Talibans want to Negotiate for Peace with Imran Khan as a mediator

Where do you "see" the sommersault?

Somersaults of Imran Khan: Imran says he got positive response from Taliban Friday, December 11, 2009 By Ansar Abbasi - ISLAMABAD [The News International and Daily Jang] REFERENCES: Imran says he got positive response from Taliban By Ansar Abbasi Friday, December 11, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=2126... and same Imran Khan during April 2009 - “Sufi Mohammad is not just violating the Swat accord, he is going against the Holy Quran by breaking promises.” The ceremony, which was held under tight security, had separate seating arrangements for women activists. http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-l...

It may be wish-ful thinking of Imran Khan, but I don't think any side would be ready for negotiations...

On one hand there is a group who think there deaths would be awarded with a place in heaven and then there is another group who has attitude of Fir-oun and has unlimited supply of funds and arms (Pakistan Army aka Pakistani-Black-Water).

I think Imran Khan should focus on opening another branch of Shaukat khanum Hospital for people of Sindh.

I'm not a big fan of Imran Khan, but I appreciate his humanitarian efforts.

@Aamir

Go to facebook and see my real name including pictures.

@Aamir

Btw: You already know my real name.

@Aamir

Cool down, I was referring to Musharrafs SELECTIVE justice and nothing against you.....LOL ;-)

If you want believe I am coward then so be it. I have told my reason for using a another name.

@Aamir

For Gods sake, where is your opinion in all these ”khabrain”. I want you to come out of the closet and explain what you mean exactly by “strategic depth”, if you will. Otherwise I can also make numerous links and copy and paste to confuse the debate.

You know my postings at many places. If someone wants to find out who I am and want to send me to f.ex. Guantanamo, then it’s quite an easy job provided they have access to the required information, IP address etc. For those who are interested in that kind of activities it is no problem to find out that. My main reason for using another username is NOT to hide my true identity, but rather to let the debate be free – even amongst friends or people I might know etc. Maybe you know something about me than others on this blog ;-)

“Death is the only thing which is Guaranteed so why fear any kind of Terrorist Outfits.”

I like this, please continue on this road!

Re. your link to your blog. Isn’t that what I am speaking against i.e. SELECTIVE justice, which means you ban those you don’t like and allow your buddies do what they want.

@Aamir yaar, Do you deliberately avoid answering questions? You have the potential to give plausible reasons/explanations on the issue because of your background. Not that I will necessarily will agree with, but that requires you come out of the closet :-) Or do you live somewhere it is a risk to air the opinion because of a terrorist outfit? [Observer]
==================

This may help to understand Intelligence Blunder while conducting Psy Ops.

"QUOTE"

Asif Ali Zardari told this scribe that Ejaz Shah had old links with Islamic radicals. He claimed that Shah was the person who managed the surrender of Omer Sheikh in 2002, a suspect in the killing of American journalist Daniel Pearl.

Asif Ali Zardari is sure that people like Ejaz Shah have encouraged Islamic radicals to attack Benazir Bhutto. In fact, Ejaz Shah was the home secretary of the Punjab in 2002. He belongs to Nankana Sahib area of the Punjab. Mother of Omer Sheikh was also from Nankana Sahib. When the security agencies raided the house of Omerís grandparents in Nankana Sahib, Ejaz Shah contacted the uncle of the alleged terrorist who was a sessions judge at that time. The uncle convinced his nephew through Ejaz Shah to surrender and that was how Omer Sheikh was arrested. REFERENCE: Why Benazir points finger at IB chief Saturday, October 20, 2007 By Hamid Mir http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=...

"UNQUOTE"

Amir mughal is master in making "dimagh ka dahi"

Imran Khan's PTI and Munnawer's JI - did not have the courtesy or the will to go hospitals to visit the injured or to the homes of the dead in their localities. What does this mean?

REVOLUTION?

@Aamir Isn’t that a quite a vast issue. Maybe we should let it rest and discuss another time. let’s get further we the “strategic depth” issue :-) [Observer]
===========

Sir,

You asked for it, now coming back to Strategic Depths and Intelligence Psy Ops Blunders, and one such blunder is this:

"QUOTE"

And while the Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan and the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi stand officially disbanded, their most militant son and leader, Maulana Azam Tariq, an accused in several cases of sectarian killing, contested elections from jail - albeit as an independent candidate - won his seat, and was released on bail shortly thereafter.

REFERENCE: The 'General' Good By Sairah Irshad Khan Monthly Newsline January 2003

General's Election By TIM MCGIRK / KHANA-KHEL Monday, Oct. 07, 2002

"UNQUOTE"

Let’s hear your views. What do you think is the solution in the above mentioned case i.e. how can Pakistan solve the problem on our western borders? [Observer]
====================

Solution is "Wind up the Strategic Depths"

Ahmed Nadeem Ghela = Observer = MQM Phobia = Hates American Gora's = Calls Altaf Hussain Kaalia

Ironic Moron?

@Aamir

There is big difference between sitting with a jagirdar and making policies for the betterment of a street vendor and sitting with a jagirdar and working for the opposite. Name a few succesful policies of the current government in which MQM is a party. I'll help you a little bit with some issues:

- Electricity
- inflation
- Terrorism
- Sugar
- roads
- sanitary
- hospitals
- education

Where has the common man benefitted?

Maybe we off topic again :-(

@Aamir

I have never said that PTI is a party of saint, but nevertheless they have the ability to admit a mistake. Those you defend don't have the ability to admit a deliberate mistake either let alone a a genuine mistake. The party you are defending has made numerous human rights violations and direct involvement in terrorist activities.
Do you deny that?

What is your own point of view? You cannot sit on the fence and point fingers at each and everybody to claim moral high ground. That is too easy, my friend. Come out of the closet and show your true colors!

IMO no matter who we elect will have more or less flaws. Nobody is perfect, but the fact of the matter is what level of faults can we tolerate? Is the level of PTI faults acceptable or is it PPP, MQM or PML-N who will decide the lowest common denominator? Look at the bigger picture and please come out of the closet!

The major obstacle for working together with MQM’s is they use terrorism to meet their goals and that the do the opposite of what they say. F.ex. they say they are anti- establishment/anti-jagirdar, but work very fine together with dictators/establishment and maybe the biggest jagirdar party=PPP. [Observer]
=====================

MQM shared power from 2002 to 2007 with PML-Q [is this party a party of Street Vendors??] and Establishment [read General Musharraf, he was COAS and Uniformed Clad President]

Imran Anti-Establishment???

Musharraf was very much Establishment in 2002 [he was wearing a Military Uniform during the Sham Referendum of 2002]. There was a Leader in PTI i.e. Mairaj M Khan [a true middle class politician] and had Imran Khan been attentive to Mairaj's advice, Imran and PTI would have been in much better postion.

Is this Anti Establishment Behaviour?

Islamabad, April 9: Pakistani cricket legend-turned politician Imran Khan on Tuesday backed the referendum to be held next month to decide the future of President Pervez Musharraf but his fledgling Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf headed for trouble as some of its leaders have opposed it openly. REFERENCE: Press Trust of India Posted online: Tuesday, April 09, 2002 at 1518 hours IST

How that Sham Referendum of Musharraf was won and Imran Khan and PTI was accessory to that Fraud as well.

REFERENCE: How the Referendum was Won [MONTHLY NEWSLINE MAY 2002] http://newsline.com.pk/NewsMay2002/cover1.htm REFERENCE: Constructing Consent - A poor turnout in Balochistan is bolstered by some help from official quarters. By Shahzada Zulfiqar [MONTHLY NEWSLINE MAY 2002] http://newsline.com.pk/NewsMay2002/cover4.htm "Either I could lie to save my job, or tell the truth to save my character" Justice (Retd.) Tariq Mahmood By Savair Akram [MONTHLY NEWSLINE MAY 2002] http://newsline.com.pk/NewsMay2002/cover5.htm

@Aamir

Both parties says they will do something for the oppressed minorities. In MQM it is primarily the so called "muhajirs", but why stop there? Why not say all oppressed people of Pakistan including the other minorities and the provinces, which don't get there share? Btw: I don't consider the urdu speaking people as Muhajirs. They are as much Pakistanis as anyone else!

Both parties are anti-establishment.

Both parties are anti-jagirdars

Both parties are primarily working for the betterment of living condition for the common man.

The major obstacle for working together with MQM's is they use terrorism to meet their goals and that the do the opposite of what they say. F.ex. they say they are anti-establishment/anti-jagirdar, but work very fine together with dictators/establishment and maybe the biggest jagirdar party=PPP.

On a serious note I think MQM and PTI have a lot in common on the ideological base. What we need is that MQM pull themselves together [Observer]
===================

Dear Sir,

Please explain what is Common between PTI AND MQM in the light of Mr Imran's news below.

"QUOTE"
Imran leaving for London to file case against Altaf
Friday, May 23, 2008 ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Tehrik-e-Insaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan is leaving for London on May
27 to file a terrorism case against the Muttahida Qaumi Movement's self-exiled leader Altaf Hussain. http://www.thenews.com.pk/print1.asp?id=114269

Imran for action against Altaf Friday, May 08, 2009
By By Our Correspondent LAHORE [The News International]

PAKISTAN Tehreek e Insaaf (PTI) Chairman Imran Khan has urged British Prime Minister Gordon Brown to take notice of criminal activities of MQM Quaid Altaf Hussain in the light of British laws on terrorism. In a letter written to Brown, the PTI called the PM’s attention to the activities of Altaf Hussain, who was granted the status of a British citizen after he had fled from Pakistan as a fugitive from justice.

Imran wrote that at the time of Altaf’s arrival in London, he was facing 234 registered criminal cases including 44 murder charges and 18 torture charges. The PTI chief alleged that the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), the party headed by Altaf was controlled in ‘mafia-style’ with his word being the law. Detractors faced the ultimate punishment - death - carried out through the private armed force maintained at his Karachi barricaded headquarters known as Nine Zero, wrote Imran to the British premier.

Holding Altaf Hussain responsible for the May 12 mayhem of 2007, Imran wrote that on Altaf’s order, his party was involved in the May 12, 2007 carnage in Karachi where 48 people lost their lives and 200 sustained bullet wounds, including 10 workers of the PTI. He added that Altaf-led MQM later went on to physically disrupt court hearings of this incident. Besides, alleging Altaf’s involvement in the recent killings in Karachi, Imran wrote that most recently, and at a time when the MQM was a coalition partner in the federal and provincial governments, Altaf Hussain (sitting in London) sought to incite ethnic violence and vigilantism by calling on his supporters to arm themselves and fight ‘Talibanisation’ a label he tried to put on the two million Pashtun workers of Karachi.

Imran wrote that as a result 36 people were killed over two days of violence and when the Sindh inspector general of police implicated the MQM in his inquiry, they demanded his immediate removal. The PTI chief further wrote that in 2007, on two occasions, the Federal Court of Canada ruled that the MQM met the legal definition of a terrorist organisation and its members could not be given political asylum, adding, “the US State Department web site describes the MQM as a violent organisation”.

@Unaiza

1.
I can speak in principle about such acts since I don’t know much about the particular incidents you have mentioned, but let there be NO doubt that I will always condemn such terrorist acts and the terrorist act committed by ANIMALS the other day in KHI. That view of point is regardless of who is the culprit and the victim. Let there be NO doubt either that you CANNOT term a whole population as a terrorist outfit and bomb the hell out of them. I refuse to believe that the entire populations on our western borders are terrorists and should be dealt with military might…NO WAY!!! What we need to do is to ensure the easiest possible victory/solution. We have many hundreds of thousands armed people in that area. That it self is great neglect from the part of the past Pakistani governments that they have not been able to integrate these people into mainstream Pakistan….off course not in a rush, but slowly and steadily by development of those areas i.e. establishment of roads, schools, hospitals etc. Since we have failed on that account we cannot and must not act on the wish of foreign powers to ensure peace in that area in a RUSH. We need long lasting solutions and need to win the hearts and minds of the vast majority of peace loving people in that area, and when we have separated the good from the evil, then it is a matter of short while to deal with the foreign aided terrorists. In short: We need to distinguish between the different groups operating and we need to make peace with the moderate forces!

2.
One has to be honest. Whenever we have been talking to the opponents and have anywhere nearby a deal, then the Americans have rushed to Pakistan to ensure that “something” happened in order to break the deal. My point is that the Pakistani government has NEVER made a wholehearted effort to make a peace deal. It has always been a show with the aim to tell the nation that we tried our “level best”, when in reality there where no will power to make peace since it that would mean no $$$$ from Yankee land.

3.
Which elections are you referring to as the “fairest” elections in the history of Pakistan? And what does the term “fairest” elections cover. Does that mean acceptable elections? If you mean the last elections, then there is proof on youtube about how much rigging f.ex. MQM was engaged in. Btw: I don’t believe MQM was the sole party rigging. PPP, PML-Q and other participants may be equally engaged in rigging.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lae7S626O1U

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zqvXOkD5HYQ&NR=...

I don’t know the exact numbers of PTI popularity right now, but I assume that PTI is even more popular than at the election time in 2008. Anyways my personal opinion is NOT based on how many follow the same political party as I do. I make my own decisions based on what I believe in. If the particular party I support tastes defeat I don’t feel humiliated since I can stand the distance regarding my point of view. I will only support a party which suits my point of view, which has nothing to do with personal interests/gain. AND since when has right or wrong anything to with numbers? Are you saying that PPP is following the right policies, because it was the biggest party in the 2008 elections?

Why did PTI not participate in the elections? I think you know the reason very well. The judiciary movement had a call i.e. don’t participate in 2008 elections. Initially PML-N supported the idea, but made a very typical u-turn thus PTI and JI were stranded but stood their ground on what they had promised i.e. no participation in elections since we had a judicial crisis. If all the parties or at least PML-N had stood together and demanded the reinstatement of CJP, then there would have been no way out for Musharraf than to reinstate CJP, but unfortunately all parties disappointed except PTI and JI. Off course we couldn’t expect a boycott from nor MQM and PML-Q since these two parties had been collaborating with the establishment since the past any years. Isn’t that strange that a party which says they are anti-establishment and anti-jagirdar is collaborating with both a jagirdar party and the establishment? If you haven’t guessed it, then I am thinking about MQM ;-)

On a serious note I think MQM and PTI have a lot in common on the ideological base. What we need is that MQM pull themselves together and do what they preach and especially denounce terrorism!

4.
Look Uniaza, One has to be fair. What he did in his young age is a personal character flaw. What he did was WRONG. He has repeatedly said that. In Islam forgiveness in this kind of personal issues is a matter between a human being and God the Almighty. If he has done anything which he can be convicted for then please go ahead and make your case instead of a yelling contest. Why don’t you go to a court of law. MQM is indeed a part of the government and should be in the prime position to act! IMO he has not stolen from anybody or harmed anyone physically. On that account I don’t believe he can be touched in court of law. What you are speaking about is something which happened decades ago, and thus at that time he WAS NOT of purely good character. As earlier mentioned he regrets those acts and that’s a matter between him and God, and the case is that for the past MANY he is of a GOOD CHARACTER.
What is your opinion? Do you think a personal flaw from the past (15+ years) is enough to ban a politician for life? If the answer is yes then please give a plausible explanation on why you believe so i.e. reference to Qur’an and constitution.
Btw: Can you enlighten us on why Altaf is sitting in London for the past decade in spite of his party being in the government?

. It is me who is actually sticking to the real topic, and it is you guys who are trying to derail the topic by bringing Altaf 'kalia' in the middle.

To summarise my points on which I would like you to clarify your position and that would be a big favour to everyone.

1. Imran Khan wants to broker negotiations with the terrorists and is trying to prove the terrorists view point
that they are executing this mass murder of innocent Muslims in 'reaction' to the offensive in tribal region.
- My question is:
There were suicide attacks in Sindh Madarasa-tul-Islam and Imam Bargah near Numaish Karachi in 2004 where nearly a hundred Muslims were mercilessly slaughtered while praying. There was no military operation in tribal areas at that time. So what was it in reaction to?

2. We saw the peace accord with the terrorists in Swat early this year, so were terrorist attack halted by any percent? The only thing that was gained were threats from terrorists to take over Islamabad and expansion of terror reign to adjacent areas. So what is Imran Khan wants to achieve now by talking of talks?

3. If Imran Khan is popular by any percent, why his party was humiliatingly defeated in the electons he participated earlier? What stopped people from voting for him? And then why he kept his party away from people's judgement in one of the fairest elections in Pakistan's history. What is his party afraid of?

4. Constitution of Pakistan only allows those from participating in elections who are of good character and are not commonly known to voilate Islamic Injunctions, (ref: article 62, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan). In view of the ruling of Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Anthony Jones about his paternity for his daughter, he cannot participate in any elections in Pakistan. So why some still discuss about any prospects of his premiership/presidency regardless of what the constitution says?

These are one of the many question that lurk in my mind about Imran Khan and his proposals for the surrender of the nation against its very enemies.

Pleas eenlighten me specifically over these aspects and I shall be thankful to you.