Video Report - Strategic Analysis and Projections for 2022 - Jerusalem Studio 657

Video Report - #CDC #PediatricCases #COVID19 CDC shortens isolation period for asymptomatic infections as pediatric cases rise

Video Report - WHO warns of Omicron overload as France reports record of nearly 180,000 Covid cases

Video Report - CDC data: Omicron still dominant despite revised estimates

Video Report - Full interview: Vice President Kamala Harris on "Face the Nation"

#PPP Music Video - BILAWAL BILAWAL - JIYE BHUTTO - JIYE BILAWAL بلاول بلاول بلاول بلاول

Video Report - Chairman PPP addresses the Jalsa of 14th Martyrdom Anniversary of Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto

#Pakistan - #Balochistan: Where Promising Cakes Doesn’t Work Anymore – OpEd

By Nilesh Kunwar

After he came to power in 2018, Prime Minister Imran Khan told Balochis that the “Centre will work with Balochistan as a partner,” and assured them that “We will not make any such promise for which we may have to excuse later on.” On National Minority Day a day earlier, Khan publicly admitted that “Balochistan is impoverished [since] Pakistan has always neglected the region.” Though it’s no secret that the people of Balochistan have been historically marginalised by the country’s powerful Punjab lobby and brutalised by Pakistan Army, Islamabad has never admitted this earlier.

So, when Khan reiterated that the future of Pakistan was linked with that of Balochistan and announced his willingness to talk with Balochi insurgents, his willingness to undo the wrongs of the past expectedly raised a lot of hopes amongst Balochis. There was another compelling reason why the people of Balochistan had high expectations from him- before becoming Prime Minister, Khan had been vocally quite critical of Pakistan army’s horrific excesses and atrocities in Balochistan.

His Khan’s concern for the pitiful condition of Balochis is apparent from an undated video in which he can be heard saying, “Our Army bombing people in Balochistan, how can we bomb our own people?” Not only this, he even said, “It is our own people with their children, but it is important to understand are we just bombing out people, just think about the immorality of bombing villages with the women and children.” So, the oppressed Balochis genuinely believed that after becoming Prime Minister, the cricketer turned politician would walk his talk.

However, while Khan’s assurances fooled the people of Balochistan for two years, his pretence finally crumbled in November when thousands of Balochis in Gwadar city took to the streets in response to a call from Jamaat-i-Islami [JI] leader Maulana Hidayatur Rehman. Initially, while the government tried to play down this massive protest, Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian dismissed reports of this humungous protest as “fake news” aimed at maligning China-Pakistan Economic Corridor [CPEC] project.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin claimed that “China-Pakistan Gwadar Faqeer Middle School, the vocational training institute in Gwadar, and China-Pakistan Fraternity Emergency Care Center in Gwadar, which have been completed, have played important roles in and made China’s contributions to creating education opportunities, improving employment skills and responding to COVID-19 for the benefit of the local people.” He also said that “… all CPEC projects including the Gwadar Port will, play a more positive part in improving people’s livelihood in both countries.”

But with large scale protests continuing for a month, it’s patently clear that while Khan was just making false promises, Beijing was issuing blatantly fallacious statements. So, while the Gwadar Port development project is being touted as the “crown” of the ambitious USD 60 billion CPEC project that would boost infrastructural development as well as provide employment to locals on a large scale, what was actually happening on ground was just the opposite. So, the Gwadar protest was both justified as well as expected.While a series of check posts has made movement of locals in the area a nightmare, security reasons are being cited to prevent fishermen from venturing into the sea. Resultantly, while local traders and commuters are facing severe hardships livelihood of fishermen is being adversely impacted. At the same time, Chinese nationals are moving around freely in Gwadar while Chinese trawlers are having a field day fishing merrily in Pakistani waters. The very fact that the government has accepted 19 demands made by protesters makes it absolutely clear that Islamabad was being grossly unfair to the people of Balochistan.

The tragedy of Balochistan is two-fold- one, its illegally occupation by Pakistan, and two, the step-motherly treatment meted out by successive governments. Yet, it goes to the credit of Balochis that they never had secession on their minds- until they were forced to consider this option, thanks to Pakistan army’s reign of terror. Balochistan is today inextricably associated with Balochis being abducted, tortured, killed and their corpses simply dumped. The top ten results of Google search for “kill and dump policy” will be about Balochistan!

In his illuminating piece titled ‘The rise of Maulana’ that appeared in ‘Dawn’ on December 1, Muhammad Akbad Notezai quotes JI leader Hidayat-ur-Rehman as saying “There are two main demands in our protest: first, our respect; second, joblessness. Our source of livelihood and employment in the name of security, via fishing, trade, and other businesses have become ruined. In a nutshell, we want our very own employment that has been snatched from us in the wake of development and security, not the one from you to be given to us.” The important thing to note here is that the people of Gwadar haven’t fallen for the much-hyped claim that CPEC will be a “game changer” and usher in prosperity, being peddled by Beijing and Islamabad. Balochis are quite happy and content with their traditional sources of livelihood and all they want is a fair share of the income accrued from sale of its mineral resources. It also wants that seurity forces should treat them with due respect and dignity.

However, there is a problem.

Khan is openly pandering to Chinese interests as evident from his priorities. Even when public discontentment in Gwadar was palpable, rather than address concerns of the locals, Khan was busy assuring a Chinese business delegation of support “on a priority basis,” and bending backwards by saying that Pakistan is “grateful to them for their keen interest in accelerating their investment in special economic zones.” Similarly, Pakistan army and other security agencies under its command hold Balochis in utter contempt and views them as terrorists. Therefore, the chances that the people of Gwadar would be treated with respect may be difficult to ensure at grass root levels. What should concern Islamabad is that though spearheaded by a JI cleric, the Gwadar protest isn’t a movement inspired or spurred by religious considerations. Au contraire, it’s a campaign for ensuring that Balochis are given basic amenities guaranteed by Constitution of Pakistan and that Pakistan army ends its highhandedness and unlawful actions. The Gwadar protests also highlights the phenomenal rise in regional and ethnic prejudices within Pakistan that are compelling several minority communities to unite and in an act of self-preservation, raise their voices against Islamabad’s discriminatory treatment.

The writing on the wall is clear. Pakistanis can no longer be fooled by hollow promises of a bright future or unimaginable riches and prosperity. So, offering cakes to the economically weak who struggle to by bread will no longer work and thus, Khan has no other option but to act. However, whether he will be able to take the bull by its horns and make Chinese commercial interests in CPEC subservient to those of his own countrymen, remains a million dollar question.

https://www.eurasiareview.com/27122021-balochistan-where-promising-cakes-doesnt-work-anymore-oped/

#Pakistan - #BenazirBhutto - Benazir Bhutto’s murder still remains a ‘mystery’

Despite a lapse of 14 years, the mystery surrounding the assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto could not be solved, and the case is still pending in the Lahore High Court’s (LHC) Rawalpindi bench, a private TV channel reported.

At least 20 party workers were killed and 71 others were seriously injured in the attack on the former premier. In the aftermath of the incident, four inquiries were conducted into the high-profile case with the police joint investigation team (JIT), the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA), the United Nations (UN) and Scotland Yard striving to solve the matter. However, these inquiries and investigations yielded no results as the Bhutto family did not pursue the case in the special anti-terrorism court (ATC), the TV channel reported.

A total of 12 challans were filed in this case, 355 appearances were recorded, 10 judges were changed and 141 witnesses, including 68 prosecution witnesses, testified. 16 people were accused in the case, but only eight of them were arrested. The main accused, Taliban commander Baitullah Mehsud, was killed in a drone strike. Five other accused – Nadir Khan alias Qari, Nasrullah, Abdullah alias Saddam, Ikramullah, Faiz Muhammad Kaskat – were also killed in encounters with intelligence agencies at different places.

The suicide bomber who attacked the former prime minister was identified as Saeed Blakel, who died in the blast. The police arrested five accused Aitzaz Shah, Sher Zaman, Rashid Ahmed, Rafaqat and Hasnain Gul, and dumped the debris on them.

The FIA also arrested the then-president General (r) Pervez Musharraf, former city police officer (CPO) Saud Aziz and superintendent (SP) Rawal Khurram Shehzad as accused in the case. However, they were later granted bail by the high court.

On August 31, 2017, Judge Muhammad Asghar Khan of the special ATC pronounced the verdict in the Adiala Jail after nine years, acquitting five accused, and declaring Musharraf as a fugitive on absenteeism, and issued permanent arrest warrants, besides confiscating his movable and immovable property.

Meanwhile, police officers – deputy inspector general (DIG) Saud Aziz and SP Khurram Shehzad – were sentenced to a total of 17 years imprisonment and a fine of Rs1 million each for destroying evidence and breach of security. However, three months later, the high court suspended the sentences and released the two officers from jail. The CPO is now retired while the SP has now been promoted to the rank of DIG.

Appeals of the accused and plaintiffs have been pending in LHC’s Rawalpindi bench for over four years, and are expected to be heard in the last week of February 2022.

Former president Asif Ali Zardari has filed an appeal in the high court against the acquittal of the five accused in the case, and has sought to increase the sentences of both the police officers and to initiate trial against Musharraf in his absence.

The FIA has also filed appeals against the acquittal of the five accused while the convicted police officers have filed appeals against the sentences.

The three acquitted accused Aitzaz Shah, Sherzaman and Rafaqat have been released from jail. Meanwhile, two accused Rasheed Ahmed and Hasnain Gul are still locked up in Adiala Jail on various charges.

https://dailytimes.com.pk/860585/benazir-bhuttos-murder-still-remains-a-mystery/

Many questions about the assassination of Benazir Bhutto - Unsolved and unhealed

By Naveed Elahi

Many questions about the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, a two time prime minister, on December 27, 2007, remain unanswered.

The assassination of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto, one of the most tragic incidents in the history of Pakistan, is still shrouded in a confusing cobweb of mysteries. Official investigation of the crime was marred by two glaring oversights: one, lack of a post mortem examination; and two, the hurried hosing down of the crime scene by the police. Both are understood to have destroyed evidence that could be vital to investigation and prosecution of the most high-profile murder case in Pakistan’s political history.

This article is about the washing of the crime scene, which later gave rise to a host of conspiracy theories. After so many years, the question remains: why was the crime scene washed away in such a hurry? According to police record, the crime scene was washed only about an hour and half after the attack that killed the Pakistan Peoples Party chairperson.

On December 27, 2007, Benazir Bhutto’s cavalcade was attacked by a suicide bomber while it was slowly coming out of Liaqat Bagh, the venue of her last public meeting. As a result, 25 people, including Benazir Bhutto, were killed and more than 100 others were injured. DIG Saud Aziz, the city police officer, visited the scene shortly after the fatal explosion. Along with the Operations chief, SSP Yaseen Farooq, he then left for Rawalpindi General Hospital where Benazir Bhutto had been rushed for treatment. SP Khurram Shahzad, DSP Rana Shahid and Inspector Kashif Riaz, the SHO, remained at the crime scene. When Benazir Bhutto was declared dead, SP Khurram Shahzad grew apprehensive that the sight of blood at the crime scene could enrage PPP workers and the general public, who might resort to violence. He shared this fear with the CPO, who gave the permission to wash the scene once the SP and his team were satisfied with the collection of evidence. Dr A Rehman of 1122 then went ahead with the actual washing on the instructions of SP Khurram Shahzad.

Questions were raised later on the ‘hasty’ washing of the scene and the improper collection of evidence from there. Reports by the UN Commission and the Scotland Yard team expressed dissatisfaction on both counts. The UN Commission report said: “Hosing of the crime scene and the failure to collect and preserve evidence inflicted irreparable damage to the investigation”. The Scotland Yard reported that “the opportunity of a thorough forensic examination was lost”.

Importantly, a rumour then spread that the Rawalpindi CPO had ordered the washing of the crime scene at the behest of the then Military Intelligence director, Maj Gen Nadeem Ijaz. The UN Commission Report quoted a source as saying that the CPO had received a call from Army Headquarters to hose down the crime scene. Another source told the UN team that the MI chief had passed on these instructions to the CPO, directly or through some junior officer. However, the DG denied having given any such instructions. The CPO too refuted this allegation. It was, however, confirmed that personnel of intelligence agencies were present at the time of collection of evidence from the crime scene. The Rawalpindi MI head had also visited the crime scene at the time.

Questions were later raised over the hasty washing of the crime scene and the improper collection of evidence. The UN Commission and the Scotland Yard reports expressed dissatisfaction with these aspects of investigation. 

The CPO and other police officers reportedly claimed that hosing down the crime scene was standard procedure in Rawalpindi once sufficient evidence had been collected from the crime scene. They said it was considered prudent to wash it to avoid reaction from the furious party workers or the general public. Some officials said that the then ASP Ashfaq Anwar and DSP Rana Shahid were not in favour of washing the scene.

Three former inspectors general of police and two former additional IGs said, however, that the hurried hosing of the crime scene raised suspicion.

One of them stated that the crime scene needed to be preserved for a “reasonable period.” He said an investigation officer may have to visit it for a second time, even several times to collect more evidence in light of information they got from the witnesses or other sources. The officers denied that washing of the crime scene was a standard practice. Earlier, crime scenes had been preserved for several days following the two attempts on Gen Musharraf’s life in Rawalpindi.

Lawyer Najib Faisal Chaudhry says that though there was no specific law setting a timeframe for the preservation of the crime scene, all evidence had to be preserved. “Section 25.10 of Police Rules demands all possible steps to preserve the crime scene, to record particulars of and secure the presence of potential evidence,” he says. He adds that in high profile cases, a prolonged preservation may be necessary because it may not be possible to collect all evidence in one go. He finds it strange that the crime scene was washed within two hours.

Furthermore, under the rules the investigation officer or the investigation team examine and collect the evidence. In this particular case, this was done by the police officers on duty. Inspector Kashif Riaz was tasked with the collection of evidence and making the recoveries and recording those. As per record, SP Tahir Ayub, the then in charge of investigation, was not part of the process of collection of evidence and preservation of the crime scene. This, later, became a handicap for the investigation teams.

SP Khurram Shahzad was the supervisory officer on duty at the Liaqat Bagh jalsa under the supervision of SSP Yaseen Farooq, in charge of Operations. However, SP Khurram Shahzad talked to the CPO directly and the Operations SSP was not consulted regarding the decision to hose down the crime scene. The SSP, therefore, was not aware of the sufficiency or thoroughness of evidence collection from the crime scene.

The police officers’ claim of collection of “all available evidence” from the crime scene was to prove incorrect later. Two days after the incident, a Special Investigation Group (SIG) of the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) carried out another inspection of the crime scene and recovered a bullet casing from a drain that matched the pistol used in the attack that had been recovered on the day of occurrence. Khalid Qureshi, the then SIG director, reportedly claimed that the team had also recovered a few pellets from the scene and a part of a skull bone from the roof of a nearby building. A former FIA director general confirmed the recovery of the .30 bullet casing and pellets but not the recovery of a skull bone. Strangely, the SIG did not issue a formal crime scene report.

The police officers’ apprehensions of violence by an enraged mob were also misplaced considering a large number of policemen were available to ensure the maintenance of law and order.

DSP Sultan Mehmood and Inspector Adul Sattar and the Waris Khan SHO had been deployed along with their force comprising more than 50 personnel to cordon the crime scene. Later inquiries confirmed that no violence took place in the vicinity and force was not used against any crowd or group of protestors at the spot. There were some small protests in front of the hospital and at Murree Road but none at or around the crime scene.

Usually, an SOS call is given over wireless for additional force to tackle such situations. There is no record of wireless communication testifying to the claim that a crowd was seen around the crime scene. Had it been so, the Operations SSP and the Investigation SP as well as other senior police officers would have played their roles. Why did the CPO and the SP communicate over the phone, instead of using the wireless system?

On August 31, 2017, an anti-terrorism court declared Gen Musharraf, the former president, a fugitive in the Benazir Bhutto case. Citing a lack of substantial evidence, it acquitted five suspected Pakistani Taliban of conspiracy to murder. Two senior police officers were, however, sentenced to 17 years in prison: one for mishandling security at the rally and the other for mishandling the crime scene. Both were subsequently exonerated and released.

Senior and seasoned police officers, retired and serving, have raised eyebrows over the handling of the case. The observations of the UN Commission Report were not followed up in terms of ascertaining whether the CPO had ordered the hurried washing of the site by himself or under instructions.

---

 https://www.thenews.com.pk/tns/detail/919469-unsolved-and-unhealed