Thursday, 28 July 2011

Sohail Ahmad punished for being honest in the Un Islamic Republic of Pakistan


According to the sources, the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday was hearingthe hajj corruption case and had ordered the secretary of establishment division to produce the restoration notification of FIA investigating officer Sohail Asghar in the court.
The court had also warned the secretary that if he failed to produce the notification, he would be sent to jail following contempt of court charges.
Sohail Ahmed presented the restoration notification following court’s deadline.
It is important to mention that Sohail Ahmed took charge as Secretary Establishment on July 6, however, he was made OSD after twenty days of his appointment.




Secy Estab. Suhail Ahmed made OSD after upholding SC orders

Submitted 2 days 13 hrs ago
Secy Estab. Suhail Ahmed made OSD after upholding SC orders
Federal government has made Secretary Establishment Suhail Ahmed officer on special duty (OSD) Tuesday, report said. According to the details, Suhail Ahmed was ordered by the Supreme Court to restore Hussain Asghar as the investigation officer of the Haj corruption case. Suhail Ahmed acted on the orders of the Supreme Court. The court had also warned the secretary that if he failed to produce the notification, he would be sent to jail following contempt of court charges. Today Prime Minister Syed Yousaf Raza Gillani made Suhail Ahmed the Officer on Special Duty (OSD). Suhail Ahmed took his responsibilities as secretary establishment after Abdul Rauf Chaudhry was relieved of his duties on completion of his employment tenure. Suhail Ahmed took the charge on July 6, after the retirement of his predecessor. Suhail Ahmed was made OSD right after 20 days of assuming his charge as secretary establishment.




Pakistan to add 24 nuclear-capable missiles capable of hitting all major Indian cities












Pakistan to add 24 nuclear-capable missiles capable of hitting all major Indian cities

Pakistan plans to add 24 nuclear-capable, short-range missiles capable of hitting all major Indian cities to its arsenal this year, reflecting a urge in the security establishment to seek 'strategic parity in the region', according to a media report on Monday.

http://hindsamachar.in/8641/Hind-Sam...p=page:n=3:z=1

Thursday, 21 July 2011

A Plagiarist Called Sana Bucha


Rampant Plagiarism

Here is something from my timeline:
“@saeedshah Sana Bucha’s column also lifted the headline and the “sulk” theme from my Economist piece”
Its just highlights disappointing and unfortunate standard of our media that a renowned anchor would plagiarise this blatantly in a national newspaper. I guess the quotes speak for themselves.
Its probably a sign of laziness that she didn’t even bother to think of a different title.
Original Article “In a sulk” – Sana’s Article -”When ‘incredibles’ sulk!”
EVEN at the best of times it would have seemed unusual for America’s embassy in Islamabad to organise its recent gathering for “gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender” people. Given the grim state of bilateral relations, the meeting looked downright provocative. Some in Pakistan’s religiously conservative society promptly accused America of conspiring to attack them by spreading outrageously liberal sexual views. One Islamic political party called it “cultural terrorism”.

Even at the best of times between Pakistan and the US it would seem unusual for the latter’s embassy in Islamabad to organise a recent gathering for homosexuals. While some in the country accused the US of conspiring to contaminate our so-called conservative society, another political party dismissed this vulgarity as “cultural terrorism”

What Ms. Bucha has done, while immoral, is far from being rare. In fact there is no thought paid to intellectual property rights of the authors of works, that are infringed by Media broadcasters and producers every day.
In past, a friend’s Picture was taken from his flickr account and shown in a video, without even an acknowledgement of the photographer (and in process at least help his cause), let alone pay royalties. That was done by Geo, Ms. Bucha’s employer and owned by same group that also owns The News. However Geo isn’t alone in this. Everyday you hear/see snippets of Bollywood music being played by tv channels, whenever it suits them.
I have little doubt that they never pay royalties. Though under the Berne Convention, Pakistan is duty bound to provide same protection to Bollywood songs, as it would to domestically produced content, but due to lack of prosecution there are no legal consequences and so the channels don’t bother with such ‘formalities’ like royalties because that would just be a chunk of profit going to someone else for no reason at all.
Then again, as incident with my friend or countless other infringements of local content show, there is no real protection for domestic producers either. Not many know of their legal rights, little legal representation and some are just happy to be noticed & published – though without proper acknowledgment there is very little gain for the author. But while there is no legal sanction, shouldn’t there be a moral duty for these large corporations to provide some royalties to people whose labour  they utilise on broadcast television?
Morality is not the primary concern for many of these corporations interested in the bottom-line. I needn’t remind anyone that many of these organisations never tire out reminding others of their moral and ethical duties, be that President’s ethical duty not to hold Party office or to face cases even while he is constitutionally protected; Or Politicians or Bureaucrats who have failed to do what was expected of them. Talk about The pot calling the kettle black.

A separate legal Issue with Plagiarism is that, if done smartly, its not even a copyright infringement. However, I would argue that in this case Ms. Bucha has done enough to make it a copyright infringement. It wouldn’t be too difficult for the Economist to sue The News and Ms. Bucha, and probably create a bit of legal history. But it’s more likely that not much would happen, as always.

Would Ms. Bucha again highlight her virtues with a straight face, as she does in the interview sent to me by a friend, who prior to this incident was an avid fan of hers. Professionalism, ma’am includes being creative and not copying of other’s work.
I may sound harsh, but fact is Plagiarism or copyright infringement in Pakistan is not seen seriously enough, as they should be. It should be Author’s right how a work is distributed, if they decide that their work may be copied and used without royalties or even acknowledgement, then so be it. However it is not for large corporations and highly paid and powerful professionals to milk other’s hard work – that’s just not on!


Interview with Ms. Bucha, please see from 5:30 onwards




Wednesday, 20 July 2011

Major General Saad Khattak -Ex Sector Commander ISI involved in kidnapping for ransom



A retired ISI colonel has revealed that

 Major General Saad Khattak -Ex Sector Commander ISI involved in kidnapping for ransom in Balochistan when he was serving in the ISI in Balochistan.

Saad Khattak also carries a reputation of extreme financial corruption.

He is now commanding a division in Balochistan.

GOD HELP PAKISTAN.

Tuesday, 19 July 2011

SC says Article 190 is mandatory

SC says Article 190 is mandatory

Those not implementing SC decisions can be punished; SC issues detailed judgment dismissing review petitions in PCO judges case

Wednesday, February 10, 2010
By Tariq Butt & Usman Manzoor

ISLAMABAD: “Article 190 of the Constitution is a mandatory provision under which there is no alternative for the executive but to act in aid of the Supreme Court. Persons identified as responsible for non-implementation of the judgment can be punished by the Supreme Court for contempt for disobedience of its judgment,” the Supreme Court ruled in its detailed judgment, which disallowed several review petitions filed against its July 31, 2009 judgment in the PCO judges case.

The short order in the case disallowing the petitions was issued on Oct 13, 2009 by the 14-member bench headed by Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, which dismissed the review petitions filed by some PCO judges against the July 31 ruling. The detailed judgment has now been posted on the website of the Supreme Court.

The review petitions, which were disallowed, were filed by former Justices Khurshid Anwar Bhinder, Hasnat Ahmed Khan, Zafar Iqbal Chaudhry, Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi and others including Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah, Mrs Yasmin Abbasi, Muhammad Ahsan Bhoon, Anwar-ul-Haq Pannu, Syed Hamid Ali Shah, Barrister Jahanzeb Rahim and Syed Zulfiqar Ali Bokhari. It is worth mentioning that not all the PCO and Dogar recommended judges had filed the review petitions.

Justice Javed Iqbal wrote the main judgment (21,127 words) while Justice Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan dissented with it and came out with his own note (6,888 words). Justice Ch Ijaz Ahmad and Justice Rehmat Hussain Jafferi consented to the judgment but also wrote their additional notes containing 338 words and 1,123 words respectively.

The Supreme Court ruled that persons identified as responsible for non-implementation of a judgment can be punished by the Supreme Court for contempt for disobedience of its verdict and it is mandatory that all executive and judicial authorities throughout Pakistan shall act in aid of the Supreme Court under Article 190 of the Constitution. 

Although the review petition pertains to the issue of judges’ appointment during Dogar’s tenure, this detailed judgment has an important relevance to the apex court’s ruling on NRO that still remains unimplemented. 

If read in that context, the SC interpretation of Article 190 in this judgment would be applicable in the NRO decision which despite the lapse of several weeks is yet to be implemented by the executive.

Besides other directions in the NRO case the SC had unambiguously ordered the executive to immediately write to the Swiss authorities to revive the cases and other investigations as they stood on October 4, 2007. According to this detailed judgment the Supreme Court can punish those who are not implementing the decision on NRO.

While writing the detailed judgment of review petition by PCO judges, Justice Javed Iqbal penned down, “According to Mr Wasim Sajjad, learned Sr ASC, pursuant to acceptance of C.P. No.8 of 2009 the petitioners have been declared not to be Judges and soon after the judgment impugned the petitioners in Civil Miscellaneous Application No.2745 of 2009 and the other persons falling in the second category were removed from their offices by means of Notification No. F.12(4)/2007-A.II-(Vol.II)(d) dated 2.8.2009.” 

“We have considered this argument advanced by learned counsel but find little force to commend it. Firstly, it is to be noted that the removal of the petitioners from the office being occupied by them was a direct consequence of the finding that the actions of General (Retd) Pervez Musharraf taken on 3.11.2007 were void ab initio and secondly that the Notifications of those petitioners who were appointed Judges of the High Courts between 3.11.2007 and 23.3.2009 had not been issued after “consultation” with the Chief Justice of Pakistan as mandated by Article 193 of the Constitution.” 

“Where the Supreme Court deliberately and with the intention of settling the law, pronounces upon a question, such pronouncement is the law declared by the Supreme Court within the meaning of this article and is binding on all Courts in Pakistan. It cannot be treated as mere obiter dictam”.

Referring to its July 31 verdict, the Supreme Court said it was the first instance of the apex court stating in a categorical, loud and abundantly clear manner that military interventions are illegal and will hardly find any colluder in future within the judiciary, another important detailed judgment says.

In fact, the judgment impugned has been considered in Pakistan as well as at global level as a triumph of democratic principles and a stinging negation of the dictatorship, the detailed decision said.

It said the July 31 verdict provides much needed redress as it will render considerable help in blocking the way of adventurers and dictators to creep in easily by taking supra-constitutional steps endorsed, supported and upheld under the garb of the principle of necessity in the past which will never happen again.

“Had our superior judiciary followed the path of non-PCO judges, the course of Pakistan’s political and judicial history would have been different. The verdict has been appreciated by all segments of society for being issue-oriented rather than individual-specific and therefore, no individual including the petitioners” [PCO judges] “should be aggrieved. The judgment impugned would encourage future justices to take the firm stand against usurpers. The judgment impugned being in the supreme national interest hardly needs any justification for review.”

The decision said that the July 31 verdict has the status of conclusiveness and finality and no person can be allowed to challenge it merely for the reason that he was not a party in the case and had not been heard.

Another important observation of the apex court was that in the light of precedents, there remains no doubt that none other than the Chief Justice of Pakistan (CJP and not even an acting CJP, who is a constitutional functionary), can be the consultee in terms of the constitutional provision.

According to the verdict, the most which has been urged by persons notified as judges of this Supreme Court or of the high courts between Nov 11, 2007 and March 23, 2009 on the basis of “consultation” with Abdul Hameed Dogar, purporting to act as CJP, is that he was the de facto chief justice and, therefore, consultation with him was sufficient to fulfil the requirement of Article 193 of the Constitution. It said that this contention is misconceived and wholly without merit. “We need go no further than the case titled Al-Jehad Trust Vs. Federation of Pakistan and others (PLD 1996 SC 324) to debunk the argument. 

FBI arrest man for collaborating with Pakistani spy agency ISI

FBI arrest man for collaborating with Pakistani spy agency ISI

WASHINGTON — US justice officials charged two alleged Pakistani agents Tuesday over a decades-long effort to illegally funnel millions of dollars to push the Kashmiri cause in Washington.
The Justice Department unsealed conspiracy charges against Ghulam Nabi Fai, 62, a US citizen, and Zaheer Ahmad, 63, a US citizen and resident of Pakistan, and said both faced up to five years in prison if found guilty.
"Foreign governments who try to influence the United States by using unregistered agents threaten our national security," said FBI Assistant Director in Charge James McJunkin.
Fai was arrested Tuesday morning and expected to appear before Thursday at a court in Alexandria, near the US capital, to hear the charges. Ahmad was believed to be currently residing in Pakistan.
The influence peddling allegations, which come amid strained ties between the United States and its nuclear-armed ally, center on the Kashmiri American Council (KAC), a Washington-based NGO founded in 1990.
"According to the affidavit, Fai and the KAC have received at least $4 million from the Pakistani government since the mid-1990s through Ahmad and his funding network," the Justice Department said.
The complaint said KAC was one of three "Kashmir Centers" actually run by Pakistan's military intelligence service, the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI) -- the other two being in London and Brussels.
Fai, who serves as KAC's Washington director, is accused of using money provided by Ahmad to lobby the corridors of power in Washington to support Pakistan's desire for self-determination for Kashmiris.
Under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, it is illegal for anyone seeking to influence US policy or law not to fully disclose their identity and any underlying information.
"The defendants are accused of thwarting this process by concealing the fact that a foreign government was funding and directing their lobbying and public relations efforts in America," said Assistant Attorney General for National Security Lisa Monaco.
US Attorney Neil MacBride said: "Mr. Fai is accused of a decades-long scheme with one purpose -- to hide Pakistan's involvement behind his efforts to influence the US government's position on Kashmir.
"His handlers in Pakistan allegedly funneled millions through the Kashmir Center to contribute to US elected officials, fund high-profile conferences, and pay for other efforts that promoted the Kashmiri cause to decision-makers in Washington."
The complaint alleged that the two conspired illegally as Pakistani agents, falsifying and concealing material facts that they had a duty to disclose in their dealings with the United States government.
A witness told FBI investigators that the ISI created the KAC as a propaganda tool and had been directing Fai's activities for the past 25 years, according to the Justice Department statement.
Fai has been in touch with four Pakistani government handlers more than 4,000 times since June 2008, it said.
Earlier this month, the United States decided to withhold a third of its annual $2.7 billion security assistance to Islamabad amid strained diplomatic relations following the May 2 raid that killed Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.
The powerful Pakistani military was humiliated by the bin Laden raid, which attracted allegations of incompetence or complicity with Al-Qaeda.
Pakistan supports Kashmir's right to self-determination in line with UN resolutions calling for a plebiscite on whether it should be ruled by India or Pakistan.
Kashmir was split in two in the aftermath of independence on the subcontinent when British rule ended in 1947. Both India and Pakistan claim the entire territory, which is divided by a heavily militarized Line of Control.
India accuses Pakistan of sponsoring an Islamist insurgency that has claimed tens of thousands of lives in the last two decades in Kashmir. Pakistan denies the claim but has often spoken in support of the fighters.
India and Pakistan have fought two of their three wars over the fate of the territory.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp...6186deff5f.2c1

Pakistan rmy’s one-day spending equivalent to one-year Pakistan education ministry budget

Army’s one-day spending equivalent to one-year education ministry budget


ISLAMABAD: Pakistan spends Rs1.35 billion per day over the three armed forces just under the head of salaries and operating expenses only, Rs8.60 million daily on the president and prime minister, Rs7.8 million per day on the Senate and National Assembly but a paltry amount of three lakh rupees per day to take care of human rights, show the budget documents.

It further discloses that the Army’s one-day spending is equivalent to the running year’s total allocation for education ministry, and the air-force’s per day expenditures far exceedwhat was allocated to the health ministry for running the financial year ending this month.

In the new financial year, as many as Rs495.215 billion has been allocated for the armed services only and the amount to be spent on the purchase and maintenance of military hardware is apart from thist. Going by the above cited figure means that Rs1.35 billion is spent on the three armed services each day.

A further break-up indicates that Rs640.37 million will be utilized by the Army per day; a sum equivalent to the running year’s budgetary allocation for the ministry of education. Although the ministry has been devolved now with no new allocation made under its head, last year’s budget for the ministry was Rs640 million which means Rs1.7 million a day. The allocated amount for the entire year for the education ministry last year, Rs640 million, is spent in a day by the Army for meeting its salaries and operating expenses only.

Likewise, the health ministry’s running year’s budget was less than the one-day spending of the air force. The ministry that has also been devolved now got budgetary allocation of Rs269 million for 2010-2011 whereas the air force’s per day spending is Rs290.86 million. Pakistan Navy’s spending per day is Rs141.80 million.

How much is spent on the ISI, the premier intelligence agency, is anybody’s guess as the budgetary allocation for the agency is not included in the amount specified for the armed forces. 

The PML-N had demanded a debate on the defence budget and the allocations for the intelligence agencies, but the point has neither been taken seriously by the government nor pressed further by the major opposition party.

In addition to the massive defence spending, the expenditures of the prime minister and president also raise many eyebrows. The prime minister of Pakistan, for example, spends an amount of Rs4.3 million per day on foreign tours and the president around one million of rupees. 

According to the budgetary allocation, the daily expenses of the Prime Minister Secretariat are Rs1.5 million in addition to Rs4.3 million each day that goes towards spending on the PM and his delegations’ foreign tours.

Likewise, the presidency’s budgetary allocation shows that a sum of Rs931,506.85 will be spent per day on his foreign tour and Rs1.322 million on the presidential secretariat. An accumulated amount of the president and PM’s expense is Rs8.60 million per day. Next comes the Senate and National Assembly Secretariat which constitute a total amount of Rs7.8 million per day. Going by that figure it shows that tax-payers would be spending five million rupees on the National Assembly Secretariat each day and Rs2.8 millions per day over Senate.

This massive spending is in contrast with the plight of human rights in Pakistan and the government’s non-serious attitude towards it. The next financial year’s budget indicates that a meagre sum of Rs110 million has been allocated which means three lakh rupees per day. Again, this amount has been allocated for employees’ related expenses as otherwise the ministry of human rights has no presence on the ground.

This is in contrast with the plight of human rights in a country like ours where even journalists are killed like dogs and cats.

An official of the ministry said they don’t have sufficient budget to create awareness, and conduct fact-finding missions. Most of the paperwork is done through media reports as neither the ministry has transport nor enough staff members to verify facts about human rights abuses taking places.

http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrin...=2&dt=6/5/2011

Execution of Colonel Imam by TTP

Amir MirMonday, February 21, 2011



VIDEO ON FOLLOWING LINK---

http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2011/02/video_pakistani_tali.php

LONGER VIDEO ON FOLLOWING LINK----

http://jihadology.net/2011/02/20/new-video-from-the-te%e1%b8%a5rik-i-%e1%b9%adaliban-pakistan-killing-of-colonel-imam-graphic/


The Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) had in fact killed Colonel Sultan Amir Tarrar alias Colonel Imam, a retired officer of the ISI, on January 22, 2011 while charging him with spying for American and the Pakistani intelligence agencies and aiding them to launch drone strikes in North Waziristan to kill Commander Hekeemullah Mehsud and his deputy Waliur Rehman.

Those in the Pakistani security agencies investigating Imam’s murder claim that he had actually been killed last month in Dandi Darpakhel area of Miramshah, the capital of North Waziristan, when Pakistani television channels flashed the news of him having been shot dead. The sources said the abductors, who used to call Imam’s family members in the past to enable them to talk to him, had stopped calling since then, indicating that he had already been killed. They added that Imam seemed to have been buried somewhere in the largely lawless tribal region and it is only now that the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan has managed to release his video. The sources said during their last trip to North Waziristan in March 2010 shortly before being abducted, Squadron Leader (R) Khalid Khawaja and Colonel (R) Imam had a meeting with Hakeemullah Mehsud and Waliur Rehman along with a British journalist who wanted to interview them.

There are those in the TTP circles who allege that after their secret meeting with the key Taliban leaders, the former ISI officials had passed on precise information about their location to the Pakistani and American intelligence. Consequently, they say, ten drone strikes were carried out by the Americans between March 8 and March 30, 2010 in the North Waziristan Agency alone, specifically targeting the hideouts of Hakeemullah and Waliur where the meeting had taken place. Hakeemullah and Waliur had narrowly escaped these strikes. That is why, the investigators say, Hakeemullah deemed it fit to get Imam executed in his presence. Both the ex-ISI officials were subsequently abducted while the US drone attacks were still on. However, the family circles of both the slain ISI officers strongly refute the allegation.

Actually, it was Usman Punjabi alias Mohammad Omar who had invited Khawaja and Imam, along with British journalist Assad Qureshi to North Waziristan to help them make a documentary about Taliban and victims of the drone attacks by the CIA-operated spy planes. They were kidnapped upon their arrival in Mir Ali, the second major town in North Waziristan, on March 26, 2010. Usman alias Omar later claimed responsibility for their kidnapping and accused them of working against the interests of the Pakistani Taliban since July 2007’s Operation Silence conducted by the security forces against the Lal Masjid clerics — Ghazi brothers. The investigators say the leaders of the Pakistani Taliban — both Pushtun as well as Punjabi — which are working in tandem for several years now, used to despise Colonel Imam and Khalid Khawaja for their support to Afghan Taliban and opposition to the Pakistani Taliban.

Those investigating Imam’s murder reminded that a day after Khalid Khawaja was killed by his captors on April 30, 2010 in North Waziristan, Usman alias Omar had declared as spokesman for the Taliban Media Centre that he was executed because he used to call the Punjabi Taliban terrorists and refer to the Afghan Taliban as mujahideen. Explaining the Taliban decision to execute Khawaja, he also said that all major militant organisations operating in the Waziristan region unanimously agreed to punish him and everybody wanted him to be executed as he had confessed to all the charges levelled against him by the Taliban court.

Imam’s close family circles say he had travelled to North Waziristan on a back channel mission to get the Taliban militants to agree to a ceasefire with Pakistani security forces. In an email sent by the Asian Tigers soon after the abduction along with a video footage of the kidnapped persons on April 23, 2010, Colonel Imam was heard saying: “My real name is Sultan Amir and I had served in the Pakistan Army for 18 years, 11 of them in the ISI. I had consulted General Aslam Beg about coming to North Waziristan”.

In the same video, Khalid Khawaja had said: “I had served in Pakistan Air Force for 18 years and in the ISI for two years. I came here on the prodding of Lt Gen Hameed Gul, General Aslam Beg and ISI’s Colonel Sajjad”.

In yet another video released on July 25, 2010, Imam said he was in the custody of the Abdullah Mansoor group of the Lashakr-e-Jhangvi Al Alami, adding that he could face a punishment worse than Khalid Khawaja if the government did not accept the kidnappers’ demands.

Immediately after their abduction, the ameer of the Afghan Taliban Mulla Mohammad Omar had sent a message to the Pakistani Taliban to release Imam and Khawaja. However, Usman Punjabi refused to listen and killed Khawaja besides releasing journalist Assad Qureshi after getting a huge ransom amount. On what to do with Imam, the Taliban were divided in two groups. Eventually, those led by Sabir Mehsud killed Usman along with five of his accomplices. The issue was then brought to Hakeemullah Mehsud, who took Imam into his custody and executed Sabir Mehsud for killing Usman. Since then, the Pakistani security forces had been trying to establish a channel of communication with Mehsud for the release of Imam. There are reports that Maulana Fazlur Rahman Khalil, the chief of the banned Harkatul Mujahideen, was the key mediator who finally failed to save Imam because of the failure of the authorities to fulfil any of the captors’ demands.

Colonel Imam was a top commando of the ISI who had trained Afghan mujahideen in camps jointly run by Pakistani and American agencies. He was widely respected by the Afghan Mujahideen and by the Afghan Taliban due to his role during the Afghan jihad against the Soviet forces in Afghanistan. He had been Pakistan’s consul-general in Herat when the Afghan Taliban captured the city in 1995 from Commander Ismail Khan, who had later claimed that Colonel Imam used to oversee the whole Taliban operation. Afterwards, he had guided the Taliban as they took over strategically important Afghan cities of Mazar-e-Sharif and Jalalabad, before eventually capturing Kabul. Imam only left Afghanistan in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent invasion of the country in October 2001 by the US-led allied forces.