Thursday, September 5, 2019

Video Music - Malika Pukhraj Aur Tahira Syed - Abhi To Main Jawan Hoon

Ghazal - Ek Bar Muskra Do - Munni Begum


Urdu Music - Iqbal Bano - Daagh-e-dil humko yaad aane lage

Music Video - Hamari Sanson Mein Aaj Tak Woh -1977 Mere Hazoor.

#Pakistan - Defence of geography, ideology interlinked: #PPP Chairman Bilawal Bhutto for following constitutional framework to ensure invincible defence of Pakistan

Chairman Pakistan Peoples Party has stated that defence of our geography and defence of our ideology are interlinked urging that all the national institutions should work within their constitutional framework to ensure an invincible defence of Pakistan.

In his message on Defence Day, the PPP Chairman said this was the day to remember the sacrifices of our martyrs, both civilians and soldiers and reinforce our commitment to defend our geography, ideology, democracy and human rights without any compromise.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari saluted Prime Minister Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto for laying foundation of a firm nuclear programme, which today stands tall as a monumental defence against powerful adversaries. Prime Minister Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto gifted ballistic missile programme, currently the core delivery system.

He paid glowing tributes to the martyrs of nation from the armed forces and expressed solidarity with their families, who sacrificed their near and dear ones in the defence of Pakistan.
Bilawal Bhutto Zardari pointed out that people of held Kashmir are undergoing worst kinds of human rights violations and let us not forget them as defending them is also our duty as a nation.

The Afghanistan War Is Over, and Pakistan Has Won

By Michael Rubin
The open secret—even among those towing Trump’s line—is that the Taliban deal will bring an American exit but not peace.
The U.S. war in Afghanistan is winding down, and Pakistan has won. The basic outline of the agreement negotiated by U.S. Special Envoy Zalmay Khalilzad is nothing new: The United States withdraws its forces in exchange for a Taliban pledge not to associate with terrorism or allow Afghanistan to be used as a safe-haven for terror groups.There problems with the agreement are many. Proponents of diplomacy with the Taliban often say that wars can only end through diplomacy. “You don’t make peace with your friends. You have to be willing to engage with your enemies if you expect to create a situation that ends an insurgency,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton explained. But the agreement outlined by Khalilzad is little different from that which Clinton administration officials struck with the Taliban in the years prior to 9/11: At the time, the Taliban promised to foreswear terrorism and quarantine Al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden. 

The subsequent terrorist attacks in New York and Washington underscored their insincerity. Perhaps the Taliban have changed, but not necessarily for the better, as the uptick in attacks throughout Khalilzad’s negotiations show. In many ways, President Donald Trump and Khalilzad seem to have embraced the John Kerry school of diplomacy, in which desperation for a deal substitutes for bringing leverage to bear and credibly convincing adversaries that failure to bargain will mean for them a far worse fate. A more fundamental problem is Pakistan. The Taliban would not exist without Pakistani support. While Khalilzad and diplomats shroud negotiations in the idea of bringing peace between Afghan factions, the Taliban negotiators were based in Qatar and answered to leadership in Quetta which in turn took direction from Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence in Islamabad. Once upon a time, Secretary of State Colin Powell spoke about the possibility of negotiating with “moderate Taliban.” He was pilloried at the time but, even if bringing the Taliban into a big tent is now preferable, these were not the Taliban with whom Khalilzad negotiated, but rather their more extreme Pakistan-controlled cousins. Simply put, the Taliban are to Pakistan what Hezbollah is to Iran.

There is also the fundamental problem of legitimacy: The Taliban justify their insurgency and terrorism in the fact that they, and not President Ashraf Ghani’s administration, are the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan. By cutting Ghani’s elected government out of negotiations, Khalilzad played to that Taliban conceit. But the logical problem remains: If the Taliban believe they are legitimate in the eyes of the Afghan public, why not simply put their weapons down and run in the elections? The answer is simple: Most Afghans see the Taliban as foreign puppets and would never cast their ballots for them. Certainly, most Afghan women would not, nor would most Afghan ethnic groups. Americans might think of the Taliban simply as Afghan, but Afghanistan is an ethnic checkerboard, and most Afghans recognize the Taliban as Pashtun supremacists and racists willing to rape and murder minorities.Trump wants to end a war that costs $30 billion annually. 

That is admirable. Put aside the fact that there are other strategies that could be brought to bear in order to compel Pakistan to cease terror support. But the basic error in his calculation may be that he has a choice between $30 billion and zero. The open secret—even among those towing Trump’s line—is that the Taliban deal will bring an American exit but not peace. Indeed, the net result could be far greater expense down the road. The Taliban continues to embrace and incorporate Al Qaeda’s philosophy and personnel. The Taliban safe-haven remains and will now expand. Refugee flows brought by renewed civil war can destabilize neighbors. Nor is there an international consensus about what terrorism is, giving the Taliban a semantic loophole through which they could drive a truck bomb. There is a strong possibility that today’s savings could cost the American people exponentially more should a Pakistani regime and their Taliban proxies high on victory decide to expand their fight, Khalilzad’s piece of paper be damned.Nor does what happen in Afghanistan necessarily stay in Afghanistan. Speaking at the University of Hargeisa in Somaliland earlier this year, students and faculty asked repeatedly whether negotiations with the Taliban would mean that negotiations with Al-Shabab, an Al Qaeda affiliate in Somalia would be next. Even if that is not the plan, every militant group now understands that the way to advance their interests is not through the ballot box but through violence and terrorism. That is a legacy to the Taliban deal which will not be easy to overcome.

Pakistan's Ahmadi Muslims: The fate of Pakistani Ahmadis: Implications of Anti-Ahmadiyya Ordinance 1984

“We stand by our declarations that members of every community will be treated as citizens of Pakistan with equal rights and privileges and obligations…” (Mr Jinnah, March 1948).
Religion, being one’s matter, leaves no room for the state to interfere. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948, “Member states have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms…”Article 2 of the said Declaration provides the freedom “without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion…” to the citizens of the member states.
Regrettably, since the very creation of Pakistan in August 1947, the so-called defeated religious assemblages like Ihraris, Jamat-i-Islami and Jamayat-i-Ulma-i-Islam played the religion card as a face-saving act to regain their influence in the “Islamic Republic of Pakistan.” All these religious entities had failed badly in their anti-Pakistan political agenda; leaving them with only the religion card. For that reason, they started invoking the differences within various Islamic factions and sects, exploiting the nation of Pakistan. The Shia-Sunni issues and particularly Anti-Ahmadiyya campaigns enormously distressed the social fabric of the country.
In a famous policy speech, Mr Jinnah on August 11, 1947, emphasised that “The first and the foremost thing that I would like to emphasize in this: remember that you are now a sovereign legislative body and you have got all the powers. It, therefore, places on you the gravest responsibility as to how you should take your decisions…” but unfortunately Pakistani Parliament in 1974 misused her powers conferred by the independent state of Pakistan.
On September 7, 1947, the Bhutto regime declared Ahmadis “non-Muslim” even though Ahmadiyya delegation, under Mirza Nasir Ahmad (the head of Ahmadis), proved them “Muslims” in Parliament of Pakistan. In effect, this matter was dealt with politically, not religiously. Religious forces used the parliamentary platform to regulate the beliefs and the faith of Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan, while no court of law or parliament holds the right to determine the religion, faith, beliefs of any individual or community.
Dr Mubashir Hasan, the finance minister in the Bhutto Cabinet, has confessed that it was all due to the Saudi pressure, which was an open violation of the articles 6 and 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948.
The self-made Ameer-ul-Momineen Gen Zia-ul-Haq practised his extremist Islamisation policy during his 11 years rule, which augmented the miseries of the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan. The implementation of his Anti-Ahmadiyya Ordinance of April 1984 (Ordinance No. XX of 1984) is also known as “the Anti-Islamic Activities of the Quadidiani Group, Lahori Group and Ahmadis (Prohibition and Punishment) Ordinance, 1984.”
This step exposed his peculiar resentment and hatred to counter the Ahmadis. Zia, as the power seeker, wanted the support of religious factions to prolong his rule and boost his strength. He used religion as a tool to attain his personal and political objectives. This above title of the ordinance is also reflecting its hatred for Ahmadis and their religious practices in Pakistan.
In 1984, the UN Human Rights Commission also took notice of this barbaric Ordinance, violating the basic human rights of Ahmadis. Later in 1985, the UN Human Rights Sub-Commission on the Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities investigated and found it to be the violation of the International Human Rights Charter of UN 1948.
Under this Ordinance, two new sections 298-B and 298-C were added in Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) particularly against the Ahmadis in Pakistan. They dealt with the “misuse of epithets, descriptions and titles, etc. reserved for certain holy personages or places” and “person of Quadiani group, etc. calling himself a Muslim or preaching or propagating his faith respectively”. This is an obstruction of the basic rights conferred by a state to her citizens. In the modern state system, no state has official religion but only its citizens. The state’s intervention in religious matters is considered the exploitation of the religious communities and individual’s rights.
Since 1947, no Ahmadi has ever found involved in anti-state and terrorist activities. No Ahmadi has never passed any derogatory remarks or actions against any Islamic teaching, faith or belief. They ever remain faithful to the State and the Constitution of Pakistan. Sir Muhammad Zafrullah Khan, Dr Abdul Salam and M M Ahmad are the pride of Pakistan. Ahmadis have always participated positively to ease the agonies of the beloved state of Pakistan. On the other hand, anti-Ahmadiyya laws are steadily increasing the anguishes of the Ahmadis, which are also the violation of Article 20 of the Constitution of 1973.
In the modern state system, no state has an official religion
The state supported laws and hatred against Ahmadis, impairing their lives and the status of independent citizens of an Islamic Republic. Under section 298-B, Ahmadis cannot use Islamic epithets. For example, they cannot use Islamic titles, say worship place “Masjid” and recite “Azan,” for which, Ahmadis can be convicted with imprisonment extended to three years with fine. Furthermore, under section 298-C, no Ahmadi can call him/herself ‘Muslim’ nor can he preach or propagate the Ahmadiyya faith and beliefs in the geographical boundaries of Pakistan, for which Ahmadis can be penalised with the imprisonment extended to three years with a fine.
Moreover, many Ahmadis also have been convicted under sections 295, 295-A, 295-B and 295-C of PPC. The misuse of blasphemy laws in Pakistan is a common practice, creating a sense of uncertainty and disruption in minorities because of the death penalty and life imprisonment with fine. Fanatics and extremist Mullahs are frequently using blasphemy laws to impend the minorities and tiny communities in the country. Moreover, article 260 of the Constitution of 1973 provides the definition of a Muslim in Pakistan, which Islam had defined 1400 years ago. Such a definition in the Constitution of 1973 is only imparting and augmenting the differences among the citizens of Pakistan. This pained behaviour as a nation among the fanatic classes is dividing Pakistan among Muslims and non-Muslims which is damaging the nationalism.
In response, after the promulgation of Ordinance XX of 1984 to till July 2019, 765 Ahmadis have been booked for displaying Kalima, 38 for calling Azan, 447 for posing themselves as Muslims, 161 for using Islamic epithets, 93 for offering prayers, 820 for preaching, 27 for celebrating Ahmadiyya Centenary (1989), 50 for celebrating 100 years anniversary of eclipses of sun and moon occurred in 1894 as a sign of Promised Mahdi, 315 for Blasphemy Law and 1191 booked for other cases.
Furthermore, from 1984 to December 2018, 264 Ahmadis have been killed, 388assaulted for their faith, 28 Ahmadiyya worship places (Mosques) demolished, 39 sealed by authorities, 23 set on fire or damaged, 17 forcibly occupied and 58 Ahmadiyya worship places’ construction was barred by the authorities, 39 Ahmadis bodies exhumed after burial, 70 Ahmadis’ burial was denied in common cemetery, 43 cases of incidents of Kalima removal from Ahmadis’ house and shops and 103 cases of Kalima removal from Ahmadi worship places have been reported.
The discriminatory decision of March 9, 2018, by Justice Shaukat Aziz Siddiqui, Chief Justice of the Islamabad High Court also appears as the next version of the Ordinance XX of 1984, in which he focused to identify the Ahmadis socially particularly in high-rank govt jobs with a mandatory affidavit in this regard. He banned Ahmadis to use word “Ahmadi” and also the Islamic names. His judgement bound the Ahmadis to add the word “Mirzai” or “Ghulaman-i-Mirza” in their names to differentiate with other Pakistani Muslims. In short, it was a step forward to corner the Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan. These standards of justice raising a sense of complexity in the Ahmadis. They have ever been sincere and loyal to the State of Pakistan but State has a disgusting attitude towards Ahmadis treating them as untouchables.
Ahmadis in Pakistan face discrimination and suffering from certain grave situations, Anti-Ahmadiyya laws and state-supported hatred swell their agonies. The role of extremist and fanatic Mullahs and religious assemblages further increase the hatred against Ahmadis. Ahmadis are facing discrimination in daily livelihood, jobs and particularly in the academics. In public places particularly in markets, discriminatory behaviour is a common practice. Ahmadis are denied from shops either verbally or by exhibiting stickers with discriminatory public notices; rebuking Ahmadis particularly to push them away from their shops. 1974 to 2019 democratic and authoritarian regimes are failed to improve the Ahmadiyya situations and provide them with equal stands in the social fabric of Pakistan. In spite of all this, Ahmadis are peacefully standing with the State willing to participate for the prosperity of Pakistan.

Christian mother Asia Bibi demands justice for blasphemy law victims: 'The world should listen'

By Leah MarieAnn Klett

Christian mother Asia Bibi condemned Pakistan’s harsh blasphemy laws and issued an urgent call for reform in her first interview since being released from prison after spending eight years on death row on a false blasphemy charge.
In an interview with The Sunday Telegraph, Bibi thanked Pakistan’s supreme court for acquitting her but said others also need fair trials. “There are many other cases where the accused are lying in jail for years and their decision should also be done on merit. The world should listen to them,” she said.
“I request the whole world to pay attention to this issue,” Bibi continued. “The way any person is alleged of blasphemy without any proper investigation without any proper proof, that should be noticed. This blasphemy law should be reviewed and there should be proper investigation mechanisms while applying this law. We should not consider anyone sinful for this act without any proof.”
Bibi’s ordeal began nearly 10 years ago when two Muslim farm laborers accused her of drinking from the same container as them and refused to drink after her because she's a Christian.
Bibi, also known as Asya Noureen and a mother of five, was subsequently accused of insulting the Islamic prophet, Muhammad. In Pakistan, where 97 percent of its 180 million inhabitants are Muslim, being charged with committing blasphemy against Islam is punishable by death or life in prison.
After spending eight years on death row, Bibi was acquitted by the Supreme Court of Pakistan, which ultimately said there were many inconsistencies in the testimonies against her. However, she was kept in custody for another seven months as the government struggled with how to free her without angering hardline Islamist groups. Speaking about her time in a Pakistani jail, Bibi told The Telegraph that her Christian faith had never faltered and also said she never cried in front of her daughters when they visited her in jail. “I used to cry alone filled with pain and grief,” she said. Still, Bibi said she feared for her future. “Sometimes I was so disappointed and losing courage I used to wonder whether I was coming out of jail or not, what would happen next, whether I would remain here all my life,” she said. “My whole life suffered, my children suffered and this had a huge impact on my life.”
In May, Bibi was finally brought to Canada, through mediation by the European’s Union special envoy on religious freedom, Jan Figel. Due to security concerns, she was unable to say goodbye to her father or her homeland.
“My heart was broken when I left that way without meeting my family. Pakistan is my country, Pakistan is my homeland, I love my country, I love my soil,” she said.Now 54, Bibi said that while she hopes to move to Europe with her family in the coming months. They are currently living in Canada. Figel told the Telegraph that Bibi is “an admirably brave woman and loving mother” whose story “can serve as a base for reforms in Pakistan, which has very outdated system of blasphemy legislation easily misused against neighbors and innocent people.”
The U.S. State Department reports that there are an estimated 77 others in prison in Pakistan under blasphemy laws. But Shaan Taseer, the son of late Punjab governor Salmaan Taseer, believes there are over 200 people jailed for blasphemy. Lawyers and rights groups say blasphemy accusations are often false and made to settle scores or silence rivals.
Over the years, thousands of Pakistani Christians, who make up just 2% of the country's population, have fled to nations like Thailand, Sri Lanka and Malaysia in hopes of being given asylum in a safer country.Following Bibi’s case, the U.S. called on Pakistan to release more than 40 members of the religious minorities facing blasphemy charges. It also urged Pakistani leadership to appoint an envoy to address the various religious freedom concerns in the country.
Pakistan was listed in January as No. 5 on Open Doors USA's World Watch List of countries where Christians face the most severe persecution for their faith, with blasphemy accusations cited as one of the major sources of oppression.

Pakistan says UAE, Saudi Arabia support its stand on Kashmir. Truth says otherwise

Hamza Ameer

Pakistan's claims of successful support confirmation from the UAE and Saudi Arabia, along with the Muslim world, proved to be exaggerated as the UAE has suggested Pakistan of not indulging the Muslim world in the Kashmir dispute, calling it a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan.

Contrary to Pakistan's claims that both the UAE and Saudi Arabia support its stand on the issue of Kashmir, UAE Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation Sheikh Abdullah Bin Zayed Bin Sultan Al Nahyan made it clear to his Pakistani counterpart Shah Mahmood Qureshi that Kashmir is a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan.
Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan on Wednesday discussed the Kashmir situation with visiting foreign ministers and insisted that the two countries along with the world should play a role in urging India to reverse its recent decision on Kashmir. Islamabad, however, failed to take their support on its position on Jammu and Kashmir (J&K).
Insisting that the Muslim world not be dragged into it, the UAE minister urged that the Kashmir dispute need to be resolved through dialogue and talks between Pakistan and India only.
Islamabad termed both Saudi Arabia and UAE ministers' visit as successful, especially with reference to the support Pakistan seeks from the Muslim world against India on Kashmir and also maintained that the joint visit was utilised in highlighting the situation in Jammu and Kashmir.
"The Pakistani foreign minister apprised the two dignitaries in detail on Pakistan's concerns over the deteriorating human rights and humanitarian situation in Indian-occupied-Jammu and Kashmir (IOJ&K), that has been exacerbated by India's illegal and unilateral action on 5 August 2019," Pakistan Foreign Office's press release read.
It further added: "The foreign minister underlined that these actions were clear violations of International law, UN Security Council resolutions, bilateral agreements [Simla] and its own solemn commitments since they were aimed at changing the globally acknowledged disputed status of IOJ&K and altering the occupied territory's demographic structure and identity."
Pakistan also shared its concerns over the suspected attempt of a false "flag operation by India", which was, the country has alleged, aimed at diverting the attention of the world from "the reign of terror unleashed against the Kashmiri people".
Pakistan has, however, claimed that both the countries have confirmed their "complete support against India on the Kashmir issue". "With regards to the situation in IOJ&K, the Ministers took full cognizance of Pakistan's perspective. It was agreed to work closely in OIC", claimed the MOFA press release.
Pakistan's claims of successful support confirmation from the UAE and Saudi Arabia, along with the Muslim world, proved to be exaggerated as the UAE has suggested Pakistan of not indulging the Muslim world in the Kashmir dispute, calling it a bilateral issue between India and Pakistan.

Pakistan's diplomacy has, till now, failed to get all-out support from Muslim countries on the issue of Kashmir.
Pakistan has been trying to prove to the world that India's decision on August 5 was aimed at targeting the Muslims living in Kashmir by imposing the "RSS racist ideology"