Saturday, January 16, 2021
Joe Biden: GOP Lawmakers Who Didn’t Wear Masks During Capitol Riot Need To ‘Grow Up’
“I know it’s become a partisan issue, but what a stupid, stupid thing for it to happen,” the president-elect said.President-elect Joe Biden scolded Republican lawmakers who didn’t wear face masks during the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6, stressing that mask-wearing should not be a divisive political debate. “I know it’s become a partisan issue, but what a stupid, stupid thing for it to happen,” Biden said in a speech about COVID-19 vaccine distribution on Friday, after reiterating his plan to ask all Americans to wear masks for at least 100 days following his inauguration on Jan. 20. Biden stressed that wearing masks is a “patriotic act” and the U.S. is “in a war” against the coronavirus. “Quite frankly, it was shocking to see members of the Congress while the Capitol was under siege by a deadly mob of thugs refuse to wear masks while they were in secure locations,” Biden said. “I’m so proud of my congresswoman right here in the state of Delaware, Lisa Blunt Rochester, trying to hand out masks while people were lying on the floor, huddled up. And Republican colleagues refusing to put them on. What the hell’s the matter with them? It’s time to grow up.” The president-elect added that at least four members of Congress — including lung cancer survivor Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-N.J.) — have since tested positive for COVID-19. “For God’s sake,” Biden said. ”Wear a mask — if not for yourself, for your loved ones. For your country.” Rep. Brad Schneider (D-Ill.), one of the four who has tested positive for COVID-19, said that multiple Republican lawmakers “put their own contempt and disregard of decency ahead of the health and safety of their colleagues and our staff” and refused to wear masks even when asked politely during the Capitol siege. Some of these lawmakers were caught on camera in a video that Biden referenced. In the clip, Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) is passing out masks to her colleagues. Rep. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) is one of several recorded refusing a mask, telling Rochester, “I’m not trying to get political here.” On Tuesday, House Democrats proposed a fine for those who refuse to wear a mask on the chamber floor, with offenders facing $500 the first time they break the rule, and $2,500 the second time. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-gop-lawmakers-masks-grow-up_n_600321dec5b697df1a060bf1
The Pariah Post-Presidency Isolated and angry, a diminished President Trump is leaving Washington for an uncertain future.
US Capitol riot: police have long history of aiding neo-Nazis and extremists
Police officers in riot gear line up near the Capitol building in Washington DC. Photograph: Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images For years, domestic terrorism researchers have warned that there are police departments in every region of America counting white supremacist extremists and neo-Nazi sympathizers among their ranks. To these experts, and the activists who have been targeted by law enforcement officers in past years, it came as no surprise that police officers were part of the mob that stormed the US Capitol on 6 January. In fact, the acceptance of far-right beliefs among law enforcement, they say, helped lay the groundwork for the extraordinary attacks in the American capital. “I’ve been trying to ring the alarm since before Donald Trump was elected,” said Cedric O’Bannon, a journalist and activist who was stabbed at a 2016 neo-Nazi rally in Sacramento and was later targeted by the investigating officer. “It’s nothing new. We’ve seen it getting worse and worse. The law enforcement collusion with white nationalists is clear,” he said.
Last Wednesday, Trump encouraged his supporters and far-right groups to march to the Capitol where Congress was sitting. Soon, rioters and militants wearing “Make America Great Again” hats and white supremacist symbols toppled the flimsy barricades on the grounds, pushed past police and stormed the building.In the days since the attack, which left five people dead and caused lawmakers to hide in fear for their lives, investigations have revealed that a wide range of US law enforcement personnel were represented in the crowd. News reports and other inquiries have identified roughly 30 sworn members of police agencies from more than 12 different states who were present at the Capitol, according to criminal justice news site, the Appeal. So far, several on-duty Capitol police officers have been suspended for allegedly supporting rioters, and two off-duty Virginia officers were arrested after boasting on social media about breaching the Capitol. A Houston officer caught inside the building has since resigned, and the police departments of New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, Philadelphia and other cities are investigating whether their employees attended. “These are people who we give guns to, who get specialized training, who have access to sensitive information,” said Vida B Johnson, Georgetown University law professor and expert on policing, “and they took part in a plan to undo the votes for the democratically elected president.” When police protect neo-Nazis Extremism experts and survivors of far-right violence have for years cried foul about the close ties between some police and white supremacist groups. These links have escalated under the Trump era, they’ve warned, with numerous examples of police openly protecting far-right organizers, including armed and violent ones. In June 2016 in Sacramento at least ten people were stabbed and injured at a rally of the Traditionalist Workers Party (TWP), a group that extremism experts have classified as neo-Nazis. The subsequent investigation, led by the California Highway Patrol (CHP), focused on the anti-fascist counter-protesters injured in the stabbings, with records showing that police worked with white supremacists to identify leftist activists and pursue criminal charges against the stabbing victims. The lead CHP investigator, Donovan Ayres, repeatedly stated in police records that he viewed the neo-Nazis as victims and the anti-fascists as suspects. In court, he repeatedly called TWP the “permitted party”, since it had a permit for a rally, and in a phone call with a TWP leader, he said, “We’re looking at you as a victim.”Records show that Ayres formally recommended Cedric O’Bannon, a Black journalist who was filming the events and was stabbed during the demonstration, face criminal charges for conspiracy, rioting, assault and unlawful assembly noting he was “among the protesters”. The officer did not recommend anyone face charges for the stabbing. O’Bannon ultimately was not charged. Reflecting on the case now, O’Bannon said there should be accountability for the way the officer treated him. “I always think about, has he treated other people in the same way? Is he still doing it now?” Without consequences, officers who sympathize with neo-Nazis are emboldened, he said. “People of color know this and we’ve been knowing this,” said Mike Williams, a 60-year-old indigenous activist in Sacramento. He was one of three counter-protesters who faced a criminal trial after Ayres pursued cases against them, alleging they violated the “free speech” rights of neo-Nazis. The reports that Capitol officers may have enabled or supported the insurrectionists make clear that there are police across the country who are aligned with far-right views, he argued: “They feel like they are going to lose control. This is about keeping systemic racism in place.” CHP declined to comment on the case, and said Ayres no longer works in the Sacramento region. Ayres did not respond to a request for comment. In Berkeley, California, in 2017, police worked with a violent and armed pro-Trump demonstrator to prosecute leftist activists over an altercation during a protest. Activists saw the criminal trial as just one of many examples of US law enforcement aggressively targeting leftwing demonstrators and favoring members of the far-right after violent clashes. Police often tolerate pro-Trump violence, said Jeff Armstrong, one of the activists who faced charges but was ultimately acquitted: “We knew we didn’t do anything wrong ... but they were trying to put us in prison,” he said. And in 2019, Rob Mathis, a Black resident of Muskegon, Michigan, exposed a white police officer who had a framed KKK application and Confederate flags in his home. Mathis, 54, discovered the items while touring the home with a real estate agent. The officer was eventually fired, but ultimately won his pension and retiree health insurance. Mathis said when police initially brought him in to ask about his viral Facebook post showing the KKK form, it felt as if the department was “interrogating” him or treating him like a suspect. Officials told him he should’ve filed an internal complaint and not gone public, he recalled. “They got rid of him because of optics, because of social media.” The officer claimed he was not a KKK member and said he collected memorabilia. It was happenstance that Mathis uncovered this officer, and he said he worries that police across the country don’t get caught and continue abusing people of color in their communities: “This system is made for white people and by white people. It is about protecting those people and their jobs.” Muskegon and Berkeley officials did not respond to an inquiry. ‘White nationalists hide in plain sight’ The number of white supremacist extremists within US police forces is unknown, but even relying solely on cases that have been publicized shows the problem is widespread. Johnson, the Georgetown expert, testified in Congress last year about white supremacist infiltration of police. She found that since 2009, more than 100 police departments in 49 states have faced scandals involving officers making overtly racist statements. In Florida, Alabama, Oklahoma, Louisiana and elsewhere, active police officers have been outed as members of organized hate groups, including the KKK, she found. And this is likely the “tip of the iceberg”, she said, adding that polls showing that 10% of Americans believe it’s acceptable to hold neo-Nazi views, and that 12% supported the Capitol attack. Those rates are likely higher for police officers, she said, given that officers are disproportionately white and male. Among the reasons behind the prevalence of white supremacy in police forces is that, according to the repeated warnings of the FBI since 2006, there are members of organized white supremacist groups who have worked to “infiltrate” police agencies. The FBI has said white supremacists are the greatest domestic terror threat, and that the groups often have “active links” to police.Because of the way policing works in America, it also attracts people with explicitly racist views – giving them a professional license to patrol Black neighborhoods and allowing them to join a system that stops, searches, arrests and prosecutes people of color at disproportionately high rates, experts say. “It’s very easy for people with white nationalist commitments to hide in policing, to find a place in policing,” said Nikki Jones, professor of African American studies at the University of California, Berkeley. American police departments, Jones said, have in many ways stayed true to their roots of protecting white people: “The way policing is structured, presented and performed allows white nationalists to hide in plain sight.” Despite the clear evidence of explicit racism within policing, the US has not prioritized investigating white supremacists in law enforcement. This is particularly true under Trump, whose administration has focused its efforts to combat domestic terrorism on targeting Black activists and other leftist groups. In addition to the federal government’s failures to proactively investigate and weed out white supremacist officers, local laws often make it very difficult to terminate officers, who are backed by powerful unions. Terminated officers are frequently rehired in other departments. Michelle Monterrosa, a 25-year-old California resident whose brother was killed by police last year, said she was worried about the officers who traveled to the Capitol and who will likely face no consequences. “These officers participated in this insurrection and participated in this hate,” said Monterrosa, who was recently arrested when she engaged in a peaceful protest. “It’s very scary to know they returned home and put their badge on.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jan/16/us-capitol-riot-police-neo-nazis-far-right
Chinese's Media - U.S. shows absurd logic in discriminating between violent demonstrations in other countries and its own territory
A violent demonstration was staged in Washington, D.C. on Jan. 6 local time, when some protesters broke into the U.S. Capitol and forcibly stopped a joint session of the U.S. Congress.
During the incident, four protesters died. On the other day, a U.S. Capitol Police officer lost his life due to injuries caused amid the violence at the Capitol.
While taking powerful measures to suppress such protests at home, the U.S. has no problem with violent demonstrations happening in other countries and regions.
In total disregarded of the chaos and social unrest, disturbance in and destruction of normal social order, threats and harm to personal and property safety, as well as attacks on and damage to public transportation, government buildings and facilities and the safety of officials caused by violent protests, the U.S. described rioters’ savage acts of violence and vandalism in China’s Hong Kong Special Administrative Region as “a beautiful sight to behold”.
Some human rights officials and experts with international organizations and certain Western media outlets have simply adhered to a “politically correct” approach to demonstrations, especially when they happen in developing countries including China.
It looks like they believe civil groups are always right and their attacks on the government are always justified.
It seems to them that human rights could be used as a tool and weapon to attack and criticize the government of other countries at any time, an extreme view in violation of legal logic and the rule of law.
Human rights are not supposed to be a slogan or a simple political label, as they have legal connotations and boundaries of rights, obligations and responsibilities.
Human rights, the rule of law, and development are important criteria for assessing the process of social development.
Respecting and protecting human rights are the essential pursuit of the rule of law, as well as the intrinsic goal of development.
The evolution of human rights couldn't be separated from the actual conditions of a country or the support and guarantee of the rule of law.
The long-lasting and large-scale social turmoil brought about by the Anti-Extradition Law Amendment Bill Movement in Hong Kong was targeted at the political system and government of Hong Kong, directly spoiled the political, social and economic order in the region, and threatened the national unity and security of China.
The violent protesters assaulted Hong Kong residents and tourists from the Chinese mainland, obstructed the police in enforcing the law and in saving individuals under attack and shops that were either smashed, burned or robbed, directly attacked the police and snatched their equipment, including guns, besieged government departments, blocked traffic, examined and attacked passing vehicles, occupied universities for a long time and even stormed the Legislative Council Complex in Hong Kong.
No law-based society can tolerate such act of directly, grossly and severely violating the law.
The Hong Kong government and police department bore a great deal of pressure, and maintained great patience and exercised considerable restraint when faced with groundless accusations from the U.S. and some other Western countries as well as certain human rights officials and experts with international organizations amid the violent protests.
The U.S., which advocates unilateralism and long-arm jurisdiction, even passed a bill to impose sanctions against Chinese officials over Hong Kong, seriously interfering in the internal affairs of China, undermining the sovereignty of China, and harming the legal rights and interests of Chinese institutions, enterprises and citizens.
Although the recent violent demonstration in Washington, D.C. didn't last long, it provoked intense response from different circles in the U.S.
Many American politicians have made remarks to criticize the illegality and intolerability of the incident.
Kayleigh McEnany, White House press secretary in the Trump administration, condemned the violence in strong terms in a statement and stressed that those that broke the law should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, called the incident “an unspeakable assault on our nation and our people”. Ironically, she was the same person that described the violent demonstrations in Hong Kong “a beautiful sight to behold”.
The American government has arrested a large number of protesters and intends to press charges against them. In response to such a violent demonstration at home, it has taken a firm stand, acted promptly and decisively and inflicted harsh punishment, nothing like what they felt about similar incidents in other countries.
Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire, as a Chinese saying goes. The wisdom and values behind the saying are echoed by the Golden Rule in philosophy, a principle found in most cultures that one should treat others as he or she wants to be treated.
The U.S. has obviously adopted double standard on discriminating between violent demonstrations in America and other countries, and shown entirely different attitudes towards similar incidents in different countries and regions.
In the information age, countries are faced with new governance opportunities and challenges.
They should continue improving and ensuring human rights under the spirits and framework of the rule of law.
Countries should treat all members of the international community out of a sense of responsibility and respect the right of people from different countries to independently choose their own development path.
International law has specified the doctrine of estoppel, which precludes a country from asserting something contrary to what is implied by a previous action or statement of that country or by a previous pertinent judicial determination and requires it to adopt the same legal logic for the same legal issue.
A person will never build himself in the society without credibility; it is the same with a country.
Legal logic matters, especially to issues concerning democracy and human rights. Officials from the U.S. and some other Western countries, as well as people who are used to looking at developing countries with prejudice need to pay attention to legal logic, respect the rule of law, and keep consistent in applying rules.
America and the Mob
The far right has come out in support of Trump. After the failed coup attempt of January 6, what’s next?The United States began as a glint in the eyes of an English mob of oddballs, dissenters, and criminals let loose on what they considered virgin territory. Once secure in their new digs, they administered rough justice to the original Americans and any colonist who fell afoul of community rules. Eventually, casting aside their imperial British overlords, the rabble achieved a measure of respectability by creating an independent state. Even as the United States fashioned an army, a constabulary, and an evolving rule of law, the mob continued to define what it meant to be an American. It policed the slave economy. It helped push the borders westward. It formed the shock troops that rolled back Reconstruction. A twentieth-century version of this mob rampaged during the long Red Summer violence that stretched from 1917 to 1923. It mobilized against the civil rights movement. And during the Trump era, it has reared its ugly head in Charlottesville, Portland, and last week on Capitol Hill. America is motherhood, apple pie…and the mob. Last week, many a politician decried the mob violence at the U.S. Capitol as “un-American.” Consider, for instance, the words of Kevin McCarthy, House Minority Leader: This is so un-American. I condemn any of this violence. I could not be sadder or more disappointed with the way our country looks right now. People are getting hurt. Anyone involved in this, if you’re hearing me, hear me loud and clear: This is not the American way. McCarthy was not on the same podium with Donald Trump earlier in the day urging on the mob. But he and the president were on the same page between November 3 and January 6. Two days after the election, the California Republican announced that Trump had won. Later, he supported the outlandish Texas lawsuit to overturn the election results, refused to acknowledge Biden’s win well into 2021, and stood up in the House last week even after the mob retreated to challenge the Electoral College results. After January 6, McCarthy has tried to put some distance between himself and the rabble. He has been willing to consider an official censure of the president and has also indicated that he won’t try to enforce party unity against an impeachment vote. No doubt McCarthy has shifted his stance because he feared for his own life when the insurrectionists stormed the barricades and invaded his sanctum. Trump, enjoying the images on TV, refused McCarthy’s plea to issue a statement calling off his attack dogs. It’s enough to make even the most loyal lapdog bark a different tune. None of this detracts from the fact that McCarthy, since the election, was the elected representative not of his California district but of the mob. He was their cheerleader, their mouthpiece on the Hill, one of the many suits over the ages who have translated the “will of the people” into official-sounding acts and bills that attempt to preserve the privileges of white people at the expense of everyone else. For that is the beating heart of Trumpism: the Confederate flag, the noose, the closed polling booth, the knee on the neck of non-white America. The word “mob” makes it sounds as though the violence was perpetrated by a group of mindless rowdies. But there has always been a method to the madness of this particular crowd. Let’s take a closer look at what the latest incarnation of the American mob wants, how it connects to like-minded groups overseas, and what to expect over the next weeks, months, and years. Against the Globalists At first glance, the people who descended upon Washington to disrupt Congress on January 6 are almost obsessively focused on domestic issues. They’re not so much America First as Trump First. They have turned against anyone in the Republican Party who has abandoned the soon-to-be-ex-president, and that includes the vice president. They are nationalist and parochial. They are also anti-globalist. But that doesn’t mean that they aren’t global in their strategizing, their connections, and their aspirations. One of the core components of the Stop the Steal coalition is QAnon, an amorphous global network that believes that another amorphous global network—of Satanic child molesters— somehow controls the levers of international power. What started out as a conspiracy theory centered on Donald Trump as a St. George figure battling a devilish dragon went global in 2020, attracting adherents in 71 countries by August. One German QAnon group counts 120,000 members in its Telegram account. Another key member of the coalition is a bloc of white nationalists and militia members that encompasses accelerationists like the Boogaloo Bois, who want to spur a race war to bring down the liberal status quo, and organizations that emphasize male supremacy like the Proud Boys. These groups have forged global links over the last decade in Canada, Europe, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, and others. Prior to COVID-19’s outbreak, these chauvinists united around a “Great Replacement” narrative according to which immigrants and people of color are determined to “replace” white people through migration, higher birthrates, or sheer pushiness. When the border closures around the pandemic reduced the salience of the immigration issue, the Great Replacement became a less useful organizing tool. It was into this vacuum that QAnon became the conspiracy theory de jour. Meanwhile, the far right shifted its discourse on “globalists” to challenge their approach to COVID-19, their deference to the Chinese, and their proposed “reset” of the global economy: anything to deflect attention from the obvious failures of the nationalist populists who headed up the countries with the highest number of infections and deaths: the United States, Brazil, India, Russia, and the United Kingdom. Although they often disagree about particulars, this array of groups is united by an animus against government. They supported Trump not as the head of government but as someone opposed to government. And they adored him because he didn’t just hate the U.S. government—and the elites that staff it—but global governance as well. The “deep state” was always a canard. The far right despised the liberal state, full stop. Trump attracted an even wider following by squaring off against the expert class: the uppity journalists and fact-bound scientists and Hollywood liberals and hand-wringing academics. Burn it all down, Trump’s followers demanded. Trump in government, however, represented a certain check on the most ambitious impulses of the far right. True, during his reign, extremists have come out into the streets to protest economic shutdowns, masking ordinances, and #BlackLivesMatter mobilizations. Some extremists planned more violent interventions, like kidnapping the governor of Michigan. But with the administration on its side, with the Senate in Republican hands, with Republicans controlling the vast majority of state legislatures, the far right focused its wrath selectively. It played the ultimate inside-outside game. After the November election, with Trump on his way out of power, the far right no longer has to place any caveats on its anti-government impulses. First has come an attack on Congress, not coincidentally on the very day that the Republicans lost their Senate majority. Next, the far right is planning an armed march on Washington and all 50 state capitols on January 17. To cap it off, a Million Militia March is planned for Inauguration Day. What happened on January 6 was, despite some prior planning, a disorganized coup effort. What comes next may well be more precisely planned, which may result in a focus on the weakest links rather than the most potent symbols, just as the Oregon extremists chose the easily occupied Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in January 2016 rather than the heavily guarded state capitol building. The storming of the U.S. Capitol, meanwhile, has proven to be a great winnower. The fainthearted, like Kevin McCarthy, have proven to be chaff, as has a number of previously ardent Trump supporters. According to polling conducted after the attack, “a quarter of Trump voters agree that actions should be taken to immediately remove him from office. Further, 41% of Trump voters believe he has ‘betrayed the values and interests of the Republican Party.’” This is an extraordinarily rapid fissure in what had hitherto been an impregnable base of support for Trump. What remains is a revolutionary core. They won’t muster enough force to make a difference over the next two weeks, not against the 15,000 National Guard likely to be deployed to Washington, DC for the inauguration. After the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville in August 2017, the far right couldn’t handle the avalanche of criticism and could barely muster a couple dozen extremists for a rally one year later in Washington, DC. But it has since altered its messaging and its strategy. Expect even more adaptation over the next months and years. What Comes Next The idea that the Civil War was a “war of Northern aggression” has survived 150 years of civic, political, and media education to the contrary. A large section of white southerners, and even a few folks outside the region, cling to their “lost cause” much as Serbian nationalists mourn their defeat on the plain of Kosovo in 1389, Hungarians rail against the loss of territory after the Trianon Treaty of 1920, and the Japanese and German far right has bridled at the “outside interference” that robbed their nations of a measure of sovereignty after World War II. Prepare for the “stolen election” narrative to serve a similar function for the ForeverTrumpers. This narrative of an unfair political system ties together many of the far right’s themes: liberal institutions are fundamentally broken and corrupted, the mainstream media is compliant in tilting the playing field, and the globalists will do anything to regain power from “the people.” Note, too, how these messages can appeal to a left also angry at the status quo, and you can understand why so many people who voted for Bernie Sanders switched to Trump and why European far right parties have harvested votes from previous bastions of the Communist Party. Such appeals to fairness – a stolen election is above all unfair – conceal the racist, sexist, and otherwise exclusionary content of the far right’s agenda. An explicitly fascist platform has considerably less broad-based appeal than a cry to right a wrong. Over the next four years, the far right will beat this drum of political illegitimacy. It will claim that nothing the Biden administration does will be legal or constitutional because of its original sin of ascension via a stolen election. The fallout from January 6 will continue to divide the Republican Party. But the opportunity to brand the Democrats as illegitimate will prove just too addictive to be ignored. Consider the attacks on Obamacare or the successful effort to block Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court. Even in the face of overwhelming counterevidence, the Republicans hammered on the illegitimacy of the Democratic initiatives. A “stolen election” caucus, composed of the congressional members who survive a corporate and fundraiser boycott, will attempt to pull the Republican Party further to the right, just as the Tea Party did during the Obama era. The international ramifications of this strategy are equally worrisome. The far right attacks governments not only because they are liberal in the sense of providing government “handouts” but because they follow liberal principles of governance (checks and balances, free press, rights to gather and express dissent). Trump’s attacks on January 6 were not just seditious. They were designed to transform his position and that of his party into something resembling United Russia and Putin’s leadership for life. Trump has always wanted to build a Moscow or a Budapest or an Ankara or a Managua on the Potomac: iron-fisted leadership, no serious political opposition, a cowering press, a cult of personality. He thought he saw his opportunity on January 6. This is also the ultimate goal of the mob. It doesn’t want anarchy, except as an interim strategy. It wants a strong hand on the tiller, as if Trump were the Great Helmsman guiding the country in a Great Leap Forward (or Backward, given that a mob’s sense of direction is never very precise). Trump’s hands, however, are being wrenched from the tiller. Even better he is being abandoned by leading members of his party, his social media enablers, his financial backers, and his corporate sponsors. His ambition having overleapt itself, Trump has stumbled, irrevocably. The mob is taking note, even as it falls back to protect its wounded leader. For the next four years, prepare for the mob and its political representatives to rely on street power to identify, campaign for, and put into office their next Great White Hope. What’s more quintessentially American than that?
https://fpif.org/america-and-the-mob/
د پاکستاني سیاست مخکښې ښځینه څهرې
نوموړې د ملتان جلسې ته په وینا کې وویل: "د ملتان ولسه! داسې ویل کېږي کنه چې تاسې د عزت خلک یاست؟ تاسو غیرتیان یاست؟ داسې ویل کېږي کنه چې خدای که چا ته دښمن ورکوي نو ظرف لرونکی هغه دې ورکړي؟ خو زموږ المیه دا ده چې کوم دښمن را تر غاړې دی، هغه کم ظرفه دی."
پاکستان جمهوري تحریک د یو شمېر اپوزیشن ګوندونو ایتلاف دی چې د حکومت خلاف هڅې کوي او په بېلا بېلو ښارونو کې یې جلسې کړي دي.
غورځنګ تور پورې کوي چې تحریک انصاف د ۲۰۱۸ز کال په عامو انتخاباتو کې د درغلیو په نتیجه کې واکمن شوی نو ځکه باید استعفا ورکړي.
خو حکومت او الېکشن کمېشن په بیا بیا دا تورونه رد کړي او هغه انتخابات یې پاک او منصافنه بللي.
حکومت وايي، د مخالفو سیاسي ګوندونو مشران د درغلیو په کېسونو کې ځان له احتسابه د د ژغورلو لپاره احتجاجي جلسې او غونډې کوي.
مریم نواز څوک ده؟
مريم نواز د ۲۰۱۱ز کال په نومبر کې سياست پیل کړ او د ۲۰۱۳ز کال عامو انتخاباتو کې يې له خپل پلار او پخواني وزیراعظم نواز شريف سره په کیمپېن کې مهم رول ولوباوه.
د ۲۰۱۸ز کال د جولای په انتخاباتو کې نوموړې ته مسلم ليګ (ن) ګوند د نوماندۍ ټېکېټ ورکړی وو خو ورته احتساب عدالت د شتمنیو په یوه مقدمه کې د اووه کاله د بند سزا ورکړه او ورسره یې د ۱۰ کلونو لپاره د لوړپوړو حکومتي څوکیو لپاره نااهله کړه.
خو اسلام اباد های کورټ د هم هغه کال د سېپټېمبر په میاشت کې د مریمې او د هغې د مېړه او پخواني پوځي کیپټېن محمد صفدر سزاګانې وځنډولې.
مريم نواز په ۲۰۱۹ز کال کې د احتساب قامي ادارې (نیب) په حراست کې هم ساتلې وه. هغه نیب چارواکو د چودرې شوګر مېلز په نوم د درغلیو د تورونو په قضیه کې له لاهوره نیولې وه.
د مسلم لیګ (ن) یو سیاستوال صدیق الفاروق مشال راډیو ته وویل، مریم نواز یو منفرد کردار لرونکی او زړوره ښځه ده چې په کوښښونو یې په تاریخ کې ځان ته نوم جوړ کړ.
"چې کله یو پوځي امر د نواز شریف خلاف کودتا وکړه نو د هغه مېرمن کلثوم نواز راووته او اعلان یې وکړ چې زما مرام خپل خاوند او بچي له بنده خوشې کول دې. اوس هم چې نواز شریف د علاج لپاره بهر دی نو لور یې یو ډېر ښه کردار تر سره کوي. مریم نواز د خپلې کورنۍ له وجې له سیاست سره بلده ده. د هغې په سوچ او تقریر کې سیاسي بلوغت او یو انفراديت دی. زوروره وینا کوي، ډېره ښه لهجه لري. هغه لوستې ده، د لوی سړي لور ده او پر معاملاتو پوه ده. نو د پاکستان په سیاست کې د نورو ښځو په شان ډېر ښه کردار ادا کوي. دا څه وخت وو چې مور یې د مرګ پر بستر، پلار ته یې د ۱۰ او دې ته د اووه کلونو د بند سزاګانې واورول شوې او جېل ته ولاړله. هغه وخت یې مړانه وښووله او ویې ویل چې د جېل جامې به اغوندي، د زندان ډوډۍ به خوري. هغې ویل چې قید او بند یې حوصله نه شي لړزولی او همدا وشول."
سیاست ته د اصفې بوټو زردارۍ راتګ
یو شمېر پاکستانیو رسنیو د ملتان جلسه د پیپلز ګوند د اصفې بوټو زردارۍ د سیاسي ژوند پیل وبلله.
د ګوند مشر او د هغې ورور بلاول بوټو زرداري کورونا وایرس وهلی وو نو ځکه په کور کې ګوښه وو نو د هغه کشرې خور د ګوند نمایندګي وکړه.
هغې په خپله لنډه وینا کې وویل چې د پاکستان تحریک انصاف د غوره کړي حکومت وخت پوره شوی: "زه نن د ټولو منندویه یم چې د غوره کړي حکومت د ظلم او جبر باوجود، داسې په لوی شمېر کې راغونډ شوي یاست. تاسې نن خپله پرېکړه کړې. دا غوره کړی [وزیراعظم] به اوس ځي."
د پیپلز ګوند یو مشر او پخوانی سېنېټر تاج حیدر وايي، د اصفې زردارۍ سیاسي روزنه له زیات وخته روانه ده ځکه چې خپله مور، پلار او کورنۍ یې په سیاسي هلو ځلو لیدلي دي:
"هغه ډېر ژر په شیانو پوهېږي او ورته معلومه وي چې څه کول دي او څنګه یې کول دي. اصفه بي بي له تېرو څو کلونو راهیسې د ګوند دننه دفتري معاملات سمبالوي. خو تاسې ولیدل چې کله ورته وویل شول چې [د ګوند] استازولي به کوي، نو ورته د زده کړو ضرورت نه وو. د هغې خو له لومړۍ ورځې راهیسې تربیت روان دی."
اصفه بوټو زرداري د خپلې کورنۍ لومړۍ نجلۍ نه ده چې سیاست کوي.
د هغې نیا نصرت بوټو او مور بېنظیر بوټو د پاکستان سیاست وتلې څهرې دي.
د بېنظیر بوټو ژوند او هڅې
بینظیر بوټو دوه ځلې د پاکستان وزیراعظمه منتخبه شوه .هغه د یو اسلامي جمهوري هېواد لومړۍ ښځینه مشره وه.
د هغې د واک لومړۍ دوره له ۱۹۸۸ز څخه تر ۱۹۹۰ز کال پورې او دویمه هغه یې له ۱۹۹۳ز تر ۱۹۹۶ز کال پورې وه.
په ۱۹۹۶ز کال کې پر هغې او پر مېړه اصف علي زرداري د درغلیو تورونه پورې شول او د هغه وخت ولسمشر فاروق لغاري یې حکومت ختم کړ.
هغې په ۱۹۹۸ز کال کې جلاوطني پیل کړه او دوبۍ ته ولاړله.
پر ۱۹۹۹ز کال چې د پوځ پخواني مشر جنرال پروېز مشرف د میا نواز شریف حکومت ړنګ کړ نو بېنظیر بوټو هم له هېواده بهر پاتې شوه، خو د جمهوریت بحالۍ هڅو ته یې دوام ورکړ.
نوموړې په ۲۰۰۷ز کال کې پاکستان ته ستنه شوه چې د ۲۰۰۸ز کال په انتخاباتو کې برخه واخلي.
بېنظیر بوټو په خپل ژوندلیک کې لیکلي چې پاکستان ته ستنېدل یې اسانه فیصله نه وه.
"زه تر وخته درې ساعته مخکې په دوبۍ کې د خپلې جلاوطنۍ له کوره روانه شوم. زما مېړه اصف باید په دوبۍ کې زما له دوه لوڼو بختاور او اصفې سره پاتې شوی وای. اصف او ما باید سخته او سمه فیصله کړې وای. موږ پر دې پوه وو چې زما له ورتګ سره خطرونه تړلي ول خو موږ دا باوري کول غوښتل چې که هر څه کېږي، زموږ د لوڼو او زوی بلاول (چې په اوکسفرډ کې په پوهنځي کې وو) د پالنې او ورته د پام کولو لپاره به یې له والدینو یو کس موجود وي. ښه خبره دا ده چې پر دې ډول موضوعاتو ډېر کم مړونه او ښځې له یو بل سره غږېږي. خو اصف او زه د خپل شخصي ژوند د قرباني کولو او یا د عادي ژوند له نه لرلو سره بلد وو. ما خپله لاره ډېر مخکې انتخاب کړې وه. د پاکستان ولس تر ټولو لوی لومړیتوب وو او د پاکستان خلک به مې تل ترجیح وي. زما بچي پر دې پوه ول او نه یوازې یې دا هر څه ومنل بلکې ډاډ یې هم راکړ."
بېنظیر بوټو په یو بل ځای کې په خپل کتاب کې کاږي چې د پاکستان په څېر ټولنه کې ښځه سیاستواله باید احساساتي چلند ونکړي:
"په سیاست کې د زیاترو ښځو په شان زه په خاصه توګه پام کومه چې ځان پیاوړې وساتم او هېڅکله خپل جذبات و نه ښییم. په سیاست یا حکومت کې که یوه ښځه احساساتي کېږي نو خلک ورڅخه د هغې د کمزورۍ مانا اخلي او دا تاثر لا پیاوړی کېږي چې ګواکې ښځه سیاست ته جوړه نه ده."
د ۲۰۰۷ز په اکتوبر کې ګڼ خلک د کراچۍ هوايي ډګر ته ورغلي ول چې بېنظیر بوټو وګوري.
نوموړې په یوه لویه قافله کې روانه وه چې پکې ځانمرګی برید وشو او لسګونه پلویان او د ګوند غړي یې ووژل او ژوبل شول.
دا هغه وخت وو چې په پاکستان کې امنیتي حالات خراب ول او وسله والو په لویو، وړو ښارونو کې بریدونه کول خو نوموړې د جمهوریت بحالۍ هڅو ته دوام ورکړ.
تر برید څه د پاسه دوه میاشتې وروسته، د ډېسېمبر پر ۲۷مه بېنظیر بوټو د راولپېنډۍ په لیاقت باغ کې لویه جلسه وکړه.
نوموړې چې تر جلسې وروسته روانه وه نو له ګاډي یې سر ایستلی وو او خپلو پلویانو ته یې لاس خوځاوه.
پر بوټو د لیاقت باغ له وره سره نېږدې بل برید وشو چې پکې هغه ووژل شوه.
امریکايي لیکوال مارک اې سېګل له بېنظیر بوټو سره د هغې د کتاب په لیکلو کې مرسته کړې وه.
سېګل د هغې تر مړینې وروسته لیکلي ول په ژوند کې یې د بېنظیر بوټو په څېر زړوره ښځه نه وه لیدلې.
نوموړی کاږي، هغه یې ګرانه ملګرې وه چې تشه یې هېڅوک نشي ډکولای.
سېګل زیاتوي چې پر دې خوشاله دی چې د بېنظیر بوټو اخري نښه یې کتاب دی چې د هغې تر مړینې وروسته خپور شو چې د هغې لویې ښځې قوت، مثبت سوچ او لیدلوری ورڅخه جوتېږي.
پخوانی سېنېټر تاج حیدر چې له بېنظیر بوټو سره یې نېږدې کار کاوه، وايي، د وزیراعظمې په حیث هغه له ډېرو چیلېنجونو سره مخامخ وه چې په زړورتیا یې مقابله وکړه:
"هغې په همت او حوصلې بلکې، په دانشمندۍ قیادت کاوه. ډېرې مرحلې وې چې پکې سختې فیصلې په کار وې لکه د [پخواني پوځي واکمن ضیاالحق پر وړاندې] د جمهوریت بحالۍ تحریک (اېم ار ډي) پیلول، له ښي لاسو ګوندونو سره په غورځنګ ورګډېدل – دا ډېرې ګرانې پرېکړې وې، خو هغې وکړې. هغه ډېره ښه متحدوونکې وه. له ډېرو چیلېنجونو او دوو غټو امریتونو سره یې مقابله وکړه. د ضیاالحق په امریت کې د مذهبي سختدریځۍ ملاتړ کېده. هغې تر اخري وخته په مړانه د سختدریځۍ مقابله وکړه. په نړۍ کې چې د اسلام په اړه څه فکر کېده، هغه یې ختم کړ. د پاکستان ښځو مخې ته یې لوی مثال کښېښود. زموږ هغه بچیانې چې له پېړیو راهیسې شا ته پرېښوول شوې وې، په هغو کې حوصله پیدا شوه چې پاکستان یوه لور لري چې په دې ډول جنګېږي."
د بېنظیر بوټو د وژنې پلټنې د پاکستان د تحقیقاتو وفاقي ادارې (اېف ای اې) کړي خو تر اوسه پکې د پام وړ پرمختګ نه دی شوی.
پلټونکې ډله تحریک طالبان پاکستان او د هغې ډلې پخوانی مشر مشر بیت الله مسید د بېنظیر بوټو په وژنه تورنوي او د پاکستان پخواني پوځي ولسمشر پرویز مشرف باندې هم د هغې د وژنې په قضیه کې د ککړتیا تورونه لګېدلي چې هغه رد کړي.
د بېګم نسیم ولي خان سیاسي مبارزه
د خدايي خدمتګار د مشر خان عبدالغفار خان زوی خان عبدالولي خان په ۱۹۷۰ز کال کې د نېشنل عوامي پارټۍ مشري کوله.
ولي خان چې زنداني شو نو بېګم نسیم ولي خان سیاست ته مخه کړه.
نوموړې اوسمهال هم د عوامي نیشنل ګوند یوه مشره ده. په پښتني سیمه کې نسیم ولي خان اولنۍ ښځه وه چې د ۱۹۷۷ز کال په غیر ګوندي انتخاباتو کې برخه واخیسته او کامیابه شوه.
کارپوه ډاکټر فضل رحیم مروت وايي، په پښتني سیمه کې په سیاست کې بېګم نسیم ولي خان خپل رول لوبولی دی.
"په ولي خان چې کومې مقدمې جوړې شوې، بوټو پر وخت د بلوچستان د سازش په تور او حکومت یې مات کړ. دلته بیا نېشنل عوامي پارټۍ او جمعېت واله ؤ استعفی ورکړه او په حیدراباد کې د سازش او دسیسو خبرې پیل شوې. که تا خیال کړی وي په دغه وخت بېګم نسیم ولي راووځي. هغې هم په خپل وخت کې ډېر غټ رول لوبولې دې. په دغه سیمه کې یوه ښځه په اول ځل سیاست ته راووځي. هغې په داسې حالاتو کې پارټي راټینګه کړه چې مارشل لا ګانې وې. یو وخت کې دوی ټول قېد وو. په سیاست کې او د جمهوریت لپاره دې یو ښه رول ولوبولو. ډېره پوهه ښځه وه، تر هغې زیاته پوهه وه چې د څه تمه ترې کېدله."
سیاستوال او کارپوه افراسیاب خټک وايي، مېرمن نسیم ولي نه یوازې د خیبر پښتونخوا اسمبلۍ ته کامیابه شوه بلکې د خپل ګوند پارلېماني مشره هم پاتې شوې او د ګوند صوبايي صدارت یې هم کړی دې.
خټک وايي، نوموړې له سختو پړاوونو تېره شوه او مشکلات یې وګالل.
"نسیم بي بي په داسې حالاتو کې راووته چې ډېره سخته سختي وه. نېشنل عوامي پارټي باندې بندېز لګېدلې و او مشران یې نظر بند شوي وو. دا په هغه وخت راووتله او سیاسي قیادت سره یې هغه خلا ډکه کړه. نېشنل عوامي پارټي د ذوالفقار بوټو حکومت خلاف وه. هغه وخت جلسې جلوسونه وو. دوېمه مرحله هغه وه چې کله د ۱۹۸۱م پس د پوځي واکمن ضیاالحق خلاف د ایم ار ډي تحریک پیل شو نو بیا نېشنل ډیموکریټ پارټي وه چې نسیم بي بي په هغې کې وه. نو په هغې کې هم نیول کېدل او نظر بندۍ دا پکې شوي وو او دې هغه مرحلې تېرې کړې."
مېرمن نسیم ولي خان د ۲۰۱۵ز په اګست کې له مشال راډیو سره په ځانګړې مرکه کې ویلي ول چې لسګونه کلونه پخوا یې کورنۍ د باچا خان په مبارزه کې شامله شوې وه او تر ننه یې ورته دوام ورکړی دی.
هغې وویل د ذوالفقار علي بوټو په حکومت کې عبدالولي خان او د هغه ملګري بندیان شول، پر ګوند یې بندیز ولګېد او په همهغو ورځو کې یې عملي سیاست پيل کړ.
په پېښور کې یو کارپوه ډاکټر فخرالاسلام د نسیم بي بي سیاسي مبارزه مهمه ګڼي او وايي چې په پښتني سیمه کې د نورو ښځینه وو سیاستوالانو لپاره یې یو مثال پریښی.
"هغه په یو داسې وخت کې سیاست ته راغله چې د ولي خان پرته هیڅ څوک د هغې په خاندان کې د دې په حق کې نه وو چې دا دې سیاست ته راشي او هغه وخت ډېر سخت و. هغې په کراچۍ کې په یوه جسله کې خپله لوپټه پښتنو ته وغورځوله چې تاسو به یې ماته په سر کوۍ. زما په فکر چې په سیاست کې چې وروسته څوک راغلي دي، د ځان لپاره یې هغه یو رول ماډل ګرځولې ده."
فاطمه جناح او هڅې یې
د ښځو سیاستوالانو په فهرست کې د پاکستان بنسټ ایښودونکي محمد علي جناح خور فاطمه جناح مهم نوم لري.
هغې په ۱۹۶۰ز کال کې د پخواني پوځي واکمن جنرال ایوب خان پر ضد د ګوندونو د غورځنګ مشري کوله.
کارپوه فضل رحیم مروت وايي، په پاکستان کې د ښځو د سیاست بنسټ فاطمه جناح کښېښود.
"زه به دا ووایم چې د نور په نسبت هغه عوامي هم وه. د ورور د سیاست په وخت چې کوم سیاست و، هغه د انګریزانو په چوکاټ کې و. خو که دې ته موږ وګورو نو دا د ایوب خان په وخت کې میدان ته راووځي، د اپوزیشن لیډرې په حیثیت. ریښتیا خبره دا ده چې خلک ورسره وو. پر هغې چې کوم تورونه وو، د دې باوجود شرقي پاکستان چې اوس بنګله دېش دې، هلته ورته د خلکو ډېر ملاتړ حاصل و. هغه کامیابه نه شوه خو دومره ضرور وشو چې ایوب خان تر فشار لاندې شو او دویمه مارشل لا یې ولګوله."
د پاکستان د انتخاباتو په تاریخ کې اکثر پر عمومي څوکیو سړي نوماندان وي او کمې ښځې په دې توانېدلي چې پر دې څوکیو ټاکنې وګټي.
زیاتره ښځې اوس هم په ځانګړو څوکیو پارلېمان ته لار پیدا کوي.
په دوی کې پخوانۍ وزیراعظمه بېنظیر بوټو، بېګم نسیم ولي خان، عابده حسین، صغرا امام، حنا رباني کر، نفیسه شاه او ډاکټره فهمیده مرزا دي.
ډاکټر فخرالاسلام هم دې ته په اشاره وايي چې په پاکستان کې په سیاست کې د ښځو ونډه د اطمینان وړ نه ده. دی وايي، میراثي سیاست د ځينو ښځو د بریا لامل دی.
"د پاکستان د ۱۹۷۳ز کال په ایین کې ویل شوي وو چې د ښځو لپاره به تر راتلونکو ۱۰ کالو پورې د چوکیو خصوصي کوټه وي. خو له بده مرغه دا تر کلونو تېرېدو باوجود بدل نه شو. خو د دې باوجود ښځو په سیاست کې په ښه ډول برخه اخیستې او ډېرې قربانیانې یې ورکړې دي. په نېغ په نېغه انتخاباتو کې کامیابې شوی ښځې په ګوتو شمارل کېدای شي او بله خبره دا چې دغه ښځې له هغو کورنیو سره تعلق -ساتي چې موږ ورته جاګیردارانه وایو."
https://www.mashaalradio.com/a/31020192.hthttps://www.mashaalradio.com/a/31020192.htmlml