Date: Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 11:58 PM
Subject: Re: [communistpartyofpakistan] Real & Ugly Face of Jamat-e-Islami - 4
To: Shaikh Mohommad <shaikh.mohommad@mail.com>
Dear Shaikh Sahab,
Jamat-e-Islami/MMA & American Funding through USAID.
Hasba Act & Use of Blasphemy Law for Electoral Politics by Mullahs.
Qazi Hussain Ahmed/Jamat-e-Islami's "Martial Law Party"!
JI-Qazi Hussain Ahmed Connections with Mehran Bank Scandal.
Jamat-e-Islami & Jang Group Conspire for Martial Law in Pakistan with Mehran Bank
Culprits.
"Friends" & Friendship of General (R) Mirza Aslam Beg.
UGLY FACE OF JAMAT-E-ISLAMI.
REALLY
Pakistan is being destroyed by Pakistan Army. Swat has been destroyed. Balochsitan has been destroyed. NOW they are attacking Waziristan [See below- the latest atrocities - where people have to flee their homes and become refugees] Pakistan Army protects NATO supply routes to Afghanistan so that occupation of Afghanistan can continue. General Musharraf arrested people and handed over to USA and received money. Now Pakistan Army is protecting American bases. American agents in Pakistan are free to kill anyone they like [Remember Raymond Davies who killed a Pakistan and the Army arrested him and sent him away. Pakistan Army has banks, factories, etc. and owns 60% of the country's economy. SHALL I GO ON?
Br Aamir Mughal does not see the above facts but talks about JI. Because if he talks about Pakistan Army he will be arrested.
People, the world over, are protesting against the present set-up which is beneficial to big business and people are ignored. Br Aamir Mughal- a supporter of Capitalist exploitation and Pakistan Army brutality wants to draw the attention to JI or MQM, etc. etc. AND not to the MAFIA [Pakistan Army] ruling over the country.
Shaikh Mohommad
NOWSHERA: When Pakistan's military launched an offensive in the Khyber tribal region in 2008, it promised residents they would soon be free of a reign of terror imposed by militants.
But many of the thousands who fled are still too scared to return, and new refugees have been escaping in large numbers as the military again cracks down on those same militants after repeated attacks on security forces and pro-government tribes.
http://www.dawn.com/2011/10/27/bus-driver-turned-militant-takes-on-pakistan-again.html
David Davis on torture – statement in House of Commons British Government outsourcing torture to Pakistan !
What former shadow home secretary told the Commons yesterday about Rangzieb Ahmed, as reported in Hansard Wednesday 8 July 2009 08.58 BST
Four years ago today, this country suffered a terrible atrocity at the hands of terrorists: 52 people were killed and many more horribly injured. I stood at the dispatch box that day and spoke of the need to face down this barbarism. In the subsequent weeks and months, I was proud of the calm and just way that the ordinary British citizen dealt with this assault and of the comparative absence of people trying to make scapegoats of the ordinary, decent Muslim community. I was proud of the courage, sense of honour, tolerance and justice of our citizens at home.
I am afraid that I cannot be so complimentary about the actions of our government abroad. In the last year, there have been at least 15 cases of British citizens or British residents claiming to be tortured by foreign intelligence agencies with the knowledge, complicity and, in some cases, presence of British intelligence officers. One case – that of Binyam Mohammed – has been referred to the police by the attorney general, which implies that there is at least a prima facie case to answer. The most salient others include Moazzam Begg, Tariq Mahmoud, Salahuddin Amin and Rashid Rauf, all in Pakistan, Jamil Rahman in Bangladesh, Alam Ghafoor in United Arab Emirates, and Azhar Khan and others in Egypt.
For each case, the government have denied complicity, but at the same time fiercely defended the secrecy of their actions, making it impossible to put the full facts in the public domain, despite the clear public interest in doing so. Although the combined circumstantial evidence of complicity in all these cases is overwhelming, it has not so far been possible – because of the government's improper use of state secrecy to cover up the evidence – to establish absolutely clear sequences of cause and effect. In the case I am about to describe, we can follow the entire chain of events from original suspicion, through active encouragement of the Pakistani authorities to arrest and through the subsequent collaboration between UK and Pakistani agencies. This is the case of Rangzieb Ahmed …..whose treatment I can describe in some detail.
As the house will realise, the account I am about to relay comes from several sources. I cannot properly give my sources, given the vindictive attitude of this government, particularly the Foreign Office, to whistleblowers. Indeed, in this case of Rangzieb Ahmed, the authorities were so paranoid that they threatened to arrest a journalist for reporting facts stated in open court. Nevertheless, although I am prevented from naming my sources, I can say that I am confident of these facts beyond reasonable doubt. I will not, of course, disclose any names, or anything that discloses intelligence agency techniques – other than torture – or other issues that threaten national security……. So what I am talking about today is just as much about defending our own civilised standards as it is about deploring what was done to this man in the name of defending our country.
In 2005-06, Rangzieb Ahmed was a suspected terrorist who was kept under surveillance for about a year before leaving the country to go first to Dubai and on a subsequent trip to Pakistan. During that time, evidence was collected against him, on the basis of which he was later convicted. Let me repeat that point, as it is very important to my subsequent argument – during that time, evidence was collected, on the basis of which he was subsequently convicted. Despite the authorities having that evidence, he was – astonishingly – not arrested but instead allowed to leave the country. To understand how odd this decision was, we should remember that this was only a year after the tragedy of 7/7, after which agencies were criticised for allowing terrorist suspects to leave the country to go to Pakistan. Since they knew he was leaving, since they knew where he was going, and since they had more than enough evidence to arrest him, allowing him to leave was clearly deliberate. That the authorities knew his itinerary is demonstrated by the fact that he was kept under surveillance when he was in Dubai. He later went on to Pakistan, where the Pakistani authorities were warned of his arrival by the British government. The British intelligence agencies wrote to their opposite numbers in Pakistan – the members of the directorate for inter-services intelligence – suggesting that they arrest him. I use the word "suggest" rather than "request" or "recommend" because of the peculiar language of the ISI's communication. No doubt the minister can confirm that for himself by asking to see the record.
We also know that the intelligence officer who wrote to the Pakistanis did so in full knowledge of the normal methods used by the ISI against terrorist suspects that it holds. That is unsurprising, as it is common public knowledge in Pakistan. The officer would therefore be aware that "suggesting" arrest was equivalent to "suggesting" torture.
Rangzieb Ahmed was arrested by the ISI on 20 August 2006. Once he was taken into custody in Pakistan by the ISI, the Manchester police and MI5 together created a list of questions to be put to him. MI5 arranged for those questions to be given to the ISI.
Rangzieb Ahmed was viciously tortured by the ISI. He says, among other things, that he was beaten with wooden staves the size of cricket stumps and whipped with a 3ft length of tyre rubber nailed to a wooden handle, and that three fingernails were removed from his left hand. There is a dispute between Ahmed and British intelligence officers about exactly when his fingernails were removed, but an independent pathologist employed by the Crown Prosecution Service confirmed that it happened during the period when he was in Pakistani custody.
Rangzieb was asked questions, under torture, about the UK by ISI officers. He claims that he saw "UK/Pakistan Secret" on the question list used by the ISI. That was presumably the list put together by the Manchester police and MI5. After about 13 days, he was visited by an officer from MI5 and another from MI6. He claims to have told them, during questioning, that he had been tortured. They deny that, but it is significant that they did not return for further interviews. By that stage, MI5 policy was not to return after any interview in which the subject claimed that he had been tortured. The British agents did not return, but Rangzieb was subsequently questioned by Americans. Is it also an extraordinary, if sinister, coincidence that the Manchester police accessed Rangzieb Ahmed's medical records within days of the MI5/MI6 interview? Why would they do that if he was in perfect health? Rangzieb Ahmed was kept in detention by the Pakistani authorities for a total of 13 months – first at the ISI centre, then at Rawalpindi and then at Adiyala jail – before being deported to the United Kingdom in September 2007. He was tried and convicted of terrorist offences in late 2008 – according to the prosecution, entirely on the basis of evidence obtained while he was under surveillance in the UK and Dubai in 2005-06. I cannot imagine a more obvious case of the outsourcing of torture, a more obvious case of "passive rendition". Let me recap. Rangzieb Ahmed should have been arrested by the UK in 2006, but he was not. The authorities knew that he intended to travel to Pakistan, so they should have prevented that; instead, they suggested that the ISI arrest him. They knew that he would be tortured, and they arranged to construct a list of questions and supply it to the ISI. The authorities know full well that this story is an evidential showcase for the policy of complicity in torture, should that evidence ever come out. One way in which the in camera veil of secrecy might be lifted would be a civil case by Mr Ahmed against the government for their complicity in torture. Part of that process would involve challenging the in-camera rulings and revealing the details of agency involvement. Just such a case was being considered by Mr Ahmed, and on 20 April this year he was visited in prison by his solicitor and a specialist legal adviser to discuss it.
Mr Ahmed tells us that a week later he was visited by an officer from MI5 and a policeman. That is the story told today on the front pages of the Daily Mail and the Guardian. During the course of their visit they said that they would like him to help in the fight against terror with information about extremism. This is perfectly proper. However, the sinister part of this visit was an alleged request to drop his allegations of torture: if he did that, they could get his sentence cut and possibly give him some money. If this request to drop the torture case is true, it is frankly monstrous. It would at the very least be a criminal misuse of the powers and funds under the government's Contest strategy, and at worst a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice.
Distributed by: Society for the propagation of truth email shaikh@asia.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Aamir Mughal
Sent: 10/28/11 04:08 PM
Subject: [communistpartyofpakistan] Real & Ugly Face of Jamat-e-Islami - 4
Real & Ugly Face of Jamat-e-Islami - 4
Zia ul Haq met JI Chief Mian Tufail Mohammad for 90 minutes the night before Bhutto was hanged. The following day, the JI supporters took to the streets to celebrate Bhutto's death. JI saved tons of US dollars but also tried to save US enemy No.1 Khalid Sheikh Mohammad, the mastermind of 9/11, who was arrested from the residence of a JI leader in Rawalpindi. --- February 10 The Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979, (or, simply, the Hudood Ordinance), has been promulgated and a system of "Islamic" punishments is introduced. The punishment for adultery by a married person is stoning to death, while 100 lashes will be awarded to an unmarried person accused of the crime. Those making false allegations regarding adultery will be awarded 80 lashes and disqualified from giving testimony in future. Minors may also be convicted for committing adultery or rape under this ordinance, and punished with imprisonment and lashes. The punishment for drinking is 80 lashes; for the theft of imperishable property equal to 4,457 grams of gold or more, one hand is to be amputated. All these punishments are to be carried out in public. Incidents of rape have increased following the promulgation of the Hudood Ordinance, apparently because the law does not distinguish between rape and adultery. Moreover, proof of rape requires the evidence of "four adult, pious and religious male Muslims." It being quite unlikely for such people to always be present at the scene of the crime, several victims have already been charged with adultery, their complain of rape being taken as a "confession to have had sexual intercourse." The law does not even exempt minor girls from punishment, and some children convicted for adultery are reported to be as young as nine. Apr 3 Mian Tufail Mohammed, Amir Jamaat-e-Islami, assures General Zia that Bhutto's execution will not lead to law and order crisis. REFERENCE: 1979 The Chronicle of Pakistan Compiled by Khurram Ali Shafique http://pakistanspace.tripod.com/chronicle/1979.htm REFERENCE: Hudood Ordinance Source: Women of Pakistan: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back? By Khawar Mumtaz and Farida Shaheed (1987). Vanguard Books, Lahore http://pakistanspace.tripod.com/archives/79hudood.htm Opportunism Jamaat-style by Waseem Altaf ONLINE ISSUE NO. 44 APRIL 1, 2011 http://www.viewpointonline.net/opportunism-jamaat-style.html
Funeral of Jinnah wasn't necessary
Mian Tufail Muhammad ki Shakhsiyat
URL: http://youtu.be/o8ZOz1IMQW8
Maulana Mawdudi Kay Sath Meri Rafaqat Ki Sargazisht by (Late) Maulana Manzoor Naumani
http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/
0 comments:
Post a Comment