Middle Eastern propaganda against Pakistan and Pakistanis and it's hypocricy

At many times I've come across Muslims from other countries, particularly the Middle East who criticize Pakistan and Pakistanis from being American pawns to being the cause of xenophobia towards Muslims worldwide because of some Pakistanis involvement in terrorism.

We should examine these accusations and see where the hypocrisy in all this comes. Firstly, for them to criticize Pakistanis in being American pawns is a rather far-fetched claim when Arab countries especially those in the Gulf alongside Turkey have American bases within their borders and provided support for the American and British invasion of Iraq.

Iran on the other hand, though not American ally, acts sometimes on behalf of the Russian Federation.
Such as Iran's silence towards Russian atrocities in Chechnya or Iran's support for Armenia against Azerbaijan during the Karabakh war.
Neither did Iran's Islamic regime cut it's ties with India, a country guilty of genocide against Kashmiri Muslims.

Iran also supports the Russian economy by purchasing their products and maintains full ties with Armenia and the Russian Federation.

This goes just as well for Arab countries who have normal diplomatic and trade relations with India and their silence to the situation in Kashmir.
Pakistan on the other hand has supported these countries in the Arab-Israeli wars and as to date has no trade or diplomatic relations with the Jewish state.

These hypocrites also maintain good ties with America, even though America is Israel's biggest supporter and allows Israel to strike at Arab countries by providing them weapons.
Why do these people not see themselves as Russian or American "pawns?" What about the fact that many of these oil rich countries provide the West with a huge percentage of their energy supply?

Even Arab countries such as Syria that developed close ties with the Soviet Union and then the Russian Federation have been silent to Russian support for Armenia against Azerbaijan or India against Pakistan or it's war crimes in Chechnya and other atrocities under communist rule.

Even during the Cold War many Arab countries developed close relations with the USSR when the USSR had been worsening many political problems in the subcontinent and other parts of the world.
Many Muslim nations under Soviet rule suffered from persecution especially the Chechens, yet the Arabs and Iranians silently opened diplomatic and political ties with the USSR.

The second accusation is somewhat more hypocritical than the first. I won't deny that a lot of Pakistanis are radicalized and have been involved in terrorist incidents and activity. But then one also has to look at the broader picture and see who contributes to this radicalization.

While Iran has been for decades supporting Shia radicals in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia has been funding religious madrassas for young Sunni children which radicalize them and encourage hatred of other religions as well as violence and intolerance towards them.

For many decades now, Iran and Saudi Arabia have been fighting proxy wars in Pakistan. Much of the sectarian violence between Shias and Sunnis is caused by Iran and Saudi Arabia's support for the two opposing sides.
So Middle Eastern people need to take a look at their governments actions and how the tax money of their relatives and friends back home or even their own tax money if they live in the Middle East is being spent to radicalize Pakistanis.

Readers wanting to learn more on this issue should research the regional proxy wars between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

There is also another side to this hypocrisy. A lot of the instability in Pakistan is due to many wanted terrorists world-wide such as Saudis and other Middle Eastern nationals hiding in Pakistan's North Western provinces and nearby countries. These people are creating a turmoil for Pakistan and have been behind many bomb attacks against Pakistani civilians within Pakistan and possibly against civilians worldwide.

Their presence and activities in Pakistan has brought a war to Pakistan and added to Pakistan's long list of problems. These include nationals from all over the Middle East.
This news report by press TV gives additional details of the German terrorist killed in Pakistan along with a Turkish terrorist who probably radicalized him.

These Middle Eastern nationals hiding in Pakistan have probably killed many troops and security forces during their stay.
They may have also killed many civilians in their bomb attacks.

So perhaps these Middle Eastern people who accuse Pakistanis for Islamophobia can answer for all the proxy wars their own or their families taxes have contributed to or all those terrorists from their home countries hiding in Pakistan, killing many innocent Pakistanis and foreigners as well as bringing a war to Southern and Central Asia.

Even in Western countries a lot of foiled and successful attacks are carried out by Middle Easterners.
Take for example Air France Flight 8969 which was a hijacking on an Air France plane carried out by North African Arab terrorists or an even better example the hijacking of Pan Am Flight 73 in Karachi, Pakistan by Arab terrorists.

Imagine how negatively this incident impacted foreigners impression of safety in Pakistan. Imagine Pakistanis carrying out such an act at a Middle Eastern airport especially on an important airline that flies to that destination.

And with the rise of Islamist militancy in Xiang province of China, certain Muslim countries in the Middle East have been pledging support for the Uighurs while Pakistan has been actively cracking down on Uighur militants hiding within it's borders.

But the biggest hypocrisy is when these Middle Eastern countries get help from Pakistan for their political wars as well as military training and technological aid.
Pakistan has trained many police and military personal from the Middle East including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and others.

Pakistan has also sold many weapons and other military equipment to these countries.
Who can forget Iran's nuclear program taking off, thanks to getting help from some people in Pakistan.

Since many Middle Eastern people despise Pakistanis, they should reject all they import from Pakistan and turn to other peoples they respect and look up to. But instead they hypocritically make full use of what they get from Pakistan while doing their best to pretend it all came from nowhere.

Even Emirates Airlines, one of the world's largest and fastest growing airlines was set up by Pakistan International Airlines (PIA).

It's always important to examine the facts when such hypocrites point fingers and make laughable accusations.
Those Middle Eastern hypocrites and racists who make such accusations against Pakistanis only need to be shown some basic facts such as those mentioned in this post to see the silliness of their own claims and ideas.

Foreign aid workers should be restricted from entering Pakistan

For more than a year now I've been reading of incidents of foreign aid workers being abducted, assaulted and even murdered in Pakistan. It is well known that the Taliban and other terrorist militants don't check their targets prior to abducting, assaulting or killing them.

But also what is well known is that they target foreigners more so than locals at any given opportunity. Foreigners are much more vulnerable targets than locals since they don't really know much of the whereabouts in large cities, have little or no knowledge of the local languages and how to ensure their own personal safety.

Even local criminal gangs not involved with any political terrorist groups also prefer to abduct foreigners instead of locals. This is true for most third world countries.

Another reason for them being more prone targets is due to the growing anti-Western sentiments in the Pakistani population, particularly anti-American. And thanks to the CIA claiming they've used their agents under the guise of aid workers, they are now more desirable targets for the militants.

There is also the reason that many uneducated people in the third world have the stereotype that all Westerners are rich and so provide good kidnapping ransom.

Even though not all or even most of the aid workers are Western, them being foreign still makes them more vulnerable. With all the reports coming in of them being attacked, it is time for aid agencies to withdraw all foreign aid workers from the country.

Also with so many people in Pakistan looking for jobs, it's better that locals are trained and employed in this profession. I understand that most people in Pakistan are not trained in job skills so agencies will be reluctant to hire them.

But the solution is still to train and hire locals with good references and recognitions. There is no point of giving the job to foreigners who will only be attacked and therefor not be able to get their jobs done.

These foreigners getting abducted and/or killed also adds more burden on our law enforcement agencies who already have enough problems to deal with.

Sending foreign aid workers into Pakistan at times like these is a bad idea to begin with. Hopefully reviewing the incidents, both aid agencies and the Pakistani government will not make these mistakes again.

The Turkish "secular" model is not suitable for Pakistan

I've come across many Pakistani leftists, both religious and secular who see the modern Turkish republic established by Mustafa Kemal Pasha, also known as the "Ataturk" or "father of Turks," as a role model for modernizing Pakistan.

Most of these people are misinformed and do not understand the history and politics of Turkey.
What has been done to Turkey is not really secularism but rather Westernization, which is separate from secularism. By abolishing the Perso-Arabic script and adopting Latin alphabet as the official alphabet and by abandoning traditional Turkish Anatolian clothes for Western dress, there is not much secularism involved.

Even though we frequently hear of the hijab being banned in public places in Turkey, is that really secularism?
I've read articles and seen news reports on the Internet over the treatment of religious minorities in Turkey and it seems to be even worse than Pakistan.

Religious minorities have a tough time working in civil services in Turkey such as police and other government jobs.
Converting from Islam has severe punishments under Turkish law. Many religious minorities in Turkey need government permission to build religious sites.

This is far from secularism, in fact quite the opposite. Does this not remind some Pakistani readers of the same "Indian secularism?" Where minorities are treated in the worst forms while keeping the country somewhat Westernized, imitating Western pop-culture.

This is not the role model for Pakistan. Those who claim that Ataturk was Jinnah's true model need to prove when Jinnah wanted a Latin alphabet writing system for Pakistan or when he wanted Pakistanis to abandon Shalwar Kameez in favor of Western clothes.

Those who also think Turkey or Ataturk are more secular than Pakistan should read this article.

I am not trying to be negative against Turkey or Turkish people. I might also be wrong about Turkey's reforms by Ataturk and the outcome of it, but all I am expressing is that it does not work for Pakistan. Pakistan must find a secular path without Westernization, retaining it's original culture and striving for maximum religious equality.

The videos below cover the tense situation of Christian minorities in Turkey:

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - [Not so] Good news! Pakistan has ‘oil’ for 200 years – its coal

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - Good news! Pakistan has ‘oil’ for 200 years – its coal

problem is we cannot rely on any type of resource to make our country rich or sustainable when we have an unsustainable population and only growing at an unsustainable rate.

Furthermore much of these resources are taken from Sindh and Balochistan. What are the chances the Baloch and Sindhis will allow these resources to be taken and used for nothing in return to them? The only good outcome from this will less dependency on foreign countries for energy, but with a growing population and rebellion within Sindh and Balochistan what good will this do other than feed internal conflict in Pakistan?

Something to think about.

Overpopulation problem discussed in Lashkari

I have not even started writing my second and more detailed and accurate post on the Pakistani overpopulation crisis. My first post can be found by clicking here. I have no plans to get to it anytime soon due to studies, but in the meantime here is a good video on the problem in Lashkari:

In favor of anti-alchohol laws in Pakistan

I don't oppose the consumption of alcohol because of religious reasons. I'm not a religious man and have no such religious commitments. I myself actually drink champagne on an average of two glasses a year when given the opportunity.

A few drinks with a clean meal is actually beneficial for the health. And whenever I consume some champagne, it's never more than one glass on each occasion. I don't recall ever consuming more than one glassful and even if one does it's safe.

But the problem is that most people don't consume two glasses a year when given the opportunity. In many countries there is a limit on what age you should be for drinking, how much should be consumed at most before you drive. But many drinkers don't care about that. They want to learn the hard way by getting jail sentences or their licenses revoked.

This does not end well for other people who have to die or get injured from such preventable accidents until the drunkard learns his/her lesson. In Western countries much of domestic violence and crime can also be owed to alcohol abuse.

An increase in domestic violence and other types of crime are amongst the last things Pakistan needs. Most people in Pakistan have little regard for the laws until they receive full capital punishment for their crimes.

Liquor is available to non-Muslims in Pakistan under license, but I oppose that. The whole reason Islam forbids alcohol, or better yet a large amount, is due to it's affects on the mind that can lead to all sorts of disasters.

But most people don't look at these reasons and simply ban it because Islam discourages it without looking into why it discourages it. It's just like the consumption of pork. Islam forbids it due to health reasons whereas people don't even want to have anything to do with pigs at all simply because Islam forbids consuming pigs as opposed to why it forbids it.

These are the reasons why non-Muslims are permitted to drink alcoholic beverages in Pakistan. But as stated people will not restrict their consumption until their desires are satisfied. In a country where hundreds of thousands of people die every year due to smoking addiction problems and drug abuse, what are the chances of them consuming alcohol with care?

You can never predict what people can do when granted the privilege of drinking alcohol until after they're drunk which can have severe consequences, even fatal.

Not to mention that regular alcohol consumption has bad affects on the health. These are the many factors that alcohol advocates need to take into consideration before pushing for it to be legalized, all in the name of "liberalism."

In Western countries there are even organizations devoted to the prevention of drunk driving and preventing alcohol from falling into the hands of liquor thirsty teens. We don't need people in Pakistan preoccupied with such devotions. We already have enough problems to worry about.

People, especially in third world countries do not take into consideration any sort of consequences for their actions only until after they have suffered through them.

Dealing with boar and other pests in Pakistan suitably

Though Islamabad's marvelous infrastructure and well planning is a pride for me as a Pakistani, I did have regrets about the city being built in a forested area at the expense of the wild life and possibly the ecosystem.

Now I truly regret the fact that the city was built in such an area especially after reading this news report.

Locating the Pakistani capital-or any city- in the middle of wilderness is the worst mistake any country can make. Even worse is the way the Islamabad authorities seem to be handling the situation of wild boars as per the news report.

The forest and Margalla Hills are the boar's natural habitat. Who are human beings to inhabit their lands and try to get rid of them? But of course since this moral and ethical question will have no meaning to our government and people, the only other way is seeking a beneficial solution.

If the government wants to keep the boar out of the city by killing it, the best solution is to export the meat abroad for food consumption. This could not only reduce the boar problem but also generate profits to the country.

Poisoning wild animals or reducing their habitat could leave an impact on the ecosystem, affecting all of us. Another and even more effective way would be using fenced areas to keep the boars in and use them as garbage consumers. It would be useful for the environment.

But since there are limited funds for that, I would go for the first option which is to kill them for the meat and export it abroad.

An even better solution would be to create large dens to keep the boars in and use the them to consume all the garbage waste in order to recycle it.

Whichever way it is done is not the point. The point is it should be done in a careful method without hurting the environment or the ecosystem. Looking at the ecosystem is the best way to find ways to preserve it and control pests who threaten it.

I may add more to this post later on, but that's all I can think of for now.

Dana Rohrabacher and the American Congress's hypocricy on the Balochistan issue

I just saw the news report of the self-righteous congressman Dana Rohrabacher and his hypocritical resolution on the Balochistan issue. Though he is right on the human rights violations by the Pakistani military and the ISI, who is he or anyone else in the American government for that matter to criticize another country on human rights violations?

When America has had so many cases of ethnically cleansing the Native peoples on their own lands. When they have so many prisoners in Guantanamo Bay held without trial and kept in terrible prison conditions, still the two-sided American government thinks it can lecture others on human rights issues?

Then there was an even more hypocritical statement made by Rohrabacher that would outrage anyone with common sense and ethics. I'll even quote it to be precise:

"Like in the United States, where we gave a declaration of independence, we have a right to a country separate from Great Britain. That's what self-determination is."

It does indeed frustrate me how the people of North America to this very day pretend they were "occupied" by the British and simply freed themselves as opposed to invading the North American continent, ethnically cleansing it's native people and then declaring themselves a separate state from Great Britain and France.

Do they actually think the world will forget that they are derived from European invaders? This is part of their school history curriculum according to which the brave "Americans" and "Canadians" were always living in North America until the wicked British and French came and "occupied" them after which they "declared independence."

They do not think they descend from these very same "occupiers" who stole the land of the Native Americans and here they invent the terms of "self-determination."

I would educate Mr Dana Rohrabacher a little on self-determination. Self-determination is when the Natives of North America have all their lands back. Self-determination is when the people of Hawaii have their independence movement granted.

If I were a Pakistani senator, I would pass a bill in the Pakistani senate calling for the recognition of Hawaii as a separate state by Pakistan. If I were the Pakistani government, I would call upon the Pakistani ambassador to the UN to petition for the condemnation of America's illegal occupation in Hawaii by the UN.

I would also petition the Pakistani representative in the UN to condemn the cleansing of Natives in North America by the US Government and press for a second petition calling for the sovereignty of Native Americans. That would be the ultimate provocation.

The Chinese should also consider such moves after the West condemned their occupation of Tibet. Show condemnation for France and Spain in the Basque region, show condemnation to America in Hawaii.

Another quote from Rohrabacher in response to the claim that this was a CIA motivated move:

"Anyone who believes that is totally out of touch with reality," Rohrabacher responded. "I've had no discussions with anyone in the CIA about this whatsoever and my guess is that if I did, they would be doing somersaults trying to prevent me from doing this."

Weather his claim is true or false, he can't hide the fact that this was somehow politically motivated. Otherwise how does it explain that America, the EU show concerns about human rights in Balochistan, Xian, Tibet, but strangely not in Kashmir, East Punjab against the Sikhs or some other region where their allies are occupying and oppressing another people, let alone they themselves in the Basque region, or in Ireland or Hawaii?

CIA or not, this was politically motivated with an agenda behind it. Had the Pakistani government been more sensible it would counter this propaganda by questioning America's occupation in Hawaii or the occupation of the Natives in mainland USA. But I don't expect the Pakistani government, regardless of their positive intentions to come up with such an idea.

Why I support Saudi influence in Pakistan in the case of Iran's nuclear program

I've always viewed external Middle Eastern Islamist influence in Pakistani society to be outright negative. It is partially also responsible for turning Pakistanis into Arab and Iranian stooges. With the Saudis funding the promotion of an Arab supremacist Wahhabi Sunni interpretation of Islam while the Iranians funding a Persian supremacist Shia interpretation of Islam- not just in Pakistan but throughout the Muslim world.

Religiously politicized Shias worldwide hold an attachment to Iran and the Persians. This phenomenon is very strong amongst Pakistani Shias particularly from the Punjab, Pakhtunkhwa and the Muhajir community as per my observation. As I explained in another post, the upper class and upper middle class Muhajirs are not too fond of Pakistan and suffer from an identity crisis.

Since they suffer from an identity crisis and despise the country that doesn't privilege them, the Muhajirs either associate with their religion or their Indian background or sometimes with their imaginary "South Asian" identity.

In the case of those where their religion matters most, the Sunni Muhajirs often live in pretense of Arabs and the Shias in pretense of Persians. Of course this is not to suggest that this mentality is  restricted to Muhajirs since much of the Pakistani population live in such beliefs.

Zardari and other politicized Shias are great examples even despite they are not Muhajirs. It has been widely speculated that should a Western or Israeli led attack on Iran occur, politicized Shias worldwide will launch violent, militant uprisings, not to mention many of Pakistan's pro-Iranian obsessed Shias.

Also speculated is that Zardari is indeed pro-Iranian given his Shia background. If true, this means he will resist any foreign intervention on Iran's nuclear program. And using whatever political power he has as president, he is likely to resist any move by the military and the ISI to counter Iranian influence in Pakistan that usually adds to instability.

I wanted to discuss in another post on the issue of Pakistan's enemies throughout the Muslim world which Pakistanis sadly live in denial of. But because I must discuss the danger of Iran's nuclear program, I want to discuss one of these enemies specifically which happen to be the Iranian state.

The Iranian state ever since it's foundation in the mid 1930s alongside other Middle Eastern countries happen to be amongst the most racist countries on Earth. While it's been known for quite some time about the Shia regime in Tehran having an enmity towards Sunni majority Pakistan, people forget that the pro-monarchist Iranians pose an equal problem.

The pro-monarchist Iranians mainly live outside of Iran and include both exiles and non-exiles alike. Many of the pro-monarchists are racial supremacists who think of themselves as "Aryans" and don't even know the proper meaning of the term. Many of them believe they are related to Germans and wish for a Nazi style state. They believe themselves to be descended from a Nordic super race before they were raped by the Arabs and forcefully converted to Islam.

They have a hatred for their neighbors and live in an imaginary superiority complex towards them as discussed by this great but sadly deceased Iranian writer which I happen to be quite fond of.

Many Iranians today desperately try to ignore/cover up the fact that Pakistan is the main source of Iran's nuclear program. Instead they pretend it to be the work their imaginary genius "Nordic" "Aryan" intelligence. And despite the pro-monarchists being anti-Islamic Republic, they do for the most part still endorse their country becoming a nuclear power to impress the world.

Having a history of conquest and military victories in ancient times, many Persians wish for that glory to return to them in the modern era. And what better way to do so than posses the ultimate weapon mankind has ever made?

Many of these racist Iranians also endorse the Islamic regime going to war against the Jewish state because they wish fit in with white nationalists around the world who for the most part are anti-Jewish.

Iranian "Aryan" wannabe racists frequently hate on Jews in a failed bid to amuse white nationalists and to fit amongst them. They call just about everything they despise a "Jewish conspiracy."

They also claim themselves to be a lost white race who were secular, peaceful, tolerant until the Arabs and Turko-Mongols changed their religion, their life-style and their genetics. They also blame Pakistanis and call them Islamic extremists even despite Pakistan's Sharia laws are far less harsh than mullah ruled Iran's Sharia laws.

The racist Persians also spend large amounts of money getting operations to make noses shorter and their facial phenotypes look more European. Many of their men spend large amounts on permanent body hair removal. Many of their women also die their hair blond.

These Persian racists are an equal problem for the region and world stability as much as the Shia Ayatollahs are. The racism of the pro-monarchist Iranians is similar to that of the Hindutva ideology. They along with the Ayatollahs are the main reasons why Iran simply must not have nuclear weapons.

Once Iran gains nuclear weapons, there is little or no chance of turning back. They are a mostly power hungry country bent on bullying their regional neighbors. And once they posses the bomb it will be difficult to disarm them without triggering a full scale nuclear war.

Also should Iran posses nuclear weapons, the entire region will go into an arms race. There have been many rumors that Saudi Arabia seeks nuclear technology from Pakistan should Iran develop a nuclear weapons arsenal.

The Saudis lack the manpower and technology to produce the bomb so they turn to Pakistan to do it. Not that they had any intention to do so before either since they are dependent on America and an American ally.

But since Iran is pursuing nuclear capability, the Saudis will most likely try to justify their own nuclear project. The Saudis have also resisted the enhancement of Iran's nuclear program. If true, it shows they are on the right path to push for a nuclear free zone.

The reason I am in favor of Saudi influence in the case of Iran's nuclear program is because Iran will definitely try to blackmail the Pakistani military to lay off their nuclear program via radical Shia proxies inside Pakistan which may or may not include Zardari. The only way to counter that will be with Saudi influence.

The Saudis are with America and Israel in the case of Iran's nuclear program and they can be helpful in countering Iranian proxies around the world. And because this is a desperate situation which does require intervention even if it is by tyrants, we face a more dangerous tyrant that is trying to gain nuclear weapons.

I had personally maintained that if Israel and NATO don't take out Iran's nuclear program, Pakistan should do it. Pakistan has little to fear from Iran militarily, but Iran will most likely retaliate by blowing the horn out to it's Shia proxies inside Pakistan to retaliate on their behalf.

To curb them will be difficult and will unfortunately require Saudi support. Saudi influence will also bypass any political Shia proxies inside Pakistan's government and defense. These Shia proxies, whom Zardari is likely one of, will resist intervention against Iran's nuclear program. Once Pakistan is free of Shia extremism, we should also cleanse our country of Wahhabi influence as well.

My main point in this post is given the choice of two evils, we must in this scenario pick the more beneficial evil to fight the more dangerous evil.

The ISI seems to have done a great job of giving the Iranian regime a taste of it's own medicine by supporting Jandullah, assuming Jundullah is indeed supported by the ISI and not on speculation.

But looking at a wider geopolitical scale and time line, the downfall of the Ayatollah regime does not mean victory for the region, for another hostile political party may take power and once again be a burden on the region.

Even if they are dealt with separately, they should still be taken down. Though the scenario of racist Persians taking power in Iran is unlikely, given that most of Iran's Muslim majority population will not leave Islam, the Persian racists may try to influence the policies of any new "democratic" regime that will replace the Ayatollahs.

These racist Persians actually believe they were the center of some advanced civilization and everyone else around them were living in caves.

Pride in one's ethnicity and nation is fine. Even more acceptable is the pride in the achievements of your race or nation. But to feel superior or feel the entitlement to better rights just because of who you are is not acceptable.

This is why I feel these fascist Persian "Aryan" groups and their propaganda should be dealt with. Even though Western governments are dealing with the Iranian Islamic regime, they should also keep out these fascist, racist Iranian groups and their ideologies.

If the FBI can put Jewish and Neo-Nazi militant groups on their watch-list, they should also put these "Aryan" wannabe Persian political groups under check.

Each country including Pakistan should play it's role in dealing with the Iranian nuclear program carefully and put aside it's differences with America and Israel in the case of Iran's nuclear program the way Saudi Arabia is co-operating with them.

If Pakistan doesn't, all hell in the region and the world may break loose.

Is Dr Aafia Siddiqui really the "daughter of the nation?"

It's not that I don't sympathize with this woman and her family. I feel terrible of the fact that somebody's life is being wasted because the fascist US Government suddenly decides they are a terrorist without even proving it.

By all means this woman deserves a fair trial- and one in an international court or Afghan court given the fact that her alleged crimes were committed in Afghanistan, not in America.

But why has she suddenly been declared "the daughter of the nation?" Out of all the thousands of Pakistanis who suffer the injustice of being imprisoned, raped, tortured, assassinated by the hands of our own brutal government and military, why does this one become "the daughter of the nation?"

Are all those other Pakistanis not worthy enough to be the sons and daughters of Pakistan? The best answer I can come up with should be obvious to others and that is because she was illegally imprisoned by a Western power and not our own or another "brotherly" Muslim country, she has become the "daughter" of the nation.

After all what of those hundreds of Pakistani expats detained and/or executed in Gulf Arab countries, especially Saudi Arabia on dubious charges? They are not given the same attention let alone even given the title of "son/daughter of the nation."
Let's also not forget the reports that Dr Siddiqui was not even abducted by the Americans but handed over voluntarily by the then Musharraf led regime.

It's the same as I emphasize all along. If our own leaders imprison and torture our citizens, it does not get the same attention as a case like that of Dr Aafia Siddiqui gets. Nor do they get any saintly title as Dr Siddiqui did. Nor do all those middle and lower class Pakistanis mistreated in Arab countries get that sort of attention or mass sympathy in comparison to those such as Dr Aafia despite that they as working class people are in a more vulnerable position and have little legal- if any- security.

Do all those other Pakistanis imprisoned both in Pakistan and other "brotherly" Muslim countries not have families the way Dr Aafia has? Do their families including spouses and children and siblings and parents suffer the fear of never seeing their loved ones again or even worse found badly beaten/mutilated?

The case of Dr Aafia Siddiqui is just one of many examples of our double standards as Pakistanis when it comes to giving sympathy and support when we strike the judicial hammer of justice.

Because whenever the West or some non-Muslim entity commits injustice against us, we are suddenly victims, but when our own kind or other Muslims commit acts of injustice against us, worse in most cases, we save our screams for the next "infidels" to commit a similar kind of injustice.

This double standard of ours is what I call a form of religious extremism. Support and outcries for Muslim causes that often turn violent but utter silence to abuses done to us by our own leadership- even when we elected them- to utter silence on worse injustices committed against by fellow Muslims.

For it's part political Islam just like Western foreign policy has no shortage of double standards and hypocrisy.
At least in the Islamic world most people will admit they follow some sort of dictatorship weather by their religious teachings or a government imposed upon them.

In Western countries on the other hand aside from Neo-Nazis and other White nationalists, the mass population do not believe let alone admit that they are not programmed by their Zionist influenced school system which indoctrinate them with the mentality of "Jews are always right because of the Holocaust" or that punishing Holocaust denial is a violation of free speech, which the West seems to champion itself on, particularly the liberal fascists living there.

Many compared the shameful release of Raymond Davis as an example of the corrupt American justice system.
To an extent I can agree with that since America pays to release a killer while imprisoning innocent people even before proving them guilty.

But the fact was that it was the PPP that was responsible for ordering his release and using our own laws of blood money which I have expressed disapproval of in my other posts long before the Raymond Davis incident even occurred.

Now let's not jump on the government blaming and bashing game as we always do. The fact is we are guilty of electing the PPP and the crook Zardari. And even those who didn't elect the PPP, they have their democracy, the rule of the majority.

We have ourselves to blame for Davis's release. Many circles in our government and public, including political parties, challenged the blasphemy law, but I don't remember anyone challenging or publicly calling for abolishing these diyat/blood money laws.

The military might have had a role too in Davis's release, but they did do it to remain per the law by taking orders from the PPP. Had the military been trying to be break the law, they would never have let a high prize like Davis go. They (the military) are so far playing along with the democracy game for what ever reason and no coup has occurred despite the current memo scandal.

It's easy to blame the Americans when we ourselves install one crooked regime after another or do nothing to reform our own medieval laws. Our double standards and hypocrisy are so strong that we do not even see it.

That being mentioned, it takes us back back to the question is Dr Aafia Saddique really the "daughter of the nation?" and I answer it as a simple no based on the circumstances I have mentioned above. At most she is no more/less a daughter than all the Pakistanis imprisoned under unjust reasons and/or imprisoned without a fair trial, be it in Pakistan or some other Muslim country.

Turning Gwadar into a tourist resort instead of a port city

In a previous post on Gwadar, I wrote against it's expansion mainly due to environmental dangers and increase in ethnic/political conflicts.

But seeing the unique location of Gwadar on a sparsely populated paradise-like area on the sea, free of industrialization and pollution unlike much of Pakistan, the town could actually turn into a successful tourist resort like the Northern Areas of Pakistan as well as like parts of the Kashmir province.

Much like the Gwadar seaport, the towns of the Northern Areas and Kashmir province still have plenty of nature which are typical tourist attractions. Prior to the arrival of militancy in the Swat region, the area was also a tourist attraction not just because of nature, but also for providing availability in sports activities.

Gwadar being on a sea coast and not filled with bustling waters, but rather clean and safe waters to swim in could provide excellent water sports for tourists. But at the same time we must be careful from creating a tourism industry which turns into unsustainable tourism and actually damages the local environment and biodiversity.

Gwadar with it's sunshine and mild temperatures during winter would provide an excellent getaway for European tourists seeking to escape the cold.

Gwadar should be connected to Europe via Karachi and Muscat. When I oppose the expansion and industrialization of Gwadar, I also oppose the expansion of the airport to accommodate wide-body planes which will increase noise and disturb the town's peaceful nature not to mention an increase in air pollution.

Turning the town into a tourists resort is the best alternate to turning it into a busy hustling port city that may as well end up like Karachi.

Karachi once upon a time:

Karachi today:

Gwadar today:

Gwadar in the future:

This is why I feel we Pakistanis must abandon our senseless ambitions of urban expansion and industrialization. Instead we must show more concern for our environment before we are destroyed by our own carelessness along with our country. We must control and reduce our growing population before we get destroyed. Our survival as living beings depends on the survival of our ecosystem. Gwadar must not become another seaport like Karachi.

Gwadar instead should follow the role of Pakistan's Northern Areas and become a successful tourist resort.