While the reasons may be partially benevolent or even understandable, this does bring out another question which is seldom raised in Pakistan: the unrestricted availability of internet pornography [2]. While it is “officially” banned in Pakistan, it is not difficult to find smalltime booksellers displaying lad mags on handcarts or at some kerbs, movie rentals renting out skin flicks, CD/DVD shops vending “top-shelf” stuff or indeed the all pervasive dot com smut [4]. However, online porn is the most freely available and easily accessible variety (i.e. without the need to conceal glossy mags, video cassettes, CDs or other tangibles). Indeed, Fox has also rated the “Islamic” Republic as the most porn-googling nation [3]. While the method of the survey was questionable (read the comment section at [3]), the Pakistani net-goers’ porn-addiction is not made out of thin air.

The question is that if youtube, facebook and VPNs can be banned on moral grounds, why can’t the government enforce a ban on pornographic websites, at least the well known ones, like Saudi Arabia, China or Gaza does [5, 6, 7]? The most common objection raised by citizens or net-goers is that it is not possible to ban every single x-rated site. This is indeed, sadly, true, but it is also true that all most all pornographic websites are owned by less than a hundred companies and hence it is easy to target the bulk of online porn. Therefore, the government should do as much as it can by:

1) Banning the pornographic websites already banned by other countries.

2) Launching a community based effort, where members of the net community can report such sites. For example, Saudi Arabia provides its net users with an online form here for blocking/unblocking websites based on their perceptions.

Another common objection is that viewing porn is a personal freedom and hurts no one. Firstly, Islam [the state religion] prohibits any form of nudity or immorality whether practiced or observed:

”Say (O Muhammad SAW): “(But) the things that my Lord has indeed forbidden are Al­Fawâhish (great evil sins, every kind of unlawful sexual intercourse, etc.) whether committed openly or secretly, sins (of all kinds), unrighteous oppression, joining partners (in worship) with Allâh for which He has given no authority, and saying things about Allâh of which you have no knowledge.” [Al-Qur'aan 7:33]

Secondly, even non Muslim experts testify that viewing pornography leads to break up of marriages, or at least difficult relationships with spouses and other social problems [ 8 , 9]. Even though Pakistan has made half-hearted attempts at banning online smut before [10,11], it is high time that civil activists should join forces to get this disease banned or at least restricted from entering and destroying our homes. There is already a court case pending [12], which is a good first step. What is needed is concerted and serious online and offline activism.

Well, a picture is worth a thousand words after all. Despite all the smoke and mirrors behind “Enduring Freedom”, “Infinite Justice”…. it seems that the most powerful military on Earth is using Afghan children as human shields. This photograph appeared in the Telegraph today (without a comment on the photo, of course).

Afghan Child used as Human Shield

Oh, but must we not believe the USAF that it is the Taliban who use them as “low tech air defense” [1]? Of course, that is why it is kosher for them to mow down a thousand [2] of these shields in a single calendar year to get a few “rag-heads”. That is, when they get time off from “tailhooking“, making lewd videos….

The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Wow.

Crunchy numbers

A Boeing 747-400 passenger jet can hold 416 passengers. This blog was viewed about 3,600 times in 2010. That’s about 9 full 747s.

In 2010, there were 34 new posts, not bad for the first year! There were 34 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 1mb. That’s about 3 pictures per month.

The busiest day of the year was March 16th with 146 views. The most popular post that day was Zaid Hamid – Here and After.

Where did they come from?

The top referring sites in 2010 were forums.islamicawakening.com, digg.com, mail.yahoo.com, facebook.com, and slashingtongue.com.

Some visitors came searching, mostly for tajzia wordpress, tajzia, battering ram in middle east, urdu tajzia, and “salman ahmad” imran khan.

Attractions in 2010

These are the posts and pages that got the most views in 2010.

Zaid Hamid – Here and After March 2010
13 comments

Afia-Caust Deniers and Revisionists February 2010
13 comments

Realising the Terrorist Threat March 2010
2 comments

NF Paracha – A Square All-Rounder March 2010
6 comments

Tax Protest, 9/11 Style February 2010

By: Bilal A. Siddiqui

Of course oil was not the reason for the US to invade Iraq. It was a country waiting to be “freed” from a dictator which the West supported with weapons (yes the very mass destruction variety used against Kurds, not the fairy tale variety never found after the invasion). That a half a million children died in the run up to the invasion was of course “worth it”, to quote two American ambassadors to the UN[1,2] . Of course, the price was worth it since it was paid in blood. Iraqi blood, that is [3].

And make no mistake. If you thought the loss of thousands of  human lives in Afghanistan were in vain, you are dead wrong. Not only did Operation Enduring Freedom rid the country of an oppressive regime, so oppressive that it eradicated drug cultivation in areas it ruled [4] and dared to think about giving oil concessions to other than American companies [5]. It’s so good that now that the Taleban are gone, year after year Afghan farmers are experiencing bumper opium crops [4]. But of course the drug money will never fill American coffers, just as it never did, ever [6].  However, now the price of death and destruction in this barbaric, 18th century relic of a country is truly worth it.

The U.S has:

discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials. Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe. An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium.” [7]

Micheal Scheuer, a top ranking former CIA analyst argued that it is West’s “imperial hubris” which is making it lose the war against Islamists. But perhaps it is really something else which makes it initiate and perpetuate these wars: Imperial Avarice.

Here is a chilling reminder from Chris Floyd [8]:

Unfortunately, given the realities of our world, one’s first reaction to such news is not a cheery “How nice for the Afghan people!” but rather a heart-sinking, dread-clammy “Uh oh.” For what this discovery almost certainly portends are many more decades of war, warlordism and foreign intervention, as the forces of greed and power fight like hyenas to tear off the juiciest chunks of this windfall.

It also guarantees many more years of American military occupation (in one guise or another); there is absolutely no chance that our Beltway banditti (and their corporate cronies) are simply going to walk away from a stash like this, not when they’ve already got “boots on the ground” — and billions of dollars in war pork invested in the place. It’s payback time, baby! (Or rather, double-dip time, as most these “investments” are just pass-throughs of public money to private profiteers). And hey, finder’s keepers and all that, right?

Rules of Engagement (2000), Paramount Pictures:

The original Rules  of Engagement (2000) Hollywood flick featuring Tomme Lee Jones and Samuel L. Jackson. It was widely condemned as one of the most racist and Arab-demonizing mainstream films to date [1,2]. The best synopsis is provided by Dr. Jack Shaheen from his ground-breaking documentary “Reel Bad Arabs – How Hollywood Vilifies a people” [3]:

JACK SHAHEEN: Of all the Department of Defense films, the one that will stand the test of time as being the most racist is Rules of Engagement. The film was written by former Secretary of the Navy (and senator) James Webb. The action takes place in Yemen, a real country in the Middle East. There are violent demonstrations at the American embassy, and the Marines, led by Col. Childers, they’re called in to evacuate the American employees. And as they try to do so, the Marines open fire on the crowd and kill scores of Yemeni, including women and children. And in the investigation that follows, Tommy Lee Jones, the lawyer who represents Col. Childers, goes to Yemen to investigate. The movie leads us to believe what seems obvious, that the Marines committed this atrocity.

[Clip from Rules of Engagement] Armed American Marines, they were shooting at his people. They were just trying to defend themselves.

JACK SHAHEEN: During his investigation, Jones’s character sees a little girl with only one leg. He follows her, comes upon a hospital ward full of civilian victims. He finds an audiotape by the bed of one of the victims. And when the tape gets translated in court, we immediately begin changing our minds about who is responsible for this massacre.

INTERPRETED TAPE: [clip from Rules of Engagement] To kill Americans and their allies, both civil and military, is duty of every Muslim who is everywhere.

JACK SHAHEEN: We discover that the Yemeni civilians aren’t so innocent after all. It turns out they fired on the Marines first. And in a moment that will live in Hollywood infamy, we suddenly learn that the little girl we’ve been sympathizing with, the very girl whose humanity and innocence may have broken down our stereotypes, well, she’s no better than those other Yemeni terrorists. As a result, when Samuel L. Jackson delivers the key line—

COL.  CHILDERS: [clip from Rules of Engagement] Waste the motherf*s!

JACK SHAHEEN:—we’re now on his side. Why does this matter? Because in the end, the massacre of even women and children has been justified and applauded. It’s a slaughter, yes, but it’s a righteous slaughter.

Deja vu? Fast forward ten years later to 2010, from the US Embassy in Yemen to the Mediterranean coast off Israel/Gaza. And Hollywood’s moment of infamy is replayed in real life.

Rules of Engagement II (2010), IDF Studios:

Featuring the likes of  Mark Regev (of Difficult Combat Situation [4] fame), the sequel’s plot is a rather ingenuous rehash of the original. I will slightly reword Dr. Shaheen’s review of the original Rules (2000):

JACK SHAHEEN: Of all the Department of Defense IDF films, the one that will stand the test of time as being the most racist run of the mill is Rules of Engagement II. The film was written by former Secretary of the Navy Commando (and senator Defense Minister) James Webb Ehud Barak. The action takes place in off Yemen Gaza, a real wannabe country in the Middle East. There are violent peaceful demonstrations at the American embassy Peace Flotilla, and the Marines Commandos, led by Col. Childers, they’re called in to evacuate board the American employees Turkish ship. And as they try to do so, the Marines Commandos open fire on the crowd and kill scores of eight Yemeni Turks and one American, injured including women and children. And in the investigation narrative that follows, Tommy Lee Jones Mark Regev, the lawyer spokesman who represents Col. Childers, goes to Yemen to investigate appears on television. The movie leads us to believe what seems obvious, that the Marines Commandos committed this atrocity.

[Clip from Rules of Engagement II] Armed American Marines Israeli Commandos, they were shooting at his people. They were just trying to defend themselves.

JACK SHAHEEN: During his investigation narrative, Jones’s Regev’s character… finds an audiotape by the bed of one of the victims. And when the tape gets translated played in court on TV, we immediately begin changing our minds about who is responsible for this massacre.

INTERPRETED PURPORTED TAPE: [clip from Rules of Engagement] To kill Americans and their allies, both civil and military, is duty of every Muslim who is everywhere. Shut up. Go back to Auschwitz. We’re helping the Arabs go against the US, don’t forget 9/11 guys! [5,6]

JACK SHAHEEN: We discover that the Yemeni international civilians activists aren’t so innocent after all. It turns out they fired on the Marines Commandos first. And in a moment that will live in Hollywood IDF infamy, we suddenly learn that the peace activists and Nobel laureates little girl we’ve been sympathizing with, … well, she’s no better than those other Yemeni Hamas terrorists. As a result, when Samuel L. Jackson delivers the key line—

COL.  CHILDERS BIBI: [clip from Rules of Engagement] Waste the motherf*s! This wasn’t a love boat, this was a hate boat. [7]

JACK SHAHEEN:—we’re now on his side. Why does this matter? Because in the end, the massacre of even women and children has been justified and applauded. It’s a slaughter, yes, but it’s a righteous slaughter.

Grotesque as it may sound, Israel expects, with good reason and past experience, that the world (or more precisely its leaders) would swallow this hogwash and look the other way. Robert Fisk did a good job (as usual) of comparing the hypocrisy of the West in turning a blind eye to Israeli terrorism in a couple of excellent articles [8,9]. He wonders why invasion of black skinned Somalis of Western ships is pyracy, but that of a Turkish ship by the Israelis is not? And, why was the Allied airlift of Berlin blockaded by the Russians in 1948 a humanitarian act, but running the Israeli blockade of Gaza is detrimental to the Jewish State’s legitimacy?

Let’s just say there is honor even among the thieves….and Obama is an honorable man.

[The post is being updated, as it has been pointed out by a reader that the Republic ended with Julius Caesar. Though the point is valid to a large extent, the basic premise holds i.e. Democracy is not a modern ideology and those accusing the Muslims of wanting to be govern with a seventh century law through the use of violence, are imposing a far more ancient system through not only violence, but underhand means.]

“Delivering democracy out of the back of a Humvee” is how Stefan Halper – a former State Department official who now teaches at Cambridge – disdainfully defined it [1]. But what is this cure-all that must be delivered at the pain of death (of the donor and receptor)? A couple of millenniums ago, the Romans too set the known world on fire in their quest to enlighten the ancient peoples of Carthia, Judea, Gaul and beyond to the “democratic” ideals of the “Republic“. The difference is only skin deep. Replace the republic with the free world, the Senate and Council with the Parliament, battering rams with humvees and the Barbarians with Muslims. Today, as yesterday, the barbarians (or Muslims) must be brought under the banner of Rome, from darkness to civilization (which today, as before, means better roads and corrupt governors). Just as a surgeon must not pay heed to the protests of a patient to attempts at removing the cancer, the Civilization must remain impassive to the uncouth rabble’s moans at being injected with “democracy.”

Roman Democracy Delivery Van

Modern Democracy Delivery Van

However, the similitude does not end here.  Indeed, as the Romans had mastered the art of giving the “people” a false feeling of empowerment, the modern proponents of democracy too deafen us by hollering “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth” [2], which is eerily reminiscent of the “Eternal Empire” of Rome. This famous definition of democracy comes from none other than Abe Licoln’s famous speech after the Battle of Gettysburg, which by some coincidence draws heavily from another ancient source  [3].  But, then as now, democracy remains a government of the few, for the few and by the few, the rest being about as empowered as workers under communism and serfs under feudalism [It is also hard to miss the fact that the battle was fought between two groups of the new confederation, both of whom believed in democracy, so espousing this definition at that moment leaves one perplexed]. Then as now, the nation’s wealth depends on foreign invasions. Then as now, success on battlefield dictated success in politics (Julius Caesar, Vespasian, Eisenhower, Powell et al were general-politicans while Nero, Honorious, Churchill, Bush et al, were draft dodging war mongers). Real emancipation of people came only grudgingly from both of these democratic dispensations, and that too to the extent with which the “people” could be barely appeased and nipped in the bud by the deaths of non-violent reformists like Tiberius Gracchus and Martin Luther King.

Then as now, the Parliament /Senate remains more of a theater than a serious house with serious business. The recent show of members of the Russian parliament caught in voting fraud [3] is perhaps as ignoble as the ancient world’s bribe-prone Senate. Other shows of theatrics would perhaps even put the ancients to shame:

Moreover, the deviant art of serenading the “people” into thinking how smart and empowered they are, also harks back to the times of Julius Caesar. Rick Shenkman, professor of history at George Mason University and author of  Just How Stupid Are We?  Facing the Truth About the American Voter says that:

We are used to thinking of the war as the Bush administration’s failure. But it could not have taken place had ordinary Americans not been taken in by the administration’s deceit, chiefly the dropped hint that Saddam Hussein was behind 9-11. One study by the University of Maryland found that nearly 60 percent of Americans were convinced that Saddam was helping al Qaeda when we undertook our invasion. A majority based their support for the war on this flagrant misunderstanding. A near-majority persisted in believing Saddam was responsible for 9-11 even after the 9-11 Commission flat out said he wasn’t. [4]

He also said that one the eve of the Iraq invasion, two in three Americans thought that most of the world supported the invasion, while one in three believed the world was cheering America on for the invasion [5]! Besides, three in five Americans do not know the branches of their own government either [6]. As Jon Stewart joked:

Isn’t the ignorance part of the American Experience? Americans are people defined to be willing to be involved in the pursuit of  happiness. And ignorance is bliss. Therefore, the founding fathers have put us on this path. We are pursuing ignorance to get to that happiness. [7]

But let us be more generous. It is not just the American people who are being led a merry dance. Isn’t it the case everywhere everyone has an equal vote on everything? The genius and the idiot, the upright and the convict, the drunkard and the sober, the educated and the unlearned? Is the only merit to make decisions and laws is to fool people into voting for oneself with the agency of a pliant press? And how is it fair to berate the barbarians (Muslims) for trying to enforce their own medieval system of governance and justice, while the West is enforcing a more ancient one on others? While Muslims’ system emancipated and empowered the weak and downtrodden, democracy is yet to prove its worth. But, why is it trying to quash its competition rather than having a fair contest? Old habits die hard…..

On 3 May 2007, just days before her 4th birthday, British girl Madeleine McCann disappeared while on holiday with her parents and twin siblings in the Algarve region of Portugal. Over the subsequent months, the case received international media coverage with daily coverage in Britain, Portugal and across the world. In addition to official investigations by the Portuguese and British police forces, at least five firms of private investigators had been engaged by a British tycoon, a former Metropolitan Police Detective Superintendent, US firms and a Portuguese lawyer, to carry out inquiries. Elaborate video reconstructions, televised pleas for assistance and endorsements by celebrities followed. With such global efforts to locate the missing child, it was not surprising that the name Madeleine McCann was the topic of conversation in coffee shops, hairdressers, schools and campuses across the world. Tragically, despite these efforts, Madeleine remains missing today.
On 28 March 2003, another four year old girl, Maryam Siddiqui, disappeared in Pakistan alongside her mother and two siblings.Maryam reappeared at her home last week in equally  bizarre circumstances claiming she was kept in a “cold, dark room” for seven years, reportedly in Bagram. Apart from a few lone voices attempting to raise awareness about the case, there was international silence regarding the issue until the summer of 2008. Why? Because unlike Madeleine, Maryam’s kidnapping appears to be have been at the instigation of the US government.

It is worth delving into the background of this case to provide some context. On 7 July 2008, following a press conference in Pakistan led by British journalist Yvonne Ridley, the case of Maryam’s mother, Aafia Siddiqui began to receive mass international coverage and resulted in a series of political inquiries in Pakistan and the UK. After all, Siddiqui and her children had been missing for over five years in the most mysterious of circumstances. Within two weeks of the press conference, the US administration reported that Siddiqui had been arrested earlier that month by Afghani forces along with her then 11 year old son Ahmed, outside the governor of Ghazni’s compound, allegedly with manuals on explosives and ‘dangerous substances in sealed jars’ on her person. Siddiqui was later extradited to the US and despite a plethora of discrepancies in the evidence against her, was convicted in January 2010 of attempting to murder US personnel in Afghanistan. No terrorism charges were brought against her at any time.

Siddiqui and her lawyers have maintained throughout that she and her children were abducted in 2003 and detained in secret prisons since that time. Siddiqui alleges that she was tortured, raped and abused during this period and forced to walk naked over a desecrated copy of the Qu’ran. Throughout her detention, she knew nothing of her children’s welfare, although her interrogators threatened to torture and harm them if she did not cooperate. Siddiqui’s mother described how an intelligence agency official came to her house a week after the incident, and warned her not to make an issue out of her daughter’s disappearance or she would never see them again. Both the Pakistan government as well as US officials in Washington denied any knowledge of their detention.

However, in late August 2008, the lies began to unravel. Firstly, Michael G Garcia, the US attorney general of the southern region of New York confirmed in a letter to Siddiqui’s sister, Dr Fowzia Siddiqui, that her son, Ahmed had been in the custody of the FBI since 2003 and that he was currently in the custody of the Karzai government in Afghanistan. Earlier the US ambassador to Pakistan, Anne W Patterson had claimed that Washington had no information regarding the children. Ahmed was finally released to the custody of Siddiqui’s family in Pakistan in September 2009. He later gave a statement to police in Lahore that he had been held in a juvenile prison in Afghanistan for years. In February 2010 Ahmed described how, when he, his mother and siblings came out of their home, fifteen to twenty people, including a ‘white lady’ and members of the Pakistani intelligence services, the ISI, were waiting in three to four vehicles on the next street and subsequently kidnapped them. His mother was placed into one black car and he and his crying siblings into another.

On Sunday 4 April 2010, a twelve year old girl was brought by unidentified men to the family residence in Karachi. The girl told the Siddiqui family that her name was Fatima and that she could only speak English and Persian. Days later, Pakistan’s Interior Minister Rehman Malik revealed that a DNA test proved that the girl’s DNA matched that of her brother Ahmed and Siddiqui’s ex-husband Dr Amjad Khan, confirming that she was in fact, Maryam, the missing daughter of Aafia Siddiqui. Chairman of the Pakistani Senate’s Standing Committee on Interior, Senator Talha Mehmood, further divulged that Maryam was recovered from Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan where she was with an American man named ‘John’. He claims that she had been kept in a “cold, dark room” at the US airbase in Bagram for the past seven years.

Siddiqui’s youngest child, Suleman – only six months old at the time of his disappearance remains unaccounted for. Rumours, apparently confirmed by Siddiqui’s lawyer Elaine Sharpe after her trial, circulated for years that he was killed at the time of his abduction.  Siddiqui was later shown a picture of her baby, lying in a pool of blood. It is not known whether he is still alive.

Irrespective of the allegations against Dr Aafia Siddiqui, questions must be answered regarding the disappearance and apparent detention of her three children. The world was shocked when it emerged that teenagers were being held at Guantanamo Bay. Some of those, like Canadian citizen Omar Khadr, have matured into adults during their imprisonment and remain there to this day. What we are dealing with in this case are toddlers who have been treated as terror suspects.

That even now, with the lies of the US government finally unravelling, whilst Pakistan’s streets have been raging with protestors and with week-long vigils beginning in London and New York, that the Western media still refuses to report this case speaks volumes of the state of denial they continue to be in. Unlike the case of Madeleine McCann which appears to have involved a regular kidnapping by persons unknown, it is too disturbing a thought to suppose that in Maryam’s case, the US government may have imprisoned these young children in a foreign detention facility, notorious for the torture and murder of detainees, away from all family and friends for seven years. It is even more horrific to think that they may have murdered a young baby during the kidnapping.

The tragic reality is that Maryam is not the first four year old girl to be detained in the War on Terror. An American four year old girl, Rahma Maldonado and Kenyan Hafsa Swaleh were among other children of a similar age detained in inhumane conditions away from their parents in the Horn of Africa. Their crime – they were the children of terror suspects. Although their detention was far shorter, the fact that it warranted little, if any, attention in the Western media suggests that when it comes to Muslim children detained in the War on Terror, not all children are equal.

We may never know the full truth and reality of what Ahmed, Maryam and Suleman have had to endure for the last seven years but Western media outlets must be true to the principles of investigative journalism and at least raise these difficult questions, no matter how distressing the answers may be. Madeleine McCann and Maryam Siddiqui were two toddlers, worlds apart, but who lived the same reality – abduction. For both, it was the worst of times. Why then the double-standard?

Fahad Ansari is the spokesman for JFAC

[Cross Post]

Nadeem Farooq Paracha is one of the most widely respected intellectual giants of the country. Throughout his life, he has dedicated himself to contribute towards the betterment of the society on issues of critical importance.

During the 1990s, when The News ran its ‘Vibes’ section in its weekend supplement, NFP, as he is affectionately known, made priceless contribution by highlighting some of the most critical issues relevant to the masses some of which are as follows:

1. Top Ten Songs of All-Time in Pakistani Pop Music (revisited and updated at least thrice with Sar Kiye Yeh Pahar by Strings always coming out on top)
2. Top Ten Albums of All-Time in Pakistani Pop Music (again, revisited and updated a number of times Vital Signs Vol. 2 featuring Junaid Junaid Pakistan was always up there)
3. Precursors of Psychedelic Rock
4. The Earth, Wind, Fire and Water in Rock Music
5. The fact that Pepsi destroyed Vital Signs and other bands
6. Perils of Bubblegum Pop
7. Musicians and why they had no right to have sponsorships
8. Dinosaur Acts
9. Aatish Raj and how to sit and mindlessly roll a coke bottle on guitar strings and record it noise and release it as music
10. Several literary masterpieces that should have been acted out – they were proper dramas with heroes such as ‘Junaid Junaid Pakistan’

Thereafter, he disappeared till a millennium went away and another came our way.

He then resurfaced and started writing for Dawn and has increasingly become more focused on politics. Such has been his dedication that he exposes Jamaat-e-Islami, Maududi and at times, Tableeghi Jamaat as well, everytime he writes. Imran Khan too always gets the limelight he deserves. There are occasional references to Junaid Jamshed as well – very few people remember that in 1995, in his Vibes column, NFP had written an exposition of Junaid for supporting Imran Khan. Junaid had written that ‘Imran Khan remains the only Pakistani who promised his nation something and then actually delivered it’.

NFP is an expert on Jihadi outfits as well and has actually read Amir Mir’s book himself. Similarly, his very statement that ‘the 2008 Mumbai attacks’ that were ‘undertaken by Pakistani Jihadis’ is the final word – Pakistanis never budge to American or Indian Pressure. You have to believe him when he implies that ‘The Dawah’ and Taliban have the same agenda. He is also correct when he clarifies the retro-Maududi’ist and Tablighi notions of ‘Islamic Society’ which have no difference. Very few have had better grips of Syed Qutb and Maududi that he has. Not many realize, for example, the death of Mustafa Akkad was actually an admission of failure from the proponent of Maududified Qutubi ideologies.

NFP’s expertise is not limited to politics, music – he is the ultimate (read square) all-rounder and can write and talk endlessly on any issue till kingdom come. He knows more about cricket and its management than Imran Khan and others ever did. It is extremely saddening to realize that Pakistani cricket team was humiliated in the 2007 World Cup which was lost because Tableeghi Jamaat exists as testified by NFP.  P. J. Mir also said that and Bob Woolmer would have done the same had he been alive. It is unfortunate that two important members of the team, Shoaib Akhtar and Muhammad Asif, could not deliver at the time because they could not get the NFP recipe for getting things right. Because he is an expert on cricket, you have to believe him that Waqar was appointed captain in 1999 even if he only played two tests and two one-dayers that year. That is because Khalid Hassan said so too. Munir Hussain, that old sadist, was entirely wrong when he mentioned in his World Cup 1992 account that Khalid Hassan spread lies about the Pakistan Team. His eyes lied. Nadeem’s pen didn’t.
If we were to follow Nadeem Farooq Paracha’s thought, the world would be diarrhea-free, conspiracy-theory-free. Everyone would be applying Aafia Beauty and Bleach Cream all the time made from the flesh of that terrorist criminal, the Amazon-like Dr. Aafia Siddiqui who can easily tackle half a dozen American Marines on her own and snatch a gun from them. Everyone would ensure that Farhat Hashmi is bashed every time anything is discussed. In fact, every discussion should start with an exposition of Farhat Hashmi.

Nadeem Farooq Paracha can read between the lines. He knows that these silly SMSs, despite the fact that they are at times actually contain fabricated Hadiths, are actually aiming to make people respect Hadiths. So he has done a great service to humanity by exposing this grand conspiracy. In fact, it is not a conspiracy but a fact because Nadeem Farooq Paracha doesn’t believe in conspiracies and because he doesn’t believe in conspiracies, they do not exist.

We love Nadeem Farooq Paracha for his humble, honest, well-informed, anarchic, Marxist, non-fascist and any-other-prefix-that-he-loves opinions and his highly ethically, completely-in-line-with-journalistic ethics, his ethically and humble ethical personality.
What would we have done without him? Our limited knowledge is nothing compared to the encyclopedia that Nadeem Farooq Paracha is. Hence, we do not know if he believes in Paradise. But if he did, he would be the first to enter it.

Yet another mega project in the Arabian Gulf. The world’s largest all women institute is being constructed near Riyadh [1]. A very positive development for women to be educated in all female environment, as not only is it an Islamic requirement [2], but girls actually perform better in all girls schools [3]. However, two points stand out. Why is somehow the emphasis primarily on “largest”. Largest, biggest and tallest do not necessarily translate to best. Already there is the “biggest endowment” university, KAUST, near Jeddah, the “tallest” tower in Dubai [soon to be outdone by another "taller" Mile High Tower in Jeddah (4)], the “largest” shopping mall [5], besides six other “biggest”  paraphernalia [6] in Dubai. Oh, and not to mention the world’s “biggest” cricket bat in Pakistan [7] for the 1996 Cricket World Cup.

The emphasis should be on quality, not quantity. Pakistan actually lost the ’96 world cup miserably and the bat is still there, awaiting Pakistan’s team victory in a World Cup so that this bat can be given to the national team in a colorful ceremony! And Dubai has suffered its predictable demise [due to defiance of Divine Laws] despite its seven wonders.

The other point is, more apt names could be suggested for the university. How about naming it after ‘Aishah Bint Abi Bakr (may Allah be pleased with them), the teacher of so many thousands of scholars. Or Karimah, the narrator of Sahih Al-Bukhari: ladies who had a lasting impact impact on world education and enlightenment!

Very good analysis. Reproduced without comment.

___________________________

Abdud-Daiyan said on

March 11, 2010 at 1:02 pm

Assalamu-alaikum,
Jazakallah Khair brothers and sisters for finally setting up this website. May Allah (SWT) bless all those at the Khatam-e-Nabuwat organisation for the strong stand they have taken on this issue and on those in the past. May Allah (SWT) bless and reward all who work for the Islamic cause in Pakistan and around the Ummah Inshallah.
I was dubious about Zaid Hamid (ZH) from the beginning because (just to cite a very few examples):
1. From the first episode of his TV program I saw there was a contradiction because how can someone be talking about Islamic issues when the young lady sitting opposite to him is be-Hijaab i.e not wearing Islamic dress. A person talks about changing Pakistan, if not the world but he cannot see to it that a young lady sitting in front of him wears the Islamic dress according to Sunnah. (By the way this was deliberate to entrap and entice viewers -particularly the youth).
2. This person (ZH) was from day one mixing up Sufi ideas and doctrines as well as “mysticism” and “spiritual” matters with his talks on Islamic issues and Pakistan’s destiny. Anyone who knows anything about basic Islamic aqeedah (beliefs) could tell you that there were a lot of problems with the type of Islam ZH was extolling. Furthermore, they were being presented to an unsuspecting and ignorant public (particularly the youth – who are desperate for change in their lives and country) as if they were in accordance with the authentic teachings of Islam.
3. Mr. ZH’s organisational style has all the hallmarks of a cult because:
a) It is secretive by nature – an Islamic effort is genuinely open and welcoming to all Muslims who want to participate and is never secretive.
b) Mr. ZH refuses to work with or include any person in his group if they have enough Islamic knowledge to start ask questions. Any person like this would threaten the cult leader’s position and so is excluded entry. Only the naive and gullible ones who are easily lead are invited because they are loyal and unquestioning. Compare this with Islamic groups where everyone is welcome and no-one is interested in becoming a “leader”.
c) The people in ZH’s group have very little understanding of Islamic knowledge and are blindly following someone they “think” is right. They certainly have totally failed to understand the implications of the “Kazzab” issue. They are happy to continue getting their salaries and working for what they think is an “Islamic cause”.
As far as the evidence for the points I mentioned regarding the nature of ZH’s team and it having all the hallmarks of a cult I would state the following:
i. Firstly, (and this point is relevant to all of us as Muslims) our greatest tool is Islamic knowledge. Once we are well grounded on what Islam is ourselves it is relatively easy to distinguish what is Islamic and what is not. The problem with a lot of the people around ZH and also his general supporters on other websites who like his mix of Pakistani nationalism with a bit of Islam mixed in (to make them feel better that they are doing something “Islamic”) is that their Islamic concepts are very weak and hence when they are dealing with ZH – they are faced with an individual they cannot properly critique. This also applies to Ahmed Qureshi – who is a very nice guy and really good on Pakistan affairs, but is way out his depth on this one.

ii. However, this is how you learn. In a way the youth will learn from this ZH controversy and this will increase their understanding Inshallah of Islamic issues and what is the criterion for those in leadership and dawah roles. Which brings me to my second point – I, personally, have spent time learning about Islamic and Pakistani political issues practically in the field. We have been through this sort of stuff countless times – with different groups and individuals. “Been there, seen it, done it”. Al-hamdulillah now Islamic activism has started in Pakistan people will learn quickly.

iii. Thirdly, having said this, (as per the above point) I visited ZH and his offices quite a few times to see how I could get involved – it is from these personal experiences of meeting ZH and talking to his staff and checking out his premises (he has about 25 staff in his offices) that I came away with the impression that this was just another group that claimed to be Islamic – but disappointed on closer inspection.
4. I was in no way at any stage against Mr ZH. All Muslims should be safe from the intentions and actions of other Muslims – this is part of our Islamic faith. A lot of what he says needs to be said and is merit worthy. However, many of us are experienced enough (politically and Islamically) to know that there were issues lurking in the background (other than the Islamic contradictions in his lectures and talks) which Mr ZH did not really want to address – a major one and one which is less important.
5. The major issue is this: Now that we have 58 mins of ZH defending Yusuf even until a few days ago (who he called Ali and not Kazzab) and basically saying that an injustice had occurred what does this mean? It means that either ZH is right or all the Ulema, Khatam-e-Nabawat movement and all the government agencies who convicted that man were wrong. Now this means that if the original conviction was right (and having studied all the available evidence at length for myself and also listening in great detail to ZH it appears to me that the conviction was completely correct) and ZH is still defending him and degrading the Ulema and courts who convicted him. Now all that has to be done is that the 58 mins of documentary evidence should be submitted in front of the appropriate authorities and Ulema to show that ZH is still a believer and follower of Yusuf “Kazzab”. This is not a small issue since this person ZH, is attempting to mobilise and gather people to his cause. So this issue needs to be cleared up quickly and people need to decide for themselves whether then they want to follow and learn from this person.
6. The minor issue is ZH claim to Jihad in Afghanistan. Where is the evidence for this from others who can verify his participation in battles etc. Mr ZH has photos of him in Afghanistan at that time. Nobody is suggesting that ZH was not in Afghanistan in the eighties – but we are all told that Mr ZH is a “very keen photographer” and a lot of people went to Afghanistan for all sorts of reasons during the Afghan Jihad. The reason all of this becomes relevant now is that Mr ZH is using his “Afghan Jihad” background as part of his public image projection (and one in which he revels by the way) – so before a lot of innocent people get mislead about ZH’s credibility and character – it’s time to sort this issue out as well.
7. This whole affair has been a mess from start to finish, full of confusion and doubt, with all sorts of unanswered questions about motives and intentions. This is what happens when you make things up as you go along. According to Islam – an Islamic personality and his or her speech/actions should be free from doubt. Everyone in Pakistan knows that ZH is aided and abetted either directly or indirectly by the agencies/armed forces etc. It doesn’t take a genius to figure that one out. Or to figure out that all ZH’s programs are paid for air-time features with staged girly presenters asking prepared questions. Furthermore, if ZH is supposed to be giving an Islamic message to the gullible youngsters then why is there music and mixed gatherings at all his “shows” [and yes they are shows - more for entertainment rather than any serious effort for our deen or country] and what have individuals like Ali Azmat and Maria B got to do with Islamic dawah.
8. We do not want an “Iqbaliyat” or “Iqbal Ka Pakistan”. Sure, I appreciate the contribution of Allama Iqbal like most Pakistanis but I don’t want any knew Dine-illahi type creation about Jinnah’s Pakistan or Iqbal’s Pakistan. We only want an Islamic Khilafah state based on the Allah’s law according to Quran and Sunnah and based on the example of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (SAW)’s Sunnah. Which was followed by the Khulafa-e-Rashideen (the four rightly guided Khalifs (RA).
9. Neither do we want an armed forces sanctioned type Islam (“deeni ghairat ko paida karne ke liye”). Pakistan was only created to serve the interests of Islam and we will establish the Islamic way of life or die trying Inshallah.
10. Mr. ZH has from day one cynically presented an easy to follow type of Islam to the impressionable (but Islamically non-practising) youth mixed with rousing political slogans – which means they do not have to change their unIslamic convictions and lifestyles. He has mixed nationalism with Islam (which Islam totally forbids) and tried to justify that it is in accordance with Islam. No, sorry, we don’t agree with any notion of “Pakistan First” (Pakistan sab se pehle) we identify ourselves first and foremost as Muslims and so we say “ISLAM FIRST, LAST AND ABOVE ALL”. I love Pakistan because it was created in the name of Islam and it is my part of the Ummah, where I was born and it is where I choose to live come what may. I will defend it (as my duty of Jihad fi-Sabilillah) from harm because it is Muslim land where Muslims live. That’s all. It is Islam and the Muslims that are our priority. Islam was there before Pakistan came into being. Islam will exist even if Pakistan is wiped from the map. Islam has no (and does not need) geographical boundaries.
11. Most noteworthy, perhaps, is that frenzied “cyber world” supporters of ZH and his “mission” are bending over backwards to suggest that all this ‘Kazzab business’ is a distraction from the work of reforming Pakistan from its woes. Well to re-iterate these naive (and Islamically ignorant) patsies do not realise that we cannot entrust in any way shape or form our Islamic or political leadership in anyone whose character or credibility is invalidated by association with any Kazzab. More importantly these cyber/internet warrior supporters of ZH like characters do not realise that we in the real world are trying to actually bring about change on the ground and it is this ZH controversy that has proved the distraction. Talk about barking up the wrong tree.
12. It is heartening to see that people like Ali Azmat and Maria B are experiencing an Islamic awakening in themselves and we pray for them and all other Muslims that they come to see that Islam is the ultimate truth (deen-ul Haqq). It’s ironic that Ali Azmat in many ways has a better understanding of domestic and international issues than Zaid Hamid (he obviously forms his opinions based on a more eclectic approach rather than ZH’s more parochial view) though he is the would be student vis-a-vis Zaid Hamid. Meaning that people like him represent greater potential for change because they are not beholden to certain quarters like ZH and therefore can (and do) speak out more freely against both internal and external enemies of Pakistan.
13. However, when it comes to taking things into the public realm we don’t care what Ali Azmat and Maria B think “Islam means to them” or what their “take on Islamic issues” is – we only care what Allah and his Last and Final Messenger Muhammad (SAW) say about Islam. There is only one Islam and that is the Islam we love and die for – and Inshallah it is this Islam – the Islam that our beloved Prophet Muhammad (SAW) conveyed to his Sahaaba (RA) and the whole world until Qiyaamah that we will implement in Pakistan and the Ummah Inshallah. Enough of the side shows.