Blog :: Jamaat-E-Islami Pakistan

Media” has often been used lately as an effective tool in smearing the name of Islam and portraying it as a fanatical religion. In reality, statistics regarding terrorism point the finger in a different direction. Infact their is an ongoing campaign to incessantly brand Muslims as “terrorists”. Some international television channels, newspapers and websites have been at the forefront of this fear-mongering crusade. Their general aim seems to vilify the Muslim masses and stir up Islamophobic sentiments.

Most English language dictionaries define the term ‘terrorism’ as the “unlawful use or threat of violence against the state or the public”, and the term ‘terrorist’ as someone who “systematically uses violence and intimidation” against innocent civilians. Hence, any activity which intimidates or hurts the civilian population in any way, shape or form can be termed as terrorism. In this context it is essential that we analyze the following events in a chronological order.

World War one, which was fought between 1914 and 1919 resulted in the death of almost 7 million innocent civilians. World War 2 (1939-1945) led to the extermination of around 47 million non-military individuals. This massive death-toll also included the 220,000 victims of the Nagasaki and Hiroshima bombings. During the Vietnam War (1959-1975), a conservative estimate of civilian deaths was put at 1.2 million. On the 6th of August 1990, United Nations Security Council imposed a stringent financial and trade embargo on the nation of Iraq. This move was strongly backed by the U.S with a motive of ending the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait and unearthing the ’supposed’ possession of WMD’s by Saddam’s government. Unicef estimated that nearly 500,000 Iraqi children died as a result of this brutal 13 year economic blockade.

This recent war in Afghanistan has also resulted in the deaths of 12000 innocent Afghani civilians and created a serious economic and political turmoil for the entire region. The Iraq war (2003-present), which was based on mythical presence of WMD’s has led to the death of a further half a million civilians to-date. Added to these depressing body count statistics are the deaths of thousands of Palestinian civilians at the hands of the murderous Israeli government. Who at the behest of the United States and its allies, have continued to illegally occupy, oppress and indiscriminately murder men, women and children for the past sixty years. An annual aid of $3 Billion dollars is provisioned by the U.S government to the Israelis. This generous ‘gift’ largely assists them in the procurement and production of high-tech precision weaponry for usage in a largely one sided war. Further the U.S and other western powers have also provisioned unconditional support to countries like Israel and India in fortifying their illegal occupations of Palestine and Kashmir.

Many recent releases of journalistic reports and videos have also proven the indiscriminate killing and torture of Afghan and Iraqi civilians by the U..S and its allied forces. In fact federal cases are being run in British and American courts against soldiers for abusing civilians and treating murder as a sport. In this context, it is high time that leaders in the Muslim world stopped with their rhetorically apologetic behavior towards the western masters. (Safwan Umair)

DAVID SWANSON

Afghanistan was supposed to be the campaign promise that President Barack Obama actually kept. He said he would escalate that war, and sure enough he did. Is he now going back on promises he’s made as president, by proposing to withdraw 2.5% of US forces in July?

Here are the relevant promises:

“After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home … [O]ur troop commitment in Afghanistan cannot be open-ended – because the nation that I’m most interested in building is our own.” – President Barack Obama, 1 December 2009

“I’m confident that the withdrawal will be significant. People will say this is a real process of transition; this is not just a token gesture.” – President Barack Obama, 15 April 2011

“In July of 2011, you’re going to see a whole lot of people moving out, bet on it.” – Vice President Joe Biden, quoted in Jonathan Alter’s The Promise

But let’s first review how we got here. When loyal Democrats heard candidate Obama say he would escalate the war as president, they mistakenly understood him to say he would end it. Progressive bloggers have planned a panel for next month to discuss their disappointment with this “broken promise” that was actually kept.

President Obama sent the first additional 17,000 troops before he’d been in office a month and explicitly before coming up with any plan for Afghanistan. Sending the troops was, apparently, an end in itself. Then,Obama sent more. He got the total up from 33,700 US troops in late 2008 to 68,000 in late 2009. These numbers do not include tens of thousands of European troops, untold numbers of “intelligence” personnel, mercenaries hired through the US state department and US defence department contractors almost equal in number to the US troops.

Obama’s 2009 “surge”, which more than doubled the US troop presence in Afghanistan preceded any public debate on an Afghanistan surge. The publicly debated surge, actually Obama’s second, was “debated” between the commander-in-chief and his supposed subordinates, and then executed in 2010. By the end of 2010, according to the US defence department (pdf), there were 96,900 US troops and 87,483 supporting contractors in Afghanistan. In rough terms, there are 200,000 Americans now in Afghanistan, against the will of the American people. Here are some recent polls from the weeks and months preceding the killing of Osama bin Laden:

• By 73% to 21%, Americans say: withdraw a substantial number of US combat forces from Afghanistan this summer – ABC/Washington Post
• By 63% to 30%, Americans want complete withdrawal –Bloomberg (pdf)
• By 72% to 25%, Americans want to speed up the withdrawal – USA Today/Gallup
• By 53% to 39%, Americans say US troops should not be involved in Afghanistan – CBS
• By 50% to 44%, Americans say: remove all troops ASAP –Pew
• By 64% to 31%, Americans say the war has not been worth fighting – ABC/Washington Post
• By 58% to 40%, Americans oppose the war – CNN/Opinion Research Corporation (pdf)

That first poll, with the 73% in favour of a “substantial” withdrawal this summer, is a poll on whether the president should keep a promise. On 1 December 2009, President Obama said of his upcoming second “surge” in Afghanistan:

“Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011.”

This deadline for “beginning” the withdrawal has been repeated for a year and a half. In May 2010, Obama said he was “confident” he could meet the deadline, but that it would just be a beginning. Many observers believed July 2011 was a promised date for completing a withdrawal, but in reality, it was always a promised date for beginning it. Still, most people assumed that beginning a withdrawal would involve a substantial number of troops leaving. After all, if a pair of “surges” of 70,000 troops lasts for years, in what sense are they “surges” rather than ordinary escalations?

In November 2010, the White House started talking about December 2014, leading the Washington Post to print this headline: “When it comes to Afghanistan policy, December 2014 is the new July 2011.” It wasn’t. July 2011 was still the date to start the withdrawal, and 2014 was the date by which a pretence would be established of Afghan “sovereignty”, despite the ongoing presence of tens of thousands, but not hundreds of thousands, of foreign troops.

In President Obama’s 25 January 2011 state of the union address, July was still the start date: “This year, we will work with nearly 50 countries to begin a transition to an Afghan lead. And this July, we will begin to bring our troops home.” Yes, but how many troops, and how many contractors? Of 200,000 people, will you bring home three-quarters? Half? A quarter?

Apparently, the answer is 2.5%.

We learned this week that: “US military officers in Afghanistan have drawn up preliminary proposals to withdraw as many as 5,000 troops from the country in July and as many as 5,000 more by the year’s end, the first phase of a US pullout promised by President Barack Obama, officials say.” This is what you call a trial balloon. It could easily be revised upward if the American people or the United States’ allies raised enough hell. It could go away entirely if we meekly accept it. The Wall Street Journal report continued:

“The proposals, prepared by staff officers in Kabul, are likely to be the subject of fierce internal debate in the White House, state department and Pentagon – a discussion influenced by calculations about how Osama bin Laden’s death will affect the Afghan battlefield. The plans were drafted before the US killed the al-Qaida leader, and could be revised. They have yet to be formally presented to General David Petraeus, the commander of US forces in Afghanistan, who must then seek White House approval for a withdrawal.”

And this trial balloon is smaller than the 5% withdrawal it appears to be. You might assume that 5,000 troops from a total of 100,000 would mean 5,000 contractors departing as well, for a total of 10,000 people out of 200,000. But you’d be wrong. The 5,000 seems to be a total of troops and contractors:

“If approved by top military officers and the president, an initial withdrawal of 5,000 would represent a modest reduction from the current 100,000 US troops in Afghanistan, allowing the military to preserve combat power through this summer’s fighting season. Some of the troops that leave in July will be combat troops but commanders hope to minimise the impact by culling support staff as well.”

In other words, 5,000 out of 200,000 – or 2.5% of US forces – would be withdrawn under this plan. Does that seem like a substantive beginning to you? It does to some anonymous military officials: “Some military officials believe a cut of 10,000 troops this year would be significant because it would represent one-third of the troop surge.” The only thing significant here is the fudging of the numbers. We’ve “surged” close to 70,000, not 30,000, troops, plus a similar number of contractors.

According to Congressman Dennis Kucinich, “the announcement of such a paltry troop withdrawal is an Orwellian attempt to appear to drawdown the war without actually ending the war.” Kucinich pointed out that at this pace of withdrawal, the Afghanistan war would drag on for another full decade. The proposal may actually be better than that, and worse as well. The plan that has now been floated publicly would supposedly withdraw 70,000 troops by 2014, meaning the pace of withdrawal would pick up. But 20,000 to 30,000 US troops would remain indefinitely. As would British troops. And multi-year plans are notoriously subject to revision.

I’m glad to be working with groups in the US and in the UK that intend to reject this latest plan. Now is the moment to put an end to the “global war on terror”, not to ease our way into its permanent establishment.

Source:Guardia

Noam Chomsky

It’s increasingly clear that the operation was a planned assassination, multiply violating elementary norms of international law. There appears to have been no attempt to apprehend the unarmed victim, as presumably could have been done by 80 commandos facing virtually no opposition—except, they claim, from his wife, who lunged towards them. In societies that profess some respect for law, suspects are apprehended and brought to fair trial. I stress “suspects.” In April 2002, the head of the FBI, Robert Mueller, informed the press that after the most intensive investigation in history, the FBI could say no more than that it “believed” that the plot was hatched in Afghanistan, though implemented in the UAE and Germany. What they only believed in April 2002, they obviously didn’t know 8 months earlier, when Washington dismissed tentative offers by the Taliban (how serious, we do not know, because they were instantly dismissed) to extradite bin Laden if they were presented with evidence—which, as we soon learned, Washington didn’t have. Thus Obama was simply lying when he said, in his White House statement, that “we quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda.” Nothing serious has been provided since. There is much talk of bin Laden’s “confession,” but that is rather like my confession that I won the Boston Marathon. He boasted of what he regarded as a great achievement. There is also much media discussion of Washington’s anger that Pakistan didn’t turn over bin Laden, though surely elements of the military and security forces were aware of his presence in Abbottabad. Less is said about Pakistani anger that the U.S. invaded their territory to carry out a political assassination. Anti-American fervor is already very high in Pakistan, and these events are likely to exacerbate it. The decision to dump the body at sea is already, predictably, provoking both anger and skepticism in much of the Muslim world. We might ask ourselves how we would be reacting if Iraqi commandos landed at George W. Bush’s compound, assassinated him, and dumped his body in the Atlantic. Uncontroversially, his crimes vastly exceed bin Laden’s, and he is not a “suspect” but uncontroversially the “decider” who gave the orders to commit the “supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole” (quoting the Nuremberg Tribunal) for which Nazi criminals were hanged: the hundreds of thousands of deaths, millions of refugees, destruction of much of the country, the bitter sectarian conflict that has now spread to the rest of the region. There’s more to say about [Cuban airline bomber Orlando] Bosch, who just died peacefully in Florida, including reference to the “Bush doctrine” that societies that harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves and should be treated accordingly. No one seemed to notice that Bush was calling for invasion and destruction of the U.S. and murder of its criminal president. Same with the name, Operation Geronimo. The imperial mentality is so profound, throughout western society, that no one can perceive that they are glorifying bin Laden by identifying him with courageous resistance against genocidal invaders. It’s like naming our murder weapons after victims of our crimes: Apache, Tomahawk… It’s as if the Luftwaffe were to call its fighter planes “Jew” and “Gypsy.” There is much more to say, but even the most obvious and elementary facts should provide us with a good deal to think about.

حافظ محمد ادریس
ڈائریکٹر ادارہ معارف اسلامی

گورنر پنجاب سلمان تاثیر کو اپنے ہی حفاظتی گارڈ، ملک ممتاز قادری نے گولیوں سے چھلنی کرکے موت کے گھاٹ اتاردیا۔ سرزمین راولپنڈی واسلام آباد تاریخی لحاظ سے حکمرانوں کے لیے بھاری ہے۔ ملک کے پہلے وزیراعظم لیاقت علی خان لیاقت باغ میں شہید کردیے گئے۔ پھر ایک دوسرے منتخب وزیراعظم ذوالفقار علی بھٹو مرحوم کو بھی اڈیالہ جیل میں پھانسی ہوگئی۔ ان کے بعد ان کی بیٹی بے نظیربھٹو جو دو مرتبہ وزیراعظم رہ چکی تھیں لیاقت باغ ہی میں گولیوں کا نشانہ بن گئی۔ نہ تو لیاقت علی خان کے سفاک قاتل منظرعام پر آئے اور نہ ہی بے نظےر بھٹو کے ظالم قاتلوں کا اب تک کوئی سراغ ملا ہے۔البتہ گورنر صاحب کے قاتل نے بڑے اطمینان کے ساتھ اپنے عمل کا اعتراف کیا ہے۔
چار بجے اچانک میڈیا پر خبریں آنے لگیں کہ پنجاب کے گورنر سلمان تاثیر کو کوہسار مارکیٹ اسلام آباد کے قریب موت کے گھاٹ اتار دیا گیا ہے۔ بہرحال ان کا قاتل معلوم بھی ہے اور اس نے اعتراف بھی کیا ہے کہ اس نے یہ کام خوب سوچ سمجھ کر بقائمی ہوش وحواس کیا ہے۔اس میں شک نہیں کہ کسی انسانی جان کا قتل قابل افسوس امر ہے تاہم اس قتل کے محرکات ووجوہات کو پیش نظر رکھنابھی ضروری ہے۔ ہمارے نزدیک قانون کی موجودگی میں کسی شخص کو قانون سے ماورا عمل کی اجازت نہیں ہونی چاہیے۔ گورنر سلمان تاثیر نے گستاخ رسول آسیہ مسیح کی سزا پر اپنے اختیارات کا جو ناجائز استعمال کیا وہ دنیا کے ہر قانون کے مطابق انتہائی غیرمطلوب اور ناپسندیدہ عمل ہے۔ یہ قانون کو ہاتھ میں لینے بلکہ اس کی دھجیاں بکھیرنے کے مترادف ہے۔کسی مجرم کو اس کا جرم ثابت ہونے پر کوئی مجاز عدالت سزادیتی ہے تو اس کے خلاف اپیل کرنے کا حق قانون کی حدود اور عدالتی دائرہ کار ہی میں استعمال میں لایا جاسکتا ہے۔ کوئی صاحب اقتدار عدالتی فیصلوں پر وہ رد عمل ظاہر کرنے لگے جو گورنر صاحب نے کیا تھا تو اس سے قانون کی عمل داری کا خاتمہ، عدلیہ کے وجود اور ساکھ کی نفی اور انارکی کا راستہ کھلتا ہے۔ اس سے بھی بڑی بات یہ ہے کہ گورنر صاحب نے تحفظ ناموس رسالت کو کالا قانون قرار دیا تھا۔
اس بارے میں کوئی دو آرا نہیں ہوسکتیں کہ یہ الفاظ ہر مسلمان کے دل کو چھلنی کرنے کے مترادف ہیں۔ انھی مجروح جذبات کے تحت ان کے گارڈ نے رد عمل میں قانون کو ہاتھ میں لے لیا اور قتل کا ارتکاب کر بیٹھا۔ یہ درست ہے کہ قاتل کو اپنے عمل پر کوئی افسوس نہیں اور صاحب زادہ ابوالخیر زبیر کی بات بھی درست ہے کہ اس قتل پر عمومی طور پر لوگوں کو کوئی افسوس نہیں ہوا۔ قانون کو ہاتھ میں لینے کا عمل درست طرز عمل نہیں اور اس کو جواز فراہم کرنا خطرناک نتائج وعواقب کا حامل ہوسکتا ہے مگر ایک مسلمان معاشرے میں آقائے دوجہان کی عزت وناموس کے خلاف کوئی بات ہر گز قابل برداشت نہیں ہے۔ یہ وہ مقام ہے کہ جہاں محبت وعقیدت اور جذبہ¿ ایمانی ہر چیز سے ماورا ہوجاتا ہے۔ ملک ممتاز اب قومی ہیرو کا درجہ اختیا کرگیا ہے اور یہ تو پوری قوم نے دیکھ لیا ہے کہ سرکاری علما تک نے گورنر کا جنازہ پڑھانے سے معذرت کرلی۔پیپلز پارٹی اپنے کلچراور منشور کے لحاظ سے سیکولر جماعت ہے۔ اس کی ایک ایم این اے شیری رحمان نے اس قانون میں ترمیم کے لیے جو مسودہ پیش کیا ہے وہ بھی خاصا ایذا رساں ہے۔ حکمرانوں کے ایسے طرز عمل کے بعد عوام الناس کا اشتعال میں آجانا ناقابل فہم نہیں۔
سلمان تاثیر کے والد ایم ڈی تاثیر ایک شاعر اور ادیب تھے۔ اپنی سوچ کے لحاظ سے وہ ترقی پسند تھے اور ترقی پسندادیبوں، شاعروں کی انجمن کے بانیوں میں سے تھے۔ سلمان تاثیر کی والدہ عیسائیت سے مسلمان ہوئی تھیں۔ انھوں نے اپنا نام بلقیس رکھا تھا جب کہ ان کی چھوٹی ہمشیرہ ایلس مشہور شاعر فیض احمد فیض سے بیاہی گئیں اور انھوں نے اپنا نام تبدیل نہیں کیا تھا۔ ایم ڈی تاثیر ترقی پسند ہونے کے باوجود تحفظ ناموس رسالت کے بارے میں بالکل یکسو تھے۔ غازی علم الدین شہید کی شہادت پر اس وقت کے تمام مسلم اکابر بشمول قائداعظم اور علامہ محمد اقبال بہت غم گین ہوئے تھے۔ ان سب نے غازی علم الدین شہید کو زبردست خراج تحسین پیش کیا تھا۔ غازی علم الدین شہید کو میانوالی جیل میں پھانسی دی گئی تو ان کی تجہیز وتکفین کے لیے لاہور میں جو کمیٹی تشکیل دی گئی اس کے روح رواں سلمان تاثیر کے والد ایم ڈی تاثیر تھے۔ انھوں نے غازی علم الدین شہید کے لیے ایک نہایت خوب صورت گہوارہ تیارکروایا۔ اسی میں ان کا جسد مبارک عقیدت مندوں کے ہاتھوں اور کندھوں پر ان کی لحد تک پہنچایا گیا تھا۔
سلمان تاثیر کے خیالات ڈھکے چھپے نہیں تھے۔ ان کے قاتل کے تفصیلی حالات اور خیالات تو معلوم نہیں ہو سکے تاہم وقوعہ کے وقت اس کے چہرے پر طمانیت اور اس کی زبان پر جو کلمات تھے اس سے یہی کہا جاسکتا ہے کہ وہ ایمانی حرارت اور عشق رسالت مآب میں غازی علم الدین شہید کا ثانی ومثیل ہے۔ اب تفتیش اور عدالتی کارروائی کے مرحلے جو بھی راستہ اختیار کریں گے اس کا انتظار کرنا چاہیے اور قتل پر شور مچانے والی این جی اوز اور غیرملکی طاقتوں کو اسلام پر حملے کرنے کی بجائے خود اپنا جائزہ لینا چاہیے۔ ایک مسلمان معاشرے کی ہیئت ترکیبی کو سمجھنا ضروری ہے۔ رسالت مآب سے عقیدت ومحبت ایمان کا لازمی جزو ہے اور ان کی ذات اور اس سے متعلق قوانین کو گستاخانہ الفاظ کا ہدف بنانا انتہائی غیر ذمہ دارانہ عمل ہے۔
اس موقع پر یہ امر بھی پیش نظر رکھنا چاہیے کہ گستاخیِ رسول کی سزا اسلامی معاشروں میں روز اول سے قتل ہی ہے۔ تاریخ اسلامی کے عظیم ہیرو صلاح الدین ایوبیؒ نے زندگی بھر کبھی کسی جنگی قیدی کو ذرا برابر بھی سزا نہیں دی تھی۔ وہ ایسا رحیم وشفیق تھا کہ دشمنوں کے لیے بھی اس کے دل میں نرمی وگداز تھا۔ اس نے یورپ کے ایک شہزادے راجر کو اپنی تلوار سے قتل کیا تھا کیونکہ اس نے نبی اکرم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی قبر مبارک اکھاڑنے اور مدینہ کی اینٹ سے اینٹ بجانے کی ہرزہ سرائی کی تھی۔ غازی صلاح الدین ایوبیؒ نے فرمایا تھا کہ :”اگر میں نے اسے اپنی تلوار سے موت کے گھاٹ نہ اتارا تو اپنے آقا کو روزِ محشر کیا منہ دکھا¶ں گا؟