After a year dominated by the global credit crisis, the election of a new president in the US and wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Observer writers look ahead to the issues that are likely to dominate headlines next year
The Observer,
Sunday 28 December 2008
Where is al-Qaida going to hit next?
The al-Qaida leadership, said by security sources to comprise between 20 and 30 key figures, has been having a hard time of it recently. A concentration of attacks from unmanned American Predator drones in Pakistan's western tribal zones has meant surviving has become as much of a priority as trying to organise spectacular militant attacks across the world aimed at radicalising and mobilising the world's Muslim masses. These strikes have taken such a toll that al-Qaida has launched a series of internal investigations aimed at finding the mole passing intelligence to the Americans.
Also, Osama bin Laden is under attack from within the jihadi movement. There are increasing numbers of senior Islamic militants who, though they are still very much committed to the cause, are now less convinced by the Saudi-born chief's leadership. Without a major attack of a genuinely dramatic nature, the confidence of even bin Laden's more loyal followers may flag. Many already see the attacks of 9/11 as deeply counter-productive.
The best target for al-Qaida would be the US. But a combination of a huge security effort and the lack of Muslims to answer the call to arms makes that hard. Attacks in the Middle East, Asia or Africa are easier to organise - as are strikes in Pakistan and Afghanistan - but have much less global resonance than a direct strike in the west. One exception would be India, where a big new strike could spark war with Pakistan.
But it is in Europe where al-Qaida has won recruits. Currently Germany's most wanted fugitive is a 21-year-old former skateboard rider and Muslim convert, who is somewhere in Afghanistan or Pakistan. Algerian groups are increasingly threatening France. Britain is easier to get to than the US, has close transatlantic links and a substantial community of people who have links with, and can easily travel to, Pakistan. If anywhere is in the firing line, it is.
And it is worth remembering that seven years ago bin Laden was on the run, in the same place, with 20 or 30 followers and question marks over his leadership.
Jason Burke
Observer correspondent and author of Al-Qaeda: Casting a Shadow of Terror
When will the recession end?
The speed at which the economy plunged into recession this year after a decade of growth and prosperity was truly frightening. Unfortunately, that does not necessarily mean we can look forward to an equally rapid recovery.
The economy performed worse than at any time since the early-1990s downturn, according to the Office for National Statistics, shrinking by 0.6% in the third quarter of 2008. Analysts from Capital Economics are now forecasting that 2009 will be the worst year since 1947, when the postwar slump was accompanied by a viciously cold winter.
A wave of redundancies in banking, construction and retail has taken the jobless total to 1.86 million, the highest for 11 years, and that figure will almost certainly get much worse. Many businesses have been staving off staff cuts, but barring a miracle these will happen in the new year. Capital Economics predicts the number out of work will almost double over the next two years to 3.5 million in the UK.
Even those who do not lose their jobs are affected by the fear factor, which is making households less inclined to spend money, despite the Chancellor's reduction in VAT; entertainment retailer Zavvi, menswear chain the Officers Club, and tea and coffee seller Whittard of Chelsea are the latest retailers to hit the buffers, following the collapse of Woolies. Shops have been offering huge discounts both before and after Christmas; good news for anyone brave enough to dip into their purse, but a big signal of the distress in the sector. More pain is on its way in the housing market, too. The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors is expecting a fall in house prices of 10% to 15% next year on top of this year's decline of 16%. RICS is also predicting an increase in repossessions.
The big questions when the banking sector crunch took hold in 2007 were whether, and how badly, the financial crisis would affect the so-called real economy of jobs, shops and factories. We now know that any hopes it would be quarantined in the financial sector were misplaced. Gordon Brown's bold measures to rescue the banks saved us from an even worse scenario - at one point, Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS were days from the brink, threatening unthinkable chaos - but it seems likely banks will need more support next year. The events of the past year are unprecedented and it is unrealistic to think that businesses and individuals will recover in a hurry. We will be paying for this for some time to come.
Ruth Sunderland
Business and Media Editor, the Observer
Is organic food going out of fashion?
In the summer the Soil Association, which certifies products as organic, bullishly predicted that sales of organic produce would rise by 10% for 2008. Compared with the 26% average growth from 1993 to 2006, it looked like a cautious estimate.
Then came the credit crunch and the first surveys that found sales of organic food had dropped month on month from Easter onwards. Organic eggs dropped from a peak of 7.4% of the egg market to 4.7%. While taken year on year 2008 is still likely to show an increase in organic sales - albeit less than the predicted 10% - by spring 2009 we are almost certain to be recording the first year-on-year falls in 15 years. Last week the Soil Association even applied to the government for an organic feed "holiday" for the producers it had certified. Organic animal feed is currently costing double the price of non-conventional feed, and the association fears it will force producers out of business. Does this mean the organic food movement is dead? Not entirely; it does have a devoted hard core who will try to stay true to the cause, regardless of how tough the economy becomes. However, its media profile has always overstated its importance. TV chefs may have extolled its virtues, but organic food has never accounted for more than 3% of the £120bn retail food market in the UK (as against more than 10% in the US). This is not out of ignorance. There is strong evidence from the market that the rest of us have started to think more deeply about our food. The drop in support for organic produce may not simply be down to cost (though that is bound to be a huge part of it). Issues of food security have made people think about where our food comes from and how it is produced. While there appears to be a growing opposition to the worst excesses of industrial food production there is also a suspicion that a lot of the claims for organic produce may be hype; that it is simply an indulgence for the affluent middle classes who can still afford it. In short, even when money is tight consumers are willing to pay for better food. But they don't see the need to go the whole (organic) hog and pay what they regard as an unnecessary premium. For conventional farmers, 2009 will not be the year to go organic.
Jay Rayner
Author and Observer restaurant critic
Will we finally face up to the challenge of climate change?
The answer, according to most climate experts, is simple: we better had in 2009 or the planet will be in trouble. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere now stands at 387 parts per million, an increase of almost 40% since the industrial revolution, and the highest the planet has experienced for at least 650,000 years. Evidence of global warming is appearing across the globe, particularly in the Arctic where scientists had always predicted it would strike first. Summer ice cover has dropped dramatically while permafrost in Siberia is melting. The first phenomenon reduces the planet's ability to reflect solar heat back into space. The second will release excess amounts of methane. Combined, they worsen the rate of global warming.
At the same time, the world's greatest carbon emitter, the US, has indicated - after eight years' inaction - that the climate will be a major priority, as revealed through the appointment of climate expert John Holdren as the chief scientific adviser for president-elect Barack Obama. Meanwhile, Britain is to announce approval or rejection for a major new coal power plant at Kingsnorth, Kent and a third runway at Heathrow. The go-ahead for either would leave the government open to accusations its climate-change commitments are worthless.
It is against this background that delegates will gather in December in Copenhagen, to agree a new global climate change treaty that will replace the Kyoto agreement, which expires in 2012. Only a decision then to establish tight, binding laws to cut emission levels will save the planet, say campaigners.
Robin McKie
Observer science editor
Will we see the end of the Steve Jobs era?
Yes, say anxious bloggers dismayed by the Apple chief executive's sudden withdrawal from next month's Macworld Expo trade show. No, insists Apple, but then it would, wouldn't it?
Jobs's move reignited the long-running speculation about his health. Five years ago, when a scan revealed that he had cancer of the pancreas, his doctor told him that it would almost certainly kill him in three to six months and he should get his affairs in order. A later biopsy found it was a very rare form of the disease that could be cured with surgery. Last July, however, Jobs, 53, appeared at an Apple event looking thin, which soon became "gaunt" in blogspeak. A month later the news agency Bloomberg mistakenly published his 2,500-word obituary. Jobs responded at the next Apple event by standing before a giant slide that said: "The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated."
Then came the announcement about Macworld, a place of pilgrimage for the Apple faithful, the "Macolytes", who compared it to the cancellation of Christmas. With nerves jangling on Wall Street, Apple's share prices went tumbling, and it announced that after 2009 it will not be attending Macworld at all.
Could this be the beginning of the end? Some believe it is not so much about the health of Jobs's body as his imagination. Since returning to the Californian company he has presided over the "i" phenomenon - iPod, iTunes and iPhone, each raising the bar for the opposition. But recent Apple launches have been relatively anticlimactic, prompting mutterings about where The Next Big Thing is going to come from. Evolution alone won't do when the world is demanding constant revolution.
However, Jobs is a notorious perfectionist living in what has been described as a "reality distortion field". He is a billionaire but unlikely to go gently into that good night of retirement in the way his Microsoft rival Bill Gates did this year. As in any dictatorship based on charismatic leadership, Apple's biggest nightmare is how to replace the man who saved the company and shaped it in his own image. None of the potential crown princes is a household name, although principal designer Jonathan Ive, from Chingford, east London, would strike a chord with the devotees. Jobs likes to quote former ice hockey player Wayne Gretzky: "I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been." Perhaps only he knows where the puck will be a year from now.
David Smith
Observer technology correspondent
Should we welcome Obama as president?
In one of his more intriguing koans, George Bush, when asked about his legacy, responded: "In history we'll all be dead." As 20 January, Inauguration Day, approaches, all I can think is: "L'histoire est morte. Vive l'histoire!"
To me, the election of Barack Obama feels like a new lease on life. Of course, I don't underestimate the challenges that his administration will face in this war-torn, financially distressed, globally overheated moment. But perhaps it's because we've hurtled so far downward in recent years that I am optimistic: frankly it is much, much too easy to imagine an alternative universe, a veritable slough of despond. We Americans came very close to electing John McCain and Sarah Palin. Imagine this interregnum if McCain were filling his cabinet with insiders from the Bush White House. Imagine what Sarah Palin's budget for clothes might be, just for the swearing-in ceremony alone. And imagine the savoury distractions: Last week, for one juicy if unfair example, Palin's pregnant daughter's fiancé's mother (or "Palin's daughter's baby daddy's mama" as the tabloids gleefully dubbed her) was arrested on drug trafficking charges.
Really - how could one not be panting with relief and a sense of promise just now? As the Palin family soap opera continued to unfold, Obama was busy rounding out his cabinet with the nomination of Steven Chu to head the Department of Energy. Chu is a physicist and Nobel laureate whose work centres on green energy alternatives. An actual climatologist! O joy and hallelujah!
President-elect Barack Obama (Lord, I love the feel of that on the tongue) really does represent a profound change of thought and direction for the US. Whether he can accomplish all that some of us hope remains to be seen, but the very fact of the change is sustaining. He's intelligent, well-informed and thoughtful; for the most part, he has surrounded himself with the same. He's also an unparalleled source of inspiration, giving the term "role model" whole new vigour. A young friend tells me that the Barack Obama action figure is selling like hotcakes, literally leaping off the shelves, something few black action figures have ever done before. "It's got moveable joints," exults my friend. "And it points!" Towards the future, I'd warrant. Yes, we'll have to see just how far symbolism can get us, but in Obama's case it's already farther than one might have had reason to expect.
So here's my New Year's shout-out to us all: Season's greetings, global friend!/The Great Mistake is at an end./Whatever gloom may yet portend,/ Just think what Heaven did forfend.
Patricia J Williams
Professor of law at Columbia University
What will be the big publishing trend?
Next year, along with a surge of finance-related titles (bankers' memoirs, polemics for reinventing capitalism), we're going to see more books about the 1980s. There are various reasons for this. Partly, it's an age thing. People who grew up in that decade are now increasingly of a book-writing age (late thirties, early forties). And so while in recent years we've had a glut of memoirs and novels about the 1970s, the next age demographic is taking over and we'll see a boom in 1980s books. Forthcoming examples include Jason Cowley's The Last Game, about football at the end of the decade, and Stephen Foster's 1980s memoir, From Working Class Hero to Absolute Disgrace
But there's another factor, to do with distance. As we approach the second decade of the 21st century, suddenly the penultimate one of the 20th century seems a lot more remote. Lots of us have clear memories of those years; but there's also a sense in which they are being claimed by history. The financial crisis has something to do with this. In the last few months, we've effectively witnessed the end of the era of unfettered capitalism ushered in by Thatcher and Reagan; the umbilical cord connecting now to then has been cut. The fact that there are so many 1980s anniversaries coming up also helps. Next year it'll be 20 years since both the collapse of communism and the Salman Rushdie fatwa, 25 years since the miners' strike, 30 years since Thatcher came to power. Such markers make it easier for us to think of the 1980s as history. And, of course, publishers love them.
Will Skidelsky
Observer books editor
Any ideas/thoughts on key questions for Kabirwala in 2009?
Wednesday, December 31, 2008
A Bone in America's Throat
A Bone in America's Throat
By JEFF HALPER
Even before the voting began, Israeli politicians and pundits were asking: Will an Obama Administration be good for Israel? “Be good for Israel” is our code for “Will the US allow us to keep our settlements and continue to support our efforts to prevent negotiations with the Palestinians from ever bearing fruit?” For Americans the question should be: Will the Obama Administration understand that without addressing Palestinian needs it will not be able to disentangle itself from its broader Middle Eastern imbroglios, rejoin the community of nations and rescue its economy?
The Israel-Palestine conflict should be of central concern to Americans, near the top of the new Administration’s agenda. It may not be the bloodiest conflict in the world – its minor when compared to Iraq – but it is emblematic to Muslims and to peoples the world over of American hostility and belligerence. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not merely a localized one between two squabbling tribes. It lies at the epicenter of global instability. Go where you may in the world and you will encounter the same phenomenon: a sense that the suffering of the Palestinians represents all that is wrong in an American-dominated world.
As Obama comes into office, he will encounter a global reality very different from that of eight years before: a multilateral one in which a weakened and isolated US must find its place. He will discover that much of America’s isolation comes from the view that the Occupation of the Palestinian territories is, in fact, an American-Israeli Occupation. If restoring a weakened American economy depends on repairing relations with the rest of the world, he will learn that without resolving the Israeli-Palestine conflict he will not create those conditions in which the US will be accepted once more into the wider global community.
To be more specific, the Israel-Palestine conflict directly affects Americans in at least five ways:
• It isolates the US from major global markets, forcing it to embark on aggressive measures to secure markets rather than peaceful accommodation;
• It thereby diverts the American economy into non-productive production (tanks not roads), making it dependent upon deficit spending which only increases dependency upon foreign financing while diverting resources into the military rather than into education, health and investment;
• Support for the Israeli military costs US taxpayers more than $3 billion annually at a time of deepening recession and crumbling national infrastructure;
• It leads to an American involvement in the world that is mainly military, thus begetting hostility and resistance which produce the threats to security Americans so greatly fear; and
• It ends up threatening American civil liberties by encouraging such legislation as the Patriot Act and by introducing Israeli “counterinsurgency” tactics and weaponry developed in the West Bank and Gaza into American police forces.
For many peoples of the world, the Palestinians represent the plight of the majority. They are the tiny grains of sand resisting what most Americans and privileged people of the West do not see. They are a people who are denied the most fundamental right: to a state of their own, even on the 22% of historic Palestine that Israel has occupied since 1967. For the majority of humanity that lives in economic and political conditions unimaginable in the West, the suffering caused by Israel’s occupation – impoverishment and a total denial of freedom that can only be sustained by total American support – is emblematic of their own continued suffering. Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians with the active backing of the US shows demonstrably the existence of a global system of Western domination that prevents others from achieving their own dreams of political and economic well-being.
Like a bone in the throat, the issue of Israel’s occupation can be neither ignored nor by-passed. If it is not addressed, the US – even under Obama – will remain mired in conflicts with Muslim peoples, will continue to be reviled by peoples seeking genuine freedom and will not find the security and even the prosperity it so craves. We live in a global reality, not a Pax Americana. The logic of the Bush Administration has run its course. No longer can the US throw its weight around in a War Against Terror. No longer can its involvement be purely military. The new logic that will accompany Obama into office can be summarized in one word: accommodation. And the US will not get to first base until it achieves accommodation with the Muslim world, which means ending the Israeli Occupation. What happens to the Palestinians takes on a global significance. Clearing the bone in the throat – that is, ending the Israeli Occupation and allowing the Palestinians a state and a future of their own – should be a top priority of the next American administration. Indeed, America’s attempt to restore its standing in the world depends on it. In the global reality in which we live, the fate of Americans and Palestinians, it turns out, are closely intertwined.
Jeff Halper is the Director of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions. He can be reached at jeff@icahd.org.
http://www.counterpunch.org/halper11102008.html
By JEFF HALPER
Even before the voting began, Israeli politicians and pundits were asking: Will an Obama Administration be good for Israel? “Be good for Israel” is our code for “Will the US allow us to keep our settlements and continue to support our efforts to prevent negotiations with the Palestinians from ever bearing fruit?” For Americans the question should be: Will the Obama Administration understand that without addressing Palestinian needs it will not be able to disentangle itself from its broader Middle Eastern imbroglios, rejoin the community of nations and rescue its economy?
The Israel-Palestine conflict should be of central concern to Americans, near the top of the new Administration’s agenda. It may not be the bloodiest conflict in the world – its minor when compared to Iraq – but it is emblematic to Muslims and to peoples the world over of American hostility and belligerence. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not merely a localized one between two squabbling tribes. It lies at the epicenter of global instability. Go where you may in the world and you will encounter the same phenomenon: a sense that the suffering of the Palestinians represents all that is wrong in an American-dominated world.
As Obama comes into office, he will encounter a global reality very different from that of eight years before: a multilateral one in which a weakened and isolated US must find its place. He will discover that much of America’s isolation comes from the view that the Occupation of the Palestinian territories is, in fact, an American-Israeli Occupation. If restoring a weakened American economy depends on repairing relations with the rest of the world, he will learn that without resolving the Israeli-Palestine conflict he will not create those conditions in which the US will be accepted once more into the wider global community.
To be more specific, the Israel-Palestine conflict directly affects Americans in at least five ways:
• It isolates the US from major global markets, forcing it to embark on aggressive measures to secure markets rather than peaceful accommodation;
• It thereby diverts the American economy into non-productive production (tanks not roads), making it dependent upon deficit spending which only increases dependency upon foreign financing while diverting resources into the military rather than into education, health and investment;
• Support for the Israeli military costs US taxpayers more than $3 billion annually at a time of deepening recession and crumbling national infrastructure;
• It leads to an American involvement in the world that is mainly military, thus begetting hostility and resistance which produce the threats to security Americans so greatly fear; and
• It ends up threatening American civil liberties by encouraging such legislation as the Patriot Act and by introducing Israeli “counterinsurgency” tactics and weaponry developed in the West Bank and Gaza into American police forces.
For many peoples of the world, the Palestinians represent the plight of the majority. They are the tiny grains of sand resisting what most Americans and privileged people of the West do not see. They are a people who are denied the most fundamental right: to a state of their own, even on the 22% of historic Palestine that Israel has occupied since 1967. For the majority of humanity that lives in economic and political conditions unimaginable in the West, the suffering caused by Israel’s occupation – impoverishment and a total denial of freedom that can only be sustained by total American support – is emblematic of their own continued suffering. Israel’s oppression of the Palestinians with the active backing of the US shows demonstrably the existence of a global system of Western domination that prevents others from achieving their own dreams of political and economic well-being.
Like a bone in the throat, the issue of Israel’s occupation can be neither ignored nor by-passed. If it is not addressed, the US – even under Obama – will remain mired in conflicts with Muslim peoples, will continue to be reviled by peoples seeking genuine freedom and will not find the security and even the prosperity it so craves. We live in a global reality, not a Pax Americana. The logic of the Bush Administration has run its course. No longer can the US throw its weight around in a War Against Terror. No longer can its involvement be purely military. The new logic that will accompany Obama into office can be summarized in one word: accommodation. And the US will not get to first base until it achieves accommodation with the Muslim world, which means ending the Israeli Occupation. What happens to the Palestinians takes on a global significance. Clearing the bone in the throat – that is, ending the Israeli Occupation and allowing the Palestinians a state and a future of their own – should be a top priority of the next American administration. Indeed, America’s attempt to restore its standing in the world depends on it. In the global reality in which we live, the fate of Americans and Palestinians, it turns out, are closely intertwined.
Jeff Halper is the Director of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions. He can be reached at jeff@icahd.org.
http://www.counterpunch.org/halper11102008.html
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
When this world
When this world favors somebody, it lends him the attributes, and surpassing merits of others and when it turns its face away from him it snatches away even his own excellences and fame.
Imam Ali A.S
Imam Ali A.S
Monday, December 29, 2008
Solemn stare of one child in Ghaza
Amid thousands of images of civilian casualties of the Israeli airstrikes in Gaza, the solemn stare of one child appears to have stood out more than any other. Newspapers and broadcasters across the world selected the image of a young girl looking into a camera lens outside the Shifa hospital hours after an Israeli air strike
Photograph: Abid Katib/Getty Images
Nothing in the world
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Vultures
Vultures are becoming an endangered species that could become extinct unless their conservation through captive breeding is developed, reports Nadeem Saeed (Dawn Jan 31, 2003)
It was surprise for someone like me whose love affair with vultures had deep associations with Raja Gidh. Seemi Shah, Would I have done anything different than Qayyum did?
Anyone up for debate…
OSP President Emeritus and BZU associate professor Dr Aleem Ahmed Khan said the Toawala population of OWBVs was perhaps the largest in the world of the oriental vultures.
Toawala is village in Kabirwala and is situated near to River Chenab.
He said the people should have to realize the importance of vultures in keeping the environment clean otherwise if they disappeared once for all then dogs and jackals would be left as the only scavengers and this phenomenon could cause epidemic of rabies and anthrax in human beings.
Diclofenac, a veterinary drug, was responsible for the sad disappearance of Vultures.
Later, WWF - Pakistan survey in December 2006 revealed that only about 220 White-backed vultures were remaining in the Punjab Province. This ecologically important species was gradually moving towards extinction. Results show that Toawala in was the only white-backed vultures’ colony in Punjab with 100 breeding pairs.
BBC reported in April 2008 that Asian vultures could be extinct in the wild within 10 years unless a livestock drug blamed for their rapid demise is eliminated, scientists warn. A survey showed that the population of the oriental white-backed vulture had crashed by 99.9% since 1992.
Every day we read & hear about extinctions and peacefully sleep because we are safe.
I will be devastated if this species vanishes.
Universe carries the weight of many human vultures whose extinction is more urgent and much needed? Who are these human vultures?
It’s anybody’s guess?
It was surprise for someone like me whose love affair with vultures had deep associations with Raja Gidh. Seemi Shah, Would I have done anything different than Qayyum did?
Anyone up for debate…
OSP President Emeritus and BZU associate professor Dr Aleem Ahmed Khan said the Toawala population of OWBVs was perhaps the largest in the world of the oriental vultures.
Toawala is village in Kabirwala and is situated near to River Chenab.
He said the people should have to realize the importance of vultures in keeping the environment clean otherwise if they disappeared once for all then dogs and jackals would be left as the only scavengers and this phenomenon could cause epidemic of rabies and anthrax in human beings.
Diclofenac, a veterinary drug, was responsible for the sad disappearance of Vultures.
Later, WWF - Pakistan survey in December 2006 revealed that only about 220 White-backed vultures were remaining in the Punjab Province. This ecologically important species was gradually moving towards extinction. Results show that Toawala in was the only white-backed vultures’ colony in Punjab with 100 breeding pairs.
BBC reported in April 2008 that Asian vultures could be extinct in the wild within 10 years unless a livestock drug blamed for their rapid demise is eliminated, scientists warn. A survey showed that the population of the oriental white-backed vulture had crashed by 99.9% since 1992.
Every day we read & hear about extinctions and peacefully sleep because we are safe.
I will be devastated if this species vanishes.
Universe carries the weight of many human vultures whose extinction is more urgent and much needed? Who are these human vultures?
It’s anybody’s guess?
You Tell Us What to Do
You Tell Us What to Do
by Faiz Ahmed Faiz
When we launched life
on the river of grief,
how vital were our arms, how ruby our blood.
With a few strokes, it seemed,
we would cross all pain,
we would soon disembark.
That didn't happen.
In the stillness of each wave we found invisible currents.
The boatmen, too, were unskilled,
their oars untested.
Investigate the matter as you will,
blame whomever, as much as you want,
but the river hasn't changed,
the raft is still the same.
Now you suggest what's to be done,
you tell us how to come ashore.
When we saw the wounds of our country
appear on our skins,
we believed each word of the healers.
Besides, we remembered so many cures,
it seemed at any moment
all troubles would end, each wound heal completely.
That didn't happen: our ailments
were so many, so deep within us
that all diagnoses proved false, each remedy useless.
Now do whatever, follow each clue,
accuse whomever, as much as you will,
our bodies are still the same,
our wounds still open.
Now tell us what we should do,
you tell us how to heal these wounds.
by Faiz Ahmed Faiz
When we launched life
on the river of grief,
how vital were our arms, how ruby our blood.
With a few strokes, it seemed,
we would cross all pain,
we would soon disembark.
That didn't happen.
In the stillness of each wave we found invisible currents.
The boatmen, too, were unskilled,
their oars untested.
Investigate the matter as you will,
blame whomever, as much as you want,
but the river hasn't changed,
the raft is still the same.
Now you suggest what's to be done,
you tell us how to come ashore.
When we saw the wounds of our country
appear on our skins,
we believed each word of the healers.
Besides, we remembered so many cures,
it seemed at any moment
all troubles would end, each wound heal completely.
That didn't happen: our ailments
were so many, so deep within us
that all diagnoses proved false, each remedy useless.
Now do whatever, follow each clue,
accuse whomever, as much as you will,
our bodies are still the same,
our wounds still open.
Now tell us what we should do,
you tell us how to heal these wounds.
Saturday, December 27, 2008
Noam Chomsky on Benazir
Noam Chomsky on Benazir
AAJ TV, February 2, 2008
FARUQUI: One of the characteristics of a failed state that you highlight in your book -Failed States - is America's increasing failure to protect its own citizens in relation to war-on-terror. Can you draw a parallel with how Pakistan has participated in this global push and has suffered the consequences in the form of increasing numbers of suicide bombings?
CHOMSKY: I'm afraid to say Pakistan is the paradigm example of a failed state and has been for a long time. It has had military rule, violence and oppression, Since the 1980's, it has undergone an extremely dangerous form of radical Islamisation, which has undermined a good part of the society, under the Zia-ul-Haq tyranny.
Now it is in danger of collapsing, there is a rebellion in Balochistan, the FATA territories are out of control and always have been - and it is getting worse. It is possible that the Bhutto assassination might increase the severe unrest in Sindh, where there has been plenty of oppression, and this may lead to another secessionist movement.
The are recent polls of Pakistan, good polls, which show that the Pakistani population is in favour of Democracy, possibly with an Islamic flavour, but not this one of oppression, but those hopes are not even near being realised in the existing political and social system.
FARUQUI: Don't you feel that democratic regimes can at times be authoritarian?
CHOMSKY: That is when they do not function. If you have formal democratic structure, but they do not function, yes, it can be authoritarian, it can be totalitarian! The old Soviet Union also called itself a democracy.
FARUQUI: What solutions do you propose for Pakistan in order for it to become a true Democracy rather than a failed state?
CHOMSKY: By developing political and social arrangements in which the population can actually determine effective policy. That is what democracy is.
FARUQUI: How can Pakistan form a democratic regime with an Islamic flavour when its Western allies buck the notion of Clash of Civilisations, which is at odds with everything that belong to the East?
CHOMSKY: The Clash of Civilisations is a concept that was invented actually by Bernard Lewis, a scholar of Islam, who has a bitter hatred for Islam. It was picked up by Samuel Huntington, a well known political scientist and he made it famous. The conception is supposed to be that the United States and its Western allies are civilised, enlightened and liberal, all sorts of wonderful qualities. And, the Islamic world is developing in the opposite direction, what is sometimes called Islamofacism - backward, regressive, violent, which doesn't understand their elevated ideals and so on and so forth.
Looking at the facts such as Iraq which is the center of concern, the US Military carried out regular intensive studies of public opinion in Iraq because it is a core part of military occupation to try to understand the opinions of people you are trying to control and dominate. They released the study a few week ago, which was reported in the Washington Post, the main national newspaper, on December 19th 2007. The military experts say that they are very encouraged by what they call "good news from Iraq." The "good news" is that the Iraqi's have "shared beliefs." That is supposed to refute the idea that they can't come together and that they are involved in tribal warfare and so on, so it is very encouraging, until you look at what the "shared beliefs" are. To which they say that the United States is responsible for all of the atrocities and disasters that have taken place, since the invasion and, therefore, the United States should get out. The aggressors should leave. That is the Iraqi position.
Notice that the Iraqis accept the ideals United States professes, for example, the ideals of the Nuremburg Tribunals, the American-run Tribunal, which tried Nazi criminals and hanged them for their crimes. The worst crime was the crime of aggression and which the Tribunal called the supreme international crime, which includes all of the evil that follows. So, in the case of Iraq, which is a textbook example of aggression - US and British aggression - includes all of the evil that followed: including sectarian warfare, the catastrophic affects on the society, the hundreds and thousands of excessive deaths, millions of people who were displaced, all of that is included in the supreme crime of aggression. And, Iraqi's agree with it. Off-course! Americans don't agree with that, nor does Europe, they don't agree with the ideals they profess; in fact, they dismiss them with contempt. Any mention of what I just said would be barely understood in the United States or the West, by intellectual opinion, but the Iraqi's understand it.
Now let's compare the United States. There is much debate about what the United States should do about Iraq. On January 20th 2008, The New York Times (newspaper for the record) had a lead story - by its main military correspondent, Michael Gordon - on Iraq and the elections, which reviewed the various opinions open to the United States and reviewed the opinion of the government officials, military experts, the political candidates, commentators, specialists and so on - a very extensive review.
Only one voice was missing, the voice of the people of Iraq. They are not people; they are what are sometimes called un-people, not people, so their voice doesn't matter. We, should ask ourselves if there is a clash of civilisations, who are the enlightened liberal people.
FARUQUI: Pakistan has shifted in and out of democracy without stabilising in any one position, is it possible for Pakistan to yield towards the right direction?
CHOMSKY: For Pakistan, its alliance with the United States, I think, has been quite harmful throughout its history. The United States has tried to convert Pakistan into its highly militarised ally and has supported its military dictatorship. The Reagan administration strongly supported the Zia-ul-Haq tyranny, which had a very harmful affect on Pakistan, and the Reagan administration even pretended they didn't know that Pakistan was developing nuclear weapons.
Off course they knew, but they had to pretend they didn't, so that Congress would continue to fund their support for Pakistan, for the army, and for the ISI, all part of their support for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, which was not intended to help the Afghans.
We know that very well, just from what happened afterwards. It was intended to harm the Russians, so the Reagan administration was using Pakistan as a way to kill the Russians. Actually, that was the term that was used by the head of the CIA station in Pakistan that "we have to kill Russians," not that the poor Afghans would suffer, but who cares.
FARUQUI: Can Pakistan ever become a true Democracy when it is continually expected to pander to external pressures, to act in ways which has a negative impact on the people of the country?
CHOMSKY: Yes, it can. I mean there is a lot wrong with India, horrible things in India, but it is more or less a functioning democracy. Pakistan could move to that level, but, I think, it has to disentangle itself from the domination from the United States. Right now the US is supporting Musharraf - is that a way to democracy?
Pakistanis have been polled extensively and we know information about Pakistani opinion. A large number of Pakistanis want Democracy - with an Islamic flavour - but that could be a functioning Democracy. Their problem is to create it, and I think that the US influence has been an impediment to that.
FARUQUI: Can a Democracy with an Islamic flavour be acceptable to the world - especially its Western Allies?
CHOMSKY: It doesn't matter if it's acceptable to the Western countries, what matters is what is acceptable to Pakistanis. The Western countries would like to rule the world, but they have no authority to do that. I think they have a lot of problems with their own democracies, for example, take Iraq again, I said that the voice of Iraqis is missing in these reviews, but I could add that the voice of Americans is also missing.
What Americans want doesn't matter, the large number of Americans agree with Iraqis that US forces should withdraw from Iraq. Americans are not as civilised as the Iraqis are in recognising that the US aggression is to blame for the atrocities.
The US citizens don't accept the professed American ideals to the extent that the Iraqis do, but that is result of propaganda, deception and so on, but their voice matters. This is not the only example in which US policy is radically divorced from the public opinion.
Even with the issue of Iran-US and Iranian public opinion have both been studied extensively by a leading polling agency in the World, and they tend to agree on most issues such as how to resolve the problem, and that Iran has the right to nuclear power, like any signatory of non-proliferation treaty, but it does not have the right to acquire nuclear weapons.
They also agree that there should a nuclear weapons free zone in the whole region that would include Israel, Iran and Pakistan. An overwhelming majority of Americans and Iranians agree with that.
Furthermore, a huge majority of American (over 80 percent), thinks the United States should live up to its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty and make good faith efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons altogether. A large majority of Americans are even opposed to any military threats against Iran, which they see as a crime.
If United States and Iran were both functioning democracies in which public opinion mattered, this crisis, which is a serious one, could probably be resolved. Unfortunately they are not, and that's not due to a clash of civilisations because the problem is right here in the United States. In fact, the opinions of the American population are not only not implemented, but they are not even reported.
FARUQUI: You've highlighted public opinion. So, my concern is, is it possible for Pakistan to steer towards the right direction, when 65% of its population is illiterate and has no active participation in politics?
CHOMSKY: Yes, it's very possible; in fact, one of the dramatic and successful achievements of Democracy, in recent years, has been in Bolivia. Bolivia is the poorest country in South America. Extremely impoverished population, illiterate and so on, but they carried out what was a real triumph of Democracy - something that cannot be imagined in the West.
In December 2005, the indigenous population, the Indian population, which happens to be in majority in Bolivia, for the first time entered the political arena and were able to take political power through the vote and elected someone from their own ranks, who is committed to cultural rights, letting the population control their own natural resources, and many other moves towards justice and equality.
That is a remarkable exercising Democracy; it doesn't take place in United States or Western countries. And, it was poor and the level of literacy was quite low. These were the people who were fighting for their rights for years.
The election didn't come out of nowhere. A few years earlier, the Indian population had driven the World Bank and major corporations, like Bechtel, out of the country because they were trying to privatise water. Privatising water may look good in the study of economics at graduate school, but for the population it means that they can't purchase water for their children, so they rejected and they struggled in which many killed. The drove the corporations and the world bank out.
FARUQUI: As you may know, elections in Pakistan will be held soon and public polls on television depict a lack of confidence in the political system. The poor masses have more immediate concerns such as rising prices of flour and wheat, scarcity of gas and electricity in the country, than bothering with who to vote for - if at all. What are your thoughts on this and how can governments gain the confidence of people and get their active participation in Politics?
CHOMSKY: Governments will gain active participation for the populous, if the issues that concern the population like getting shoes for your children or having water to drink or having cultural rights or controlling your own natural resources, if those issues are open to vote on then they'll vote, just like in Bolivia. If the vote is a matter of picking one or the other member from the wealthy and oppressive elite then people won't vote. The voting is very low in the United States for similar reasons.
AAJ TV, February 2, 2008
FARUQUI: One of the characteristics of a failed state that you highlight in your book -Failed States - is America's increasing failure to protect its own citizens in relation to war-on-terror. Can you draw a parallel with how Pakistan has participated in this global push and has suffered the consequences in the form of increasing numbers of suicide bombings?
CHOMSKY: I'm afraid to say Pakistan is the paradigm example of a failed state and has been for a long time. It has had military rule, violence and oppression, Since the 1980's, it has undergone an extremely dangerous form of radical Islamisation, which has undermined a good part of the society, under the Zia-ul-Haq tyranny.
Now it is in danger of collapsing, there is a rebellion in Balochistan, the FATA territories are out of control and always have been - and it is getting worse. It is possible that the Bhutto assassination might increase the severe unrest in Sindh, where there has been plenty of oppression, and this may lead to another secessionist movement.
The are recent polls of Pakistan, good polls, which show that the Pakistani population is in favour of Democracy, possibly with an Islamic flavour, but not this one of oppression, but those hopes are not even near being realised in the existing political and social system.
FARUQUI: Don't you feel that democratic regimes can at times be authoritarian?
CHOMSKY: That is when they do not function. If you have formal democratic structure, but they do not function, yes, it can be authoritarian, it can be totalitarian! The old Soviet Union also called itself a democracy.
FARUQUI: What solutions do you propose for Pakistan in order for it to become a true Democracy rather than a failed state?
CHOMSKY: By developing political and social arrangements in which the population can actually determine effective policy. That is what democracy is.
FARUQUI: How can Pakistan form a democratic regime with an Islamic flavour when its Western allies buck the notion of Clash of Civilisations, which is at odds with everything that belong to the East?
CHOMSKY: The Clash of Civilisations is a concept that was invented actually by Bernard Lewis, a scholar of Islam, who has a bitter hatred for Islam. It was picked up by Samuel Huntington, a well known political scientist and he made it famous. The conception is supposed to be that the United States and its Western allies are civilised, enlightened and liberal, all sorts of wonderful qualities. And, the Islamic world is developing in the opposite direction, what is sometimes called Islamofacism - backward, regressive, violent, which doesn't understand their elevated ideals and so on and so forth.
Looking at the facts such as Iraq which is the center of concern, the US Military carried out regular intensive studies of public opinion in Iraq because it is a core part of military occupation to try to understand the opinions of people you are trying to control and dominate. They released the study a few week ago, which was reported in the Washington Post, the main national newspaper, on December 19th 2007. The military experts say that they are very encouraged by what they call "good news from Iraq." The "good news" is that the Iraqi's have "shared beliefs." That is supposed to refute the idea that they can't come together and that they are involved in tribal warfare and so on, so it is very encouraging, until you look at what the "shared beliefs" are. To which they say that the United States is responsible for all of the atrocities and disasters that have taken place, since the invasion and, therefore, the United States should get out. The aggressors should leave. That is the Iraqi position.
Notice that the Iraqis accept the ideals United States professes, for example, the ideals of the Nuremburg Tribunals, the American-run Tribunal, which tried Nazi criminals and hanged them for their crimes. The worst crime was the crime of aggression and which the Tribunal called the supreme international crime, which includes all of the evil that follows. So, in the case of Iraq, which is a textbook example of aggression - US and British aggression - includes all of the evil that followed: including sectarian warfare, the catastrophic affects on the society, the hundreds and thousands of excessive deaths, millions of people who were displaced, all of that is included in the supreme crime of aggression. And, Iraqi's agree with it. Off-course! Americans don't agree with that, nor does Europe, they don't agree with the ideals they profess; in fact, they dismiss them with contempt. Any mention of what I just said would be barely understood in the United States or the West, by intellectual opinion, but the Iraqi's understand it.
Now let's compare the United States. There is much debate about what the United States should do about Iraq. On January 20th 2008, The New York Times (newspaper for the record) had a lead story - by its main military correspondent, Michael Gordon - on Iraq and the elections, which reviewed the various opinions open to the United States and reviewed the opinion of the government officials, military experts, the political candidates, commentators, specialists and so on - a very extensive review.
Only one voice was missing, the voice of the people of Iraq. They are not people; they are what are sometimes called un-people, not people, so their voice doesn't matter. We, should ask ourselves if there is a clash of civilisations, who are the enlightened liberal people.
FARUQUI: Pakistan has shifted in and out of democracy without stabilising in any one position, is it possible for Pakistan to yield towards the right direction?
CHOMSKY: For Pakistan, its alliance with the United States, I think, has been quite harmful throughout its history. The United States has tried to convert Pakistan into its highly militarised ally and has supported its military dictatorship. The Reagan administration strongly supported the Zia-ul-Haq tyranny, which had a very harmful affect on Pakistan, and the Reagan administration even pretended they didn't know that Pakistan was developing nuclear weapons.
Off course they knew, but they had to pretend they didn't, so that Congress would continue to fund their support for Pakistan, for the army, and for the ISI, all part of their support for the Mujahideen in Afghanistan, which was not intended to help the Afghans.
We know that very well, just from what happened afterwards. It was intended to harm the Russians, so the Reagan administration was using Pakistan as a way to kill the Russians. Actually, that was the term that was used by the head of the CIA station in Pakistan that "we have to kill Russians," not that the poor Afghans would suffer, but who cares.
FARUQUI: Can Pakistan ever become a true Democracy when it is continually expected to pander to external pressures, to act in ways which has a negative impact on the people of the country?
CHOMSKY: Yes, it can. I mean there is a lot wrong with India, horrible things in India, but it is more or less a functioning democracy. Pakistan could move to that level, but, I think, it has to disentangle itself from the domination from the United States. Right now the US is supporting Musharraf - is that a way to democracy?
Pakistanis have been polled extensively and we know information about Pakistani opinion. A large number of Pakistanis want Democracy - with an Islamic flavour - but that could be a functioning Democracy. Their problem is to create it, and I think that the US influence has been an impediment to that.
FARUQUI: Can a Democracy with an Islamic flavour be acceptable to the world - especially its Western Allies?
CHOMSKY: It doesn't matter if it's acceptable to the Western countries, what matters is what is acceptable to Pakistanis. The Western countries would like to rule the world, but they have no authority to do that. I think they have a lot of problems with their own democracies, for example, take Iraq again, I said that the voice of Iraqis is missing in these reviews, but I could add that the voice of Americans is also missing.
What Americans want doesn't matter, the large number of Americans agree with Iraqis that US forces should withdraw from Iraq. Americans are not as civilised as the Iraqis are in recognising that the US aggression is to blame for the atrocities.
The US citizens don't accept the professed American ideals to the extent that the Iraqis do, but that is result of propaganda, deception and so on, but their voice matters. This is not the only example in which US policy is radically divorced from the public opinion.
Even with the issue of Iran-US and Iranian public opinion have both been studied extensively by a leading polling agency in the World, and they tend to agree on most issues such as how to resolve the problem, and that Iran has the right to nuclear power, like any signatory of non-proliferation treaty, but it does not have the right to acquire nuclear weapons.
They also agree that there should a nuclear weapons free zone in the whole region that would include Israel, Iran and Pakistan. An overwhelming majority of Americans and Iranians agree with that.
Furthermore, a huge majority of American (over 80 percent), thinks the United States should live up to its obligations under the non-proliferation treaty and make good faith efforts to eliminate nuclear weapons altogether. A large majority of Americans are even opposed to any military threats against Iran, which they see as a crime.
If United States and Iran were both functioning democracies in which public opinion mattered, this crisis, which is a serious one, could probably be resolved. Unfortunately they are not, and that's not due to a clash of civilisations because the problem is right here in the United States. In fact, the opinions of the American population are not only not implemented, but they are not even reported.
FARUQUI: You've highlighted public opinion. So, my concern is, is it possible for Pakistan to steer towards the right direction, when 65% of its population is illiterate and has no active participation in politics?
CHOMSKY: Yes, it's very possible; in fact, one of the dramatic and successful achievements of Democracy, in recent years, has been in Bolivia. Bolivia is the poorest country in South America. Extremely impoverished population, illiterate and so on, but they carried out what was a real triumph of Democracy - something that cannot be imagined in the West.
In December 2005, the indigenous population, the Indian population, which happens to be in majority in Bolivia, for the first time entered the political arena and were able to take political power through the vote and elected someone from their own ranks, who is committed to cultural rights, letting the population control their own natural resources, and many other moves towards justice and equality.
That is a remarkable exercising Democracy; it doesn't take place in United States or Western countries. And, it was poor and the level of literacy was quite low. These were the people who were fighting for their rights for years.
The election didn't come out of nowhere. A few years earlier, the Indian population had driven the World Bank and major corporations, like Bechtel, out of the country because they were trying to privatise water. Privatising water may look good in the study of economics at graduate school, but for the population it means that they can't purchase water for their children, so they rejected and they struggled in which many killed. The drove the corporations and the world bank out.
FARUQUI: As you may know, elections in Pakistan will be held soon and public polls on television depict a lack of confidence in the political system. The poor masses have more immediate concerns such as rising prices of flour and wheat, scarcity of gas and electricity in the country, than bothering with who to vote for - if at all. What are your thoughts on this and how can governments gain the confidence of people and get their active participation in Politics?
CHOMSKY: Governments will gain active participation for the populous, if the issues that concern the population like getting shoes for your children or having water to drink or having cultural rights or controlling your own natural resources, if those issues are open to vote on then they'll vote, just like in Bolivia. If the vote is a matter of picking one or the other member from the wealthy and oppressive elite then people won't vote. The voting is very low in the United States for similar reasons.
Friday, December 26, 2008
A bizarre idea
I am listening Multan’s FM Radio…
I am stuck with the thought that Can we not have Kabirwala fm radio that would play music of our folk singers?
What a bizarre idea!
I am stuck with the thought that Can we not have Kabirwala fm radio that would play music of our folk singers?
What a bizarre idea!
For a long time...
For a long time it seemed to me that real life was about to begin, but there was always some obstacle in the way. Something had to be got through first, some unfinished business; time still to be served, a debt to be paid.
Then life would begin. At last it dawned on me that these obstacles were my life.
Bette Howland
Then life would begin. At last it dawned on me that these obstacles were my life.
Bette Howland
Lateral thinking
I invented the term 'lateral thinking' in 1967. It was first written up in a book called "The Use of Lateral Thinking" (Jonathan Cape, London) - "New Think" (Basic Books, New York) - the two titles refer to the same book.
For many years now this has been acknowledged in the Oxford English Dictionary which is the final arbiter of the English Language.
There are several ways of defining lateral thinking, ranging from the technical to the illustrative.
1. "You cannot dig a hole in a different place by digging the same hole deeper"
This means that trying harder in the same direction may not be as useful as changing direction. Effort in the same direction (approach) will not necessarily succeed.
2. "Lateral Thinking is for changing concepts and perceptions"
With logic you start out with certain ingredients just as in playing chess you start out with given pieces. But what are those pieces? In most real life situations the pieces are not given, we just assume they are there. We assume certain perceptions, certain concepts and certain boundaries. Lateral thinking is concerned not with playing with the existing pieces but with seeking to change those very pieces. Lateral thinking is concerned with the perception part of thinking. This is where we organise the external world into the pieces we can then 'process'.
3. "The brain as a self-organising information system forms asymmetric patterns. In such systems there is a mathematical need for moving across patterns. The tools and processes of lateral thinking are designed to achieve such 'lateral' movement. The tools are based on an understanding of self-organising information systems."
This is a technical definition which depends on an understanding of self-organising information systems.
4. "In any self-organising system there is a need to escape from a local optimum in order to move towards a more global optimum."
Edward de Bono
For many years now this has been acknowledged in the Oxford English Dictionary which is the final arbiter of the English Language.
There are several ways of defining lateral thinking, ranging from the technical to the illustrative.
1. "You cannot dig a hole in a different place by digging the same hole deeper"
This means that trying harder in the same direction may not be as useful as changing direction. Effort in the same direction (approach) will not necessarily succeed.
2. "Lateral Thinking is for changing concepts and perceptions"
With logic you start out with certain ingredients just as in playing chess you start out with given pieces. But what are those pieces? In most real life situations the pieces are not given, we just assume they are there. We assume certain perceptions, certain concepts and certain boundaries. Lateral thinking is concerned not with playing with the existing pieces but with seeking to change those very pieces. Lateral thinking is concerned with the perception part of thinking. This is where we organise the external world into the pieces we can then 'process'.
3. "The brain as a self-organising information system forms asymmetric patterns. In such systems there is a mathematical need for moving across patterns. The tools and processes of lateral thinking are designed to achieve such 'lateral' movement. The tools are based on an understanding of self-organising information systems."
This is a technical definition which depends on an understanding of self-organising information systems.
4. "In any self-organising system there is a need to escape from a local optimum in order to move towards a more global optimum."
Edward de Bono
Nothing lives for forever
1873: Frank W Woolworth becomes a sales assistant in New York
1879: Opens first store in Pennsylvania
1909: Opens first British general store in Liverpool and more follow across north of England
2001: Becomes a plc
2008: Has 815 stores across the UK
2008: All 27,000 permanent and temporary staff will lose their jobs unless a last-minute buyer can be found.
99 years of history and now even infrastructure is for sales. Has any store in Kabirwala history of almost one century, I will find this for you?
Big empires, large buildings, greed for money, and lust for everything (and anything), It’s our approach, “visionary” human approach. But at the end, we forget, nothing lives for forever.
Dunia jhok fana di hey!
1879: Opens first store in Pennsylvania
1909: Opens first British general store in Liverpool and more follow across north of England
2001: Becomes a plc
2008: Has 815 stores across the UK
2008: All 27,000 permanent and temporary staff will lose their jobs unless a last-minute buyer can be found.
99 years of history and now even infrastructure is for sales. Has any store in Kabirwala history of almost one century, I will find this for you?
Big empires, large buildings, greed for money, and lust for everything (and anything), It’s our approach, “visionary” human approach. But at the end, we forget, nothing lives for forever.
Dunia jhok fana di hey!
Jinnah - Human side of Great Leader
Tariq Ali’s latest book has many eye openers and various disturbing accounts from our history. Today is Jinnah’s birth anniversary; I have huge respect for our father of nation. But he was a human being and here is tale of his human side. No comments.
Even in the trying times, during the first months after independence, most of the people at the top were mainly thinking about themselves. Young Pakistanis should have no illusions. The situation has worsened considerably, but there never was a golden age.
Take the Great Leader, Jinnah. A revealing portrait of his priorities emerges from a confidential report by Paul H. Alling, the Connecticut Yankee sent as the first U.S ambassador to the new country. While presenting his credentials, Alling informed that United States was “appreciative of the difficulties which beset a new nation” and was “deeply sympathetic with the many problems which face Pakistan.”
Nonetheless the ambassador was invited for the picnic with Jinnah and his sister, Fatima. Assuming that important matters of the state might be discussed, Alling prepared himself as best as he could and joined the siblings on the governor-general launch close to their beach cottage on Sandspit. As turbaned waiters were serving tea and cucumber sandwiches, Jinnah wanted to know how the ambassador was getting on the acquisition of property for new embassy and staff. Alling explained that they had a tentative program and everything was under control:
Both he and his sister then inquired whether we were interested in their house “Flagstaff” which he had told me a few days previously was available for purchase. I explained that our negotiations for the purchase of an Ambassador’s residence at No 1 Bonus Road progressed so far – before we had acknowledged that “Flagstaff” was available – that it proved impossible to withdraw.
He then asked if “Flagstaff” would not be suitable for the use other personnel in the embassy. In reply I said we had, of course, explored that possibility but our building expert felt that he could not justify the purchase of such an extensive property for any of the subordinate personnel. I added that actually we were interested only in purchasing a few small houses or flats whereupon he said he would send us details of one or two of such properties. I could sense, however, that Mr Jinnah and his sister were disappointed that we had been unable to purchase “Flagstaff.”
The Dual, Pakistan on the flight path of American Power by Tariq Ali
Page 41-42
I read this tale and decided to forgive "leaders" of my town - Kabirwala at least for one day, so guys, I give you one day amensty and will not say anything about you today:)
Even in the trying times, during the first months after independence, most of the people at the top were mainly thinking about themselves. Young Pakistanis should have no illusions. The situation has worsened considerably, but there never was a golden age.
Take the Great Leader, Jinnah. A revealing portrait of his priorities emerges from a confidential report by Paul H. Alling, the Connecticut Yankee sent as the first U.S ambassador to the new country. While presenting his credentials, Alling informed that United States was “appreciative of the difficulties which beset a new nation” and was “deeply sympathetic with the many problems which face Pakistan.”
Nonetheless the ambassador was invited for the picnic with Jinnah and his sister, Fatima. Assuming that important matters of the state might be discussed, Alling prepared himself as best as he could and joined the siblings on the governor-general launch close to their beach cottage on Sandspit. As turbaned waiters were serving tea and cucumber sandwiches, Jinnah wanted to know how the ambassador was getting on the acquisition of property for new embassy and staff. Alling explained that they had a tentative program and everything was under control:
Both he and his sister then inquired whether we were interested in their house “Flagstaff” which he had told me a few days previously was available for purchase. I explained that our negotiations for the purchase of an Ambassador’s residence at No 1 Bonus Road progressed so far – before we had acknowledged that “Flagstaff” was available – that it proved impossible to withdraw.
He then asked if “Flagstaff” would not be suitable for the use other personnel in the embassy. In reply I said we had, of course, explored that possibility but our building expert felt that he could not justify the purchase of such an extensive property for any of the subordinate personnel. I added that actually we were interested only in purchasing a few small houses or flats whereupon he said he would send us details of one or two of such properties. I could sense, however, that Mr Jinnah and his sister were disappointed that we had been unable to purchase “Flagstaff.”
The Dual, Pakistan on the flight path of American Power by Tariq Ali
Page 41-42
I read this tale and decided to forgive "leaders" of my town - Kabirwala at least for one day, so guys, I give you one day amensty and will not say anything about you today:)
Thursday, December 25, 2008
Ansar Abbasi threats
Today’s “The News” carries a piece that Ansar Abbassi has been given life threats for exposing dark truths about politicians, judges and religious leaders…
Why he is doing this? What’s his objective? I have no answers…do we not already know about these dirty faces…we are familiar with this but thanks to him that I heard (read) few classic pieces
Wasi Zafar on phone was classic, he was law minister of this innocent nation who showed his best on Voice of America, Still not listened the conversation, leave this.
then...I was simply moved when I watched “Capital Talk” couple of months ago where Ansar Abbasi came with the proofs of allotment scam. The program had a JUI Senator who besides knowing the facts and seeing the proof was persistent on calling Maulana Fazalur Rehman a ‘Hazrat’. He was shamelessly denying the truth. I have never believed in so-called religious authority of likes of Maulana Diesel, yet I was shocked on “be ghairati” and determination of the maulvis to declare Ansar Abbasi agent of “Jewish” lobby.
Kabirwala has few followers of Maulana and everyone appreciated courage of the journalist and denounced acts of Maulana & his cronies.
Not to mention the case of Farah Dogar and
US Government’s efforts on inclusion of Hameed Gul in international terrorists list, I will not be surprised if it happens.
Failed State, Evil Politicians, and dying morality in Masses; this is how world sees us.
I have no high hopes that his stories will bring any big change except creating more troubles for him.
Should Ansar Abbassi stop exposing the dirt and darkness? The answer depends upon, what your moral and ethical values are? Decide yourself, I better go and meet my friendsJ
Why he is doing this? What’s his objective? I have no answers…do we not already know about these dirty faces…we are familiar with this but thanks to him that I heard (read) few classic pieces
Wasi Zafar on phone was classic, he was law minister of this innocent nation who showed his best on Voice of America, Still not listened the conversation, leave this.
then...I was simply moved when I watched “Capital Talk” couple of months ago where Ansar Abbasi came with the proofs of allotment scam. The program had a JUI Senator who besides knowing the facts and seeing the proof was persistent on calling Maulana Fazalur Rehman a ‘Hazrat’. He was shamelessly denying the truth. I have never believed in so-called religious authority of likes of Maulana Diesel, yet I was shocked on “be ghairati” and determination of the maulvis to declare Ansar Abbasi agent of “Jewish” lobby.
Kabirwala has few followers of Maulana and everyone appreciated courage of the journalist and denounced acts of Maulana & his cronies.
Not to mention the case of Farah Dogar and
US Government’s efforts on inclusion of Hameed Gul in international terrorists list, I will not be surprised if it happens.
Failed State, Evil Politicians, and dying morality in Masses; this is how world sees us.
I have no high hopes that his stories will bring any big change except creating more troubles for him.
Should Ansar Abbassi stop exposing the dirt and darkness? The answer depends upon, what your moral and ethical values are? Decide yourself, I better go and meet my friendsJ
Have you ever been ...
Have you ever been in love? Horrible isn't it? It makes you so vulnerable. It opens your chest and it opens up your heart and it means that someone can get inside you and mess you up. You build up all these defenses, you build up a whole suit of armor, so that nothing can hurt you, then one stupid person, no different from any other stupid person, wanders into your stupid life...
You give them a piece of you. They didn't ask for it. They did something dumb one day, like kiss you or smile at you, and then your life isn't your own anymore. Love takes hostages. It gets inside you. It eats you out and leaves you crying in the darkness, so simple a phrase like 'maybe we should be just friends' turns into a glass splinter working its way into your heart. It hurts.
Not just in the imagination. Not just in the mind. It's a soul-hurt, a real gets-inside-you-and-rips-you-apart pain. I hate love.
Neil Gaiman
You give them a piece of you. They didn't ask for it. They did something dumb one day, like kiss you or smile at you, and then your life isn't your own anymore. Love takes hostages. It gets inside you. It eats you out and leaves you crying in the darkness, so simple a phrase like 'maybe we should be just friends' turns into a glass splinter working its way into your heart. It hurts.
Not just in the imagination. Not just in the mind. It's a soul-hurt, a real gets-inside-you-and-rips-you-apart pain. I hate love.
Neil Gaiman
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
A Strange thought!
The devil is an optimist if he thinks he can make people worse than they are.
Karl Kraus (1874-1936), Austrian satirist
Karl Kraus (1874-1936), Austrian satirist
Obsession: A History
Obsession: A History by Lennard J. Davis.
University of Chicago Press, 2008
Admit it: at some point in your life, you’ve been completely obsessed. Obsessed with a particular project perhaps, or a great author, or that hot senior who smiled at you once when you were a freshman. Obsession is common and typically harmless, often a powerful motivator and a source of artistic inspiration. Yet its extremes are also feared and reviled, because they form the foundation for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), a disease that has apparently exploded in prevalence in recent decades. How exactly can we reconcile two conflicting notions of the same phenomenon?
Perhaps we can’t—but we can glean some insight by taking a closer look at society’s complex history with obsession, Lennard J. Davis posits in his new book. Since the 18th century our understanding of obsession has evolved from believing it to be an incurable “madness,” thought to afflict a small number of people who were typically poor, to a potentially curable disease afflicting many, including the upper classes.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=mind-reviews-dec-08&page=2
A must read for 2009!
University of Chicago Press, 2008
Admit it: at some point in your life, you’ve been completely obsessed. Obsessed with a particular project perhaps, or a great author, or that hot senior who smiled at you once when you were a freshman. Obsession is common and typically harmless, often a powerful motivator and a source of artistic inspiration. Yet its extremes are also feared and reviled, because they form the foundation for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), a disease that has apparently exploded in prevalence in recent decades. How exactly can we reconcile two conflicting notions of the same phenomenon?
Perhaps we can’t—but we can glean some insight by taking a closer look at society’s complex history with obsession, Lennard J. Davis posits in his new book. Since the 18th century our understanding of obsession has evolved from believing it to be an incurable “madness,” thought to afflict a small number of people who were typically poor, to a potentially curable disease afflicting many, including the upper classes.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=mind-reviews-dec-08&page=2
A must read for 2009!
The aim of a joke
The aim of a joke is not to degrade the human being, but to remind him that he is already degraded.
George Orwell
George Orwell
It's the Oil, stupid!
Its almost over now, finally the dumbest American president is about say leave the oval office, its time for the reflection. Iraq war is one of his legacies and after his “tremendous” farewell trip to Iraq, he must be enjoying his last few days. Many reasons were given for invasion, I think, Noam Chomsky, took this right….
It's the Oil, stupid!
Noam Chomsky
Khaleej Times, July 8, 2008
The deal just taking shape between Iraq's Oil Ministry and four Western oil companies raises critical questions about the nature of the US invasion and occupation of Iraq — questions that should certainly be addressed by presidential candidates and seriously discussed in the United States, and of course in occupied Iraq, where it appears that the population has little if any role in determining the future of their country.
Negotiations are under way for Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — the original partners decades ago in the Iraq Petroleum Company, now joined by Chevron and other smaller oil companies — to renew the oil concession they lost to nationalisation during the years when the oil producers took over their own resources. The no-bid contracts, apparently written by the oil corporations with the help of U.S. officials, prevailed over offers from more than 40 other companies, including companies in China, India and Russia.
"There was suspicion among many in the Arab world and among parts of the American public that the United States had gone to war in Iraq precisely to secure the oil wealth these contracts seek to extract," Andrew E. Kramer wrote in The New York Times.
Kramer's reference to "suspicion" is an understatement. Furthermore, it is highly likely that the military occupation has taken the initiative in restoring the hated Iraq Petroleum Company, which, as Seamus Milne writes in the London Guardian, was imposed under British rule to "dine off Iraq's wealth in a famously exploitative deal."
Later reports speak of delays in the bidding. Much is happening in secrecy, and it would be no surprise if new scandals emerge.
The demand could hardly be more intense. Iraq contains perhaps the second largest oil reserves in the world, which are, furthermore, very cheap to extract: no permafrost or tar sands or deep sea drilling. For US planners, it is imperative that Iraq remain under U.S. control, to the extent possible, as an obedient client state that will also house major U.S. military bases, right at the heart of the world's major energy reserves.
That these were the primary goals of the invasion was always clear enough through the haze of successive pretexts: weapons of mass destruction, Saddam's links with Al-Qaeda, democracy promotion and the war against terrorism, which, as predicted, sharply increased as a result of the invasion.
Last November, the guiding concerns were made explicit when President Bush and Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki signed a "Declaration of Principles," ignoring the U.S. Congress and Iraqi parliament, and the populations of the two countries.
The Declaration left open the possibility of an indefinite long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq that would presumably include the huge air bases now being built around the country, and the "embassy" in Baghdad, a city within a city, unlike any embassy in the world. These are not being constructed to be abandoned.
The Declaration also had a remarkably brazen statement about exploiting the resources of Iraq. It said that the economy of Iraq, which means its oil resources, must be open to foreign investment, "especially American investments." That comes close to a pronouncement that we invaded you so that we can control your country and have privileged access to your resources.
The seriousness of this commitment was underscored in January, when President Bush issued a "signing statement" declaring that he would reject any congressional legislation that restricted funding "to establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq" or "to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq."
Extensive resort to "signing statements" to expand executive power is yet another Bush innovation, condemned by the American Bar Association as "contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional separation of powers." To no avail.
Not surprisingly, the Declaration aroused immediate objections in Iraq, among others from Iraqi unions, which survive even under the harsh anti-labour laws that Saddam instituted and the occupation preserves.
In Washington propaganda, the spoiler to US domination in Iraq is Iran. U.S. problems in Iraq are blamed on Iran. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sees a simple solution: "foreign forces" and "foreign arms" should be withdrawn from Iraq — Iran's, not ours.
The confrontation over Iran's nuclear programme heightens the tensions. The Bush administration's "regime change" policy toward Iran comes with ominous threats of force (there Bush is joined by both US presidential candidates). The policy also is reported to include terrorism within Iran — again legitimate, for the world rulers. A majority of the American people favours diplomacy and oppose the use of force. But public opinion is largely irrelevant to policy formation, not just in this case.
An irony is that Iraq is turning into a US-Iranian condominium. The Maliki government is the sector of Iraqi society most supported by Iran. The so-called Iraqi army — just another militia — is largely based on the Badr brigade, which was trained in Iran, and fought on the Iranian side during the Iran-Iraq war.
Nir Rosen, one of the most astute and knowledgeable correspondents in the region, observes that the main target of the US-Maliki military operations, Moktada Al Sadr, is disliked by Iran as well: He's independent and has popular support, therefore dangerous.
Iran "clearly supported Prime Minister Maliki and the Iraqi government against what they described as 'illegal armed groups' (of Moktada's Mahdi army) in the recent conflict in Basra," Rosen writes, "which is not surprising given that their main proxy in Iraq, the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council dominates the Iraqi state and is Maliki's main backer."
"There is no proxy war in Iraq," Rosen concludes, "because the U.S. and Iran share the same proxy."
Teheran is presumably pleased to see the United States institute and sustain a government in Iraq that's receptive to their influence. For the Iraqi people, however, that government continues to be a disaster, very likely with worse to come.
In Foreign Affairs, Steven Simon points out that current US counterinsurgency strategy is "stoking the three forces that have traditionally threatened the stability of Middle Eastern states: tribalism, warlordism and sectarianism." The outcome might be "a strong, centralised state ruled by a military junta that would resemble" Saddam's regime.
If Washington achieves its goals, then its actions are justified. Reactions are quite different when Vladimir Putin succeeds in pacifying Chechnya, to an extent well beyond what Gen. David Petraeus has achieved in Iraq. But that is THEM, and this is US. Criteria are therefore entirely different.
In the US, the Democrats are silenced now because of the supposed success of the US military surge in Iraq. Their silence reflects the fact that there are no principled criticisms of the war. In this way of regarding the world, if you're achieving your goals, the war and occupation are justified. The sweetheart oil deals come with the territory.
In fact, the whole invasion is a war crime — indeed the supreme international crime, differing from other war crimes in that it encompasses all the evil that follows, in the terms of the Nuremberg judgment. This is among the topics that can't be discussed, in the presidential campaign or elsewhere. Why are we in Iraq? What do we owe Iraqis for destroying their country? The majority of the American people favour US withdrawal from Iraq. Do their voices matter?
It's the Oil, stupid!
Noam Chomsky
Khaleej Times, July 8, 2008
The deal just taking shape between Iraq's Oil Ministry and four Western oil companies raises critical questions about the nature of the US invasion and occupation of Iraq — questions that should certainly be addressed by presidential candidates and seriously discussed in the United States, and of course in occupied Iraq, where it appears that the population has little if any role in determining the future of their country.
Negotiations are under way for Exxon Mobil, Shell, Total and BP — the original partners decades ago in the Iraq Petroleum Company, now joined by Chevron and other smaller oil companies — to renew the oil concession they lost to nationalisation during the years when the oil producers took over their own resources. The no-bid contracts, apparently written by the oil corporations with the help of U.S. officials, prevailed over offers from more than 40 other companies, including companies in China, India and Russia.
"There was suspicion among many in the Arab world and among parts of the American public that the United States had gone to war in Iraq precisely to secure the oil wealth these contracts seek to extract," Andrew E. Kramer wrote in The New York Times.
Kramer's reference to "suspicion" is an understatement. Furthermore, it is highly likely that the military occupation has taken the initiative in restoring the hated Iraq Petroleum Company, which, as Seamus Milne writes in the London Guardian, was imposed under British rule to "dine off Iraq's wealth in a famously exploitative deal."
Later reports speak of delays in the bidding. Much is happening in secrecy, and it would be no surprise if new scandals emerge.
The demand could hardly be more intense. Iraq contains perhaps the second largest oil reserves in the world, which are, furthermore, very cheap to extract: no permafrost or tar sands or deep sea drilling. For US planners, it is imperative that Iraq remain under U.S. control, to the extent possible, as an obedient client state that will also house major U.S. military bases, right at the heart of the world's major energy reserves.
That these were the primary goals of the invasion was always clear enough through the haze of successive pretexts: weapons of mass destruction, Saddam's links with Al-Qaeda, democracy promotion and the war against terrorism, which, as predicted, sharply increased as a result of the invasion.
Last November, the guiding concerns were made explicit when President Bush and Iraq's Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki signed a "Declaration of Principles," ignoring the U.S. Congress and Iraqi parliament, and the populations of the two countries.
The Declaration left open the possibility of an indefinite long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq that would presumably include the huge air bases now being built around the country, and the "embassy" in Baghdad, a city within a city, unlike any embassy in the world. These are not being constructed to be abandoned.
The Declaration also had a remarkably brazen statement about exploiting the resources of Iraq. It said that the economy of Iraq, which means its oil resources, must be open to foreign investment, "especially American investments." That comes close to a pronouncement that we invaded you so that we can control your country and have privileged access to your resources.
The seriousness of this commitment was underscored in January, when President Bush issued a "signing statement" declaring that he would reject any congressional legislation that restricted funding "to establish any military installation or base for the purpose of providing for the permanent stationing of United States Armed Forces in Iraq" or "to exercise United States control of the oil resources of Iraq."
Extensive resort to "signing statements" to expand executive power is yet another Bush innovation, condemned by the American Bar Association as "contrary to the rule of law and our constitutional separation of powers." To no avail.
Not surprisingly, the Declaration aroused immediate objections in Iraq, among others from Iraqi unions, which survive even under the harsh anti-labour laws that Saddam instituted and the occupation preserves.
In Washington propaganda, the spoiler to US domination in Iraq is Iran. U.S. problems in Iraq are blamed on Iran. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice sees a simple solution: "foreign forces" and "foreign arms" should be withdrawn from Iraq — Iran's, not ours.
The confrontation over Iran's nuclear programme heightens the tensions. The Bush administration's "regime change" policy toward Iran comes with ominous threats of force (there Bush is joined by both US presidential candidates). The policy also is reported to include terrorism within Iran — again legitimate, for the world rulers. A majority of the American people favours diplomacy and oppose the use of force. But public opinion is largely irrelevant to policy formation, not just in this case.
An irony is that Iraq is turning into a US-Iranian condominium. The Maliki government is the sector of Iraqi society most supported by Iran. The so-called Iraqi army — just another militia — is largely based on the Badr brigade, which was trained in Iran, and fought on the Iranian side during the Iran-Iraq war.
Nir Rosen, one of the most astute and knowledgeable correspondents in the region, observes that the main target of the US-Maliki military operations, Moktada Al Sadr, is disliked by Iran as well: He's independent and has popular support, therefore dangerous.
Iran "clearly supported Prime Minister Maliki and the Iraqi government against what they described as 'illegal armed groups' (of Moktada's Mahdi army) in the recent conflict in Basra," Rosen writes, "which is not surprising given that their main proxy in Iraq, the Supreme Iraqi Islamic Council dominates the Iraqi state and is Maliki's main backer."
"There is no proxy war in Iraq," Rosen concludes, "because the U.S. and Iran share the same proxy."
Teheran is presumably pleased to see the United States institute and sustain a government in Iraq that's receptive to their influence. For the Iraqi people, however, that government continues to be a disaster, very likely with worse to come.
In Foreign Affairs, Steven Simon points out that current US counterinsurgency strategy is "stoking the three forces that have traditionally threatened the stability of Middle Eastern states: tribalism, warlordism and sectarianism." The outcome might be "a strong, centralised state ruled by a military junta that would resemble" Saddam's regime.
If Washington achieves its goals, then its actions are justified. Reactions are quite different when Vladimir Putin succeeds in pacifying Chechnya, to an extent well beyond what Gen. David Petraeus has achieved in Iraq. But that is THEM, and this is US. Criteria are therefore entirely different.
In the US, the Democrats are silenced now because of the supposed success of the US military surge in Iraq. Their silence reflects the fact that there are no principled criticisms of the war. In this way of regarding the world, if you're achieving your goals, the war and occupation are justified. The sweetheart oil deals come with the territory.
In fact, the whole invasion is a war crime — indeed the supreme international crime, differing from other war crimes in that it encompasses all the evil that follows, in the terms of the Nuremberg judgment. This is among the topics that can't be discussed, in the presidential campaign or elsewhere. Why are we in Iraq? What do we owe Iraqis for destroying their country? The majority of the American people favour US withdrawal from Iraq. Do their voices matter?
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
I'll Do It Tomorrow
I am among those “blessed” who have missed many of the life’s beautiful moments due to delaying tasks and deluding my wits with the promises of tomorrow.
On my do list, Tauba (asking for forgiveness) is on top but I am delaying it on the hope that I have still a long life to live, “many” things to see, “various” activities to do. My Lord, I sin but will beg mercy tomorrow.
I made many mistakes. Many people were hurt due to my selection of words. No offense, but folks, I yet have to piss you off on few things, so wait until I knock at your doors and ask for the forgiveness. I know this but I will do it tomorrow.
Power made me mad, and “small god” in me did things which I had pledged not to, when I was taking the charge. I have to go and say sorry to those I sacked, fired or made their working life hell in the name of procedures, quality and standards. I realize this but I will do it tomorrow.
Not to mention the eyes who cried for me. Prayed for me, but I never went back to tell them, I also love them and miss them. Now you know, I will do it tomorrow.
Tomorrow never comes, every wise man has said. They were (are) innocent people as my tomorrow always comes and I have shamelessly done the same for many years. So why change today, I will do it tomorrow.
On my do list, Tauba (asking for forgiveness) is on top but I am delaying it on the hope that I have still a long life to live, “many” things to see, “various” activities to do. My Lord, I sin but will beg mercy tomorrow.
I made many mistakes. Many people were hurt due to my selection of words. No offense, but folks, I yet have to piss you off on few things, so wait until I knock at your doors and ask for the forgiveness. I know this but I will do it tomorrow.
Power made me mad, and “small god” in me did things which I had pledged not to, when I was taking the charge. I have to go and say sorry to those I sacked, fired or made their working life hell in the name of procedures, quality and standards. I realize this but I will do it tomorrow.
Not to mention the eyes who cried for me. Prayed for me, but I never went back to tell them, I also love them and miss them. Now you know, I will do it tomorrow.
Tomorrow never comes, every wise man has said. They were (are) innocent people as my tomorrow always comes and I have shamelessly done the same for many years. So why change today, I will do it tomorrow.
Just as I succeeded!
In a bar in a remote village in Spain, close to the city of Olite, there is a sign placed there by the owner. "Just as I succeeded in finding all the answers, all the questions changed."
The master says:
We are always concerned with finding answers. We feel that answers are important to understand what life means. It is more important to live fully, and allow time to reveal to us the secrets of our existence.
If we are too concerned with making sense of life, we prevent nature from acting, and we become unable to read God's signs.
Maktub
The master says:
We are always concerned with finding answers. We feel that answers are important to understand what life means. It is more important to live fully, and allow time to reveal to us the secrets of our existence.
If we are too concerned with making sense of life, we prevent nature from acting, and we become unable to read God's signs.
Maktub
Mutual weirdness
We are all a little weird and life's a little weird, and when we find someone whose weirdness is compatible with ours, we join up with them and fall in mutual weirdness and call it love.
Unkown
Unkown
Monday, December 22, 2008
Ki Janaan Mein Kon
The German philosopher, Schopenhauer, was strolling along a street in Dresden, seeking the answers to questions that bothered him. Passing by a garden, he decided to sit and look at the flowers. One of the residents of the neighborhood observed the philosopher's strange behavior and summoned the police.
Minutes later, an officer approached Schopenhauer. "Who are you," the officer asked brusquely.
Schopenhauer looked the policeman up and down. "If you can help me find the answer to that question," he said, "I will be eternally grateful to you."
Minutes later, an officer approached Schopenhauer. "Who are you," the officer asked brusquely.
Schopenhauer looked the policeman up and down. "If you can help me find the answer to that question," he said, "I will be eternally grateful to you."
Progress is not an illusion
Progress is not an illusion, it happens, but it is slow and invariably disappointing.
George Orwell
George Orwell
Sunday, December 21, 2008
The Road of Dreams
The master says:
“If you are traveling the road of your dreams, be committed to it. Do not leave an open door to be used as an excuse such as, 'Well, this isn't exactly what I wanted.' Therein are contained the seeds of defeat.
Walk your path. Even if your steps have to be uncertain, even if you know that you could be doing it better. If you accept your possibilities in the present, there is no doubt that you will improve in the future. But if you deny that you have limitations, you will never be rid of them. "Confront your path with courage, and don't be afraid of the criticism of others. And, above all, don't allow yourself to become paralyzed by self-criticism.
God will be with you on your sleepless nights, and will dry your tears with His love. God is for the valiant."
“If you are traveling the road of your dreams, be committed to it. Do not leave an open door to be used as an excuse such as, 'Well, this isn't exactly what I wanted.' Therein are contained the seeds of defeat.
Walk your path. Even if your steps have to be uncertain, even if you know that you could be doing it better. If you accept your possibilities in the present, there is no doubt that you will improve in the future. But if you deny that you have limitations, you will never be rid of them. "Confront your path with courage, and don't be afraid of the criticism of others. And, above all, don't allow yourself to become paralyzed by self-criticism.
God will be with you on your sleepless nights, and will dry your tears with His love. God is for the valiant."
Saturday, December 20, 2008
All murderers are punished unless
All murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets.
Voltaire
Voltaire
Worship
There are people who worship Allah to gain His Favors, this is the worship of traders; while there are some who worship Him to keep themselves free from His Wrath, this is the worship of slaves;
a few who obey Him out' of their sense of gratitude and obligations, this is the worship of free and noble men.
Imam Ali A.S.
a few who obey Him out' of their sense of gratitude and obligations, this is the worship of free and noble men.
Imam Ali A.S.
Friday, December 19, 2008
God is an artist
The phrase is from Pablo Picasso: "God is an artist. He invented the giraffe, the elephant and the ant. Actually, he never sought for a style -- he was simply doing everything that he wanted to do."
The master says: "When we begin along our path, a great fear arises. We feel obligated to do everything right. In the end, since we have only one life to live, who was it that invented the standard of "Everything right?" God made the giraffe, the elephant and the ant -- why do we have to follow a standard?
"A standard serves only to show us how others define their own reality. Often we admire the models of others, and many times we can avoid the errors committed by others. "But as for living well -- only we know how to do that for ourselves."
The master says: "When we begin along our path, a great fear arises. We feel obligated to do everything right. In the end, since we have only one life to live, who was it that invented the standard of "Everything right?" God made the giraffe, the elephant and the ant -- why do we have to follow a standard?
"A standard serves only to show us how others define their own reality. Often we admire the models of others, and many times we can avoid the errors committed by others. "But as for living well -- only we know how to do that for ourselves."
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Bonobo Sex and Society
.jpg)
One of our close primates is Bonobo, you don’t know this, and I will not blame you. Even Microsoft Word doesn’t recognize the word and has given me spell error.
They are different from us, no doubt in it. Francs de Wall, in his article for Scientific American in March 1995, wrote about Bonobo Sex and Society. Here are my favorite paragraphs…
The bonobo is one of the last large mammals to be found by science. The creature was discovered in 1929 in a Belgian colonial museum, far from its lush African habitat. The species is best characterized as female-centered and egalitarian and as one that substitute’s sex for aggression. A female gives birth to a single infant at intervals of between five and six years. So bonobos share at least one very important characteristic with our own species, namely, a partial separation between sex and reproduction.
Like chimpanzees, female bonobos nurse and carry around their young for up to five years. By the age of seven the offspring reach adolescence. Wild females give birth for the first time at 13 or 14 years of age, becoming full grown by about 15. A bonobo's longevity is unknown, but judging by the chimpanzee it may be older than 40 in the wild and close to 60 in captivity.
Sex, it turned out, is the key to the social life of the bonobo. Although chimpanzees virtually never adopt face-to-face positions, bonobos do so in one out of three copulations in the wild. Sex is connected to feeding, and even appears to make food sharing possible, has been observed not only in zoos but also in the wild. One explanation for the sexual activity at feeding time could be that excitement over food translates into sexual arousal. This idea may be partly true. Yet another motivation is probably the real cause: competition. There are two reasons to believe sexual activity is the bonobo's answer to avoiding conflict.
Both bonobos and chimpanzees live in so-called fission- fusion societies. The apes move alone or in small parties of a few individuals at a time, the composition of which changes constantly. Several bonobos traveling together in the morning might meet another group in the forest, whereupon one individual from the first group wanders off with others from the second group, while those left behind forage together. All associations, except the one between mother and dependent offspring, are of a temporary character.
Bonobo males remain attached to their mothers all their lives, following them through the forest and being dependent on them for protection in aggressive encounters with other males. As a result, the highest-ranking males of a bonobo community tend to be sons of important females.
Occasionally, the role of sex in relation to food is taken one step further, bringing bonobos very close to humans in their behavior. It has been speculated by anthropologists-- including C. Owen Lovejoy of Kent State University and Helen Fisher of Rutgers University--that sex is partially separated from reproduction in our species because it serves to cement mutually profitable relationships between men and women. The human female's capacity to mate throughout her cycle and her strong sex drive allow her to exchange sex for male commitment and paternal care, thus giving rise to the nuclear family.
At the San Diego Zoo, I observed that if Loretta was in a sexually attractive state, she would not hesitate to approach the adult male, Vernon, if he had food. Presenting herself to Vernon, she would mate with him and make high- pitched food calls while taking over his entire bundle of branches and leaves. When Loretta had no genital swelling, she would wait until Vernon was ready to share. Primatologist Suehisa Kuroda reports similar exchanges at Wamba: "A young female approached a male, who was eating sugarcane. They copulated in short order, whereupon she took one of the two canes held by him and left."
Just imagine that we had never heard of chimpanzees or baboons and had known bonobos first. We would at present most likely believe that early hominids lived in female- centered societies, in which sex served important social functions and in which warfare was rare or absent. In the end, perhaps the most successful reconstruction of our past will be based not on chimpanzees or even on bonobos but on a three-way comparison of chimpanzees, bonobos and humans.
They are different from us, no doubt in it. Francs de Wall, in his article for Scientific American in March 1995, wrote about Bonobo Sex and Society. Here are my favorite paragraphs…
The bonobo is one of the last large mammals to be found by science. The creature was discovered in 1929 in a Belgian colonial museum, far from its lush African habitat. The species is best characterized as female-centered and egalitarian and as one that substitute’s sex for aggression. A female gives birth to a single infant at intervals of between five and six years. So bonobos share at least one very important characteristic with our own species, namely, a partial separation between sex and reproduction.
Like chimpanzees, female bonobos nurse and carry around their young for up to five years. By the age of seven the offspring reach adolescence. Wild females give birth for the first time at 13 or 14 years of age, becoming full grown by about 15. A bonobo's longevity is unknown, but judging by the chimpanzee it may be older than 40 in the wild and close to 60 in captivity.
Sex, it turned out, is the key to the social life of the bonobo. Although chimpanzees virtually never adopt face-to-face positions, bonobos do so in one out of three copulations in the wild. Sex is connected to feeding, and even appears to make food sharing possible, has been observed not only in zoos but also in the wild. One explanation for the sexual activity at feeding time could be that excitement over food translates into sexual arousal. This idea may be partly true. Yet another motivation is probably the real cause: competition. There are two reasons to believe sexual activity is the bonobo's answer to avoiding conflict.
Both bonobos and chimpanzees live in so-called fission- fusion societies. The apes move alone or in small parties of a few individuals at a time, the composition of which changes constantly. Several bonobos traveling together in the morning might meet another group in the forest, whereupon one individual from the first group wanders off with others from the second group, while those left behind forage together. All associations, except the one between mother and dependent offspring, are of a temporary character.
Bonobo males remain attached to their mothers all their lives, following them through the forest and being dependent on them for protection in aggressive encounters with other males. As a result, the highest-ranking males of a bonobo community tend to be sons of important females.
Occasionally, the role of sex in relation to food is taken one step further, bringing bonobos very close to humans in their behavior. It has been speculated by anthropologists-- including C. Owen Lovejoy of Kent State University and Helen Fisher of Rutgers University--that sex is partially separated from reproduction in our species because it serves to cement mutually profitable relationships between men and women. The human female's capacity to mate throughout her cycle and her strong sex drive allow her to exchange sex for male commitment and paternal care, thus giving rise to the nuclear family.
At the San Diego Zoo, I observed that if Loretta was in a sexually attractive state, she would not hesitate to approach the adult male, Vernon, if he had food. Presenting herself to Vernon, she would mate with him and make high- pitched food calls while taking over his entire bundle of branches and leaves. When Loretta had no genital swelling, she would wait until Vernon was ready to share. Primatologist Suehisa Kuroda reports similar exchanges at Wamba: "A young female approached a male, who was eating sugarcane. They copulated in short order, whereupon she took one of the two canes held by him and left."
Just imagine that we had never heard of chimpanzees or baboons and had known bonobos first. We would at present most likely believe that early hominids lived in female- centered societies, in which sex served important social functions and in which warfare was rare or absent. In the end, perhaps the most successful reconstruction of our past will be based not on chimpanzees or even on bonobos but on a three-way comparison of chimpanzees, bonobos and humans.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
No monkeys my friend
One of my friends likes apes but dislikes the fact that they are called monkeys.
No monkeys; I understand and stand corrected.
Apes and humans differ from all of the other primates in that they lack external tails. They also are more intelligent and more dependent for survival on learned behavior patterns. There are several internal body differences as well, such as the absence of an appendix in monkeys.
I can’t deny something and neither would my friend as both of us use lot of hands in our communication and now scientists have told us…
People who talk as much with their hands as their voices could be aping an earlier state in the evolution of language.
Scientists have discovered that chimpanzees and bonobos communicate more freely using gestures than they do by means of vocal sounds and facial expressions. Their findings support the theory that the human gift of the gab evolved from gesturing.
No monkeys my friend, but I am intrigued by this striking resemblance in sign language.
What about morality, sins and punishment? I am still not complete human being and more of my acts are closer to my animal instincts. I understand this, is there anyway out for escaping from Day of Judgment?
No monkeys; I understand and stand corrected.
Apes and humans differ from all of the other primates in that they lack external tails. They also are more intelligent and more dependent for survival on learned behavior patterns. There are several internal body differences as well, such as the absence of an appendix in monkeys.
I can’t deny something and neither would my friend as both of us use lot of hands in our communication and now scientists have told us…
People who talk as much with their hands as their voices could be aping an earlier state in the evolution of language.
Scientists have discovered that chimpanzees and bonobos communicate more freely using gestures than they do by means of vocal sounds and facial expressions. Their findings support the theory that the human gift of the gab evolved from gesturing.
No monkeys my friend, but I am intrigued by this striking resemblance in sign language.
What about morality, sins and punishment? I am still not complete human being and more of my acts are closer to my animal instincts. I understand this, is there anyway out for escaping from Day of Judgment?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3291891/How-apes-gave-language-a-hand.html
http://anthro.palomar.edu/primate/prim_7.htm
Wait until
An explorer, a white man, anxious to reach his destination in the heart of Africa, promised an extra payment to his bearers if they would make greater speed. For several days, the bearers moved along at a faster pace.
One afternoon, though, they all suddenly put down their burden and sat on the ground. No matter how much money they were offered, they refused to move on. When the explorer finally asked why they were behaving as they were, he was given the following answer:
"We have been moving along at such a fast pace that we no longer know what we are doing. Now we have to wait until our soul catches up with us."
One afternoon, though, they all suddenly put down their burden and sat on the ground. No matter how much money they were offered, they refused to move on. When the explorer finally asked why they were behaving as they were, he was given the following answer:
"We have been moving along at such a fast pace that we no longer know what we are doing. Now we have to wait until our soul catches up with us."
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
God does not play dice
God does not play dice with the universe; He plays an ineffable game of His own devising, which might be compared, from the perspective of the players, (ie everybody), to being involved in an obscure and complex version of poker in a pitch-dark room, with blank cards, for infinite stakes, with a Dealer who won't tell you the rules, and who smiles all the time.
Neil Gaiman
Neil Gaiman
When I stand before God
When I stand before God at the end of my life, I would hope that I would not have a single bit of talent left, and could say, "I used everything you gave me".
Erma Bombeck
Erma Bombeck
Fulfillment
Fulfillment doesn’t come from clearing hurdles others set for you; it comes from clearing those you set for yourself.
Robert Kaplan
Robert Kaplan
Saturday, December 13, 2008
We go our ways
The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways--I to die, and you to live. Which is better God only knows.
Socrates
Words from last Speech
Socrates
Words from last Speech
Wisdom
Over two thousand years ago, a young man in his eighteens had this intense desire to seek out the truth. He discovered that there was a man in his town he could go to in his search for wisdom – and this wise old man was Socrates.
He met this philosopher who took him for a walk to a lake. On reaching the shore Socrates took this young man's hand in his and started walking into the water ever so slowly and continued moving gently till the water was almost waist high. Socrates stopped, quietly placed his hand behind the young man's head and in a sudden motion gripped him hard and shoved the boys head into the water and kept it there.
The seeker of wisdom was now in a state of terrible shock and thought maybe he had a made a mistake. He realized this old man could actually be mad. As the seconds ticked away, the lad struggled for breath, and Socrates in turn used more force to keep him down. A point came when the boy knew that the only way to survive was to put all his might and lunge out of Socrates' firm grip for a gasp of air. And he succeeded to pull himself out of danger by using all his might.
On recovering his breath and composure, he demanded to know why on earth did Socrates do this?! Socrates replied, “Young man, the day you pursue your goals with the force of passion and courage you displayed for catching one breath, is the day you will have wisdom!”
He met this philosopher who took him for a walk to a lake. On reaching the shore Socrates took this young man's hand in his and started walking into the water ever so slowly and continued moving gently till the water was almost waist high. Socrates stopped, quietly placed his hand behind the young man's head and in a sudden motion gripped him hard and shoved the boys head into the water and kept it there.
The seeker of wisdom was now in a state of terrible shock and thought maybe he had a made a mistake. He realized this old man could actually be mad. As the seconds ticked away, the lad struggled for breath, and Socrates in turn used more force to keep him down. A point came when the boy knew that the only way to survive was to put all his might and lunge out of Socrates' firm grip for a gasp of air. And he succeeded to pull himself out of danger by using all his might.
On recovering his breath and composure, he demanded to know why on earth did Socrates do this?! Socrates replied, “Young man, the day you pursue your goals with the force of passion and courage you displayed for catching one breath, is the day you will have wisdom!”
In Search of Widom, Kamran Rizvi
http://www.navitus.biz/content.asp?ContentId=628
Friday, December 12, 2008
Thursday, December 11, 2008
The Duel; Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power
Tariq Ali was born in Lahore and educated at Oxford University. He has campaigned against wars from Vietnam to Iraq. I always admire him for his commitment to his ideologies’; I have seen many intellectuals marching from left to right or opting to stay “in between”. Tariq Ali writes for the Guardian, the Nation and the London Review of Books. He has written more than dozen books including Can Pakistan Survive? The Clash of Fundamentalisms’, etc…
His latest book, The Duel; Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power is an eye opener. Personally, it’s been shock for me; I didn’t want to believe what I read. I can’t change the history and can not deny the fact that East Pakistan is now called Bangladesh.
Tariq Ali’s books are (generally) banned in Pakistan; there is no official word on it. But I think Tariq Ali knows why? He writes in the preface…
“Books have a destiny. This is my Third Study of Pakistan. The first, Pakistan: Military Rule or People’s Power? Was written in 1969 and predicted the breakup of the state. It was banned in Pakistan. Critics of every persuasion, even those who liked the book, thought it was going too far in suggesting that the state could disintegrate, but a few decades later that is what exactly happened? Just over a decade later, I wrote Can Pakistan Survive? The question mark was not that important but nonetheless struck a raw nerve in General Zia’s Pakistan, where to even pose question was unacceptable”
God Bless him (though he doesn’t believe in God), his third book is more uncomfortable and harder to digest. It’s about Pakistan’s strange love affair with America and 60 years of pain, agony and distress.
Here are few insights from the book…
In Can Pakistan Survive, I argued that if the state carried out the same old way, some of the minority left behind might also defect, leaving the Punjab alone, strutting like a cock on a dunghill.
The country is here to stay. It’s not the mystical “ideology of Pakistan” or even religion that guarantees it survival, but two factors: its nuclear capacity and the support it receives from Washington. The threat of jihadi takeover is remote. There is no possibility of a coup by the religious extremists unless the army wants.
Unless the West begins nuclear disarmament, it has no moral or material on which to demand the others to do the same. Only a twisted logic accepts that London and Paris can have the bomb, but New Delhi and Islamabad cannot. It’s unlikely that they would resort to first use of these weapons, but that is not sufficient reassurance for the citizens of either country. While Pakistan’s principal preoccupation remains India, its senior partners in Washington have been trying to hard to shift Islamabad’s focus to the western frontier.
Tariq Ali discusses the role of Pakistan army, government’s writ on Waziristan, Taliban and much more. More can be found about Tariq Ali at www.tariqali.org
The book may be purchased from www.amazon.com/Duel-Pakistan-Flight-American-Power/dp/1416561013
His latest book, The Duel; Pakistan on the Flight Path of American Power is an eye opener. Personally, it’s been shock for me; I didn’t want to believe what I read. I can’t change the history and can not deny the fact that East Pakistan is now called Bangladesh.
Tariq Ali’s books are (generally) banned in Pakistan; there is no official word on it. But I think Tariq Ali knows why? He writes in the preface…
“Books have a destiny. This is my Third Study of Pakistan. The first, Pakistan: Military Rule or People’s Power? Was written in 1969 and predicted the breakup of the state. It was banned in Pakistan. Critics of every persuasion, even those who liked the book, thought it was going too far in suggesting that the state could disintegrate, but a few decades later that is what exactly happened? Just over a decade later, I wrote Can Pakistan Survive? The question mark was not that important but nonetheless struck a raw nerve in General Zia’s Pakistan, where to even pose question was unacceptable”
God Bless him (though he doesn’t believe in God), his third book is more uncomfortable and harder to digest. It’s about Pakistan’s strange love affair with America and 60 years of pain, agony and distress.
Here are few insights from the book…
In Can Pakistan Survive, I argued that if the state carried out the same old way, some of the minority left behind might also defect, leaving the Punjab alone, strutting like a cock on a dunghill.
The country is here to stay. It’s not the mystical “ideology of Pakistan” or even religion that guarantees it survival, but two factors: its nuclear capacity and the support it receives from Washington. The threat of jihadi takeover is remote. There is no possibility of a coup by the religious extremists unless the army wants.
Unless the West begins nuclear disarmament, it has no moral or material on which to demand the others to do the same. Only a twisted logic accepts that London and Paris can have the bomb, but New Delhi and Islamabad cannot. It’s unlikely that they would resort to first use of these weapons, but that is not sufficient reassurance for the citizens of either country. While Pakistan’s principal preoccupation remains India, its senior partners in Washington have been trying to hard to shift Islamabad’s focus to the western frontier.
Tariq Ali discusses the role of Pakistan army, government’s writ on Waziristan, Taliban and much more. More can be found about Tariq Ali at www.tariqali.org
The book may be purchased from www.amazon.com/Duel-Pakistan-Flight-American-Power/dp/1416561013
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Top 10 Terms searched in Pakistan in 2008
Google has published its year-end Zeitgeist, the tool which reveals what internet users are searching for. The data goes back to 2004 and can be narrowed to specific dates.
Top 10 Terms searched in Pakistan in 2008
Pakistan
Download
Urdu
Songs
Nokia
News
Movies
Google
Games
You Tube
Top 10 rising searches in last 30 days
Salman Taseer
Twilight
Indian news
Dostana
Urdu news
Cricinfo
Weather
Mobile prices
Khabrain
Karachi University
Zong, Express news, Face book, AIOU and ufone searches has seen enormous growth in search in 2008.
For more information on Pakistan, please see the following link
http://www.google.com/insights/search/#geo=PK&date=1%2F2008%2012m&cmpt=q
2008 Year-End Google Zeitgeist
http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/zeitgeist2008/index.html
Top 10 Terms searched in Pakistan in 2008
Pakistan
Download
Urdu
Songs
Nokia
News
Movies
Games
You Tube
Top 10 rising searches in last 30 days
Salman Taseer
Twilight
Indian news
Dostana
Urdu news
Cricinfo
Weather
Mobile prices
Khabrain
Karachi University
Zong, Express news, Face book, AIOU and ufone searches has seen enormous growth in search in 2008.
For more information on Pakistan, please see the following link
http://www.google.com/insights/search/#geo=PK&date=1%2F2008%2012m&cmpt=q
2008 Year-End Google Zeitgeist
http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/zeitgeist2008/index.html
Thursday, December 04, 2008
On the day when my words...
On the day when my words
were earth...
I was a friend to stalks of wheat.
On the day when my words
were wrath...
I was a friend to chains.
On the day when my words
were stones...
I was a friend to streams.
On the day when my words
were a rebellion...
I was a friend to earthquakes.
On the day when my words
were bitter apples
I was a friend to the optimist.
But when my words became
honey...
flies covered my lips!
were earth...
I was a friend to stalks of wheat.
On the day when my words
were wrath...
I was a friend to chains.
On the day when my words
were stones...
I was a friend to streams.
On the day when my words
were a rebellion...
I was a friend to earthquakes.
On the day when my words
were bitter apples
I was a friend to the optimist.
But when my words became
honey...
flies covered my lips!
Mahmoud Darwish
The greatest danger
The greatest danger
for most of us
is not that our aim is
too high
and we miss it,
but that it is
too low
and we reach it.
Michelangelo
for most of us
is not that our aim is
too high
and we miss it,
but that it is
too low
and we reach it.
Michelangelo
We are accused of terrorism:
We are accused of terrorism
if we defended with guts
the hair of Balqis
and the lips of Maysun
if we defended Hind, and Da`d
Lubna and Rabab ..
and the stream of Kohl
***
Salt in our eyes
Salt in our lips
Salt in our words
Can the self carry such dryness?
***
We are accused of terrorism
If we refuse to die
with Israel's bulldozers
tearing our land
tearing our history
tearing our Evangelium
tearing our Koran
tearing the graves of our prophets
If this was our sin,
then, lo, how beautiful terrorism is?
***
We are accused of terrorism
if we refuse to negotiate with the wolf
and shake the hand with a whore
****
We are accused of terrorism
if we defended land
and the honor of dust
if we revolted against the rape of people
and our rape
if we defended the last palm trees in our desert
the last stars in our sky
the last syllabi of our names
the last milk in our mothers' bosoms
if this was our sin
how beautiful is terrorism.
***
I am with terrorism
as long as this new world order
is shared
between America and Israel
half-half
***
I am with terrorism
with all my poetry
with all my words
and all my teeth
as long as this new world
is in the hands of a butcher.
***
Nizar Qabbani
London, 15 April 1997
if we defended with guts
the hair of Balqis
and the lips of Maysun
if we defended Hind, and Da`d
Lubna and Rabab ..
and the stream of Kohl
***
Salt in our eyes
Salt in our lips
Salt in our words
Can the self carry such dryness?
***
We are accused of terrorism
If we refuse to die
with Israel's bulldozers
tearing our land
tearing our history
tearing our Evangelium
tearing our Koran
tearing the graves of our prophets
If this was our sin,
then, lo, how beautiful terrorism is?
***
We are accused of terrorism
if we refuse to negotiate with the wolf
and shake the hand with a whore
****
We are accused of terrorism
if we defended land
and the honor of dust
if we revolted against the rape of people
and our rape
if we defended the last palm trees in our desert
the last stars in our sky
the last syllabi of our names
the last milk in our mothers' bosoms
if this was our sin
how beautiful is terrorism.
***
I am with terrorism
as long as this new world order
is shared
between America and Israel
half-half
***
I am with terrorism
with all my poetry
with all my words
and all my teeth
as long as this new world
is in the hands of a butcher.
***
Nizar Qabbani
London, 15 April 1997
Wednesday, December 03, 2008
NGO's in Kabirwala
I have closely observed the growth of serious (and opportunist) humanitarians in Kabirwala. With the advent of Adult Learning and spread of concepts like Education for All; there has been lot that has happened in the last 10 years.
I have witnessed love for poor and obsession about personal glorification at the same time...
There is something special about dual personalities and conflicting interests.
I have written to different NGO’s asking for their areas of activities and major achievements. I am placing this entry on hold until I hear from few more…
You can reach me at kabirwala1@gmail.com
I have witnessed love for poor and obsession about personal glorification at the same time...
There is something special about dual personalities and conflicting interests.
I have written to different NGO’s asking for their areas of activities and major achievements. I am placing this entry on hold until I hear from few more…
You can reach me at kabirwala1@gmail.com
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
An age is called Dark...
An age is called Dark, not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it.
James A. Michener
James A. Michener
Politics in my town!
Politics and politicians of Kabirwala truly represent national sample and I can’t identify any outliers. I am wrong because I can remember one exception which is being the man of principle.
When Sadaat of Qatalpur lost election in 2002, I watched a TV package on Geo. Farrukh (Jang’s Local correspondent) said that they lost the election due to lack of public contacts (coordination). The janta thought that they were seasonal birds. 2008 saw huge national support for Peoples Party but Syed Fakhar Imam lost again…do you know what? The same reason, he didn’t learn from the past. I am proud at least he stayed committed and didn’t give public a damn shit.
Well-done Peer Sahib!
I am talking rubbish, Isn’t it? Who learns from the past? Have Peoples party learnt from the past? Has Nawaz Sharif stopped playing different cards? Is Maulana Diesel doing anything different?
Local politics surrounds around few families, and they are elected in turn for National & Provincial assemblies. Our sitting member of National Assembly was elected on PPP’s ticket in 2002 but he saw patriotism in Musharraf & he joined “Patriots” to become a Federal Minister. He is shrewd and intelligent & waiting for the right time for the next swing…
One politician promised us that he would make Kabirwala look like Paris.
Paris – Yes, believe me, he said Paris. I have not been to Paris, Can anyone tell me; are there any similarities in the two cities?
Richard Dawkins’s The Selfish Gene taught us that since evolution helps those who help themselves, selfishness should be looked at as a driving force for change rather than a flaw that drags us down. We may be nasty apes, but it makes sense that we are, and the world is a better place for it. We simply can not survive without our sensitivity to power dynamics.
Selfish or not, could be intellectual question, but humans definitely strive for the power. So if our guy finds a new lap and gets another ministry, I will appreciate his wisdom and shrewdness.
They cheat people and in return get the same treatment. I was sitting in one of friend’s office when a hopeful came to ask for his vote. He gave him his words. This is was the fourth word he had given in last three days. Then I heard that he was playing key role in the winning camp.
“Tit for Tat” is the word…
When Sadaat of Qatalpur lost election in 2002, I watched a TV package on Geo. Farrukh (Jang’s Local correspondent) said that they lost the election due to lack of public contacts (coordination). The janta thought that they were seasonal birds. 2008 saw huge national support for Peoples Party but Syed Fakhar Imam lost again…do you know what? The same reason, he didn’t learn from the past. I am proud at least he stayed committed and didn’t give public a damn shit.
Well-done Peer Sahib!
I am talking rubbish, Isn’t it? Who learns from the past? Have Peoples party learnt from the past? Has Nawaz Sharif stopped playing different cards? Is Maulana Diesel doing anything different?
Local politics surrounds around few families, and they are elected in turn for National & Provincial assemblies. Our sitting member of National Assembly was elected on PPP’s ticket in 2002 but he saw patriotism in Musharraf & he joined “Patriots” to become a Federal Minister. He is shrewd and intelligent & waiting for the right time for the next swing…
One politician promised us that he would make Kabirwala look like Paris.
Paris – Yes, believe me, he said Paris. I have not been to Paris, Can anyone tell me; are there any similarities in the two cities?
Richard Dawkins’s The Selfish Gene taught us that since evolution helps those who help themselves, selfishness should be looked at as a driving force for change rather than a flaw that drags us down. We may be nasty apes, but it makes sense that we are, and the world is a better place for it. We simply can not survive without our sensitivity to power dynamics.
Selfish or not, could be intellectual question, but humans definitely strive for the power. So if our guy finds a new lap and gets another ministry, I will appreciate his wisdom and shrewdness.
They cheat people and in return get the same treatment. I was sitting in one of friend’s office when a hopeful came to ask for his vote. He gave him his words. This is was the fourth word he had given in last three days. Then I heard that he was playing key role in the winning camp.
“Tit for Tat” is the word…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)