Berries Good for Memory?

F-word signs across the globe

'Hot girls' make world's worst song?

Sharif brothers involved in embezzlement

Rehman Malik presented evidence against Sharif brothers during a press conference.

Interior Minister Rehman Malik on Saturday uncovered involvement of Mian Nawaz Sharif and his family in US $32 million money laundering scam, saying he would expose their more such corruption acts. Addressing a press conference, Rehman Malik said that Shehbaz Sharif was declared defaulter by High Court of Queen’s bench London. Nawaz Sharif was also the defaulter of 6 billion rupees of different banks. ‘They are not honest therefore cannot be in politics,’ Malik added. When asked that why is he bringing up these allegations at this time, rehman Malik replied that during Benazir’s second term General Amjad of National Accountability Bureau asked for my assistance against Sharif brothers but Benzair refused to do so. The Interior Minister said he would send a reference of that scam to the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) next week and to present all documents in the court if called. ‘Fearing the investigations Nawaz Sharif signed first NRO with Farooq Laghari and second NRO then with Musharaf,’ said Rehman Malik. Rehman Malik asked the Supreme Court to take a suo moto notice of the scam in which the precious money of national exchequer was sent abroad.

Sarkozy snaps at DSK as France poll approaches

French President Nicolas Sarkozy

has rejected claims by Dominique Strauss-Kahn that his party was behind the former IMF chief's downfall. Mr Sarkozy told reporters Mr Strauss-Kahn should keep quiet and "spare the French his remarks." Mr Strauss-Kahn told Britain's Guardian newspaper that sex allegations against him were orchestrated by opponents. He said although he did not believe he had been set up, events were "shaped by those with a political agenda." The Guardian said it was clear that he was referring to people working for Nicolas Sarkozy and his UMP party. Mr Strauss-Kahn was forced to stand down as head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in May last year when he was arrested in New York and accused of sexually assaulting a hotel maid. The charges were later dropped, but he has since been embroilled in new allegations that he was involved in a prostitution ring. On the campaign trail Mr Sarkozy dismissed Mr Strauss-Kahn's interpretation of events. "Enough is enough!" he said, "I would tell Mr Strauss-Kahn to explain himself to the law." Libyan 'support' Mr Sarkozy is trailing in the polls in the run up to the second and decisive round of France's presidential election on 6 May. And he is faced with further damaging allegations about his links to Libya under former leader Col Muammar Gaddafi. A left-wing political website, Mediapart, claims to have documentary evidence that Mr Sarkozy's 2007 presidential campaign received 50m euros ($66m) from the Gaddafi regime. The document - dated 2006 and written in Arabic - appears to have been signed the then Libyan foreign intelligence chief Musa Kusa. It refers to an "agreement in principle to support the campaign for the candidate for the presidential elections, Nicolas Sarkozy, for a sum equivalent to 50m euros." The website made similar claims last month. Mr Sarkozy said the claims were "grotesque", and said that if Gaddafi had financed his campaign "I wasn't very grateful" - a reference to the role he played in the former leader's overthrow in 2011.

Ex-Israeli spy boss attacks Netanyahu and Barak over Iran

Harriet Sherwood in Jerusalem

PM and defence chief not fit to lead Israel and are misleading the public over Iran, warns former Shin Bet boss Yuval Diskin Israel's former security chief has censured the country's "messianic" political leadership for talking up the prospects of a military stike on Iran's nuclear programme. In unusually candid comments set to ratchet up tensions over Iran at the top of Israel's political establishment, Yuval Diskin, who retired as head of the internal intelligence agency Shin Bet last year, said he had "no faith" in the abilities of the prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, and the defence minister, Ehud Barak, to conduct a war. The pair, who are the foremost advocates of military action against Iran's nuclear programme, were "not fit to hold the steering wheel of power", Diskin told a meeting on Friday night. "My major problem is that I have no faith in the current leadership, which must lead us in an event on the scale of war with Iran or a regional war," he said. "I don't believe in either the prime minister or the defence minister. I don't believe in a leadership that makes decisions based on messianic feelings. Believe me, I have observed them from up close ... They are not people who I, on a personal level, trust to lead Israel to an event on that scale and carry it off. "They are misleading the public on the Iran issue. They tell the public that if Israel acts, Iran won't have a nuclear bomb. This is misleading. Actually, many experts say that an Israeli attack would accelerate the Iranian nuclear race." Government aides described Diskin's comments as irresponsible and motivated from personal frustration. Diskin's remarks followed a furore over comments made on Wednesday by Israel's serving military chief, Benny Gantz, which starkly contrasted with Netanyahu's rhetoric on Iran. Gantz said he did not believe the Iranian leadership was prepared to "go the extra mile" to acquire nuclear weapons because it was "composed of very rational people" who understood the consequences. In what was seen as a veiled rebuke to the prime minister, Gantz added: "Decisions can and must be made carefully, out of historic responsibility but without hysteria." The chief of staff later attempted to gloss over suggestions of a breach between the military and political leaderships, telling reporters there was "really no distance" between his view and the prime minister's. Neither Netanyahu nor Barak have moderated their rhetoric. The prime minister recently said that those who downplayed the threat from a nuclear Iran "have learned nothing from the Holocaust". He added: "The Iranian regime is openly calling for our destruction and working frantically for the development of nuclear weapons as a means to that end." On Thursday, Barak said the chances of Iran halting its nuclear programme in response to international sanctions appeared low. Iran, he said, was not "rational in the western sense of the word". Diskin's comments also put him in agreement with the former head of the Mossad, Meir Dagan, who has said that attacking Iran was "the stupidest thing I have ever heard" and that the Iranian regime was rational.

Nawaz Sharif involved in money laundering

Interior Minister Rehman Malik on Saturday alleged that PML-N Chief and former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif was involved in money laundering. Addressing a news conference in Islamabad, he said evidence against Nawaz Sharif would be placed before the Supreme Court and National Accountability Bureau (NAB) for alleged corruption of $32 million. Rehman Malik said a commission may be formed to investigate alleged involvement of Nawaz Sharif in money laundering. He appealed to the Supreme Court to call him and he would present all evidence. He further alleged that Nawaz Sharif made an NRO with former President Farooq Ahmed Leghari and as a result, Benazir Bhutto’s elected government was unconstitutionally dismissed in November 1996. Rehman Malik also alleged that Nawaz Sharif made a second NRO with dictator Pervez Musharraf and went abroad after signing an agreement and violated the Charter of Democracy (COD) he signed with Benazir Bhutto in 2006.

Tehran police in new dress code crackdown

Police in Tehran are conducting a new crackdown on women

wearing mandatory headscarves improperly or in "vulgar" dress, the city's police chief said, according to media reports on Saturday. Such operations, which see police screening foot and vehicle traffic at major junctions and shopping centres, are conducted fairly often in Iran. The latest one was ordered days ahead of the May 4 second round of parliamentary elections, and as the onset of warm spring weather prompts Iranian women to don lighter clothing.

The police chief, Hossein Sajedinia, said the crackdown was "asked for by the people," the Fars news agency reported. Women wearing "bad headscarves, bad dress, and model-type women in vulgar dress" would be stopped, he said. Typically, such women are fined or detained in police stations until relatives collect them hours later with more modest clothing. Sajedinia said that companies importing "illegal clothes" that do not comply with Islamic dress standards would be given a warning or closed. The police chief said that "thugs" disrupting public order and men "who bother other people's daughters and wives" would also be confronted by officers.

Secularism: A concept most misunderstood!

by:Dur-e-Aden

It is almost a sin to mention the word secularism in Pakistan. Suddenly you are bombarded with labels of being pro-western, anti-Islam, ashamed of your values, threat to identity of the nation, as a result of which you are not a true Pakistani or a good Muslim. People associate secularism with the images of clubbing, partying, drinking, promiscuity, prostitution, broken family structure, mental diseases and all other ills that are associated with western culture. The idea being that when these societies moved away from religion, they became materialistic and lost their sense of morality, as a result of which they are suffering from these social disasters today. It is very true that religion is an important source of morality. Some of our basic senses of right and wrong come from religious teachings whether it’s respect for human life, caring for the poor, modesty and respect in personal relationships or refraining from materialistic pursuits of the world; these are very important and valuable concepts that help to build up the character of a person. The misguided idea however, is that to build such a character among people, religion has to be a part of the state structure and imposed on people forcefully. Muslims who demand a religious state forget to notice that it is actually Muslims who prove this idea wrong that secularism is a threat to your religious values. For example, there is a large number of Muslims who live in secular western societies where Islam is not part of the state, yet they don’t do any of the things that are common place in those countries and which we think are not “our values.” Even though Islam is not a part of western governmental structure, this doesn’t mean that it is a threat to the beliefs of Muslims living in those countries. This is a very important point that people need to understand. Secularism merely means separation of church/mosque and the state. In other words, your state and its institutions don’t adhere to a religion. It certainly doesn’t mean that you yourself have to leave your religion. In fact, in a secular society, you will have more freedom to practice your particular interpretation of a religion which is very much limited in a state where anyone ideological religion interpretation is part of the state apparatus. Let’s talk about Pakistan. Here we have Brelvies, Deobandis, Imamis, Ismaelis, Zikris, mystic Sufis, Wahabis and Ahmadis. Now if we want to make Pakistan an “Islamic” country, this means that Islam has to be a part of the state and all its functions, from education, to laws, to foreign policy, to treatment of minorities etc. Now which version are we going to adopt? (Especially when even within one version, there are disagreements. Not all Hanafis agree on everything, neither all Shafi’s). Moreover, what gives one particular version the right to impose itself on others? (I am not even talking about non-Muslim minorities here, just talking about divisions within Muslims). May be if we agreed on what “Islam” is, the argument to make Pakistan an “Islamic” country would be stronger, but considering the diversity that we have within Islam, incorporation of religion with the state is only going to increase resentment among the groups who would be left out, and sectarian violence by those who would consider their version right and others’ wrong. We have already experimented with this bloody business during Zia years when one ideological interpretation of religion became part of the state and now that cancer has engulfed our society. Secondly, the moral degradation of western societies is not a result of secularism. It’s a result of abandonment of religion or other sources of moral ethics in their personal sphere as well, something that we don’t have to worry about. It is because in our society, along with all the modernity, religion is still and will continue to be a very important part of our everyday lives. That is why I think that secularism would be perfect for our society as even though we may differ on complex matters regarding interpretations, there are a lot of commonalities that we take pride in by calling them “our values.” Moreover, if you look at Pakistan today, it’s not an “Islamic” country in the full sense of the word (whatever that means in the first place?). Despite the inclusion of certain religious clauses, our laws are largely secular and so is our society in their everyday lives. We have people wearing niqabs and people wearing jeans, we have women running for Parliament and stay at home mothers, we have people with beards and those who are clean-shaven, we have people listening and performing music and those who tend to refrain from such activities. Now I am pretty sure none of these classes of society would want their way of life to be banned, and that can only happen in a secular society. Otherwise, if you have one religious interpretation guiding the lives of people who come from diverse social and ethnic backgrounds, result will be chaotic. People don’t really like much interference in their personal lives and state should be concerned with matters that affect the society as a whole. Now getting back to “our values” which are always so threatened, I just want to give one example, let’s take drinking. Majority of the Muslims don’t like the idea of legalizing alcohol as it is clearly prohibited by Islam. However, if you want to make a law regarding its prohibition in the country, you can and should make other logical/valid arguments as to why it is harmful, because it causes addiction, drunk driving accidents, can be a cause of increase in domestic violence/abusive families etc. Moreover, other countries ban drugs too depending on how much harm they will cause to a society so there is no clear cut line as to what drugs should and shouldn’t be legalised. As far as minorities are concerned, if they are not discriminated on other more important basic rights, they probably won’t mind as they also understand that sometimes majority considerations are important in order to avoid conflicts. For example, when Muslims live in other countries that do sell alcohol, they might not fully agree with it they have to accept the decision of what the majority wants. My point here is certainly not to say that minority voices are not important or that they should be ignored at the expense of majority. I just want to point out a political reality. Even the most liberal/modern/secular societies haven’t been able to completely remove the influence of religion on their political decisions. It is a thing that people take seriously and you cannot completely erase its influence in the public sphere especially when adherents of one particular faith have such a vast majority (97% Muslims in case of Pakistan). The point that I want to emphasize is that when majority won’t see their values being compromised, they won’t see minorities as a threat and this will stop strong anti-minority feelings to be developed. As a result, more important issues of minorities can be brought to forefront and resolved. Moreover, generally I have observed that minorities in Pakistan don’t have a huge list of demands and I think that they do understand that being in a Muslim majority country, certain practices of Muslims will affect their public life. Still, all minorities want is to be treated equally with regards to other citizens and not discriminated in their day to day affairs on the basis of their identity. This thing can be seen in the West as well that when certain Muslim practices are suddenly seen as a threat to modern, liberal values, it only ends up increasing discrimination against them; whereas Muslims normally just want to have the freedom to go about their everyday lives without being hunted on the basis of their identity. There are certain policies in the west that clearly run against Islamic principles/values, but even if those Muslims disagree with them, changing them at the state level is not a part of their agenda. Politics is a business of compromises as you can never make everyone happy. Using this analogy, I think that minorities in Pakistan would prefer that we give them complete freedom in their private sphere and treat them as equal citizens with regards to fundamental rights that everybody should be entitled to including the right to vote and run for office and have a voice in making of policies. As a result they would also accept and realize that sometimes national policies might be more influenced by majority demands than that of minorities, even when minority voices are listened to and accounted for. A secular, democratic state is what our founders thought Pakistan would grow up to be when this country was born. When our grandparents migrated from across the border leaving everything behind, they came to be a part of the country where in the course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Hindus, not in a religious sense, because that’s everyone’s private matter, but in the political sense, as citizens of the state. A country where everything is being blown into pieces and whose countrymen are always so ready to be at each other’s throat is not the land of pure that was formed after years of struggles. Just as people were united for the formation of this country despite many different ethnic and religious identities, that unity is now needed more than ever to sustain it which belongs to us, all of us, irrespective of our religion, caste or creed. That was the Pakistan that Jinnah gifted us, and that is the Pakistan that we have to get back. It’s ours and God willing, it will remain ours.

Obama would veto GOP student loan plan

The White House said Friday that President Barack Obama would veto a Republican measure passed by the House to extend lower interest rates on federal student loans because it takes money from a health care fund that benefits women. A White House statement said Obama's senior advisers would recommend a veto if the House measure, which passed 215-195 on a largely party-line vote, were to win Senate approval and reach the president's desk. "Women, in particular, will benefit from this prevention fund, which would provide for hundreds of thousands of screenings for breast and cervical cancer," the White House statement said. "This is a politically motivated proposal and not the serious response that the problem facing America's college students deserves. If the president is presented with H.R. 4628, his senior advisers would recommend that he veto the bill." Obama favors extending the current lower interest rates on student loans but would seek a different way to pay the $6 billion cost. A proposal by Senate Democrats would pay for the measure by ending some tax loopholes for corporations, a move opposed by Republicans. The House plan would instead take the money from the health care fund, which is part of the 2010 Affordable Care Act detested by Republicans. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, proposed the GOP's student loan measure this week in the face of a high-profile campaign by Obama that rallied college students -- a key component of the vital youth vote in November -- to pressure Congress to extend the lower student loan rates.n addition, certain Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney pinned Boehner and congressional Republicans in a corner by coming out in favor of the lower rates this week. House Republicans previously backed a budget plan that called for letting the lower interest rates on student loans expire on July 1. In an emotional floor speech Friday, Boehner labeled the issue a fake fight mounted by Democrats for political advantage. "People want to politicize this because it is an election year, but my God, do we have to fight about everything?" Boehner said, at times pounding the podium. "And no, now we are going to have a fight over women's health. Give me a break! This is the latest plank in the so-called war on women entirely created by colleagues across the aisle for political gain." Calling for a review of "the facts," Boehner said Obama's proposed budget called for reducing the same health care fund, which he labeled a "slush fund." "You may have already forgotten that several months ago, you all voted to cut $4 billion out of this slush fund to pay for the payroll credit bill" that extended a payroll tax cut, Boehner continued, shouting, "So, to accuse us of wanting to gut women's health is absolutely not true." On Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, took exception to Republicans characterizing the health care fund as something inappropriate or sinister. "You call preventive care a 'slush fund'? I mean, they should be ashamed of themselves," Reid said. "This is saving people's lives, saving the country huge amounts of money." Asked about the payroll tax vote at a Friday news conference, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, said Democrats weren't happy about taking money from the fund for the payroll tax measure at the time and now want to ensure that the rest of the money stays in the fund. On the House floor, Pelosi said House Republicans were forced by Obama's publicizing of the issue to reverse their previous opposition to keeping the interest rates on federal student loans at the current 3.4% instead of letting them double to 6.8% on July 1. She said the House budget proposal by Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, called for allowing the interest rate to double in July, and that House Republicans had backed the plan as recently as last week. The new House measure would eliminate the Prevention and Public Health Fund, Pelosi said, accusing Republicans of protecting tax subsidies for the oil industry while wanting "mom and children to pay the price." On Wednesday, Obama took on Boehner by name, telling students at the University of Iowa a spokesman in the speaker's office believed the president's focus on student loans is an effort to "distract people from the economy." The president told a rowdy audience, "Now think about that for a second, because these guys don't get it." He told the cheering crowd, "If you do well, the economy does well. This is about the economy. What economy are they talking about? You are the economy." A few hours later, Boehner announced a Friday vote on the House measure and hit back at the president saying, "This week the president is campaigning and trying to invent a fight where there is none and never has been on this issue of student loans." On Tuesday night, Democratic Sens. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, Tom Harkin of Iowa and Sherrod Brown of Ohio introduced the Democratic proposal. It would freeze the current interest rate for one year and pay for it by closing a loophole on "S corporations," a tax structure Democrats say can be used to avoid paying Social Security and Medicare taxes. The Republican proposal in House also extends the current rate for one year, but it covers the cost by dipping into the health care fund intended to promote wellness, prevent disease and protect against public health emergencies.

Gaddafi 'agreed to fund Sarkozy' with €50m cheque

French investigative website Mediapart reported Saturday that deposed Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi agreed to fund President Nicolas Sarkozy’s 2007 election campaign with a 50 million euro cheque. By News Wires (text) AFP - Moamer Kadhafi's regime agreed to fund French President Nicolas Sarkozy's 2007 election campaign to the tune of 50 million euros, a news website reported Saturday, publishing what it said was documentary evidence. The 2006 document in Arabic, which website Mediapart said was signed by Kadhafi's intelligence chief Mussa Kussa, referred to an "agreement in principle to support the campaign for the candidate for the presidential elections, Nicolas Sarkozy, for a sum equivalent to 50 million euros." The left-wing investigative website made similar assertions on March 12, based on testimony by a former doctor of a French arms dealer alleged to have arranged the campaign donation, which Sarkozy slammed as "grotesque." "If he had financed it, I wasn't very grateful," Sarkozy said sarcastically, in an apparent reference to the active role that France played in the NATO campaign that led to the strongman's ouster. The latest report comes as Sarkozy trails Socialist rival Francois Hollande in opinion polls ahead of the run-off second round of presidential elections on May 6.

Saudi girls school defies clerics with basketball

A girls' school in Saudi Arabia has defied a religious ban on female sports by erecting basketball hoops and letting pupils play at break-time, the daily al-Watan reported on Wednesday. Powerful clerics in the conservative Islamic kingdom have long spoken against allowing girls to play sports, with one senior figure saying in 2009 it might lead them to lose their virginity by tearing their hymens. Saudi Arabia's austere interpretation of Islamic law prevents women from working, opening bank accounts or having some elective surgery without the permission of a male relative. They are not allowed to drive. The school in Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province has now become the first state-run girls school openly to encourage sports, Watan reported, quoting a supervisor as saying it would expend pupils' energy "in a positive way".

Saudi silent over woman’s arrest

http://www.sundaytimes.lk/

The authorities in Saudi Arabia are yet to provide details over the arrest of a Sri Lankan woman on charges that she had dabbled in witch craft, a senior official with the External Affairs Ministry (EAM) said today. Director Publicity at the EAM Mr. Sarath Dissanayake said the Lankan Mission in Riyadh had been instructed to follow up the matter at the earliest because if the woman is convicted she faces the death penalty. "For their part the Saudi authorities have so far failed to bring the matter to the notice of the Sri Lankan Mission and this is a cause to worry", Mr. Dissanayake said. The woman was arrested earlier this month after a Saudi couple complained to the authorities that her daughter acted in an abnormal manner when ever the Lankan woman was nearby and she was subsequently arrested. Apart from that which appeared in the media there are no other details of the arrest and the follow-up action taken by the Saudi authorities, he added. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, with no known written criminal code and judges’ make their decisions from interpretations of the Islamic Shariah Law.

Hidden crisis in Saudi Arabia

Since March last year, a hidden movement has gathered pace in the oil-rich kingdom of Saudi Arabia. For the first time in decades, ordinary citizens in large numbers are demanding reform in public in the Arab monarchy. This is considered phenomenal because no public gatherings of any kind are allowed in Saudi Arabia. It all began early last year when the "Islamic Awakening" started. Activists inspired by the revolutions taking place in Tunisia and Egypt decided to start a movement of their own. In January 2011, protesters took to the streets, demonstrating against the government corruption. The protests were not organized at first and happened sporadically in different cities including the capital Riyadh and the main western port city of Jeddah. But, in February things changed. Activists, using the social site Facebook, called for nationwide mass rallies on March 11 dubbing it the "Day of Rage." In Riyadh, only one person showed up as the Saudi government had the whole capital on lock down. His name was Khaled al-Johani. He was detained since then and became known on twitter and Facebook as the "only brave man in Saudi Arabia." Human rights group Amnesty International later learned that four others had also been arrested on the same day. In a frightening statement, the London-based group said "the fact that we have only just found out about four of these men gives us real concern that there are others swept up in arrests around the time of last year's demonstrations who we are yet to find out about." At around the same time frame, the protests of another front became known. In the oil-rich Eastern Province, thousands of people--mainly from the minority Shia sect of Islam---began to come to the streets, calling for equal representation in key offices, reform, and the release of the prisoners. As their movement began to grow and infuriated by their government's decision to send hundreds of military vehicles to Bahrain to help the regime crackdown on pro-democracy protesters, they called for the Saudi government to withdraw its troops from the tiny Persian Gulf kingdom. When the Saudi government started to feel the pinch, its security forces opened life fire on the protesters, killing several in different incidents. Since then, the protesters began to rally on an almost daily basis. The government in Riyadh blames the unrest on what it calls foreign agents-an indirect reference to Iran--- trying to stir up the unrest, the same excuse it used before invading and occupying Bahrain. The leader of the group Sheikh Ali Salman criticized Riyadh's allegations during a Friday mass rally outside the capital Manama a few weeks ago. Salman said "Saudi Arabia's occupation of Bahrain only makes the situation worse." He went on to say "Iran has nothing to do with the revolution in Bahrain." Human Rights Watch reported a while back that more than 160 people calling for reform have been arrested in Saudi Arabia since January of 2011. The Saudi-based Human Rights First Society reported that the detainees have been subjected to torture---mental and physical. Surprisingly in a theocratic strict monarchy, women are not sitting back from the reform movement. Last summer, female activists organized a campaign calling on all women drivers to take behind the wheel and violate a Saudi law which prohibits women from driving vehicles. The main event took place on June 17 and infuriated the government. At least 70 women have been arrested in that month alone for driving. A few weeks ago in the southern tourist city of Abha, hundreds of women protesters staged a sit-in at their university, protesting against injustice and inequality. They were brutally attacked by the moral police. Over 50 of the women were injured and taken to a hospital. The incident sparked outrage across the country with male and female students taking to the streets in Abha, Riyadh and the holy city of Medina. Saudi citizens for the first time are showing their anger at the government and asking for change. Riyadh knows this very well. Therefore its actions of playing the counter-revolution party in the region also aim to illustrate the horror of a revolution in their country. The government-controlled media only cover the negative aspects of the pro-democracy movements sweeping the Arab world. This comes while Saudi Arabia is playing a key role in containing the uprising and helping Arab regimes suppress the revolutions in their countries. It seems evident that as the US and its western allies continue to turn a blind eye on the main violators of human rights in the Middle East and one of many in the world; the Riyadh government will only feel more confident to do as it wants and what it sees is right. Apparently no western country wants to upset one of its biggest weapons customer and oil providers in the region. It’s clear that the winds of change are right on the borders of Saudi Arabia. With the ongoing revolutions in Yemen and Bahrain and the uprising movement in Jordan, the Saudis abroad and inside the Arab kingdom are watching closely as the fate of their freedom might depend on the outcome of those revolutions happening around them.

Pakistan’s first gold class 3D cinema

The launching ceremony of Bahria Town’s 3D cinema was inaugurated by CEO Bahria Town, Ahmed Ali Riaz, along with VCE Bahria Town Cdr (r) Ilyas and senior management of Bahria Town, says a press release issued here on Friday. People from all walks of life attended the ceremony. The guests, including celebrities, socialites and other high profile figures of society, opined that ‘The Arena’ is the best 3D movie theater in the country and truly a Gold Class Cinema up to international standards. On the occasion the CEO expressed: “The Arena has been built on the vision of Bahria Town Chairman Malik Riaz Hussain, which is that Bahria Town not only aims to provide quality housing with complete lifestyle amenities and facilities to the general public, besides its residents. Based on this very vision Bahria Town has set up an array of both indoor & outdoor recreational facilities, including fitness clubs, spas, movie theaters salons, golf courses, horse riding clubs, mini golf courses and even a mini Formula-1 Track.” The Arena is a state-of-the-art movie theatre equipped with digital 3-D technology, which is the first of its kind in Pakistan. Its unique combination of the latest high-tech equipment and extreme luxury, set up in a very tasteful and classy manner, is what distinguishes its likes amongst others. The theatre has the capacity to contain 250 heads, and similar to certain European opera theatres, it also has an addition of 2 VIP lounges; consisting of 6 Lay-z-Boy recliners each and an in-theater snack bar. Besides the movie related aspects of the facility, there are certain other salient features of the “Arena” which, more than supplement and compliment the box office pleasure. Furthermore, there is an exhibition hall with world class decor meant to cater to all kinds of exhibitor requirements including art displays. There are quite a few restaurants for fine dining and outlets for High-Street-Brands. A separate space has been set apart for a “kids play area” along with a gaming arcade.

Kandahar governor's compound attacked

Two bodyguards and two suicide attackers were killed in a gun battle inside the governor's compound in Afghanistan's southern Kandahar province Saturday, an official said. The Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack, saying their main target was the provincial Governor Tooryalai Weesa. The insurgents somehow made it through the tight security at the compound with small pistols hidden in their sandals, Weesa said, and a gun fight ensued with guards that lasted for about 30 minutes. "After killing two bodyguards, the attackers seized their rifles and opened fire on other bodyguards, injuring one," the governor told AFP, confirming that he was not hurt in the incident. The attackers were eventually killed, Kandahar government spokesman Zalmay Ayobi told AFP. Security forces also found a vehicle laden with explosives abandoned outside the compound. Kandahar province is the heartland of hardline Taliban insurgents and has been one of the hardest hit in 10 years of war in which NATO troops are supporting the government of President Hamid Karzai. Condemning the attack, Weesa said the Taliban were resorting to "new ways and tactics to hurt the government and the people" but reiterated that "they will not succeed". The Taliban ruled Afghanistan from 1996 until they were toppled in a 2001 US-led invasion for refusing to hand-over Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. Since then, remnants of the regime have orchestrated an increasingly deadly insurgency focused on suicide attacks and roadside bombing that frequently miss their military targets and cause civilian casualties. The attack on governor's compound comes a day after an American soldier, two Afghan troops and an interpreter died when an Afghan soldier opened fire at them in the latest in a series of so-called green-on-blue attacks in Shah Wali Kot district of Kandahar. On April 15, squads of suicide attackers took up positions in the nation's capital Kabul, firing on embassies, government buildings and foreign military bases for 18 hours before they were all killed. Afghan officials and US Ambassador in Kabul blamed the Pakistanis-based Haqqani Network, a close ally of the Taliban for the attacks on Kabul, considered to have been the biggest assault on the capital in 10 years of war. Apart from Kabul, the eastern capitals of Paktia, Logar and Nangarhar provinces also came under attack, with a total of 51 people, including 36 militants, killed.

77,000 IDPs living outside camps

An inter-agency rapid assessment of people, displaced by renewed conflict in tribal agency of Khyber, living outside formal camps in Peshawar valley has identified more than 77,000 people. IOM, WFP and IVAP co-led the assessment, which was conducted in coordination with UNOCHA and the KP Provincial Disaster Management Authority (PDMA) and with support from NGOs, including Save the Children, CERD, BEST, SSTD, LHO, NRC and ACTED. The assessment was designed to map off-camp populations, identify urgent needs and provide the planning needed to ensure that aid deliveries target the most vulnerable. It was conducted across three districts (Peshawar, Nowshera and Kohat), covering 54 union councils and 275 villages. Data collection was done by 16 teams using smart phones. Preliminary results indicated that 9,744 families (77,435 individuals) are living outside camps in the three districts. Some 67 per cent of them arrived over a month ago, 19% arrived within the last 3-4 weeks, 12 per cent arrived in the last two weeks and two per cent in the last week. The assessment showed that newly displaced families are in urgent need of food, emergency shelter, clean drinking water, health and nutrition services, and protection.

Another govt girls school blown up in Khyber Agency

Unknown miscreants blew up a government girls primary school with explosives here in Landikotal late Friday night. Sources said that anti-literacy militants had planted explosives in a government run girls primary school located in Sheikh Mankhel area of Landikotal, Khyber Agency which exploded late at night. The school building was completely destroyed in the bomb blast but no human loss was reported as the building was vacant due to night time. It should be mentioned that 72 educational institutions, mostly girls primary schools have been destroyed by anti-literacy militants in Khyber Agency during the last three years. Most of the tribesmen in Khyber Agency avoid sending their children to school due to terror threats.

Latif Khosa, Chaudhry Shujaat hit back at Nawaz Sharif

The Express Tribune

Punjab Governor Sardar Latif Khosa and Pakistan Muslim League – Quaid (PML-Q) leader Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain, talking on separate occasions, spoke in favour of Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani and criticised Pakistan Muslim League (PML-N) chief Nawaz Sharif. Khosa, while talking to the media at the governor house, said that no one except the speaker of the parliament had the right to declare the prime minister ineligible, may they be a party or the Supreme Court itself. “Parliament is supreme and all courts are subjected to it,” he said, adding that the parliament can reject the contempt of court decision. “Who gave Nawaz Sharif the right to interpret the contempt of case verdict,” said the governor. “Is the detailed verdict being written by him or is it being written on his directive?” He said that if the judiciary wanted to do justice, it should do so in a fair manner. “Stay orders on the Sharifs’ cases and seven judges on Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) cases? This joke with the nation should be stopped.” Khosa said that judiciary to date had not opened any case against a military dictator which was why Amna Janjua had withdrawn her case. “Is this the Supreme Court of Pakistan or Sharif brothers,” he asked. Speaking on Babar Awan and Masood Chishti, he likened them to Mir Jaffar and Mir Sadiq, saying, “On whose directive did they refuse to testify and make the file disappear? Contempt cases against them will be postponed date after date and no verdict will ever be given.” ‘PM has right to appeal’ While talking to the media, PML-Q leader Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain said that the prime minister had every right to an appeal and Nawaz Sharif’s acceptance or rejection of this fact would not make any difference. While giving a tour to the 15-member Korean delegation which was invited by the Gandhara Association to visit Lahore Museum, Chaudhry Shujaat Hussain asked the media, “Where in the Supreme Court’s decision was it written that he is not the prime minister anymore?” “Nawaz and Shahbaz Sharif can also be held in contempt for attacking the Supreme Court,” he said.

FACE LIFTING OF QUETTA

Quetta is the seat of Provincial Government and it lacks basic amenities and civic services which had brought the prestige of Quetta to the lowest level. All the time gutters are overflowing polluting the atmosphere in the Civil Secretariat and Governor’s House area. The flood gate of gutter water is overflowing in front of Civil Hospital where hundreds of patients are being operated upon risking more serious infections for the patients at the operation tables. It is learnt that the new Chief Secretary took notice to worst condition of Quetta roads and streets and asked concerned authorities to mobilize resources for reconstruction and rebuilding of roads on priority basis. He also confirmed this news while informally interacting with newspaper editors and senior journalists at a dinner the other day. He said the Ministers and MPAs had pledged to make available funds for rebuilding roads and streets of Quetta at the earliest. We have two brief suggestions that first the sewerage lines should be improved and overflow of gutters and open drain lines be stopped as it is choked off and on causing pollution in the entire city. Besides the long term planning to improve the sewerage system for Quetta, the Municipal authorities be made responsible if any of the open drain line was found choked at any day on seven days a week. Friday is off day and Sunday is full holiday and during holidays, there is a definite overflowing of gutters or open drain line. After improving the sewerage system, the roads should be rebuilt that a quality construction should be ensured. Saryab Road is built during the days of late Nawab Bugti and it is in finest shape and not washed away in overflowing gutters or rains. While all others roads are in worst condition slowing down the pace of vehicular traffic causing congestion. Thus quality of roads should not be compromised and it is ensured that overflowing gutters and open drain lines are not washing away the entire investment in hours and not in days and weeks. Thus public money should be protected at all cost.

PPP fight back

EDITORIAL:Daily Times

One day after being convicted and symbolically sentenced for contempt till the rising of the seven-member bench of the Supreme Court (SC), Prime Minister (PM) Yousaf Raza Gilani appeared in confident, fighting mood in his appearance in the National Assembly (NA). In a hard-hitting defence from the floor of the house of his stance on the conviction and a host of other issues highlighted by the verdict, the PM raised some pertinent points. He took the Leader of the Opposition, Chaudhry Nisar, to task for challenging the treasury benches to bring the PM to the house. The PM’s advice to Chaudhry Nisar and others of his ilk was to avoid trying to play God. He argued that, as the PML-N chief has stated, even if you do not recognise me as the PM, I am still a member of the house and cannot be prevented by threats from attending the sessions of the NA. The PM questioned why the judiciary had never in our history put military coup makers and dictators in the dock. He pointed to the infamous doctrine of necessity formulated by the judiciary, which led to the condoning and justification of all coups in the country’s history. He said he had only defended the constitution as a member of a party that had not only formulated the 1973 constitution but also restored it (considerably) through the 18th Amendment. He further asserted that all the constitutions of the country, the 1956, 1962 and 1973 constitutions promulgated immunity for the president of the country. Therefore, by implication, the demand of the judiciary that he write a letter to the Swiss authorities to reopen the alleged corruption cases against the president would be in violation of the laid down immunity for the president while in office, an immunity that exists for all heads of state internationally. Had the immunity not been laid down in all the constitutions in the country’s history, the PM argued, the demand to ignore the clear provisions of Article 248 might have had some weight and value. As things stood, his view and the view of the government’s legal experts was that this was not possible under the long standing and consistent immunity available to heads of state while in office. The PM reiterated his view that parliament is supreme as it expresses the will of the people and all other institutions of state receive their legitimacy and standing from parliament. The contempt verdict has split legal, political and all other circles right down the middle. The division in the political field corresponds to the PPP and its allies in one corner, while the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary opposition stands on the opposite side of the ring. This was also visible in the NA on Thursday when the house descended into scenes reminiscent of a fish market, much to the discomfiture of the Speaker and all those who fear such scenes erode the sanctity of parliament and thereby depreciate democracy itself. Demands have been raised by Nawaz Sharif, Imran Khan and others, both with a presence in parliament and outside it, for the PM to resign immediately. The first named has gone so far as to say that the government must immediately appoint a non-controversial caretaker PM to conduct the coming elections, who should also write the SC’s desired letter to the Swiss authorities. Ironically, forgetting to even glance at his own past track record, Nawaz Sharif attempted to take the high moral ground by accusing the PM of ridiculing the judiciary. Politics does require thick skins, but this must rank as close to taking the cake. No wonder after the SC verdict against him, the PM in a lighter mood remarked that politics is like watching a “horror movie”. The government, its allies and the PPP seem to be in no mood to roll over and die after the contempt conviction. Apart from filing an appeal against the verdict and allowing the process after that appeal is exhausted to take its course, the PPP-led government, given its strength in both houses of parliament, still retains the ultimate weapon, as hinted at by Chaudhry Aitzaz Ahsan: legislation to nullify the effects of the SC verdict and bring an assertive judiciary within the fold of restraint required by all institutions of state in their relationship and working with, not against, each other.

Sindh CM threatens long march against PML-N

In a tit-for-tat reply to PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif’s call for Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani’s resignation, Chief Minister Sindh Syed Qaim Ali Shah has threatened Long March to Lahore against Nawaz League. Nawaz Sharif had appealed to the nation to rise up against what he called ‘immoral’ and ‘illegal government’. War of the words has escalated between the PPP and PML-N after Supreme Court convicted Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani of contempt for not ordering reopening of multi-million-dollar corruption cases against President Zardari. Qaim Ali Shah, during a press conference here in Karachi, said “Nawaz Sharif should refrain from issuing threats. If they will go to Islamabad then PPP jialas will march to Lahore.” “He (Sharif) is taking cover of the Supreme Court which is yet to issue a detailed verdict… He should wait for general elections,” charged Qaim said in an angry tone.

PML-N losing its popularity

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani on Saturday said that Pakistan People’s Party’s success in Multan’s by-elections was proof that Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) was losing its popularity, DawnNews reported. Speaking to a lawyers’ delegation at Governor House Punjab, the prime minister said Nawaz Sharif was disappointed with his party’s lost popularity. The prime minister said rhetorically: “We have restored the constitution, how can we violate it…we will always comply with the constitution”. Gilani said he did not write to Swiss authorities because the constitution granted immunity to the president. The lawyers vowed their support for rule of law, democracy and an independent judiciary.

United States Talks Fail as Pakistanis Seek Apology

The latest high-level talks on ending a diplomatic deadlock between the United States and Pakistan ended in failure on Friday over Pakistani demands for an unconditional apology from the Obama administration for an airstrike. The White House, angered by the recent spectacular Taliban attacks in Afghanistan, refuses to apologize. The Obama administration’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Marc Grossman, left the Pakistani capital Friday night with no agreement after two days of discussions aimed at patching up the damage caused by the American airstrikes last November that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers on the Afghanistan border. Both sides insist that they are now ready to make up and restore an uneasy alliance that at its best offers support for American efforts in Afghanistan as well as the battle against some extremist groups operating from Pakistan. The administration had been seriously debating whether to say “I’m sorry” to the Pakistanis’ satisfaction — until April 15, when multiple, simultaneous attacks struck Kabul and other Afghan cities. “What changed was the 15th of April,” said a senior administration official. American military and intelligence officials concluded the attacks came at the direction of a group working from a base in North Waziristan in Pakistan’s tribal belt: the Haqqani network, an association of border criminals and smugglers that has mounted lethal attacks on foreign forces in Afghanistan. That confirmed longstanding American mistrust about Pakistani intentions — a poison that infects nearly every other aspect of the strained relationship. That swung the raging debate on whether Mr. Obama or another senior American should go beyond the expression of regret that the administration had already given, and apologize. The negotiations are complicated by a complex web of interlocking demands from both sides. Without the apology, Pakistani officials say they cannot reopen NATO supply routes into Afghanistan that have been closed since November. The Americans, in turn, are withholding between $1.18 billion and $3 billion of promised military aid — the exact figure depending on which side is speaking. The continuing deadlock does not bode well for Pakistan’s attendance at a NATO meeting in Chicago in three weeks, assuming it is even invited. The administration has been eager to cast the event as a regional security summit meeting, and Pakistan’s absence would be embarrassing. Administration officials acknowledged Friday that the stalemate would not be resolved quickly. “This is the beginning of the re-engagement conversation,” Victoria Nuland, the State Department spokeswoman, said in Washington. “We’re going to have to work through these issues, and it’s going to take some time.” The two countries at least are relieved to have started talking. A series of visits and discussions in recent weeks included a meeting between Mr. Obama and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani on the sidelines of a nuclear summit meeting in Seoul, South Korea, last month. Since the Pakistani Parliament completed a review of relations with the United States, Americans have repeatedly vowed to respect the will of Pakistan’s lawmakers, even though they demanded an end to American drone strikes, which the United States sees as crucial in fighting militants hiding in Pakistan’s border areas. Aside from the apparently intractable issues of drones and the apology, the two countries focused on four specific areas of potential cooperation: counterterrorism, the NATO supply lines, military aid payments and the Taliban peace process. Yet there was an undeniable sense of wariness, driven by the pressures of domestic politics, with Mr. Obama facing re-election this year and Pakistan due for elections in the coming 12 months. Pakistanis’ rage has been rising since a shooting in Lahore in January 2011 that involved a C.I.A. employee and fueled common fantasies about being overrun by rogue spies. The American operation to kill Osama bin Laden a few months later was taken as a stunning breach of Pakistan’s sovereignty. An American apology is also problematic given Republican pressures weighing on Mr. Obama and the hostility of a Congress with little patience for Pakistan. “The politics of election year in both countries are slowing down the resolution of admittedly vexed issues in an environment of persistent mistrust,” said Maleeha Lodhi, a former Pakistani ambassador to Washington. The Haqqani network has re-emerged as a focal American issue, particularly after the April 15 attacks. The next day, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told Pakistan’s foreign minister, Hina Rabbani Khar, that “there has to be a concerted effort by the Pakistanis with the Afghans, with the others of us, against extremists of all kinds.” American officials refused Friday to say whether there were any links between Pakistan’s main spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate, or ISI, and the Haqqani network’s latest attacks. One said the intelligence on the issue was “constantly evolving.” Others in Washington say they have not yet found any such ties. New details about the attacks have emerged in the past two weeks, according to Afghan and American officials. While it is possible that some fighters were smuggled into Afghanistan over time and in small numbers, and that some weapons and ammunition were pre-staged, many may have been brought in from Pakistan only a day or two before the attacks, said a senior American military officer in Afghanistan. “Our initial assessment is they probably moved them in a last moment to avoid detection,” said the officer, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the continuing inquiry. Officials have also identified a possible intelligence gap. Ethnic infighting at the top of Afghanistan’s intelligence agency, the National Directorate of Security, may have resulted in key people failing to pass on information that could have helped derail the attacks. At this week’s meetings in Islamabad, new ideas were gently sounded out. A senior Pakistani official said his country was offering a “wide menu of counterterrorism options” in a bid to at least slow down the rate of drone strikes. Pakistan has also offered to send F-16 fighter jets to strike Taliban and Qaeda targets in the tribal belt. United States officials have said that if Pakistan would not or could not strike insurgents in places like Miram Shah, the capital of North Waziristan, then the drone attacks would have to continue. With Pakistan refusing at least publicly to condone the strikes, the two sides seem at an impasse. “The policy of the government is very, very clear,” Pakistan’s foreign secretary, Jalil Abbas Jilani, said Thursday. “We consider drones as illegal, counterproductive and, accordingly, unacceptable.” Another Pakistani official, however, conceded, “Privately, we know they are unlikely to stop.” The reopening of NATO supply lines is important for the United States military to support troops currently in Afghanistan, but also to help withdraw tons of weapons and matériel out as a major drawdown approaches in 2014. But, the senior Obama administration official added, Pakistan’s support for the NATO lines was about politics as much as logistics. “Our NATO partners see them as increasingly problematic, not as a partner,” he said. “If they don’t restore this, those feelings will become intensified over time.”

More arrests in weekly Occupy Wall Street march

More Occupy Wall Street protesters are arrested as they take part in a weekly march to the New York Stock Exchange

The road to a stable Afghanistan is through...the Pakistani countryside?

By:Dr. Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed

Since NATO's Lisbon summit in November 2010, debate has raged over the decision to draw-down troops from Afghanistan by 2014. And in less than a month, NATO is to hold its 25th heads of state summit in Chicago on 20th May. Unsurprisingly, among the summit's major themes will be the seemingly intractable Afghan question, controversy over which has continued with increasingly ferocious attacks by militants - the synchronised 18-hour assault on Kabul on April 16 being an outstanding example - along with persistently strained U.S.-Pakistani relations since NATO airstrikes killed 24 Pakistani soldiers last November. But rather than endlessly debating troop numbers - whose link to stability is at the least exceedingly unclear - NATO allies would be better off focusing on how to maximise the impact of programs which pave the way for long-term stability by dramatically re-shifting the focus of aid funding from security to development. The full transition of responsibility for Afghanistan's security from NATO to Afghan forces poses deep questions about the efficacy of international intervention and traditional military approaches. For some critics calling for a faster transition to Afghan control, NATO's presence is the problem. Two years ago, NATO Afghan war veteran Lt. Col. Thomas Brouns warned presciently that "the possibility of strategic defeat looms" as "violent incidents" increase in direct proportion to the troop surge. The war is "a losing battle in winning the hearts and minds of nearly 30 million Afghans." Others argue that a quick NATO withdrawal could be a grave mistake, precipitating a downwards spiral into endless civil war - a view expounded last year by the German military, the RAF, and a British government review ordered by Prime Minister David Cameron. Even the Afghan defence minister Abdul Rahim Wardak warned of the potentially catastrophic ramifications of a more abrupt withdrawal - no doubt fearing a Taliban come-back in the wake of the vacuum left behind by NATO's departure. Amidst all the controversy about NATO in Afghanistan, the curious assumption is that the country's stability is somehow purely correlated with troop numbers, rather than underlying socio-economic conditions and political accountability. Indeed, commentators have overlooked the single component of international intervention which has had resounding success - development aid, through Afghanistan's National Solidarity Programme (NSP). Under the programme, the Afghan government disburses grants to village-level elected organisa­tions, Community Development Councils (CDCs), which in turn identify local priorities and implement small-scale development projects. The NSP has reached out to 24,000 villages, mobilising nearly 70 percent of rural communities across all of Afghanistan's 34 provinces - including enrolling over 100,000 women into new local CDCs. An independent evaluation by academics from Harvard, MIT and the New School found that the NSP had led to "significant improvement in villagers' economic wellbeing" and "their attitudes towards the government" - "reducing the number of people willing to join the insurgents" leading to "an improved security situation in the long run." Yet the evaluation report also observes that development mitigates militancy only in regions facing "moderate violence" - but not where there are "high levels of initial violence." Here, the impact of the war is palpable - 2011 saw a record number of 3,021 Afghan civilian deaths. And a UN assessment for that year found the average monthly number of "security incidents" - such as gun battles and roadside bombings - was 39 per cent higher than the preceding year. So if the exit strategy is the right one, it's still not enough. From June 2002 to September 2010, the United States - though the largest NSP donor - has given $528 million to the programme (as well as another $225 million from FY 2010 funds, with Congress appropriating a further $800 million or so). This is a tiny fraction in the total of about $18.8 billion in foreign assistance over the last decade, and much more needs to be done. Over two-thirds of Afghans still live in dire poverty; only 23 per cent have access to safe drinking water; and just 24 percent above the age of 15 can read and write, according to the UN High Commission for Human Rights. Thus, a recent report by the Center for a New American Security urges that the US government "not only continue its [NSP's] funding but should also help expand the program across Afghanistan. Only through steadfast support of the NSP and similarly structured enterprises can hard-won military gains be consolidated into an enduring, Afghan-led peace." Yet the NSP is a virtual carbon copy of a longstanding development model being implemented just across the border in rural Pakistan, including the Taliban's strongholds in the northwest frontier province: the Rural Support Programmes Network (RSPN). As Pakistan's largest NGO, the RSPN has run quietly for nearly thirty years, with a staggering success rate - having mobilised over 4 million Pakistani households through local community organisations, provided skills training to nearly 3 million, and reached approximately 30 million people. The RSPN's model - replicated so successfully in Afghanistan under the NSP - is distinguished by its unique participatory approach, based on partnership with communities. The programme began in the early 1980s through the Aga Khan Rural Support Programme (AKRSP), in the Chitral and Gilgit-Baltistan regions. Under the leadership of Nobel Prize nominee Shoaib Sultan Khan, the AKRSP model was replicated by establishing a further ten autonomous Rural Support Programmes (RSP) across three quarters of the country's districts - which together form the umbrella that is the RSPN. The secret of the RSPN's success is deceptively simple. The poor are mobilised to establish local community organisations where citizens are involved in every aspect of decision-making - designing and selecting projects, managing them, and monitoring expenditures - in projects which have immediate, tangible impact. The programme thus empowers villagers to see themselves as citizens with the skills, tools and acumen to work together in managing disbursement of government funds to lift themselves out of poverty. In the northwest province of Chitral, for instance, local micro-scale hydro-electricity projects now supply power to over half of the population. Elsewhere, RSPN has empowered locals to establish 1,449 community schools, whose pupils out-perform their peers from government schools, and enrolled 681,000 women in community activism - the largest outreach to poor rural women of any Pakistani organisation. That is why the RSPN's work is so critical to the future of the country - for a strong, representative Pakistani state to emerge, it must be grounded in strong local civil society institutions capable of holding it to account and engaging with it constructively. But like the NSP, the RSPN receives only a fraction of the overall U.S.-U.K. aid budget to Pakistan. The ongoing debate about troop numbers and drone strikes - while important - has served to distract attention from the critical role of development aid in building resilience to radicalisation. Thus, across the region, the obsession with traditional security solutions has arguably been its own worst enemy. As the countdown to withdrawal continues, the international community must strengthen and expand these proven development models. Otherwise, the quagmire will become an abyss.

Obama ad: Would Romney have killed bin Laden?

http://news.yahoo.com

Would Mitt Romney have ordered the raid that killed Osama bin Laden? President Barack Obama's re-election campaign released a new video on Friday that strongly implies that he would not have, using the presumptive Republican nominee's own words against him. Ever since Vice President Joe Biden boiled down Obama's 2012 slogan to "bin Laden is dead, GM is alive," it has been clear that the embattled incumbent would not hesitate to use the May 2, 2011, Navy SEAL strike as a political weapon. Fighting over the political use of bin Laden is hardly new—as Obama's 2008 presidential campaign could tell you, since they complained about then-rival Hillary Clinton doing just that. Clinton's camp ran an ad that used Osama bin Laden and implied that Obama (the ad didn't use his name) didn't have the foreign policy chops to be president.The video, taken from footage shot for Obama's 17-minute campaign commercial "The Road We've Traveled," opens with the message "The Commander-in-Chief gets one chance to make the right decision" and turns to former President Bill Clinton for validation. "That's one thing George Bush said that was right: The president is the decider in chief. Nobody can make that decision for you." "Look, he knew what would happen," says Clinton. "Suppose the Navy SEALs had gone in there and it hadn't been bin Laden. Suppose they had been captured or killed. The downside would have been horrible for him, but he reasoned 'I cannot in good conscience do nothing.' He took the harder and the more honorable path and the one that produced in my opinion the best result," he says, amid images including a photograph of New York City firefighters cheering the news of bin Laden's death. "Which path would Mitt Romney have taken?" asks the on-screen text. The video recalls Romney's contention, in an April 2007 interview with the Associated Press, that Americans will not be markedly safer if bin Laden were killed and that "it's not worth moving heaven and earth spending billions of dollars just trying to catch one person." (Days later, in a May 3, 2007, debate, Romney was asked about his words and responded, "We'll move everything to get him. ... This is a global effort we're going to have to lead to overcome this jihadist effort. It's more than Osama bin Laden. But he is going to pay, and he will die.") It also cites a Reuters report referring to an August 2007 Republican candidates debate: "Mitt Romney criticized Barack Obama for vowing to strike al-Qaeda targets inside Pakistan if necessary." (That's probably safer than directing viewers to the transcript of the debate: Romney criticized Obama for openly discussing the possibility of striking inside Pakistan, not for entertaining the idea. When moderator George Stephanopoulos asks whether it's fair to summarize his position as "keep this option on the table, but it is foolish to talk about it in public," Romney doesn't disagree.)The Obama campaign video wraps up with Clinton saying: "He had to decide and that's what you hire a president to do. You hire the president to make the calls when no one else can do it." Romney has taken pains to praise Obama for the raid. On Friday, Romney campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul bristled at the video. "It's now sad to see the Obama campaign seek to use an event that unified our country to once again divide us, in order to try to distract voters' attention from the failures of his administration. With 23 million Americans struggling for work, our national debt soaring, and household budgets being squeezed like never before, Mitt Romney is focused on strengthening America at home and abroad," she said. The Obama video came one day after Vice President Biden, in a speech assailing Romney on foreign policy, declared: "On this gut issue, we know what President Obama did. We can't say for certain what Gov. Romney would have done."

President Obama, Michelle Obama Receive Highest Award In Homeless Veteran Advocacy

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/

For their determination to put an end to veterans living on the streets, President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama will receive the highest honor given to homeless advocates. The Obamas were chosen to get this year’s Jerald Washington Memorial Founders' Award, according to the National Coalition for Homeless Veterans (NCHV), and Barack Obama is the first person -- in history -- to receive the award more than once.

Barack Obama is tackling the issue with his “Opening Doors: Federal Strategic Plan to Prevent and End Homelessness,” an initiative that aims to end chronic and veteran homelessness by 2015. He's working to meet this goal by mainstreaming housing, health, education and human service programs. On any given night last January, 67,495 homeless veterans were sleeping on the streets, a 56 percent decline since the president took office, according to the Annual Homelessness Assessment Report to Congress. "Under the leadership of President Obama, we are witnessing unprecedented national unity in the campaign to end and prevent veteran homelessness," Patrick Ryan, Chairman of the NCHV Board of Directors, said in a press release. "The progress we have seen from the federal agencies, the Congress, the community partners NCHV represents, and the American people in just the last three years give rise to the expectation that this campaign will succeed." Michelle Obama has been doing her part to address the range of issues veteran face, including homelessness, with the one-year-old initiative, Joining Forces, which she founded with Jill Biden. “Our goal was as ambitious as it was simple. We wanted to get every single American to ask themselves one simple question,” Michelle Obama said in an exclusive video for HuffPost Impact. “What can I do to give back to these families that have given us so much?”To date, Joining Forces has helped employ 50,000 military spouses and veterans, encouraged schools to improve the experience of military children and connected veterans with community health centers in areas where the VA doesn’t have a prominent presence. "In most cases, access to affordable housing, employment at a livable wage, and health services greatly reduce a family's risk of becoming homeless,” NCHV President and CEO John Driscoll said in the release. “Joining Forces is helping communities learn how to anticipate the need for and provide these critical supports."

Obama Attacks Colleges Targeting Veterans’ Benefits

voa news

U.S. President Barack Obama has signed an executive order to help protect active-duty troops and veterans from fraudulent and misleading college recruiting practices that target their federal education benefits. The president signed the order Friday after he and first lady Michelle Obama spoke to troops at Fort Stewart army post in the southern state of Georgia. Mr. Obama said some colleges were trying to “swindle and hoodwink” military families and that his administration was “putting an end to it.” The order limits recruiters' access to military facilities and requires schools to provide more information to current and former troops before signing them up for programs. It targets for-profit colleges and universities that market heavily to military families for their education loan money provided by the government under what is known as the “GI Bill.” First Lady Obama told troops that “America does have [their] backs” (supports them). She said the government wanted to serve soldiers and their families just as they have served their country. The trip to Georgia comes about a week before Mr. Obama's first official re-election campaign rallies in Virginia and Ohio. The president lost the state of Georgia to Republican candidate John McCain in the 2008 election.

What next for Pakistan's convicted Prime Minister?

Far from clarifying matters, the Pakistani Supreme Court's guilty verdict against Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani has added several layers of uncertainty about the fate of Pakistan's civilian government and its longest serving prime minister.

Moments after Gilani was found guilty of contempt for his refusal to revive old corruption charges against President Asif Ali Zardari, politicians and political analysts on dozens of Pakistan's 24-hour news networks offered a dizzying array of contrasting views on what the ruling meant. "It plunges the country into political and legal crisis," said Najam Sethi, editor of the English language political weekly, The Friday Times."In practical and legal terms it does not mean much," said Ahmed Bilal Mehboob, the head of an Islamabad based political think tank. "A lot of people were under the impression that the prime minister would be disqualified, but he is not."For now, Gilani remains Pakistan's prime minister and the new debate raging here is whether his conviction justifies a disqualification and his removal from the post. Within hours of the verdict Gilani's lawyer, Aitzaz Ahsan, held a press conference and cited Pakistan's constitution, which says a member of parliament can only be disqualified after a conviction and a prison sentence of at least two years. The Supreme Court did not sentence Gilani to time behind bars but delivered a symbolic sentence by keeping him in custody for the duration of the hearing which lasted only several minutes. Therefore, "there is no automatic immediate disqualification," Ahsan said. "The prime minister is not disqualified." Gilani's eligibility to remain Pakistan's prime minister will be decided by the speaker of parliament, and possibly the election commission, in a process that could take months. But Gilani's political enemies are already calling for him to step down and no one's screaming louder than Nawaz Sharif, a former premier who would love nothing more than to reclaim the post following next year's parliamentary elections. "I think that after the conviction the PM should immediately step down from his post," Sharif told a reporters in a live news conference following Thursday's verdict. "This is a convicted prime minister. He has been found guilty, he has been sentenced by the Supreme Court." Sethi said Sharif could decide to take the drastic measure of quitting parliament in protest if the prime minister refuses to resign, a move that would place the legitimacy of parliament in jeopardy and fuel a fresh political crisis.The contempt case against Gilani stemmed from his refusal to ask Swiss authorities to reopen old corruption charges against President Zardari. The charges date back to the 1990s when Zardari allegedly laundered tens of millions of dollars while his wife, Benazir Bhutto, served as prime minister. Mehboob said the verdict failed to answer central questions about Zardari. "It has diverted attention from the real issue," he said. "The real issue is if our president is guilty of amassing illegitimate wealth and money laundering. We have failed to arrive at any conclusion and we're still perceived as a nation that doesn't abide by the rule of law." Even so, Mehboob said the political drama is likely to continue, taking up precious time and resources in a country that is facing a myriad of crises including widespread poverty, a broken economy and the bloody fight against Islamist militants. "This is just a waste of the nation's time," said businessman Abdul Rauf. "It's just very disappointing."

Where does the world go from here?

Developed Western capitalist countries’ reflections on capitalism The world remains undeniably dominated by capitalism, but unlike before, people are increasingly worried about the future of capitalism, which is severely ill. Capitalists have become their own worst enemies, according to an article titled “How to Save Capitalism” published in Time magazine on Jan. 30. Many people want to find another way of development. Young Westerners are not as afraid of communism as the older generation, and are more willing to consider it as a way out. Many of them have an interest in the China model. Certain Western people believe that the future of capitalism is the future of the world. Over the past few centuries, capitalism has been advocating getting rich by all means, including even the use of force. What will capitalism continue to bring to the world? How long can the earth withstand environmental damages and the ravages of war? U.S. columnist Paul B. Farrell wrote in an article published on Jan. 10 that we must focus on solving the real big problems facing mankind: Not the killing of, but the survival of, 10 billion people by 2050. “Forget the military war machine. Yes, forget all the threats, war games, fear mongering, big macho egos and all the special interests that get rich from maintaining a 600-billion-U.S.-dollar war machine… We must and we will soon wake up and focus on the survival of human civilization, working together — yes, China and America as partners — figuring out how to feed 10 billion people on a planet of limited resources,” Farrell said. The survival of mankind requires both material and spiritual resources. How should human beings get along with each other? How should we treat the earth where we were born? Over the past thousands of years, many far-sighted sages, religious leaders, thinkers, philosophers, and politicians have given their thought-provoking answers to the two questions. More than 80 years ago, Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi said that there were seven social sins: politics without principles, wealth without work, pleasure without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality, science without humanity, and worship without sacrifice. The seven sins still apply in today’s society.

Prime Minister Gillani gets convicted

by:Farhad Jarral

Let Us Build Pakistan

The Supreme Court of Pakistan has just convicted an elected Prime Minister for following an explicit Constitutional clause (Article 248 (2)) – on the basis of an Ordinance passed by a military dictator, General Musharaf (Contempt of Court Ordinance 2004) – who in turn was empowered to subvert the Constitution by this very same Judiciary! However, if one is expecting any balance or nuance from Pakistan’s media on this landmark decision, one is sorely mistaken. The media’s role in being a cheer leader of right-wing, Islamist politicians and populist judges is an unfortunate departure from its often stated role of being a “fair and balanced” presenter of the news and of informing the public. In the last few years, the media, for the most part, has gone out of its way in presenting, supporting and empowering an obscurantist and conspiratorial mindset that is low on facts and high on sanctimonious piety and selective morality. To understand the “dynamics” of the symbiotic relationship between the media and the judiciary, one needs to look no further than the following exchange that took place between the dignified Information Minister, Qamar Zaman Kaira and prominent news anchor, Kamran Khan. It is a sad reflection of how the media distorts facts and is very reluctant to allow gentlemen like Kaira to argue a case on its merits, as opposed to moral grandstanding.At this point in time, one must also reflect on the role of Pakistan’s Jejune “liberals” who were an essential part of the Lawyer’s Movement, long after it had lost its legitimacy post-2008 elections. This was when all judges were released by the newly elected Prime Minister, Yousuf Raza Gillani and over 96% of them restored. The current Junta in the judiciary that often evokes dictator-inserted clauses to continuously undermine the legislature and the executive has been hugely supported by the Jejune “liberals” of Pakistan – an exclusivist cabal who assume the moral high ground by discarding with uncomfortable facts as it relates to them. By distorting history and constructing a narrative based on half-truths and distortions, this elite cabal of Jejune “liberals” spare no opportunity to bash the PPP in general and Shaheed Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto and Shaheed Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto in particular. While one must acknowledge their mistakes, inflating their role in the current problems facing Pakistan is both an intellectual fallacy as well as deflecting the role of Pakistan’s Jejune “Liberals”. By their willful and continuing support to this judiciary, Pakistan’s Jejune “liberals” stand forever exposed as opportunists who share an equal blame in the current constitutional crisis. In their published articles and media space, these Jejune “liberals” of Pakistan have portrayed this judiciary as anti-military dictatorship. After today’s verdict (on dictator-inserted clauses), their misrepresentation of this judiciary comes across as a cruel joke to the public. However, one should not comment any further as Pakistan’s Jejune “liberals” are deeply intolerant of criticism and one cannot afford the witch hunts and intimidation that ensues after they are criticized. Today’ verdict against the Prime Minister was based on THOSE parts of the Constitution which were mangled by military dictators, General Zia and General Musharaf while the Prime Minister did not want to violate THAT part of the Constitution that is derived from the Geneva Convention. Pakistan’s Jejune “liberals” who never tire of inflating and misrepresenting ZAB’s role in creating religious intolerance need some honest self-reflection given their own support for this judiciary and its continued usage of Article 63 – a constitutional clause that was mangled by General Zia ul Haq; whose coup and martial law was supported by the judiciary then; as was General Musharaf by the current judiciary. Article 63, as it stands, is the Islamist manifesto of Jamaat Islami and the pillar used by this judiciary for its often controversial decisions.

Are Washington and Wall St. afraid of a French Socialist leader?