By Shaahima Fahim- MM Correspondent covering Sri Lanka and the GCC

The city of Dambulla in Sri Lanka, more known for its representation in tourism brochures as a registered heritage destination for culturally-inclined tourists to the island, made headlines of a less-idyllic nature on the afternoon of Friday the 20^th of April – when Buddhist monks led a 2000-strong protest against a local mosque. Intimidation in the form of marching picket-wielders, fire-bombs being hurled and emotionally-driven chants demanding the demolition of Masjidul Khaira led to the cancellation of Jumaah prayers at the masjid, the evacuation of worshipers and effective cordoning off of the premises.

Said protestors claim that the land on which the mosque is built is of reverential value and sacred to their faith, the reason for which the 'illegal structure' must go.  The Muslim community of Dambulla has countered the allegations stating that the mosque has in fact been lawfully registered and operational for the past 50 years.

Muslims in Sri Lanka make up roughly 8% of the 21.5 million-strong population, a percentage tying them in third place with their Christian counterparts, after Buddhism and Hinduism. A statistic that also has them tagged a 'minority' in the Sinhala Buddhist dominated (70% of population) nation.

Surprisingly (as is not usually the norm with these type of targeted attacks) the majority of immediate public reaction exchanged over social media and online forums was not of reactionary animosity directed towards Buddhism and the Buddhist community as an entity, but rather a collectively-acknowledged finger of disapproval pointing in the direction of another sort of minority  – the minority of radical trouble-makers representing  the very anathema of what Buddhism entails.

Aside from a negligible faction of ideological individuals out to instill and fester strained Muslim-Buddhist relations, true Buddhists embarrassed at this misrepresentation sympathized with the Muslim community, and the Muslims though understandably upset at being targeted in such a fashion, in turn acknowledged that the attacks were not definitive of general public sentiment.

All ears however were directed to the then-silent government, at the time yet to take a stand on the issue.

On Sunday the 22^nd of April, the Prime Minister's office released a statement ordering for the mosque's closure, but 'assuring ' the Muslim community that they would be provided with the necessary facilities to facilitate the relocation of Masjidul Khairah to a safer location. The decision claimed to have been collectively made with the consent of the country's Muslim leaders, but the ministers in question have denied having had any say at the time.

This portrays the Sri Lankan government in a very negative light both internally and across international waters, especially to the Muslim countries who voted in support of Sri Lanka in the recent US-backed UNHRC resolution last month.

Despite a history in the island dating as far back as the 8^th century, Sri Lankan Muslims feel they've been plated an unfair share of occasions to feel targeted, especially over the last couple of years. What with a similar incident in September 2011, and when earlier this year more than a hundred visiting Islamic preachers were asked to leave on grounds relating to flouting Sri Lanka's immigration laws – this sentiment is not without argument.

The nationalization and politicization of Buddhism as a state religion has always been a cause for concern among the religious minorities, having the potential to hinder any balanced decision making that can serve to suitably placate all parties concerned.

The ethnic minorities have however proven their mettle in tolerance (not mere complacence) in light of recent events, but the minority in question that needs to be dealt with more pressingly, is this new surge of religious radicals set out to widen the divide on peaceful co-existence.

At the point of this going to print, the repercussions of this ordered move was only just getting started with a volley of words exchanged between the Muslim Council of Sri Lanka and the so-called 'Buddhists' behind the attacks.

The Muslim community of Sri Lanka seems to have now resorted to placing greater expectancies on the well-positioned Muslim parliamentarians (a considerably large representation in the current regime) than in the government as a whole. That in exercising their rights as MPs and leaders they will be dutifully positioning the well-being of the Muslim community before personal fears of potentially risking their political footing on the boards they represent.

If there is anything productive to come out of all of this, it is the exposition of the not-so-lesser-evil of the religious extremist. For like the hate-driven Breivik murders in Norway earlier this year, the exhibitionist tendencies of these misfits in question are being broadcast (and received) for what they truly are. A pandemic not just for the governments of Asia, Europe or America to learn to quash effectively long-term, but also a pressure test for the targeted groups to come out of it better represented than when they went in.

Image Courtesy: Associated Press

Mindanao, Philippines was recently hit by Typhoon Sendong (Washi), the deadliest cyclone to hit the country in the last 12 years. More than 1200 people died, drowning as the main cause of death. Tens of thousands of families were affected and displaced. Floods carrying logs, rocks and mud from the mountains damaged homes, cars and infrastructure. Since the storm struck in the middle of the night and there was no flood warning system, the population was unprepared resulting in a great deal of damage and a high death toll.

Later about a month after the disaster, people are still recovering in evacuation centers and there is ongoing reconstruction and relief work. As delegates of Amal Foundation of Malaysia providing assistance and community service, we had the opportunity to learn about and see the condition of the Muslim communities in Mindanao, at first hand. We collaborated with the Bangsamoro Development Agency (BDA), an organization that has been mandated to determine, lead and manage relief, rehabilitation and development programs in the conflict-affected areas of Mindanao. We focused primarily on Muslims because extending help and supplying aid directly to them is crucial, since Muslims are often excluded from the official government's listing of victims. Also, as brothers and sisters in faith, it is our collective responsibility to assist them with their problems.

Allāh says in the Qurʾān:

“The believers, both men and women, are awlia (helpers, supporters, allies) to each other…” [Al-Tawbah, 71]

The Prophet also said:

“Whoever relieves a calamity that has struck a believer in this world, Allāh will relieve for him one of the calamities of the day of Judgment, and whoever makes things easy for a person in trouble, Allāh will make his matters easy in this life and in the hereafter, and whoever shields the faults of a Muslim, Allāh will shield his faults in this world and the hereafter, and Allāh will help and support his servant as long as he is helping and supporting his brother” [Sahih Muslim]

“The most beloved people to Allāh are those who help and benefit others the most, and the most beloved actions to Allāh , is pleasure and happiness that you cause to enter the heart of a Muslim, or to solve one of his problems, or to pay off his debt, or to prevent him from being hungry, and working to help my Muslim brother is more beloved to me than making I'tikaf in this masjid for a month, and whoever controls his anger, Allah will conceal his faults, and whoever controls his ill feelings, Allāh will fill his heart with contentment on the day of Judgment, and whoever strives to help fulfill a need for his Muslim brother, Allāh will make his feet steadfast on the day of Judgment, and bad manners ruin good deeds just like vinegar ruins honey.” [Sahih Al-Jami' - Graded sound by Sheikh Al-Albani]

History of Muslims in Philippines

Indeed, it is true when it is said that history is written by the victors. During our brief stay, we learned about the other side of history and came to understand the long and gory struggle of our welcoming hosts.

The arrival of Islam in the Malay-Indonesia archipelago and the Southern Philippines dates back to the late 13^th and early 14^th centuries when Arab merchants and missionaries brought Islam to Southeast Asia through the development of trade and trade routes. In the Southern Philippines, the core of the Muslim communities was developed when Muslim missionaries and traders married the local population and produced Muslim descendants. It was later that Muslim political figures arrived and introduced Islamic political, educational and religious institutions.

The Sulu Sultanate was established around 1450, and Muslim influence spread northward, reaching the island of Luzon. In fact, when the Spanish colonialists arrived, they were astonished to find a strong Muslim presence when they just had expelled the Moors from Spain after 800 years of conflict. Due to their similarity to the Moors, the Spaniards called them Moros, which today has become the name of preference when speaking of the Muslims in the Philippines. The Spaniards took over most of Luzon and Visayas and converted the population into Christianity.

The Sultanate was already 71 years old when the Spanish colonialists invaded the Moro territories in 1521. Due to the Spanish colonial policy of subjugating and Christianizing the Moros, there was fierce resistance and wars broke out in opposition to fight the Spanish attempts to establish dominance over Mindanao and Sulu. Having failed to conquer the Moros, the Spaniards signed them over to the Americans in the 1898 Treaty of Paris. Later, the Americans signed them over to the Filipinos when the Philippines gained independence in 1946. However, the American regime managed to abolish the sultanate as a political institution through a brutal war, and imposed their socio-cultural, economic and political institutions on Moro societies.

After independence, the Philippine government encouraged the landless non-Muslims of Luzon and Visayas to settle in Mindanao to resolve rural instability. This resulted in tension due to competition for land, and, as a result, the most productive agricultural land was taken over by the settlers. However, although Mindanao contributed significantly to the national treasury, only small ventures were planned for development in there, especially in the Muslim areas.  This systematic marginalization caused resentment among the Moros, which eventually turned into open rebellion. Consequently, influenced by a series of incidents, in particular the Jabidah massacre in 1968 where at least 28 young Muslim recruits of the Philippine army were killed by their superiors, they were convinced that armed struggle was the only way to attain self-determination.

After the evolution of political resurgences, fragmentation, clashes, ceasefires and peace talks, negotiations are now being pursued, in order to discuss the establishment of a Bangsamoro sub-state, a far cry from its original demand of independence. Although they were previously granted autonomy in 13 Muslim majority provinces, and the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) was devised, discontentment resumed, as it was only autonomy in name, but not in practice.

During my trip, I came to realize that the response of some to this series of events is natural. It fits the frustration-aggression theory by Ted Gurr who argued that frustration does not necessarily lead to violence, but when deprivation is prolonged and sharply felt, it often results in anger and eventually violence.

I am not advocating violence but it is inevitable for separatist movements to rise when their aim is to attain the determination to retain control of their own culture, language and territory and not to be manipulated by foreigners and elites who deprive them of their rights.

I still remember their last remark as we were saying goodbye:

May Allāh grant them victory and we pray that we will see the fruit of their struggle in the near future insha'Allāh.

Related Video:

People cross flood water in the Masti Kalan village

The last two years have been like something out of an apocalypse movie for Pakistan. The huge wounds inflicted on the economy and the populace of this nation have not even begun to heal, and a fresh flood has arrived in Sindh.
People are no doubt fed up of the same footage of water-drenched peasants being played before them, and perhaps that is why the media in its utmost sagacity has decided not to show it. This does not take away from the tragedy on the ground, which is an utterly grave one with over 5.3 million people affected and more than 475,000 in camps having lost their homes to the oncoming waters.

It's like driving in an ocean and it's seriously scary

I have along with the team of SA Relief been visiting the rain-affected areas of Khorwah, Golarchi, Badin, Nindo, Khoski, Shadi large and Kohli to distribute relief in whatever way I can. SA Relief is no great NGO with minions across the land. It's a community-based initiative put together by 6 friends who couldn't stand by and watch anymore. Four of us are bloggers, that is me, Awab Alvi, Sabahat Ashraf and Arif Rafiq; two of us are from the business community (Nabil Jangda and Rehan Bandukda). Collectively what we have seen on the ground this time is definitely worse than the floods of last year. Of course people are going to tell you that the overall scale is lower. But this year's disaster is concentrated in one province and that has brought destruction with a magnitude that is utterly unimaginable.

One only has to drive beyond Thatta about one and a half hours from Karachi and it starts. The highway is suddenly surrounded by water from both sides. Half an hour into this and the water reaches road-level on either side and stretches as far as you can see. It's like driving in an ocean and it's seriously scary. Not only is the road upon entering the Badin district littered with people seeking shelter but is in several places run over with water: you can see fish and even water snakes the length of your car if you care to stop.
The problems do not end here, sadly. The destruction of homes and crops is just the start. This area is the breadbasket of Pakistan and grows sugarcane, rice, onions and tomatoes, and 5.3 million acres of this crop has been destroyed. The economic results will be before us in a few days with double digit inflation in food staples. Add to this the fact that an over-stretched army is trying its best to evacuate people with little or no response from them, and you have a situation resembling a nightmare. (More)

Attacking children was a real low. However, it was still out in Peshawar. Today, the horror came very close to home as a bomb blast outside the house of Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) Criminal Investigation Department (CID) of Pakistan, Chaudhry Aslam. Aslam heads the counter-terrorism unit of the CID in Karachi. According to Ali Chisti of The Friday Times, “Chaudry Aslam is the one who killed Rehman Dakait (a notorious gangster in Karachi), captured numerous TTP, alQaeda & Quetta Shura members.”

What makes ones blood boil is that Aslam's house is right next to 3 major schools of Karachi and the area has several more in the vicinity. Thus, the blast which occurred at 7:26 am was at a time when the area was filling up with school going children and their parents. Had the blast occurred 10-15 minutes later the carnage would have been horrible. The initial reported death count is 08 people which includes 06 policemen and a child and her mother. The child went to the school my cousin's wife teaches at and their children study there. They were safe Alhamdulillah but it was terrifyingly very close to home. Not that the death of any in Karachi is superior to that of that the people in Peshawar and other areas. Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan claimed responsibility for the bombing, saying Aslam had arrested and killed many of its fighters. “We will attack other police officials as well who are taking action against our people,” TTP spokesman Ehsanullah Ehsan told Reuters by telephone from an undisclosed location.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Speaking to the media right after the blast (partial video above), Aslam remarked:

“I was sleeping when they carried out this cowardly act and rammed a vehicle packed with explosives into my house.”

“I will not be cowed. I will teach a lesson to generations of militants.”

“I did not know that these terrorists were such cowards that they would attack sleeping children.”

Karachi, has not been a stranger to violence and around 10000 civilians have been killed in Karachi since 2002 due to ethnic, political, sectarian violence and incidents of terrorism. In August alone more than a 100 people were killed due to ethnic violence.

Citizen's Reactions

Some of the tweets this morning showed the reaction of citizens:

#karachi blast happened outside our friends house 32nd lane (adjacent to SSP house) house totally damaged kids family safe (via @DrAwab)

Our friends driver was killed he was ringing the house bell to call out the kids and take them to school – family immensely traumatised (via @DrAwab)

Its time to raise ur voice against these brutal inhumane terrorists responsible for slaying our little children daily. #Pakistan #terrorism (via @RiazToori)

“Damn , if I wanted a holiday for my birthday, I would DEFINITELY not want one if it meant a bomb blast wd occur” – schoolgirl #Karachi (via @BeenaSarwar)

“We saw this guy next to our car, his face was filled with blood and he was waiting for the ambulance!” – says my daughter's friend #Karachi (via @BeenaSarwar)

Trying to explain to my 4yr old – who's just woken up – why its not safe to go to school. #hatethis #Karachi (via @SalmaJafri)

“the blast was shit scary!” – friend of my daughter on facebook chat #karachi #blast (via @BeenaSarwar)

Blast was more powerful than needed to target just the SSP's home: 6-10 ft crater, nearby cars and houses damaged, massive sound (via @MadihaSattar)

The school teacher who was killed worked at Washington International School. Always used to reach early. Colleague of my mother's student. (via @Sabeen)

Just spoke to wife who's at the scene. The explosion happened right behind X's school. They would've been there at the time of blast if not for the wrongly parked car blocking ours in the apartment. (via @farrukhahmed)

Kid's school closed for next 3 days , all windows blown out (via @schawlaf)

Kids have nerves of steel, if we'd seen this much carnage at our times, many would be needing psychological help #Karachi #ChangingTimes(via @schawlaf)

People plan for next 10 years or even next 10 days, here you can't even plan the next day (via @schawlaf)

#Pakistan – all is well until it doesn't happen to you and when it does you are just news :'(

#Karachi (via @DrAwab)

Related articles

• Pakistan Bomb: Explosion Kills Several Outside Police Officer's Home (huffingtonpost.com)
• Bomber targets top Pakistani policeman; 8 killed(sfgate.com)
• Blast in
  Karachi targets SSP CID, 8 killed (tribune.com.pk)
• CID arrests suspected Hizbullah terrorist (tribune.com.pk)
• Suspected Taliban commander arrested in Karachi: CID (tribune.com.pk)
• Senior al Qaeda leader arrested from Quetta: ISPR (tribune.com.pk)
• Pakistan Navy base in Karachi attacked by terrorists (muslimmatters.org)
• Heavy bomb blast in Karachi (dawn.com)

A violent and unhinged dictator has used overwhelming air power and foreign mercenaries to mow down Libyans who dare protest against his tyranny. Teachers, lawyers, and peasants have taken up arms in a rag-tag rebellion against the dictator. Egyptians vow to help their brothers and sisters in Libya but can do little due to their own difficult political situation. There are a great many similarities between the genocide perpetrated by the forces of Mussolini in his vain attempt to re-enact the Roman conquest of Libya and the actions of Gaddafi today.

Back then, the Libyan people faced seemingly insurmountable odds against victory. They were armed with ancient rifles and swords whilst the Italian army faced them down with all the resources available of a modern state, everything from tanks to fighter planes. Despite the desperate situation, Libyans continued their struggle against their oppressors with persistence.

A large explanation of the will and resolve of the Libya people was exemplified in their leader – the Grand Sanussi. Although a native of Algeria, he studied in Morocco and developed his Sufi order in Makkah thereafter, before finally settling in Eastern Libya.  The Grand Sanussi was the very embodiment of Muslim unity for his followers. From his base in Zawia Baida (the White Monastery), he called people back towards an Islam free of sectarianism and superstition. His message reverberated around the world, but nowhere more than his adopted homeland of Libya. Within his lifetime it was estimated that a third of all Libyans were part of his movement.

Muhammad Al-Mahdi left behind one of his followers–Omar Mukhtar– to continue the struggle.  A Quran teacher from near Tobruk, Omar led the Libyans in their seemingly impossible struggle. Through a combination of faith and excellent military strategy, he managed to keep the hopes of victory alive. The oppressors showed no mercy, however, imprisoning large sections of the Libyan population in concentration camps attempting to starve them into submission. Over half a million died before Omar Mukhtar was captured by the Italians. Three days later, he was hung to death in front of his own people as a warning to all those who dared to believe they could overthrow the oppression of tyrants.

For a brief moment, the people of Libya allowed themselves to dream they may have achieved victory. Unfortunately, their hopes were dashed as they watched the ambitious young Captain quickly take on the persona of the tyrants they had once fought and, worse, became ever more repressive. Yet again, for the next 42 years, freedom would be put on hold. Until now. The majority of the Libyan people have risen up once more, refusing to give up even when Gaddafi brought his vengeance to the gates of Benghazi. As NATO and the West implement a No-Fly Zone and launch air strikes to prevent a massacre soon to be on the scale of Rwanda, the fate of Libya and Libyans still rests in the balance between the armies of a murderous dictator and the true sons of the Sanussi.

A Pakistani man shoots dead two Americans on a busy strip using an unlicensed weapon, and then another Pakistani colleague radioed by the shooter runs over a third American. Then all three try to feel the scene but are overpowered by the police and turned in.

The Pakistani man is found to have entered America on a business visa, claims to police that he was a “consultant” to the Pakistani Consulate, but the Pakistani government swiftly changes documentation at the Embassy to include him as an employee, to provide him legal immunity.

The Pakistani government then brings great pressure on America to “follow the Vienna Conventions” and to release the man, including statements from the Prime Minister & President.

——————

Scene from la-la land? Precisely. It’s hard to imagine that any citizen from any part of the world, let alone from Pakistan, could wreak havoc on a shopping strip in America and get away without consequence.

Such is the hypocrisy of American pressure on Pakistan (threats about aid, by Obama & to Ambassador) to release the now notorious, Raymond Allen Davis, the businessman-turned-consultant-turned-consular staffer-turned-embassy staffer. The American government wants Pakistan to comply with its own convenient interpretations of the Vienna Conventions for diplomatic immunity.

What Happened?

For those unaware of the situation, it is exactly as described at the top, except with roles reversed. On Jan 27, 2011, Raymond Davis shot dead two Pakistanis on a motorcycle in broad daylight on a busy shopping strip. The egregious incident led to three direct deaths and one indirect one when the widow of one of the shooting victims committed suicide due to her sense of hopelessness in a just trial.

Instead of letting Pakistani courts evaluate the legal ramifications of the situation and the extension of Vienna Conventions to Raymond, the entire US government apparatus including President Obama is bearing great pressure on their feeble stooges in the Pakistani government to release Davis without any consequence for his killing spree. By prejudicing a legal case with political expediency, Mr. Obama is further damaging his reputation in the Muslim world, and pretty much hammering the final nail in the coffin of the great optimism in his Egypt address to the Muslim world.

Window into the Vienna Conventions

As for the Vienna Conventions, the emphasis on the distinction between consular and embassy staff is not trivial. There is also little doubt that Davis was only placed in the Embassy rolls AFTER the incident.

Davis was not one of the embassy employees listed on January 25, 2010, two days before the incident However, a revised list submitted a day after the incident on Jan 28 carried his name.

So, there are two Conventions in play here. One is the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic Relations (1961, adopted 1964) and the other being Vienna Conventions on Consular Relations (1963, adopted 1967).

Article 29 of the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic Relations states that

the person of a diplomatic agent shall be inviolable. He shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention.

The United States would like to see him being treated as a diplomat (linked to the Embassy), with extremely expansive and broad immunity, and not liable to any form of arrest.

On the other hand, consular staffers have much more limited immunity, as under Article 41 (1) of the Vienna Conventions on Consular Relations which states:

Consular officers shall not be liable to arrest or detention pending trial, except in the case of a grave crime and pursuant to a decision by the competent judicial authority

There is little doubt that the case is extremely grave and Davis would face a competent judicial authority as applied under this scenario, which makes it understandable that records are being modified (sloppily) to apply Article 29 rather than Article 41.

Which Convention is appropriate?

Let's see what a couple of experts have been saying. In order to be treated as a diplomat, it is more than just being a staffer at the Embassy. Najmuddin Shaikh, a former Pakistan diplomat and Ambassador, concludes that Davis would have immunity under Article 29 “only if it was established that his presence in Mozang Chowrangi on that day was in 'execution of his duties' and that was something that had to be determined by a court of law.”

Similarly, former British Ambassador and Human Rights Activist Craig Murray concludes that the circumstances surrounding Davis do not allow for diplomatic immunity.

Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) Agent Twist

Which Vienna Conventions might apply is likely to be only an academic exercise. More than two weeks ago, the Guardian reported that Raymond is in fact a CIA agent. Once that fact is realized, all the pieces of the puzzle fall nicely into place. There was a reason for the sudden rush to classify Raymond as a Consulate staffer, and then realizing the Vienna issue, there was another mad rush to classify Davis as an Embassy staffer. All done to protect Davis' real identity as a CIA agent, which of course makes the entire issue of diplomatic protection a moot point, as the Guardian hints:

Based on interviews in the US and Pakistan, the Guardian can confirm that the 36-year-old former special forces soldier is employed by the CIA. “It's beyond a shadow of a doubt,” said a senior Pakistani intelligence official.

Also, from the same article, we find that unsurprisingly, the US stooges in the Pakistani government were fully aware of Davis' CIA status but were complying with “immense pressure” of American directives to circumvent the entire justice system of Pakistan via the Vienna Conventions.

“Immense pressure” is probably being kind to Pakistani government. What is even more unfortunate is the acquiescence of the US media (including the New York Times) to yield to government requests and hide the information from the American public. By continuing to flout it as a case of Pakistan not complying with international conventions, Pakistan again became the whipping boy in the US media, with continuing negative implications for its public image.

A number of US media outlets learned about Davis's CIA role but have kept it under wraps at the request of the Obama administration. A Colorado television station, 9NEWS, made a connection… [but] removed the CIA reference from its website at the request of the US government. [Guardian]

Aftermath

Writing for CounterPunch, the journalist Dave Lindorff has written

“in other words, the prosecutorial, police and judicial authorities in Lahore and the state of Punjab are doing exactly what they are supposed to do in holding Davis on murder charges, pending a judicial determination concerning whether or not he can properly claim diplomatic immunity. The US claim that Pakistan is violating the convention is simply nonsense.”

In a strange twist, the US government has also been actively seeking an Islamic shariah-based approach of offering blood-money (diya) to seek Davis’ release! This is especially ironic in light of the laughable and Islamophobic attempts by several states to ban “shariah law”.   Under the principles of Qisas, blood money would be an option, only if the relatives of those murdered accept to forgive the murderer, but cannot be FORCED to forgive. The ruling emanates from the Qur'anic verse [2.178] that is a clear evidence of Islam's emphasis of mercy and life over punishment and death.

In conclusion, Davis needs to be tried by the Pakistani courts. If he escapes prosecution, then there would be no bigger travesty of justice, comparable only to the travesty of Dr. Aafia Siddiqui’s prosecution (persecution) and conviction.  I dare say Davis has a better chance of getting a fair trial in Pakistan than did Siddiqui in a New York court. While Aafia was sentenced to 86 years in prison for the ATTEMPTED murder of US interrogators in Afghanistan (in the complete absence of any forensic evidence), we have here a killer identified by witnesses that America wants freed under the pretext of conventions it itself routinely flouts as Glenn Greenwald cites. From the same linked article, I’ll leave you with more food for thought from Greenwald, one of the few defenders of truth in the American media:

Those crazy, primitive Pakistanis and their inscrutable Muslim customs.  Scandals over diplomatic immunity are usually one-time, aberrational occurrences…  But what happened in Lahore is part of an ongoing, continuous assault by American forces in that region.  They [Pakistanis] (but not we) hear routinely about the killing of their innocent civilians by Americans in their country.  Why don't we hear much about such things?  The Guardian article provides some insight: A number of US media outlets learned about Davis's CIA role but have kept it under wraps at the request of the Obama administration.

That's our intrepid, independent Watchdog press.  The cost of this conduct is so predictable — intense anti-American sentiment and the threats of Terrorism it produces — that a rational person would have to inquire whether that outcome is not a bug but a feature of our policy in that region.

In other words, American hypocrisy in its foreign affairs only leads to anti-Americanism, which ultimately feeds radicalism that will continue to haunt our nation.

[audio http://abdulnasirj.com/audio/egyptkhutbah.mp3]

From Boston.com Big Picture

I watched CNN and FOX News with contempt…as they were focusing on was how America could be affected, nothing on the where, what and how. Switching to BBC World News, I finally found something substantial to watch. Still, I did not fully comprehend the profound effects and ramifications of the bombing that were to come in British society. Perhaps it was due to my lack of understanding or the distance between London and New York. My parents were worried, not just because members of my family work in Central London, but also because I was due to start my degree at university that year right in the centre of London and I would have to travel on the Tube daily. Naturally, their feelings were understandable.

That day came and went and I began my first day at university with excitement, stress, and the joy of making new friends. It wasn’t until 7th July, 2006 came around that I truly felt the magnitude of the previous year’s events. I watched the memorial for the 56 people who died that day…and it was then that the tears flowed. I cried. I wept. The tears gushed for the people who had died. For their families who were suffering without them. But most of all, for the Muslims and for what was to come. I knew that it was going to be an uphill struggle for us all from now on.

So how do I feel 5 years on? I’m not quite sure. Yes, it has been an uphill struggle for Muslims in the West. But has it been as tough as I thought it would? No. But then that’s relative. How do I feel about 7/7 now? I still feel the horror and the shock when I go to Russell Square and Edgware Road. And it’s not like there isn’t something to remind me at the Tube stations either. I feel like my beautiful hometown has been tarnished…like someone broke it. But not just that, I feel like the Muslim community in London has become divided as a result of it all. And it hurts.

I just wish I could find the glue for it.

I pray that Allah (swt) reunites us all and gives us all hidayah. May Allah (swt) bestow His Mercy on us all. Ameen.

Of course blaming Obama for being awarded the prize is absurd.

Nobel keeps its selection process a secret for fifty years and Nobel reported that its five person committee was unanimous, so speculation here is of no use.

I found myself having a sympathetic ear for a very unlikely source, Bill O’Reilly who sidestepped the opportunity to sling political mud and presented the award as “good for America”:

However, I can’t accept this stance (the idea that it is good that the world is “hearing” America and Peace in the same sentence) as the realities on the ground show that every major hotspot (Afghanistan/Pakistan, Iraq and Palestine) have further degenerated since Obama’s term began.

Along with the famous sense of hope, human suffering has also increased and because of the pivotal role of American policy in the major conflicts occurring in Muslims lands, the number of my brothers and sisters in faith who are perishing continues to rise. Not exactly a change toward peace…

This idea that Obama was chosen for his efforts as President seems ridiculous due to the brevity (nine months) of his administration. So does the more accurate and definitely more outlandish nomination which happened in, count them folks, eleven days! You read that correctly; the deadline for nominations for the prize was a mere eleven days into Obama’s term. That means, for the nominator at least, Obama was worthy of this tremendous honor in less than two full weeks of service and authority!

So what does it mean to have an American President awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for announcing his good intentions? Does it devalue the prize or the previous awardees’ actual accomplishments?

Consider these important sentiments:

• UK Journalist Robert Fisk is quoted saying that, “this isn’t the Nobel Peace Prize; it is the Nobel Speech Prize.”
• Fidel Castro essentially said that this prize is more of a rebuke of past administrations.
• Reporters covering the announcement gasped upon hearing that Obama was selected!

Explaining, or perhaps defending their decision, the Nobel spokesperson pointed out that they are commending Obama for “…creating a new climate in international politics.” I find myself forced to ask, just how does one measure political weather? Is there a consensus on “political global warming?”

As a Muslim activist I have to ask; what good can be done?

Certainly, Obama was correct in labeling it a “call to action.” Yet, considering the response from Israel on settlements and Iran on non-civilian nuclear technology or our own increase of the use of drones in Pakistan, despite the resulting civilian casualties and increased violence, one has to wonder if accepting the award will actually strengthen the cause for peace?

I for one, believe that accepting this award is a hugely missed opportunity.

President Obama, on Dec. 10^th at the Nobel Award Ceremony, I urge you to table your acceptance of this once, noble prize. Use the occasion to call on those whose actions and policies are roadblocks toward peace. Table your acceptance by naming names, and applying political pressure to each diplomatic failure and stalemate you have ran into this far in your efforts.

President Obama, you once told Republicans the plain truth, that you won the election. Now it is time to act with similar boldness. Act so that illegal settlements are stopped, the siege in Gaza is lifted, genocides are not ignored, torture is truly repudiated and nuclear nonproliferation is moved forward. Then with renewed political pressure you can share the award with those who are currently the very obstacles to peace, should they decided to embrace change. With this clear demonstration of your resolve they might be persuaded to take steps on these most pressing problems.

Tabling your acceptance based on tangible results creates a no lose scenario. Regardless of your progress on these important fronts, you will be able to take home something much more valuable than the Noble Prize. You will have harmony with your stated principles and our nation’s honor as an honest broker for peace. What better legacy for a statesman is there than one where action and rhetoric are in unison?

The fourteenth of August was technically the Pakistani day of independence, but Pakistanis found little to celebrate this year; many citizens expressed their fear that their independence is gradually but surely being eroded away by American interventionism in the region.

Just a few days ago, the Americans announced that there was a high probability that the CIA had killed Baitullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistani Taliban. Certainly not many Pakistanis will shed tears over the Taliban's slain leader: recent polls indicate that support for the Taliban in Pakistan has dropped to less than five percent.. In fact, the majority of Pakistanis (80%) view the Taliban as a crucial threat to their country, and a similar number (78%) support their own government's military campaign against the Pakistani Taliban. One would think then that Pakistanis would be grateful to the Americans for eliminating the top Taliban official in their country.

But such is not the case. In fact, the Pakistani populace stews in anger over what–according to international law–was an American attack against Pakistan. The United States ignored Pakistan's sovereignty and initiated drone attacks on independent Pakistani soil, something which constitutes an act of war. This is of course the latest in a series of drone attacks on sovereign Pakistani territory; there have been over “60 cross-border predator strikes carried out by the Afghanistan-based American drones in Pakistan between January 14th, 2006 and April 8, 2009.” Even more damning is the fact that “only 10 were able to hit their actual targets, killing 14 wanted al-Qaeda leaders,” whereas on the other hand the drones have killed “687 innocent Pakistani civilians,” giving the US predator strikes a success rate of “not more than six percent.” (link)

Unfortunately, few Americans are introspective enough to ask: “how would we Americans feel if some Muslim government did the same to us?” For example, what would be the American reaction if the Iraqi government initiated drone attacks against Blackwater facilities in North Carolina? If the Americans are justified in striking against Baitullah Mehsud, who has never killed a single American, then would not Iraqis be justified in striking against Erik Prince, the Blackwater CEO responsible for massacres against Iraqi citizenry? But when the shoe is on the other foot, many Americans reject any “moral equivalency;” no American would tolerate another country launching missiles into sovereign U.S. territory, even if it be directed against criminals and murderers. We are quite capable of prosecuting our own, would be the prevalent American response. Yet, why is it then that the Americans cannot seem to understand that the Pakistanis want their own government to deal with militants in their country, not foreigners with a long history of what is viewed by some as neo-colonialism?

Can one imagine the American reaction if some foreign Muslim sounding country launched missiles into America that killed 687 American civilians, including women and children? There would be rage in the American eyes, and cries to “bomb them back into the stone age.” There would be a savage and absurdly disproportionate retaliation from the Americans. But suddenly when Americans kill 687 Pakistani civilians, then so what? Are brown lives really equal to those of Americans?

To add to the absurdity, some American neoconservatives had the gall to criticize the Pakistani “ingratitude:” after all, these hawks argued, shouldn't Pakistan be thankful to America for getting rid of the Taliban's top official in the country? If anyone were to attack American soil, these neoconservatives would be outraged–and they would call to bomb some country (any country!) back to the stone age–whereas Pakistanis should not only be silent about the same transgression, but send a thank you card.

Some Americans have tried to justify the drone attacks by arguing that the Pakistani government gave them the wink and nod, unofficially giving the Americans permission to launch these strikes. Yet the reality is that the Pakistani government has repeatedly issued official and unofficial statements categorically rejecting such fanciful claims.

The Pakistani foreign office issued the following statement: “It has been Pakistan's consistent position that drone attacks are in violation of its sovereignty and must be stopped.” (link) A spokesman for the Pakistani military, Major Murad Khan, even went so far as to vow retaliation should America strike within Pakistani borders. Khan warned: “Border violations by US-led forces in Afghanistan, which have killed scores of Pakistani civilians, would no longer be tolerated, and we have informed them that we reserve the right to self defense and that we will retaliate if the US continues cross-border attacks.” (link)

The Pakistani government's stance did not change after the strike against Baitullah Mehsud, as evidenced by a statement released after the attack:

No Drone Accord with US: FO

Foreign Office spokesman Abdul Basit said…drone attacks had caused more damage than benefit to Pakistan…No accord existed between Pakistan and the US with regard to drone attacks, he said.

(link)

Former president of Pakistan, Parvez Musharraf, rejected claims that he had an agreement with the United States, saying: “There was no such agreement. There was no permission for outside forces to operate inside Pakistan.” (link)

In 2007, the Foreign Office spokesperson, Tasnim Aslam, reiterated:

“We have stated in the clearest terms that any attack inside our territory would be unacceptable…We are committed [to fighting terrorism] and we will take firm action on the basis of information gathered by us through our own means or concrete and actionable intelligence shared with us…We are therefore, combating terrorism in our own interest. We do not want our efforts to be undermined by any ill-conceived action from any quarter that is inconsistent with the principles of international law.”

(link)

Amazingly, some of the Americans will continue to insist that the Pakistani government is just placating its own constituents, and that in reality they have given the green light to the Americans. Once again, these same Americans would categorically reject this logic if it were used by anyone else. Can one imagine Russia justifying an assault on Georgia by claiming that despite the Georgian denials, the Georgians had secretly sanctioned the Russian intervention in order to quell rebels and terrorists? Or perhaps Israel could invade Lebanon, claiming that the Lebanese government secretly requested its help against Hezbollah. Such sort of justification would completely destroy any semblance of international law.

Americans claim that they wish to spread democracy. Do they think it wise then to launch such strikes in Pakistan, even though an overwhelming majority (81%) of Pakistanis oppose U.S. missile strikes within their country? Is this how American democracy works? As Malcolm X said: “You and I have never seen democracy; all we've seen is hypocrisy.”

The American strikes within Pakistan destroy Pakistan's credibility as a nation-state, call to question its sovereignty and hegemony, and bring it one step closer to becoming a failed state. It has stirred up feelings of resentment against America and the West in general, which do nothing but fuel the rise of fundamentalism and extremism.  The death of hundreds of Pakistanis as a result of U.S. drone attacks serves to boost Taliban recruitment.  The Pakistanis feel a great deal of shame and humiliation over the blatant U.S. encroachment on their country's sovereignty; one cannot help but recall a similar sense of shame and humiliation that overcame Germans after the Allied Powers placed severe restrictions on their country's sovereignty. It was this same sense of helplessness that allowed Adolf Hitler to throw aside the inept and incompetent Weimar Republic, promising the people to restore the country's hegemony and honor. If a government cannot safeguard a country's sovereignty, then what right does it have to rule the people? Similar questions will be asked by fundamentalists and extremists, who will use it as a recruiting tool to agitate against the government.

The Pakistani fear of American influence in the region is further exacerbated by the news that the U.S. is planning on massively expanding its embassy in Islamabad. It is estimated that the embassy will cost a whopping $736 million, rivaling that of the gargantuan U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, which cost $740 million. Such massive compounds serve not simply as embassies but as military bases, and remind Pakistanis of the British trading posts established by the East Indian Company that preceded British colonial rule. Indeed, the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad was the control center for U.S. rule over Iraq; Pakistanis fear a similar fate with the creation of such a compound on Pakistani territory. The nonchalance with which Americans flout Pakistani sovereignty gives Pakistanis little reason not to fear growing American interference.

The embassy cum military base will house U.S. marines. The exact number of marines is unknown, and Washington insists that it won't be more than a “couple of dozens.” Yet, the American government has allocated a staggering $112.5 million for the residential complex for Marines inside the embassy. Unless the “couple of dozens” of Marines plan on living in a palace, it is safe to say that the building would easily accommodate hundreds–if not thousands–of marines. The Pakistani Foreign Office Spokesman, Abdul Basit Khan, mentioned that some one thousand U.S. marines will be stationed there.

One recalls a similar situation in Saudi Arabia. Thousands of U.S. troops were stationed in the Arabian Peninsula, despite the local population's opposition. It was in fact the issue that caused Usama bin Ladin to choose the “interesting” career path that he did. Islamic militants and extremists used the foreign deployment of troops in the birthplace of Islam as a recruitment tool. Is it not then foreseeable–nay, inevitable–that militants and extremists in Pakistan will use the heightened American presence in the country as a means to recruit fighters and agitate against the lackey Pakistani government?

Pakistanis know all too well that if they give an inch to the U.S., the Americans will take a mile. If in the first year, a few dozen soldiers station themselves in Pakistan, in subsequent years that number will double and triple and multiply many-fold. After all, it took decades for U.S. troops to leave Saudi Arabia, who stayed behind long after Saudis needed protection against Saddam. Pakistanis do not want a monstrous U.S. embassy cum base in their lands, for they know it will be the command center from which the Americans will micromanage the country. The Americans themselves have echoed a similar tone; an American diplomat “reassured” Pakistanis: “When you have got non-military and economic assistance going up to $1.5 billion every year and the security aid almost trebling, then you need people [Americans] to develop, implement and run the programmes and, more importantly, keep an oversight to ensure that money is appropriately spent.” (link)

The celebrity turned politician Imran Khan asked:

“The [Pakistani] government keeps begging the US for more dollars stating that the war is costing the country more than the money it is receiving from the US. If it is our war, then fighting it should not be dependent on funds and material flowing from the US. If it is our war, why do we have no control over it? If it is our war, then why is the US government asking us to do more?”

(link)

Pakistanis feel that America is forcing Pakistan to go against its own national interest by fighting a war at the behest of America (which is why Imran Khan famously said “this is America's war, not Pakistan's.”) Admittedly, unlike Mr. Khan, most Pakistanis want their government to take a forceful stance against the Pakistani Taliban, but they don't want Pakistan to be puppeteered by America. The United States has become the school bully, declaring that it can bomb Pakistani land at will, whilst still demanding that Pakistanis eagerly respond to the American jihad against the Taliban; hundreds of Pakistani soldiers die fighting a war that oftentimes serves the American self-interest, not the Pakistani national interest. The American puppeteers have decided that the remote control they had from Washington was not good enough; now they want to move into Islamabad in order to exert even more influence.

On the sixty-second annual celebration of Pakistan's independence, Pakistanis question how much independence they still have. The collectively wonder: how far off is the country from simply becoming a sock-puppet?