversial action and therefore Pakistan’s participation cannot arise, which proved correct.
Washington of course was not amused and the Bush Administration grew increasingly hostile to Musharraf’s determination to prioritise Pakistan’s interests when steering the ship of the state through the choppy waters of the unfolding New Great Game, in which the West — led by the US — is manoeuvring to contain growing Russian and Chinese influences in Central and West Asia. His foreign policy decisions over time convinced Washington that under his leadership, Pakistan would side with enemies of US and Britain in the New Great Game. First, he refused to isolate Iran; instead he vigorously pursued energy cooperation to build the Iran-Pakistan-India gas pipeline in the face of stiff American opposition. Second, Washington was alarmed by Musharraf’s preference for deepening Pakistan-China bilateral relations and forging nuclear cooperation; and more so when he offered Beijing naval facilities at the Gwadar port on Balochistan’s Arabian Sea coast overlooking the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic chokepoint through which passes approximately 30 per cent of world’s energy supplies.
Perhaps the last straw was his success in gaining Observer Status for Pakistan in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO). Russia and China are spearheading the SCO, which includes four other countries: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan; Iran and India are also Observers. The SCO is widely perceived as a rising eastern counterweight to western security and economic groupings and Islamabad drifting towards the SCO was simply unacceptable in Washington.
To rub salt into its wounds, Musharraf refused permission to interrogate Dr. AQ Khan and firmly rejected Washington’s demands that NATO troops be allowed into the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) to hunt down Osama bin Laden and his associates.
By early 2006 it was clear Washington was looking for nothing less than a pliable leader in Islamabad, a firm political foothold in Pakistan and a Pakistani foreign policy that complemented US strategic aims in Central Asia.
What perhaps angered Washington the most were actions Musharraf took to wind down the ‘war on terror’ within Pakistan.
Immediately after taking power, he outlawed three Islamic extremist groups and, after 9/11, intensified military operations in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) bordering Afghanistan.
Washington would have gone along with Musharraf had he focussed on military operations to curb Islamists. Military action alone cannot defeat guerrillas; but it can kill many of them and in turn induce new recruits — well known points reiterated by William R Polk in Violent Politics (2007) – so that the so-called ‘war on terror’ would not end any time soon.
That could supplement US Administrations’ assiduous manufacture of the ‘Islamic threat’ through the 1990s to launch an endless ‘war on terror’ — the New Cold War — to rescue America’s permanent war economy. For after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the US economy (and by extension west European economies) faced perhaps its biggest crisis: the ‘Communist threat’ ceased to be credible; it could not be exploited to terrify the American people into acquiescing to rising military expenditure that keeps wheels of the permanent war economy rolling and to expanding the repressive security apparatuses.
So the Bush Administration deftly replaced the ‘Communist threat’ with the ‘Islamic threat’, no doubt following Machiavelli’s famous advice in The Prince, that a wise ruler invents enemies and then slays them in order to control his own subjects. The apparently counterproductive bombings, arrests, torture, kidnappings and disappearances (sanitised as Extraordinary Rendition) carried out by US forces while the CIA covertly funded, armed and supported Islamists are intended not to eliminate the ‘Islamic threat’ but to contain it within manageable limits and to spawn the next generation of ‘terrorists’.
Sometimes, plans go awry; ‘culling’ may not contain the resistance, as seen in Afghanistan from time to time. Nevertheless, the strategy is to ‘feed terrorism’ and simultaneously ‘cull terrorists’ so that the perpetual New Cold War oils America’s moribund permanent war economy.
Musharraf, however, did not play ball. He complemented military force to defeat Islamists with political initiatives.
He signed a peace treaty with tribal elders in North Waziristan (within FATA) to marginalise the Islamists. To combat the Islamists’ religious ideology, he promoted ‘enlightened moderation’, a veiled reference to secularism and tolerance. Musharraf’s vision of a secular Pakistan has its roots in exposure to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk’s legacy when he attended school in Ankara during his father’s diplomatic posting to Turkey. In fact, after taking power in Pakistan he often held up Ataturk as his role model. He planned to ‘wean away’ the people from the ‘extremists’ through education is how he described his approach to this writer. Towards this end, he introduced educational reforms and re-wrote school history text books; enacted laws protecting women’s rights and diluted Islamic laws against women; and he liberalised the media. To deny Islamists their traditional rallying cry — Kashmir — he opened path breaking negotiations with India to remove that arrow from the Islamists’ quiver.
When Musharraf skilfully combined military operations against Islamists with a political front promoting secularism to ideologically disarm them, the US administration saw red. By secularising Pakistani society over time Musharraf would de-fang the ‘Islamic threat’ within Pakistan and extricate the country out of the contrived orbit of ‘war on terror’.
That would greatly diminish Washington’s leverage to intervene in the country to distance Islamabad from Beijing and exploit energy resources abundantly found in Balochistan and, in the long run, perhaps derail US administration’s well laid plans to bring Afghanistan to heel and to dominate Central Asia and its oil-rich Caspian Sea basin.
But Musharraf was in no mood to back down. So the Bush Administration slipped regime change into gear. Taking advantage of his missteps, the anti-Musharraf media blitz, NGO and student mobilisations, lawyers agitations, protests by political parties and civil society organisations seemingly coming from all directions in fact displayed a fantastic degree of organisation, coordination and financing clearly beyond the ken of the fratricidal activists and often ad hoc institutions and never witnessed before in the country. Very likely they will not be seen again either; indeed later the activists were singularly incapable of organising any significant agitation when three women were buried alive for defying their parents’ choice of husbands. The manoeuvres against Musharraf bear uncanny resemblances to organised ‘people’s power’ the CIA unleashed during ‘colour revolutions’ and upheavals against Hugo Chavez.
The Bush Administration began reaping the rewards of unseating Musharraf within 24 hours of his resignation. Chief of Army Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani travelled to Kabul to meet NATO and Afghan commanders on 19 August. About 10 days later Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen informed a Pentagon news conference on 28 August that Kayani and his lieutenants held a ’secret meeting’ with their US counterparts on a US aircraft carrier, reminiscent of American gun boat diplomacy in Latin America and unthinkable in Pakistan under Musharraf’s watch..
Mullen touchingly chronicled how he ‘learned to trust’ Kayani and bent over backwards to emphasise that Kayani is no American puppet, that Kayani’s ‘principles and goals are to do what’s best for Pakistan.’ But a few sections of the US media, weaned on decades of Pentagon-speak from the debacle in Vietnam to the illegal invasion of Iraq, saw through the verbal obfuscation. And when a reporter pointedly queried Mullen whether Kayani’s ‘goal for Pakistan also aligned a hundred per cent with the US goal’, the Admiral waffled: ‘[Kayani] knows his country a whole lot better than we do. And again, I just think that’s where he is, that’s where he’ll stay.’ Translation: US administration has got Kayani on tight leash.
And to maintain there is no substantial change from Musharraf’s policies, Kayani’s spokesman Maj-Gen Athar Abbas and Mullen alleged the meetings had been arranged several weeks earlier, when Musharraf was President, to facetiously imply he had approved the contacts.
The import of ‘coordination’ between American, NATO, Afghan and Pakistan militaries will become clearer over the next weeks and months. For now the suspicion is unavoidable that the US Administration has at long last begun frog-marching Pakistan into the US-created Afghan quagmire to further destabilise the country and justify intervention.
Musharraf had resolutely opposed precisely this eventuality. He rejected US demands that the Pakistani army assist NATO forces in Afghanistan. He underlined the country will not repeat the catastrophic mistakes of the 1980s when it got embroiled in America’s war in Afghanistan against the then Soviet Union, for which the Pakistani people continues to pay a heavy price. Rather, he insisted his army will fight only Pakistan’s war within Pakistan’s borders.
The consequences of the PPP leadership following the US into the Afghan quagmire will soon be evident. Already, within 16 days of Musharraf’s resignation, US forces carried out the first ground assault in Angoor Adda area within Pakistan’s borders — which Musharraf had disallowed — with the connivance of the new leadership. Obviously there is more to come since the Bush Administration has eagerly caricatured the Pakistan-Afghanistan border as ‘The New Frontier’ in the New Cold War.
For the moment, there is great euphoria among Pakistani liberals over the presumed ‘return to democracy’. The comments by Ayesha Tanmy Haq are typical: ‘We have removed a dictator by the citizenry showing that real power lies with them.’ The hapless liberals have yet to discover Late Neo-colonialism and its devious manoeuvres for regime change; they have in fact effectively legitimised them by opposing Musharraf. They are agonisingly unaware of the labyrinthine geo-politics and economic imperatives underlying the New Cold War. They are blissfully going along with the collaborationist leaders who are bartering away the country’s future for the proverbial pieces of silver.
http://pakalert.wordpress.com/
@Rafay Kashmiri
I am not gonna side with Mr. Zaid Hamid or Mr. Arif. Before I was kind of defending Zaid Hamid. Until we get some valid issues resolved! Because I believe if we truly want to help Islam and Pakistan we must go about doing it in “Islamic way”.
Lets just analyze the statement Not Arif or Zaid!
“But I know zaid personally through his 5 former associate , two are still with him and 3 have left after reliazing that Zaid is a lair.”
Only thing I see wrong with this statment is that:
when you say personally to me it means you have atleast talked to the person. The one person you claim to personally know. But that wouldn’t be truly saying that you know him or her. Other than that I don’t see anything wrong with it
I hope it is sufficient.
Thanks
I would like to add couple more things here:
1. Just because Maulana of Lal Masjid wanted Pakistan to be an “Islamic state” was not a good reason to use “Brutal” force against them. And by the way this is what Hindus did to the Sikhs and their golden temple.
2. Zaid hamid in one on his new videos points out that Mullah Omar is a Jehadi.
May Allah give us courage to Fight for Islam! Ameen!
Rashid, Rafay Kashmiri, monia and tonia are names of one person who in the words of bois is “llegitmate offspring of the likes of General Rani and Aunty Shamim who are the elites of Pakistan these days.”
for those who are defending zaid zaman hamid.
you are supposedly have an easy access to zzh.Why don’t you ask the questions which are repeatedly being raised in this forum.And finish this issue or at least give a direction to the discussion.
what is the use of longsomeness of same kind of arguments.
repestedly.
regards
Dr Sahib to whom are you saying all this? These are few of Zaid Zaman followers and he also reportedly post here. There are not gona answer any of your question.
@all the looser employees of zaid hamid’s brasstacks fighting a lost war on different blogs
why don’t you people fear God! on one hand there are several families who became victims of yusuf kazzab. not only because of his distorted version of tasawwuf but also because of his sifli and hypnoticism. on the other this blog is full of arguments by the like of rafay kashmiri who are defending that kazzab on the instructions of his boss zaid hamid.
one can’t imagine that how that kazzab ruined the lives of so many girls and women of respected families! each and every person in karachi who knew zaid hamid in 80s and early 90s can witness this fact that zaid was the person who brought yusuf ali here and marketed him as a great sufi in upper middle class families. we still know the trauma thos families suffered and are still suffering.
there are enough fools in rawalpindi and islamabad who can be easily deceived by zz hamid. alhamdulillah in karachi there is hardly any now.
@Bios/Bias
We are from Karachi and fully support and love Zaid Sahab.. you ignorant people have lost this.. not a f–king single evidence was brought forward but you a–holes are continuously trying to defend yourself and keep crying over those terrorist lal masjid gangs… boys you have lost this.. because truth always wins.. and we have won! Alhamduallah
Cheers to all Zaid Hamid supports and fans 🙂
@Rauf!
If you’re in Karachi then call on this number 021-2630391 and come there. i’m gona show the evidence and you decide the place im gona reach there with all evidence. Fast man. Don’t waste time.
@Rauf
Well I don’t think anybody has won yet. Though there is not credible evidence provided by the opposers of Zaid Hamid. These Opposers bring up good Points:
1. Did Zaid Hamid support Musharraff regarding Lal Masjid?
All mosques are like golden temple to me so if you destroy it with people in it like golden temple was then you to me aren’t sincere to Islam or Pakistan.
2. Why aren’t the women in Brasstacks properly covering up?
3. Did Zaid hamid Support Yusuf Ali?
4. Does he support Yusuf Ali?
Again may Allah guide us to the right path! Ameen!
Why dont you publish that publicly.. why so secrecy? are you afraid of Zaid Hamid? Whats the point call me to some place and showing me the evidence? common man.. talk some logic here… if you are doing public propaganda against him, publish evidence publicly please
Lal Masjid:
For months prior to the fateful standoff, the Lal Masjid brigade kidnapped, harassed and extorted common citizens and foreign guests to further their cause of cleansing societies ills. During these months, after each emboldened step, the media and intelligentsia questioned the government’s resolve in dealing with militants in the heart of Islamabad. Time after time, talk show after talk show, the comments were the same, ”the government needs to bring this violence to an end.” How, no one dared to offer a solution. When the Musharraf government surrounded the Red Mosque, and gave repeated ultimatums to the people inside to come out and surrender and no harm would come of them, the media called it an “amazing act of patience” to not storm the mosque or launch an operation. However, most of the politicos, pundits and talk show hosts were calling for a military operation to end the standoff.
At the 10th hour, numerous religious leaders stepped forward to attempt to negotiate the release of the people and the surrender of the Ghazi brothers. Failed. A group of political leaders went to the Red Mosque to attempt the same, only to see failure. Television networks continued to give the Lal Masjid brigade’s leaders free air time to entice public opinion to the plight that they were suffering at the hands of the government and military. Cries were made for “safe passage” in exchange for the hostages. No deal. Meetings went on at the President and Prime Minister houses searching for a solution that would not cost any lives, none could be agreed upon. Then late one night, the military offensive started against the Red Mosque.
It was an almost immediate position change by the media from demanding action be taken to calling the military operation a “tragedy” and in the same breath, the people that not hours ago were militants, became marytrs. Militant to marytr in the blink of an eye?
@Rauf
“Why dont you publish that publicly.. why so secrecy? are you afraid of Zaid Hamid? Whats the point call me to some place and showing me the evidence? common man.. talk some logic here… if you are doing public propaganda against him, publish evidence publicly please”
There is sense in calling you to certain place. The family in trauma wouldn’t come public but at least you see them and see the ugly face of Zaid Hamid, the bloody dalal.
Weren’t those hoodlums in Laal Masjid causing chaos and taking law into their own hands and attacking citizens who did not fit their understanding and perception of Islam! So, if the government took action against them, what’s wrong with that? Why were they amassing weapons in a mosque?
If you think that forcing someone to follow your brand of Islam is correct then you are giving credence to the Western claim against Islam and proving their point!
For the sake of humanity, try to understand that religion CANNOT be forced upon people! There will always be people who wouldn’t want to lead a strict religious life. That is entirely their business and between them and Allah. If you are afraid that their actions or lack thereof will affect your Iman, then the fault lies with you that your Iman is weak! But shoving down Islam in people’s throats is a terrible, terrible disservice to it and certainly, NOT to forget, a very distorted and a misunderstood interpretation of the religion.
There is one another thing I utterly fail to understand! Why is Musharraf being subjected to such scorn? Zia-ul-Haq was much worse. He truly was a despot who, under any circumstance would NOT and did NOT tolerate dissent! Not only that, he was an imbecile too!
In essence, Musharraf inherited the wreck left behind by Zia and in my opinion, he was doing a fine job to the extent a person can do with sincerity given the deck of cards he has to deal with!
SAIMA KHAN wants to die a martyr. Life is transient, she told her father in a telephone call last week, and the real glory is to sacrifice it for Allah. Her statement would be alarming at any age, but Saima is only 10.
As she spoke, rifle shots rang out, the acrid smell of tear gas drifted over Islamabad and hundreds of troops surrounded the pro-Taliban Red Mosque, a religious school complex in the heart of Pakistan’s capital where Saima was among hundreds of children being held as virtual hostages in a stand-off between militants and the government.
Saima and her 14-year-old sister, Asma, were embroiled in a struggle for the soul of Pakistan in which up to 70 militants died last week and more than 100 were injured, according to mosque officials.
Holed up inside the complex behind the lines of troops and razor wire, the children – many of them girls whose families had sent them to the mosque to receive a strict Islamic education – repeatedly rejected relatives’ entreaties to leave before a threatened army onslaught.
There was evidence that many had been brainwashed into a cult of martyrdom, and the authorities feared last night that some were being prepared to be suicide bombers. In barely eight weeks, Saima had been transformed from a religious but fun-loving girl to a jihadi, grimly craving martyrdom.
At the barricades, her father, Luftullah Khan, a shopkeeper, frantically pestered soldiers to let him rescue both his daughters. But when he got through to them on their mobile telephone, they said they preferred martyrdom to freedom.
“I spoke to my daughter. She said there was no food or water left. I tried to arrange a meeting, but she said, ‘We’re here; my dead body will be here. I will not leave my teachers’,” Khan said.
His bewilderment at her sudden transformation reflects that of a nation that can barely believe the events unfolding in the shadow of General Pervez Musharraf’s presidential palace.
Militant leaders said yesterday that 30 girls had been buried in a mass grave inside the mosque grounds. Two more students died in fighting overnight. The children attend the Jamia Hafsa and the Jamia Faridia, two local madrasahs, or religious schools. The militants have herded their students into the basement of the mosque.
Early yesterday the city was rocked by a dozen loud explosions as the army used shellfire to demolish long stretches of a 5ft wall that surrounds the mosque. Tear gas was fired from armoured personnel carriers, and soldiers provided heavy covering machinegun fire, but no effort was made to storm the building.
Despite their evident fire-power, the military, many of them drawn from special forces, were playing a waiting game. They wanted to avoid the bloody confrontation apparently being sought by the mosque’s firebrand leader, Abdul Rashid Ghazi, who said he was determined to fight to the last.
Ghazi, who claimed that 1,800 children remained inside, said yesterday he had divided the boys and girls into two camps. “The boys are the first line of defence, then the girls,” he said. “They have all sworn an oath on the Koran that they will fight to the death.”
The combination of fighting and fanaticism was a stark reminder of Musharraf’s failure to rein in Pakistan’s militants, despite the apprehension of western allies about the advance of extremism in a nuclear power.
For months the leaders of the Red Mosque have unleashed a campaign of fear and intimidation in Islamabad, using their burqa-clad students as the shock troops of a moral crusade.
They raided massage par-lours, tore down posters of women, kidnapped alleged brothel madams and video shop owners and forced them to apologise for their “immorality” at televised press conferences. Last week Musharraf finally decided to clamp down and demonstrate that his government, which has presented itself as a bastion of “enlightened moderation”, was prepared to confront the extremists on its doorstep.
Musharraf told Pakistan televi-sion yesterday that he was prepared to raise the stakes with the militants: “People hiding in the Red Mosque should come out, otherwise they will get killed. Action will be taken against them if they don’t come out.”
Musharraf, considered a key ally of the West in the war on terror, has been bitterly criticised by Pakistani moderates, who feel his refusal to return the country to civilian leadership after eight years of military rule has fostered radicalism.
They argue that his decision to exile the two country’s two most prominent politicians, Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif, has weakened democratic institutions and strengthened the hold of the militants.
There are fears among western leaders that Pakistan could implode into a bitter battle between secular and the hard-line religious groups, becoming another failed state where Al-Qaeda can thrive.
The militants provided a stark reminder of their power on Friday when a burst of gunfire from a rooftop was reported to have been aimed at Musharraf’s plane as it took off from an airfield in Rawalpindi. Security officials said later they had found two antiaircraft guns and a sub-ma-chinegun with a telescopic sight. Musharraf has already survived at least three attempts to kill him.
The Red Mosque first earned a reputation for militancy in the 1980s when its founder, Maulana Abdullah, won favour from the military dictator Zia ul Haq, who encouraged Pakistanis to join a jihad, or holy war, against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Senior intelligence officers prayed at the mosque and the cleric forged strong links with Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban regime in Kabul that sheltered him.
When Abdullah was assassinated, the mosque was taken over by his two sons, Ghazi and Maulana, who was captured last week as he tried to flee disguised in a burka.
They called for jihad against the United States, supported the Taliban and linked up with militants in deeply conservative tribal areas on the Afghan border. The current conflict began after the authorities warned the mosque that it had illegally seized government land and must give it up. Its leaders responded in March by sending in burqa-clad women armed with Kalashnikov rifles to occupy a government-run children’s library next door.
Last month Maulana reached the point of no return when his followers kidnapped nine Chinese women, including six acu-puncturists and masseuses, denouncing them as prostitutes. China, which is Pakistan’s closest military ally, registered a formal complaint and demanded protection for its nationals.
Troops from the Pakistan Rangers, special forces and elite female paramilitary commandos took up positions around the complex to stop any further attempts by the militants to enforce religious law. Surrounding roads were sealed and the mosque’s supplies of food and ammunition were cut off.
On Tuesday the confrontation finally turned violent as militant students threw stones and fired shots at soldiers, who retaliated with volleys of tear gas.
As fighting escalated throughout the week, Musharraf kept a restraining hand on his forces. “We have reports that women and children have been locked in the basement floors. If we blow any of the walls, the whole building would collapse on them,” said one officer.
For one family at least there was a happy ending of sorts. As a gun battle raged late on Friday, with snipers on the roof of the mosque forcing the army back to its lines 100 yards away, Khan, the father who had been pleading with his two daughters to leave, called them on their mobile phone and told them their mother was outside. She had been taken ill and lay unconscious on the pavement, he said.
It was a lie but it worked. The two girls quickly left the compound and found their waiting father in the crowd. “I’m taking them back to our village,” said Khan. “They were ready for martyrdom and they’re very angry with me. I’m just happy I’ve got my daughters back, and sorry for those whose daughters are still in there.”
Saima, in a bitter, fanatical voice that belied her 10 years, told The Sunday Times her father had cheated her of martyrdom. “The teachers taught us about martyrdom and that it is a great achievement,” she said.
“I could see the fighting was in front of me and I could understand that we would die. I felt real anger about what my father did. He tricked me.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article2042156.ece
@ Arshad Khan,
you also think the same way on “knowing personally”!
” Knowing personally” is a term in any juridique analysis,
the very base of any civil or penal procedures, defining
different degrees of “knowing ” some one, right ?
but when it comes to the defendant! knowing him/her
personally, can modify or change everything as far as
the facts are concerned, consequestly, the judgement
as well !
but you can ask any lawyer in your vacinity.
– does any third person has the same significance than
the “personal” acquaintences ?
– all the witnesses can be discarded and will stand
insignifacant and could be interpreted as biased,
therefore, liable to a sanction, if those third persons
testify wrongly, dishonestly, malaciously or
distortingly.
Can anyone, just to encourage me, confirm Pakistan’s
justice is reliable to such extent ?
I am sure there could have been a peaceful solution to the Red Mosque.
1. It could have been left sorrounded for years if they were sincere. We leave our leaders who are corrupt in place for years.
2. Well when you are trying to say that you are for Islam and Pakistan then you should take a proper approach in doing so staying with in the limits of Islam. I never asked people to cover up in every news station.
May Allah guide us to the right path in these time of trials. Ameen!
AL-QAEDA’S leadership secretly directed the Islamic militants whose armed revolt at the Red Mosque in Islamabad ended last week with more than 100 deaths after it was stormed by the Pakistan army.
According to senior intelligence officials, the troops who finally took control discovered letters from Osama Bin Laden’s deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri. They were written to Abdul Rashid Ghazi and Abdul Aziz, the brothers who ran the mosque and adjacent madrasah.
Government sources said up to 18 foreign fighters � including Uzbeks, Egyptians and several Afghans � had arrived weeks before the final shootout and set up firing ranges to teach students, including children, how to handle weapons.
Al-Qaeda has wanted to open a Pakistan front in its global jihad since President Pervez Musharraf sided with America after the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Diplomats were surprised by the speed with which the fugitive Zawahiri condemned the raid and called on Pakistanis to rise up against Musharraf.
The response to his appeal was equally swift. Twenty-seven soldiers were killed when a suicide attacker struck a military convoy in northwest Pakistan near the Afghan border yesterday. At least 58 have been killed in bombings and shootings since the Red Mosque crisis began 12 days ago.
This weekend street protests were organised by religious parties as the government dispatched thousands more soldiers to its troubled North West Frontier province.
Some were sent to the Swat Valley, where a suicide car bomber killed three policemen last Thursday and a madrasah controlled by Maulana Fazlullah, a militant mullah, is expected to be the next flashpoint. Fazlullah has been using a radio station to rally support for Al-Qaeda and has urged followers to arm themselves in preparation for a siege.
Ministers blamed the presence of foreign fighters for the breakdown of negotiations at the Red Mosque just as they seemed about to reach a deal to end the standoff peacefully.
According to government sources and western diplomats, Al-Qaeda sought martyrdom instead. “They wanted a poster boy for Pakistan and Ghazi was the perfect guy,” said one western diplomat.
Ghazi was shot dead in the army’s final assault on the mosque a week after his older brother tried to escape disguised in a burqa.
Musharraf’s use of overwhelming force to defeat the militants was welcomed not only by international allies in the war on terror but by Pakistan’s urban middle classes. Advisers were weighing up whether his declaration of war on militants, could be turned to political advantage.
His presidential term expires in September and he must decide whether to seek reappointment by the current parliament or call early parliamentary elections with the aim of securing a fresh mandate.
Diplomats believe an initial surge of support may already be fading, however, as concern grows over the number of women and children killed in the Red Mosque.
Ministers denied at first that any had died but the army has since admitted 19 bodies were “beyond recognition”. “They could be anybody, any age,” a spokesman said.
Although the interior ministry confirmed later that up to 25 women and children had been killed in the mosque, survivors suggested that the toll could be considerably higher.
Asma Hayat, 15, said she had seen several classmates shot and had been told of 15 other girls killed. She claimed she had seen “dozens” of 12 and 13-year-old boys dead, insisting: “Their faces were recognisable.”
According to Asma, she was handing out water to children affected by tear gas near the main gate when her friend Nasmeen, 17, was shot in the side.
When she went to help her, Nasmeen pushed her away, saying: “It feels good, it’s martyrdom.” She was taken away for treatment, but her father called a few days later to say she had died.
Bilal Sabir Khan, 11, claimed one of his friends had been shot in the foot and he saw “many martyrs and injured students on the roof of the library and the lawn in front of the mosque”.
At the Jinnah stadium, where more than 100 distraught relatives waited to learn the fate of their children, charity workers posted the names of those admitted to hospitals and morgues.
Mattiullah Khan, 50, said he had not spoken to his 16-year-old nephew Mohammed Yusuf since the previous week, when the boy had said he wanted to escape. “He didn’t want to be a martyr,” his uncle said.
The lists of injured, dead and detained told their own story of panic and terror. Among those held in Adyala jail were a six-year-old boy, with two nine-year-olds for company.
There were 23 names on the list of confirmed dead, many of them aged 15 and 16. At the Federal Government Services hospital, 34 girls under 16 were treated for tear gas inhalation, including a six-year-old, four girls of eight, and many more younger than 12.
Hamid Gul, a former head of Pakistan’s ISI intelligence service, said statistics like these, and the stories of dead and injured children, could drive Musharraf from power. “The government is trying to hide the number of young girls killed,” he claimed. “As the truth comes out that young girls were gassed and burnt, riddled with bullets and killed, it’ll be bad for Musharraf.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1866105/posts
@ Kashif,
your murderers Impostor’s followers of secularism
behaved like Stalin, should I remind you, its just
60 years ago, you can find refuge in condemning Zia,
but its because you are basically a tribe of cowards,
corrupt and Indian soldouts working for Batilans.
I think we know each other.
@Ahsan
I didn’t read the whole thing.
But i don’t care what and who the people in the Red Mosque were associated with.
There should have been a peaceful soultion to it.period.
@ This runing commentary concerning Laal Masjid
is nothing but a stupidly orchestrated
joint report drafted by CIA & Musharraf’s
courtiers. First half of paragraphs are
proved pure rubbish.
But the massacre commited by Nazi bastards is true
even worst, there are more than 2000 butchered victims.
Musharrafians are activated again on this blog !
@Talkhaba,
don’t give 90 Azizabad land-line telephone
number to Rauf, the whole world knows this
number even MI6 !!!!
@Rafay Kashmiri
I think you are trying to say that those people could have lied.
I agree they could have lied!
We need proofs!!!!
@Ahsan
Why quote from freerepublic.com and telegraph? What “brilliant” reporting e.g. “AL-QAEDA’S leadership secretly directed the Islamic militants whose armed revolt at the Red Mosque in Islamabad”; What melodrama: “As she spoke, rifle shots rang out, the acrid smell of tear gas drifted over Islamabad and hundreds of troops surrounded the pro-Taliban Red Mosque”; what HOGWASH: “Bin Laden’s deputy behind the Red Mosque bloodbath” headline and “Government sources said up to 18 foreign fighters — including Uzbeks, Egyptians and several Afghans — had arrived weeks before the final shootout and set up firing ranges to teach students, including children, how to handle weapons.”
@ Rafay Kashmiri
“don’t give 90 Azizabad land-line telephone”
Abay Ullo, you prove you are ullo. Its not 90 numbers. it is the number of Daily Jasarat, Karachi. any way your proved you’re ullo. By the way, YEh Fakhr-e-Alam kia lagta hai tera?
@ Mr. Doctor,
talkhaba, joon badal li, jasarat ko mein us waqt
say jantah hon jab unka pehla parcha nikla tha,
yeh Fakhr-e-Alam, kisi zamany mein jasarat kay katib
the, ab mukhberi kartay hein. MQM say bhi ankh mataka
kartay hein
zara dorio, pakrio, wo jo blog hay Islamabadobserver
wo 3 gawah pakar kar laya hey Zaid kay khilaff, laikin
sirf comment mein hay,nazar nehein attay !!
zara baghio, unko lao yehan par, ham puchaein gay.
@ Ahsan is an old client of Khaliffa Adil Najam’s
holy ATP Pakistaniat.com where many agnostics jerks
and MQM’s , PPP’s ANP’s frustrated fake Republicans
seculars, hinduvta’s new clients and yellow jokers,
try to enlighten the whole fucking world, with their
pearls of wisdom of Roshakhayyalism dotted with their
GURU MUSHARRAF, the salesman of Pakistanis females with
three kids to his Fucking Nazi FBI pimps masters.