Syrians are suffering from the hands of both Pro-Assad camps and ISIS.

The process of destabilization in the middle east region which started with 2003 invasion of Iraq is now taking more deadly turns. Aleppo and other Syrian cities are facing genocides of people from pro-Assad forces backed by Russia and the Khomenist regime in Iran, and also from the hands of ISIS.

The countries which started this war mess in the middle east especially US, UK and the countries who supported them are not even accepting refugees.

It is the prime responsibility of OIC countries especially bigger countries like Pakistan, Indonesia, Turkey etc. to stand up and start a peace process in the region. At the moment USA, Russia and Iran are playing their super power game in Syria at the cost of innocent lives.

Saudi Arabia and other GCC cannot be trusted with any peace process either as they are playing their own power games at the cost of human lives in Yemen.

People around the world who believe in justice and humanity should raise their voice on the issues.

If the ongoing genocide in Syria doesn’t end then I am afraid that it will create more sectarian hate based wars in the region.

I hope some sense will prevail and someday in-sha-Allah we will see peace in the region.

Advertisements

Erdogan, Turkey, ISIS, Russia and Syrian mess

After the downing of the Russian Jet when it violated the Turkish airspace, there seems to be a lot of cold war style propaganda against Turkey and its role in Syria. It seems there is a deliberate attempt to take down Turkey using the situation in Syria.

If a liberal and democratic Turkey goes down then it will empower groups like ISIS and create chaos in Middle East and surrounding regions including Europe. Erdogan is not perfect like any other leader of the world but it is stupid to think that he is in bed with ISIS even after ISIS killed hundreds in Ankara blasts. ISIS considers all democratic leaders and their voters as infidels and worthy of being killed including leaders in Turkey, Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh etc so it will be really stupid for anyone to support a group which is committed to to kill you, takeover your countries and destroy your system. ISIS is a product of hatred and chaos created after 2003 Invasion, they have no ideological grounds except revenge, hatred and ignorance. They started as a splinter group of Al-Qaida and later joined by Saddam loyalists who were full of vengeance.

If NATO or Russian led alliance want to eliminate ISIS then they need to stop playing super power games in Syria like they played in Afghanistan which resulted in the creation of Al-Qaida type groups.

Before accusing others, Russia first needs to give answers about the downed Malaysian civilian jet and the way they are destabilizing Ukraine.

This whole Syrian game is fishy with no clarity of approach on how to tackle ISIS or Daesh. At the moment Pakistan and China both are doing the right thing by staying out of it despite their own allies pushing them into this mess.

Turkey made a mistake of jumping into this Syrian mess like Pakistan made by jumping into the Afghan mess. Now they are facing similar pressures to do more or accusations of being in bed with the terrorists like Pakistan was facing even after losing a lot of civilians and soldiers in this war.

Many Pakistanis seem to be falling for this game too, mainly due to sectarian or left/right political alignment. Instead of bringing sectarianism from the conflicts between a theocracy like Iran or a family dynasty like KSA, we need to go more towards liberal Muslim democracies like Turkey, Indonesia, Azerbaijan and I hope Pakistan will be in the same or better league too. Things are not perfect in these countries but they seem to go in the right direction with the establishment of democratic processes, strong opposition culture and strong media.

Unfortunately, even in 21st century, we are stuck with theocracies, dictators like Assad or Al-Sissi and backward monarchies.

Paris attacks, Islamophobia and ISIS

Many people are exploiting the situation to show their inner bigot. At least try and understand the problem before deciding to go for a third world war or some other solution your genocidal mentality tells you to go for.

ISIS is an offshoot of Al-Qaida in Iraq and Syria.

Not many even bother to question how Al-Qaida was formed. It was created by anti-communism alliance led by NATO to fight against Soviets. We were part of it as non-NATO members but we were not the leading players.

They got stronger when they were joined by disgruntled elements in Iraq who were angry at 2003 USA invasion of Iraq. Again we didn’t ordered or invited the invasion but the blame will some how find its way towards us. I hope the attacks will not make life difficult for minorities living in Europe and other parts of the world. Recent statements on the issue by Tony Blair (PM of United Kingdom during the time of invasion) can give some indication about the start of this ISIS menace.

Imagine if Soviets had started to fund KKK or IRA then they would have turned into uncontrollable monsters too. The solution is to stop creating these monsters in the first place and stop invading countries which results in the destruction of societies. These broken societies with soared up poverty, due to war, end up as breeding grounds for terrorism.

I sympathize with the people of Paris like I sympathize with the people in and with people in all other places who are facing poverty and death as a result of political and military policies not created by them.

People like Donald Trump, Netanyahu and other people who feed on hatred and fear do not want peace as peace does not serve their interests. We need to stand up as human beings to beat both war mongers and terrorists.

For those who want to give it  a religious color, I can only say that if you want to blame a religion then at least develop some understanding of it. Even if you treat all Muslims as your enemies, it’s not a bad idea to do some opposition research.

a)Quranic verse for dealing with enemies:

“O ye who believe! Be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity, and let not hatred of any people seduce you that ye deal not justly. Deal justly, that is nearer to your duty. Observe your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is Informed of what ye do.” [Al-maeda ,8]

b) Quranic verse prohibiting the murder of innocent human beings:

“For this reason, We decreed for the children of Isra’il that whoever kills a person not in retaliation for a person killed, nor (as a punishment) for spreading disorder on the earth, is as if he has killed the whole of humankind, and whoever saves the life of a person is as if he has saved the life of the whole of humankind. Certainly, Our messengers have come to them with clear signs. Then, after all that, many of them are there to commit excesses on the earth.” [Al-maeda,32]

c)Even in the case where some transgression has been committed against someone, the preferable way is forgiveness:

“The recompense of evil is evil like it. Then the one who forgives and opts for compromise has his reward undertaken by Allah. Surely, He does not like the unjust.” [As-Shura,40]

Who Allowed ISIS To Flourish And Who Is Benefiting From Their Murderous Onslaught?

By Yvonne Ridley

Source: http://yvonneridley.org/analysis-and-opinion/who-allowed-isis-to-flourish-and-who-is-benefiting-from-their-murderous-onslaught/


 

I have no idea where the Islamic State/ISIS/ISIL or whatever name it uses came from, and I’m just as baffled by the roots of its violent ideology. While I never pretend to speak for the diverse community of Muslims living in Britain today, I reckon my views on this will be echoed by the majority who have watched with growing concern the unprecedented rise of this group.

However, just as unprecedented is the childish invective being spewed out by Islamophobes, racists and so-called terrorism experts encouraged by some sections of the British media. They have not helped at all.

While I’ve blocked most of the jack-booted trolls who patrol Twitterland demanding that anyone who is or even looks like a Muslim should launch an immediate protest march against ISIS, I’m amazed that similar rhetoric is being pushed by elements of the media.

There are many reasons why I’ve not spoken out against ISIS. For a start, I’m not sure who it is, where it came from or how it is funded. I’ve not seen such a militarily- and strategically-savvy fighting force emerge in the Middle East before, other than the highly disciplined and much feared Hezbollah. I, like many others, want to know a little bit more about ISIS before making public comments.

Secondly, why should I organise a march against ISIS? I am not responsible for its actions, just as my Jewish friends are not responsible – and nor should they be – for the actions of that other group of violent psychos in the Middle East, the Israeli military. While ISIS enforcers wield head- and limb-chopping knives, Israel drops bombs called Daisy Cutters which also decapitate and maim anyone caught in the fallout.

Thirdly, my silence over ISIS does not mean that I support the group even if some fools take my silence as a sign that I do. Only when I ask some male tweeters to apologise on behalf of rapists, on the grounds that every rapist is a man so they must all be somehow culpable, does the penny drop; occasionally I’ll get a muffled apology.

And finally, even if I jumped up and down and declared that “ISIS is the scum of the earth”, exactly what would that achieve anyway? I hardly think its leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi is going to lose any sleep over Yvonne Ridley’s views.

There are few certainties in the chaos that is now the Middle East. However, what I can say with authority is that the world would never have heard of ISIS had widow-makers George W Bush and Tony Blair not launched their illegal war in Iraq in 2003. The world would also never have seen ISIS develop into the full blown monster that it is if the West had, at the very least, introduced a no-fly zone in Syria after the chemical weapons were unleashed on civilians by Bashar Al-Assad’s forces exactly a year ago this week.

The question to ask is this: Who really benefits from the unfolding ISIS spectacle? The big winners are sitting within the Assad regime. It is that regime which was, by the way, suspected of capturing US journalist James Foley who went missing in north-west Syria on 12 November 2012. How on earth did he slip out of the Syrian government’s hands into those of the murderous head-chopping maniacs of ISIS?

The former head of the British Army says that the West should sit down and negotiate with Assad to get rid of ISIS, but what if ISIS was created by Assad and his ally Iran, which has members of the elite Republican Guard in parts of Syria?

As crazy as it sounds, that would explain why Nouri Al-Maliki’s Iraqi army fell away so easily in the face of ISIS leaving behind a massive arsenal of weapons for the militia to use. It is virtually inconceivable for a trained fighting force to leave all of its kit behind before doing a runner, just as it’s virtually inconceivable that a crack fighting force like ISIS could emerge from a rag tag bunch of ill-disciplined rebel fighters buoyed-up by disaffected youngsters from Europe and beyond.

Make no mistake, ISIS’s domination of Iraq is nothing short of breath-taking; it has achieved in a matter of weeks what the US and its allies failed to do in 10 years of occupation. This hasn’t happened by accident; military victories on this scale take strategic planning and inside help. So who, exactly, is behind ISIS?

This article was first published in the Middle East Monitor.

Disappointments with my friends

I really hate myself while writing this but need to write it to give an honest view point.

I am really disappointed with almost all of my Shia friends who support this war. I thought there must be some good significant number of Shias in Pakistan who don’t blindly toe the line of that Jerk Khemenei or Seestani but here it seems its not the case and almost all are determined to push not only their selves in this more war mess and resulting terrorism but also others too. Almost all my Shia friends cannot see the fact they are being used as a fuel for this war by Pakistani and other pro-war establishments including their beloved Khomenist regime in Iran.

I also criticize sunni or deobandi or ahl-e-hadith or other sects and social classes for the hate based crap some of their leaders or other people do (LeJ or ST or Mumtaz Qadri or Malik Ishaq types) but a clear thing which disappoints me is that others have broad range of views and diversity at extremes (almost all against innocent killings except few mad people) but for my almost all Shia friends it looks that they are toeing some kind of deep rooted hate based agenda against others with no room for reconciliation.

They need to know no anti-war on terror person supports suicide attacks on Hazara or on other Shia communities but what I have seen is that almost all (not all) of my Shia friends feel really happy when they know about deaths of people including children from other sects in tribal areas, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan or any where else. Even in Pakistan, they don’t really sympathize with anyone else but merely use one majority sect like Barelvi against the others like Deobandi or Ahl-e-Hadith. The trend is not just in religious maniacs but also evident in so called liberal or moderates.

I have always criticized army for this war mess but those who think they are being victimized should also see where they are going or what they are becoming in blind hatred.

They are trying to eliminate any space for those who want peaceful resolution of this war issue as probably it doesn’t fit into their hate based agenda to settle some centuries old good for nothing historical issues. Anti-war on terror people always condemn LeJ or other groups but unfortunately my Shia friends almost never condemn aerial bombings or military’s use of heavy conventional or even chemical weapons against other sects which is a crime even in worldly laws.

I don’t have any sympathies now for those who want innocent killings on both sides to satisfy their hatred for other sects and social classes. my only concern is those unrelated (who do not support this war or resulting terrorism) people who die as collateral damage but unfortunately there is no way to discriminate one from the other in aerial or suicide bombings which Shia groups want when they support this war.

May the wrath of Allah be on those from both sides of the conflict (Army, TTP, MWM,LeJ,SUC,SIC, PPP, ST,PMLN,MQM or others) who support these mass murders either through aerial/drone/military bombings or through suicide attacks.

Even India never does aerial bombings (drone or jet) on civilian populated areas despite almost 2 dozens of insurgencies.

I pray for the hardest wrath of Allah on those who consider innocent dead kids as an unavoidable or tolerable or necessary collateral damage.

I still pray for the blind followers of this corrupt system to get on the path of justice and peace but it seems we are going for complete self-destruction.

If the hatred is about religion or sects then at least while supporting aerial bombings, we should remember what the holy book says:

“O ye who believe! Be steadfast witnesses for Allah in equity, and let not hatred of any people seduce you that ye deal not justly. Deal justly, that is nearer to your duty. Observe your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is Informed of what ye do.” [Al-maeda ,8]

Why War Fails–>By Howard Zinn

Below is an article by late Howard Zinn on the issue of war and its role in achieving any good desired goals. A good read for those who are interested in understanding the view other than the one presented by governments fighting this criminal war.

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

Why War Fails

By Howard Zinn

Source : http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article15395.htm

10/23/06 ” The Progressive” –I suggest there is something important to be learned from the recent experience of the United States and Israel in the Middle East: that massive military attacks are not only morally reprehensible but useless in achieving the stated aims of those who carry them out.

In the three years of the Iraq War, which began with shock-and-awe bombardment and goes on with day-to-day violence and chaos, the United States has failed utterly in its claimed objective of bringing democracy and stability to Iraq. American soldiers and civilians, fearful of going into the neighborhoods of Baghdad, are huddled inside the Green Zone, where the largest embassy in the world is being built, covering 104 acres and closed off from the world outside its walls.

I remember John Hersey’s novel The War Lover, in which a macho American pilot, who loves to drop bombs on people, and also to boast about his sexual conquests, turns out to be impotent. George Bush, strutting in his flight jacket on an aircraft carrier, and announcing victory in Iraq, has turned out to be an embodiment of the Hersey character, his words equally boastful, his military machine equally impotent.

The Israeli invasion and bombing of Lebanon has not brought security to Israel. Indeed, it has increased the number of its enemies, whether in Hezbollah or Hamas, or among Arabs who belong to neither of those groups.

That failure of massive force goes so deep into history that Israeli leaders must have been extraordinarily obtuse, or blindly fanatic, to miss it. The memory is not lost to Professor Ze’ev Maoz at Tel Aviv University, writing recently in the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz about a previous Israeli invasion of Lebanon: “Approximately 14,000 civilians were killed between June and September of 1982, according to a conservative estimate.” The result, aside from the physical and human devastation, was the rise of Hezbollah, whose rockets provoked another desperate exercise of massive force.

The history of wars fought since the end of World War II reveals the futility of large-scale violence. The United States and the Soviet Union, despite their enormous firepower, were unable to defeat resistance movements in small, weak nations. Even though the United States dropped more bombs in the Vietnam War than in all of World War II, it was still forced to withdraw. The Soviet Union, trying for a decade to conquer Afghanistan, in a war that caused a million deaths, became bogged down and also finally withdrew.

Even the supposed triumphs of great military powers turn out to be elusive. After attacking and invading Afghanistan, President Bush boasted that the Taliban were defeated. But five years later, Afghanistan is rife with violence, and the Taliban are active in much of the country. Last May, there were riots in Kabul, after a runaway American military truck killed five Afghans. When U.S. soldiers fired into the crowd, four more people were killed.

After the brief, apparently victorious war against Iraq in 1991, George Bush Sr. declared (in a moment of rare eloquence): “The specter of Vietnam has been buried forever in the desert sands of the Arabian peninsula.” Those sands are bloody once more.

The same George Bush presided over the military attack on Panama in 1989, which killed thousands and destroyed entire neighborhoods, justified by the “war on drugs.” Another victory, but in a few years, the drug trade in Panama was thriving as before.

The nations of Eastern Europe, despite Soviet occupation, developed resistance movements that eventually compelled the Soviet military to leave. The United States, which had its way in Latin America for a hundred years, has been unable, despite a long history of military interventions, to control events in Cuba, or Venezuela, or Brazil, or Bolivia.

Overwhelming Israeli military power, while occupying the West Bank and Gaza, has not been able to stop the resistance movement of Palestinians. Israel has not made itself more secure by its continued use of massive force. The United States, despite two successive wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, is not more secure.

More important than the futility of armed force, and ultimately more important, is the fact that war in our time always results in the indiscriminate killing of large numbers of people. To put it more bluntly, war is terrorism. That is why a “war on terrorism” is a contradiction in terms.

The repeated excuse for war, and its toll on civilians-and this has been uttered by Pentagon spokespersons as well as by Israeli officials-is that terrorists hide among civilians. Therefore the killing of innocent people (in Iraq, in Lebanon) is “accidental” whereas the deaths caused by terrorists (9/11, Hezbollah rockets) are deliberate.

This is a false distinction. If a bomb is deliberately dropped on a house or a vehicle on the ground that a “suspected terrorist” is inside (note the frequent use of the word “suspected” as evidence of the uncertainty surrounding targets), it is argued that the resulting deaths of women and children is not intended, therefore “accidental.” The deaths of innocent people in bombing may not be intentional. Neither are they accidental. The proper description is “inevitable.”

So if an action will inevitably kill innocent people, it is as immoral as a “deliberate” attack on civilians. And when you consider that the number of people dying inevitably in “accidental” events has been far greater than all the deaths of innocent people deliberately caused by terrorists, one must reconsider the morality of war, any war in our time.

It is a supreme irony that the “war on terrorism” has brought a higher death toll among innocent civilians than the hijackings of 9/11, which killed up to 3,000 people. The United States reacted to 9/11 by invading and bombing Afghanistan. In that operation, at least 3,000 civilians were killed, and hundreds of thousands were forced to flee their homes and villages, terrorized by what was supposed to be a war on terror. Bush’s Iraq War, which he keeps linking to the “war on terror,” has killed between 40,000 and 140,000 civilians.

More than a million civilians in Vietnam were killed by U.S. bombs, presumably by “accident.” Add up all the terrorist attacks throughout the world in the twentieth century and they do not equal that awful toll.

If reacting to terrorist attacks by war is inevitably immoral, then we must look for ways other than war to end terrorism.

And if military retaliation for terrorism is not only immoral but futile, then political leaders, however cold-blooded their calculations, must reconsider their policies. When such practical considerations are joined to a rising popular revulsion against war, perhaps the long era of mass murder may be brought to an end.

Aafia Siddiqui Indictment

Below is the text of indictment in Dr. Aafia case.

The judgment below has many flaws but just to give you some idea:

– It doesn’t prove anything regarding her affiliation with Al-Qaida which was the primary reason for her abduction.

– It doesn’t discuss her abduction from Karachi in 2003 with her 3 children and the feared death of her youngest son by the hands of kidnappers.

– The decision talks of her having some attack plans. No evidence quality was checked and if we look at this point in line with the point of her abduction from Karachi in 2003 , this turns out to be as true as “Iraq having WMDs”.

All this is given in case background to create a fear among the reader about the accused without any solid proofs.

-The jury has given decision against her for attacking US citizens and soldiers even though no fingerprints were found on the M-4 rifle and no proof of firing with  M-4 riffle were found and presented by FBI.

On principles the burden of proof lies with the prosecution or accusing party but here accused was found guilty because she could not prove herself innocent to the satisfaction of the jury.