Tuesday, March 5, 2019

Music Video - Guns N' Roses - Paradise City

Video Report - 🇻🇪 What's left of Hugo Chavez's legacy?

Video Report - Macron: "He's trying to create a fight between pro-EU parties and the sovereigntists"

Video Report - ‘Never has Europe been in such danger’: Macron calls for new ‘renaissance’ as Brexit looms

Video - Civil Rights Under Trump | Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj | Netflix

Sacked Pakistani minister Fayyaz Chohan has a history of being anti-Hindu, racist & sexist


Fayyaz-ul Hassan Chohan has been videotaped making misogynistic remarks about women actors in Pakistan and hurling abuses at a TV host.

Prime Minister Imran Khan’s party Tuesday fired its Punjab province Information Minister, Fayyaz-ul Hassan Chohan, for allegedly making derogatory remarks against Hindus in a video that subsequently went viral on social media.
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) tweeted that it has “removed Fayyaz Chohan from the post of Punjab Information Minister following derogatory remarks about the Hindu community”.
“Bashing someone’s faith should not be a part of any narrative,” the party tweeted. “Tolerance is the first and foremost pillar on which Pakistan was built.”
Chohan came under fire from his party members after he referred to Hindus as “cow urine-drinking people” at a press conference last month.
“We are Muslims and we have a flag, the flag of Maula Alia’s bravery, and flag of Hazrat Umara’s valour,” IANS and Samaa news agency quoted the minister as having said. “You don’t have that flag; it isn’t in your hands.
“Don’t operate under the delusion that you are seven times better than us,” Chohan added. “What we have, you can’t have, you idol-worshippers.”
These remarks come amid rising tensions between India and Pakistan following the 14 February attack in Pulwama by the Jaish-e-Mohammed, which claimed the lives of 40 CRPF personnel.

Repeat offender

This, however, is not the first time that Chohan has been at the centre of such a controversy.
Soon after assuming charge as a minister in August 2018, Chohan was videotaped making misogynistic remarks about women actors in Lollywood (Pakistan’s Bollywood equivalent).
Referring to the “sad state of affairs” in the Pakistani film industry, Chohan criticised advertisements that he said displayed “half-naked woman”.
“I would have transformed Nargis to Haji Nargis,” he said, adding through insinuation that “actor Megha would have fasted for 300, instead of 30 days in a year, under his supervision”, Daily Pakistan reported in 2018.
The same day, a video of Chohan hurling abuses at a TV host after the channel aired old clips of him, also went viral.
In the past, Chohan has also allegedly used the word ‘Kashmiri’ to imply an insult and was also asked to resign from his post in February 2018, after making similarly anti-Hindu remarks during a speech in Lahore.

Final Straw

Following the most recent ‘cow urine’ remarks, Pakistan PM Imran Khan took exception to Chohan’s anti-Hindu comments and said his party will not tolerate remarks against any minority community”.
Chohan then attempted to explain himself, saying on Samaa TV Tuesday that he was “referring to Narendra Modi, RAW and the Indian media”.
“The remarks weren’t meant for any person in Pakistan. My message was for Indians,” he added. “I didn’t demean any religion. The things I said are a part of Hindutva. I said things that are a part of their religion.”
It did little to assuage the anger within the party. Multiple ministers from PTI made public statements condemning his speech before Chohan was sacked from the party Tuesday.

#Pakistan: How the Traditional Power Structure Undermines Democracy in Developing World?

The principal fault in democracy, as it is practiced all over the world, is the election campaign funding part, because individuals and corporations that finance election campaigns always have ulterior motives: that is, they treat political funding as investments from which they expect to make profits by influencing executive policy and legislation.
In Pakistan’s political system, there are three major structural faults. A representative and democratic political system weeds out corrupt and inept rulers in the long run. But Pakistan’s democracy was derailed by three decade-long martial laws and every time we got back to square one and had to start anew.
Democracy works like the trial-and-error method: the politicians who fail to perform are cast aside and those who deliver are retained through election process. A martial law, especially if it is decade-long, gives a new lease of life to the already tried, tested and failed politicians.
The second major fault in Pakistan’s political system is the refusal of mainstream political parties to hold genuine intra-party elections. How can one champion democracy on a national level when one refuses to ensure representation within political parties?
Nevertheless, democracy evolves over time. Instead of losing faith in political system, we must remain engaged in repetitive electoral process, which delivers in the long run through scientifically proven trial-and-error method.
The abovementioned two imperfections in democratic system, however, are only Pakistan-specific. When we take a look at stable democracies, like India for instance, even their politicians are not representative of the masses, because they work in the interest of moneyed elites rather than for the benefit of the underprivileged masses. This fact begs some further analysis of democracy as it is practiced in the developing world.
Politics is the exclusive prerogative of the ultra-rich in the developing world: the feudal landlords, industrialists and big businesses. The masses and members of the middle class cannot take part in elections, because election campaigns entail huge expenses, and if individual candidates spend money from their own pockets on their election campaigns, then how can one expect from such elected representatives that they will not use political office for personal gains in order to raise money for their expensive election campaigns for the next elections?
In the developing countries, politics works like business: individual candidates of political parties make an investment on their election campaigns and reap windfalls when they get elected as lawmakers in legislatures or as ministers in cabinets.
In the developed Western countries, on the other hand, individual candidates do not spend money from their own pockets on election campaigns; instead, political parties raise funds from electoral donations which are then spent on election campaigns of political parties and their candidates.
But this practice is also subject to abuse, because donors of electoral funds, especially corporations, when they donate money to a particular political party’s election campaign, in return they demand a say in the policymaking of governments of such political parties. Such governments are beholden to their financiers and hence cannot pursue independent policies in the interests of the masses.
A much better practice for generating election-related funds has been adopted in some developed countries like Canada and Germany, where state allocates funds from its national budget for political parties’ election campaigns if they manage to obtain a certain percentage of popular vote on a national level.
Although this practice may sound onerous for impoverished developing democracies, if we take a look at all other governance-related expenses, it would appear feasible. Take the cost of maintaining behemoth federal and provincial bureaucracies, for instance: paying the salaries of bureaucrats, maintaining federal and provincial public service commissions, and academies etc.
The bureaucracy only constitutes the mid-tier of governance structure; the top-tier is comprised of politicians who formulate state policy. Paying for election-related expenses of political parties would require expenditure from national exchequer only once in five years, but its benefits can be enormous, and it would also avoid all the pitfalls of taking contributions from shady individual and corporate donors.
More to the point, in the developed Western democracies, a distinction is generally drawn between power and money. If we take a cursory look at some of the well-known Western politicians, excluding a few billionaires like Donald Trump, others like Barack ObamaBill ClintonTony Blair and Francois Hollande were successful lawyers from middle class backgrounds before they were elected as executives of their respective countries. Some Western executives even go back to their previous jobs and private practices once they retire from politics.
The Republican and Democratic parties in the US and the Conservative and Labour parties in the UK, all of them accept political contributions which are then spent on the election campaigns of their nominees, which generally are the members of the middle class.
Nowhere in the developed and politically mature West, it is permitted to individual candidates to spend money from their own pockets on election campaigns, because instead of a political contest, it would then become a contest between the bank accounts of candidates.
Therefore, Western politicians typically are genuine representatives of their electorates, whereas the politicians of the developing world generally belong to the insular and detached elite classes and hence they don’t have much in common with the electorates that they are supposed to represent.
Although money does influence politics even in the Western countries, that happens only through indirect means, such as the election campaign financing of political parties, congressional lobbying and advocacy groups etc.
In the developing democracies, like India and Pakistan, however, only the so-called ‘electable’ landowners, industrialists and billionaire businessmen can aspire for political offices due to election campaign-related expenses, and the masses are completely excluded from the whole electoral exercise.
This makes a sheer mockery of democratic process, because how can one expect from wealthy elites to protect the interests of the middle and lower classes? They would obviously enact laws and formulate public policy which would favor the financial interests of their own class without any regard for the interest of the masses.

Pakistan begins crackdown on militant groups amid global pressure

Asif Shahzad, Drazen Jorgic
Pakistan said on Tuesday it had begun a crackdown on Islamist militant groups, detaining 44 members of banned organizations including close relatives of the leader of a group blamed for a deadly bombing in Indian-controlled Kashmir last month.
The interior ministry said it was a move to “speed up action against all proscribed organizations”. Officials said it was part of a long-planned drive against militant groups, not a response to Indian anger over what New Delhi calls Islamabad’s failure to rein in militant groups operating on Pakistani soil.Pakistan is facing pressure from global powers to act against groups carrying out attacks in India, including Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM), which claimed responsibility for the Feb. 14 attack that killed at least 40 paramilitary police.The incident led to the most serious conflict in years between the nuclear-armed neighbors, with cross-border air strikes and a brief dogfight over the skies of Kashmir. Tension cooled when Pakistan returned a downed Indian pilot on Friday.In a further sign that tensions were easing, Pakistan’s foreign ministry said a delegation would visit New Delhi next week to discuss an accord on Sikh pilgrims visiting holy sites in Pakistan.The interior ministry said close relatives of JeM leader Masood Azhar had been detained in “preventive custody” as part of the crackdown. It named them as Mufti Abdul Raoof and Hamad Azhar, who one ministry official said was the leader’s son.
On Tuesday, Pakistan placed two charities linked to Hafiz Saeed, founder of a militant organization the United States and India have blamed for numerous deadly attacks, including a siege by gunmen in Mumbai in 2008 that killed 166 people, on the country’s official banned list.
The Jamaat-ud-Dawa and Falah-e-Insaniat Foundation charities were placed on the list after the government announced the restriction last month.
Some of the people detained were named by India in a dossier it gave to Pakistan after last month’s bombing, Interior secretary Azam Suleman said.“We are investigating them and if we get more evidence, more proof against them, they will be proceeded against according to law and if we don’t get any proof their detention will end,” Suleman said.Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi told CNN last week that JeM chief Azhar was in Pakistan and was “really unwell”.
The United States, Britain and France proposed last month that the U.N. Security Council blacklist Azhar.
A Security Council vote is due to be held in mid-March. However, Pakistan’s staunch ally China, a Security Council member, has blocked previous attempts by world powers to sanction the JeM chief.The United States and Britain have urged Pakistan to deal with militant groups.Many Pakistani groups and individuals are under U.N. sanctions, including the JeM, and Hafiz Saeed, the founder of the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) militant group that carried out the 2008 attacks in the Indian city of Mumbai, in which 166 people were killed.
There was no immediate official reaction in India to the arrests in Pakistan.
However, an Indian government official, speaking on condition of anonymity, expressed skepticism.
“We have all seen this done for the last several decades now. How many times has Hafiz Saeed been arrested and let out?” the official said. “And have they taken action against Jaish camps?”

Israel and Pakistan - A worrying nexus

A few days ago, an op-ed by prominent British journalist Robert Fisk on Indo-Israeli military cooperation exposed the common ground between the two countries and how it may have played its part in the recent air strikes undertaken by India. Frisk has also confirmed that defence ties between New Delhi and Tel Aviv have strengthened in recent years including sophisticated training and arms trade.
Historically, India had distanced itself from cosying up with Israel owing to political and economic factors in the Middle East. But, with the onset of globalisation and trade liberalisation in the 1990s, their relationship boomed owing to both states’ upward trajectory as regional powerhouses.
India, being a large arms client, sought to modernise its armed forces to counter states such as Pakistan and China in the neighbourhood. Ideologically, the incumbent Indian and Israeli leadership believe in supremacy of their respective religious identities that also shape their political aspirations. Hindutva and Zionism have never been so close. Ironically Hindu extremists have time and again shown their admiration for Adolf Hitler and the Nazi tactics. But we do live in interesting times.
Pakistan’s decision to boycott the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation’s (OIC) Council of Foreign Ministers (CFM) 46th session may have been an ill-conceived idea, but it did yield some results in terms of acknowledging New Delhi’s acts of violence and state-sanctioned human rights abuses in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (IoK).
Pakistan could have used the OIC as a platform to corner the Indian delegation in an effective manner, especially considering its alliance with Israel.
The platform, regardless of its objectives, has become rudderless, to say the least. Just like SAARC, it has deep internal cracks due to the rivalries in the Middle East. All states have interests which do bind them together but their individual agendas make collective action weaker. Perhaps, the time has come to reform OIC and speak as one voice.
Having said that Israel and Pakistan are not enemies, barring the ideological differences. Benjamin Netanyahu has opened doors for Islamabad from time to time, but the domestic political environment of Pakistan are some of the key hindrances.
The honeymoon period between New Delhi and Tel Aviv may have become stronger but perhaps a time may come when Islamabad opens its doors to the Israelis on pragmatic grounds. Gen Musharraf has been arguing in favour of a policy shift. Perhaps the Parliament could initiate a debate on our relationship with Israel and forge a national consensus on how to tackle the challenge of India-Israel nexus.



Israel is one of India's chief suppliers of arms, and weaponry it provided during the Kargil War in 1999 between India and Pakistan is widely believed to have contributed to India's successes.

With India and Pakistan facing their worst crisis since the countries last went to war in 1999, a Pakistani daily editorialized on Tuesday that Islamabad should explore ties with Israel to challenge the “worrying” Israel-India “nexus.”

Barring their ideological differences, Israel and Pakistan “are not enemies,” read the editorial in Pakistan’s liberal, English-language Daily Times. “[Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu has opened doors for Islamabad from time to time, but the domestic political environment of Pakistan are some of the key hindrances,” the paper wrote.

The editorial, which noted the close relationship that has developed between Jerusalem and New Delhi, wrote that “perhaps a time may come when Islamabad opens its doors to the Israelis on pragmatic grounds.”

The paper cited former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf as arguing in favor of a policy shift toward Israel, and wrote, “Perhaps the Parliament could initiate a debate on our relationship with Israel and forge a national consensus on how to tackle the challenge of India-Israel nexus.”

Israel and Pakistan do not have diplomatic ties.

Israel is one of India’s chief suppliers of arms, and the weaponry it provided during the Kargil War in 1999 between India and Pakistan is widely believed to have contributed to India’s successes.

Musharraf, living in self-exile in Dubai, was quoted as telling a press conference there two weeks ago that establishing relations with Israel “will help Pakistan counter India.”

Musharraf led Pakistan from 1999 to 2008. In 2005 – after Israel and Pakistan flirted with diplomatic ties – then-foreign minister Silvan Shalom met his Pakistani counterpart in Istanbul. Shortly after that, Musharraf shook then-prime minister Ariel Sharon’s hand while they were at the UN General Assembly, but efforts at establishing diplomatic ties between the two countries soon petered out.

The Daily Times editorial follows a string of steps that could be interpreted as some movement toward the development of better ties between Pakistan and Israel, developments being carefully watched by India.

These include reports that a senior Israeli official – some speculated that it may have been Netanyahu himself – flew to Islamabad from Tel Aviv in October; permission Pakistan granted in January for a Pakistani Jew to visit Israel; and Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi statement last month that his country is “interested in advancing its relations with Israel, but this is a question of the diplomatic situation in the region.”

“Progress in solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will be very helpful, and if the American plan succeeds in doing this, that will be good. We wish Israel all the best,” Qureshi told Maariv at the Munich Security Conference. “We have many friends in the region and we would like you to join them.”

One senior diplomatic source said that New Delhi has not asked anything in particular from Israel since tensions with Pakistan escalated last week when India carried out a pre-emptive attack on a jihadist training camp in Pakistan, and Pakistan downed an Indian fighter and captured a pilot, later returned to India.

Following the suicide bombing on February 14 that killed 40 Indian paramilitary police in the Kashmir region that sparked the crisis, New Delhi did make clear that it would like to see Jerusalem take a proactive role in helping New Delhi get the world to sanction Pakistan-based terror organizations.

The Indian media reported that Israeli-made SPICE 2000 smart bombs were used in India’s attack on the jihadist camp.

Music - #PPP - Kal Bhi Bhutto Zinda Tha,Ajj Bhi Bhutto Zinda Hai

Former President Zardari demands compensation for the victims of floods in Balochistan and KPK

Former President of Pakistan and President Pakistan Peoples Party Parliamentarians Asif Ali Zardari has expressed concerns over devastation and loss of lives and properties due to rain floods in Balochistan and KPK.
In a statement former President has expressed his condolences and sympathies with the families who lost their loved ones. He also demanded of the federal and provincial governments to compensate the loss of properties of the victims.


Chairman PPP submits resolution asking Federal Government to provide relief to Balochistan

Chairman Pakistan Peoples Party Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has submitted a resolution in the National Assembly showing concern over floods in Balochistan and expressing dismay over absence of action so far. He asked the Federal Government to provide relief on urgent basis.
The resolution reads as follows:
“This House expresses concern over the catastrophic damages as a result of heavy rains and snowfall in Balochistan; expresses dismay over the continued apathy on part of the Federal Government; feels strongly that the people of Balochistan cannot be left alone in such challenging times, therefore demands the Federal Government to provide relief on urgent basis so as to ensure the people of Balochistan don’t feel alone and helpless.”


#Pakistan #PPPP - Bilawal Bhutto elected as the Chairman of the National Assembly Standing Committee for Human Rights.

PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto-Zardari on Tuesday was elected as the chairperson of the National Assembly Standing Committee for Human Rights.

Would like to thank all members across party lines for unanimously electing me as chairperson of the human rights committee of National Assembly of Pakistan. Human rights are the foundation stone of any democracy. we must ensure every Pakistanis human rights.

2,208 people are talking about this

He added that the PPP always wanted to strengthen the parliament.
“Democracy has no meaning without human rights. If we cannot guarantee human rights then we cannot guarantee any other thing, included freedom of expression, access to healthcare, to education, the rule of law and justice,” Bilawal stressed.
He supposed the “canvas of human rights is very expansive”.
The PPP chairman regretted the way in which human rights are being violated in Indian-occupied Kashmir.
On reply to a question, Bilawal said until Pakistan does not shift to a “human rights-based society”, the country’s democracy will not be strengthened and there will not be social justice.
“He does not need any advice,”said Asif Ali Zardari while responding to a question from a journalist.

Video Report - #Indian submarine intercepted & forced to retreat – #Pakistan Navy

The Pakistani Navy has prevented an Indian submarine from sneaking into its waters, a spokesman has reported. The ship was detected and forced to retreat, he said.
The Navy released purported footage of the intercepted submarine, shown moving with its periscopes over the water surface.
The statement said the Navy didn’t engage the submarine, but was proud of its success in detecting it despite India’s large investment in modern submarine technology.
This great feat is a testament of the Pakistan Navy's superior skills. The Navy will keep defending Pakistan's naval border. The force has the capability to respond to any aggression.
The Pakistani Navy said the interception of the submarine was the second one since 2016.
The incident comes a week after a major flare-up between India and Pakistan, decades-old regional rivals. India triggered the escalation by using warplanes to attack a suspected terrorist camp in Pakistani territory, retaliating for an earlier attack on its troops. Pakistan responded with a demonstration of force the next day, conducting attacks on targets in the Indian-controlled part of the disputed region of Kashmir. In the ensuing dogfight, India lost one fighter jet and claims to have shot down one of Pakistan’s.