adloaded

bidvertiser

Showing posts with label Three. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Three. Show all posts

Friday, 3 February 2012

The Three Generals

Ansar Abbasi on 29, Jan 2012 | No Comments | in Category: Debate Desk

Ansar Abbasig4

The three retired generals, who had submitted their statements/affidavits before the Supreme Court in the Asghar Khan case, have hurt their own institution more than anything else by admitting that the ISI had been doling out money to political parties and leaders but without having any concrete evidence that it was done on the orders of the political leadership.
None of these generals, former COAS General Aslam Beg, ex-DG ISI Lt General Asad Durrani and former interior minister late Maj General Naseerullah Babar, had anything concrete to show to the apex court that it was the then President Ghulam Ishaq Khan and his Election Cell that had ordered the military-led ISI to distribute money among anti-PPP politicians and political parties over 30 years back.

If there was any such order, it could be a verbal direction from the then president, who too has expired. The very admission of the former army chief and the ex-DG ISI that the ISI did distribute money amongst politicians, political parties and journalists, is a clear indictment of the elite intelligence agency of the country whereas there is no proof in writing that Ghulam Ishaq Khan had ordered the same.

No less than the ex-DG ISI Asad Durrani, who during his tenure as ambassador to Germany under Benazir Bhutto’s regime, had admitted to have done the dirty work as chief of the ISI, had forewarned the then Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto that GIK (who was alive at that time) could pretend ignorance from this shame, as indeed he never involved himself directly.

While the generals have exposed themselves and their institutions, none of the “beneficiary” political parties and politicians have admitted to have received the money. The PML-N, Jamaat-e-Islami, Muttahida Qaumi Movement etc all have denied receiving money from the ISI while most of the politicians and journalists, named in the list of beneficiaries have also rebutted the claim of the generals.

Durrani in his affidavit had confessed to have distributed the money but contended in a secret note that he wrote to the then prime minister, which is now part of the Asghar Khan case, that the operation not only had the ‘blessings’ of the president (GIK) and the whole-hearted participation of the caretaker PM, but was also in the knowledge of the Army high command (Gen Beg).

In the same note, he shared with Benazir Bhutto that Gen Beg’s involvement would be the disgrace for many but still he would have to be protected. Durrani’s intentions apart, there is nothing in writing today that GIK or the then caretaker Prime Minister Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi had issued any such order.

Former army chief Aslam Beg, in his statement, had even admitted that it was the practice with the ISI to support candidates during elections under the direction of the chief executive of the government. In his statement submitted before the apex court in the case, the former army chief said that the then DG ISI Lt Gen (retd) Asad Durrani had acted within the limits of the “lawful command” received from the then President Ghulam Ishaq Khan’s Election Cell.

According to his interpretation: “A superior can give a command for the purpose of maintaining good order or suppressing a disturbance or for the execution of a military duty or regulation.” But Beg did not have anything in writing that proved what he called a “lawful command” had come from the then president and the prime minister and that it was not the work of the military and the ISI.

General Beg would now have to explain this as well before the apex court that how does he think that an order, if it really existed, for the distribution of money to a selected group of political parties, leaders and journalists was a “lawful command”. What makes this whole operation “lawful”? Why did General Beg or General Durrani not question the verbal command of their political masters? Why did the two top men, representing the military establishment at that time, not gather the courage to seek in writing what Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi allegedly wanted from them?

General Beg admitted that it was in his knowledge that it was a practice with the ISI to support candidates during elections under the directions of chief executives of the government. “The receipt of this amount by the ISI from Younis Habib in 1990 was also under the directions of the chief executive.”

He said that the DG ISI had also told him that the policy of financial support to the candidates was laid down by the President’s Election Cell and that the DG ISI was acting on their behalf and made payments to various politicians and persons as directed. He will have to explain whether the so-called Election Cell was legally constituted and if it could issue such orders, which apparently were meant to derail the democratic system.

He also disclosed that during his meeting with the then President Ghulam Ishaq Khan, he had informed the president about the donations made by Younis Habib and its utilisation by the DG ISI under the instructions of the President’s Political Cell. However, there are no minutes of any such meeting available in the official record.

Beg recalled that in 1975 Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the then prime minister, created a Political Cell within the ISI. “As a result, the ISI was made responsible to the chief executive i.e. the prime minister/president for all matters of national and political intelligence. After the establishment of the Higher Defence Organization in 1976, the ISI continued to be responsible to the chief executive, while the Joint Staff Headquarters maintained administrative control only. This was the situation which existed in 1990 and continues even today.”

General Naseerullah Babar, in his affidavit, also stated that he did not want to damage the military in any manner by probing the Mehrangate scam but in reality he too did what may possibly shift all the blame on generals as the politicians were apparently too smart not to have accepted the money in their names or through crossed cheques.

Tuesday, 31 January 2012

The Three Generals

Ansar Abbasi on 29, Jan 2012 | No Comments | in Category: Debate Desk

Ansar Abbasig4

The three retired generals, who had submitted their statements/affidavits before the Supreme Court in the Asghar Khan case, have hurt their own institution more than anything else by admitting that the ISI had been doling out money to political parties and leaders but without having any concrete evidence that it was done on the orders of the political leadership.
None of these generals, former COAS General Aslam Beg, ex-DG ISI Lt General Asad Durrani and former interior minister late Maj General Naseerullah Babar, had anything concrete to show to the apex court that it was the then President Ghulam Ishaq Khan and his Election Cell that had ordered the military-led ISI to distribute money among anti-PPP politicians and political parties over 30 years back.

If there was any such order, it could be a verbal direction from the then president, who too has expired. The very admission of the former army chief and the ex-DG ISI that the ISI did distribute money amongst politicians, political parties and journalists, is a clear indictment of the elite intelligence agency of the country whereas there is no proof in writing that Ghulam Ishaq Khan had ordered the same.

No less than the ex-DG ISI Asad Durrani, who during his tenure as ambassador to Germany under Benazir Bhutto’s regime, had admitted to have done the dirty work as chief of the ISI, had forewarned the then Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto that GIK (who was alive at that time) could pretend ignorance from this shame, as indeed he never involved himself directly.

While the generals have exposed themselves and their institutions, none of the “beneficiary” political parties and politicians have admitted to have received the money. The PML-N, Jamaat-e-Islami, Muttahida Qaumi Movement etc all have denied receiving money from the ISI while most of the politicians and journalists, named in the list of beneficiaries have also rebutted the claim of the generals.

Durrani in his affidavit had confessed to have distributed the money but contended in a secret note that he wrote to the then prime minister, which is now part of the Asghar Khan case, that the operation not only had the ‘blessings’ of the president (GIK) and the whole-hearted participation of the caretaker PM, but was also in the knowledge of the Army high command (Gen Beg).

In the same note, he shared with Benazir Bhutto that Gen Beg’s involvement would be the disgrace for many but still he would have to be protected. Durrani’s intentions apart, there is nothing in writing today that GIK or the then caretaker Prime Minister Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi had issued any such order.

Former army chief Aslam Beg, in his statement, had even admitted that it was the practice with the ISI to support candidates during elections under the direction of the chief executive of the government. In his statement submitted before the apex court in the case, the former army chief said that the then DG ISI Lt Gen (retd) Asad Durrani had acted within the limits of the “lawful command” received from the then President Ghulam Ishaq Khan’s Election Cell.

According to his interpretation: “A superior can give a command for the purpose of maintaining good order or suppressing a disturbance or for the execution of a military duty or regulation.” But Beg did not have anything in writing that proved what he called a “lawful command” had come from the then president and the prime minister and that it was not the work of the military and the ISI.

General Beg would now have to explain this as well before the apex court that how does he think that an order, if it really existed, for the distribution of money to a selected group of political parties, leaders and journalists was a “lawful command”. What makes this whole operation “lawful”? Why did General Beg or General Durrani not question the verbal command of their political masters? Why did the two top men, representing the military establishment at that time, not gather the courage to seek in writing what Ghulam Ishaq Khan and Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi allegedly wanted from them?

General Beg admitted that it was in his knowledge that it was a practice with the ISI to support candidates during elections under the directions of chief executives of the government. “The receipt of this amount by the ISI from Younis Habib in 1990 was also under the directions of the chief executive.”

He said that the DG ISI had also told him that the policy of financial support to the candidates was laid down by the President’s Election Cell and that the DG ISI was acting on their behalf and made payments to various politicians and persons as directed. He will have to explain whether the so-called Election Cell was legally constituted and if it could issue such orders, which apparently were meant to derail the democratic system.

He also disclosed that during his meeting with the then President Ghulam Ishaq Khan, he had informed the president about the donations made by Younis Habib and its utilisation by the DG ISI under the instructions of the President’s Political Cell. However, there are no minutes of any such meeting available in the official record.

Beg recalled that in 1975 Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the then prime minister, created a Political Cell within the ISI. “As a result, the ISI was made responsible to the chief executive i.e. the prime minister/president for all matters of national and political intelligence. After the establishment of the Higher Defence Organization in 1976, the ISI continued to be responsible to the chief executive, while the Joint Staff Headquarters maintained administrative control only. This was the situation which existed in 1990 and continues even today.”

General Naseerullah Babar, in his affidavit, also stated that he did not want to damage the military in any manner by probing the Mehrangate scam but in reality he too did what may possibly shift all the blame on generals as the politicians were apparently too smart not to have accepted the money in their names or through crossed cheques.

Monday, 23 January 2012

Three Germans held, freed after interrogation

PESHAWAR: Three Germans including a serving colonel of the army were arrested for illegally staying in the provincial capital and indulging in suspicious activities during a raid in the University Town here on Saturday, officials said.

The three foreigners were later handed over to the German embassy in Islamabad after brief interrogation.

A police party headed by superintendent of police (SP-cantonment) along with officials of the intelligence agencies raided a building in the University Town and arrested the three Germans.

They claimed to be part of the diplomatic staff of the German embassy running a liaison office of the diplomatic mission in Peshawar.

The foreigners, however, failed to produce the no objection certificate (NOC),†which all foreigners need for staying in Peshawar due to the uncertain law and order situation in the city and province.

ìThe office was also being run without any authorisation by the Pakistani authorities,î a source said.

A police official, on the condition of anonymity, told this scribe that there were confirmed reports that the office was involved in suspicious activities and had also played a key role in damaging Pakistanís image before and after the Bonn Conference on Afghanistan.

Pakistan had boycotted the conference in protest against a Nato attack on its security post in Salala in Mohmand Agency on November 26 last year in which 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed.

One of the detained men was stated to be a serving colonel of the German Army. He was identified as Colonel Christine Wild. The two other German nationals held from the building were Lawrence and Ralph Smith.

A number of diplomatic missions and international organisations have their offices in the University Town. Some offices of the foreign organizations are also located in Hayatabad and Cantonment areas.

There are reports that some of these offices are involved in suspicious activities. It may be recalled that many foreign nationals, mostly Americans, were detained in recent months and sent back to Islamabad.

Authorities have directed the foreigners coming to Peshawar to obtain an NOC from the concerned authorities so that they could be provided security.

The KP Home and Tribal Affairs Department recently asked the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to shift all the diplomatic missions and offices of international organisations to a single place in Peshawar for security reasons.


Monday, 9 January 2012

'In Anatolia,' A Murder And A Meditation Or Three

Painterly compositions and languid, discursive storytelling are the hallmarks of Nuri Bilge Ceylan, whose Once Upon a Time in Anatolia is a meditative masterpiece of a policier. The Cinema Guild

Painterly compositions and languid, discursive storytelling are the hallmarks of Nuri Bilge Ceylan, whose Once Upon a Time in Anatolia is a meditative masterpiece of a policier.

Once Upon A Time
In Anatolia

Director: Nuri Bilge CeylanGenre: Drama Running Time: 150 minutes

Not rated

With: Yilmaz Erdogan, Taner Birsel, Muhammet Uzuner, Firat Tanis, Burhan Yildiz

In Turkish with subtitles

(Recommended)

Once upon a time, long ago, I asked the late, great Polish director Krzysztof Kieslowski why his Three Colors triptych was so operatic. He thought about this for a minute. "My dear," he said dryly, "life is boring," and then he tucked into his lunch.

I've thought of that exchange often when pondering the cosmos and paying the gas bill, but never more so than while watching Once Upon a Time in Anatolia, a ravishingly atmospheric new Turkish film about the entanglement of life's big-ticket dramas with the red tape that comes with getting through the day.

At least I think that's what it's about. Director Nuri Bilge Ceylan, who made the equally opaque and nourishing Climates (2006) and Three Monkeys (2008), isn't a man to put his thematic cards on the table. In Anatolia, the mundane, the profound and the ineffable mingle freely within the frame of a policier that's stacked to the gills with seemingly irrelevant process.

The movie, which won the Grand Prix at last year's Cannes Film Festival, opens on a huddle of rough-looking men seen through a fogged-up window, laughing, talking and drinking. We can't hear what they're saying, and there's no score to key the mood. Which leaves us free to attend to the ambient noise — a dog barking, a roll of thunder, the rustle of wind through leaves — a Bressonian soundscape that strands us between the longing to enter this world and a terror of being eaten alive by it. There's a whoosh of brakes; a truck draws up; the men go to meet it. Next thing we know, there's a corpse to be dug up.

Or so we're told — because much of the next 140 minutes is taken up with the chitchat of several officials and one haunted-looking suspect, driving around the barren steppes of rural Anatolia in search of the body. And every minute is well worth your trouble, especially if you share the men's yearning to make meaning out of the big old mess of life.

A police commissar (Yilmaz Erdogan, left) and a junior officer (Murat Kilic, right) are among the men shepherding a confessed murderer (Firat Tanis) as he tries to track down the body he's supposedly stashed in the vast landscapes of rural Turkey. Enlarge The Cinema Guild

A police commissar (Yilmaz Erdogan, left) and a junior officer (Murat Kilic, right) are among the men shepherding a confessed murderer (Firat Tanis) as he tries to track down the body he's supposedly stashed in the vast landscapes of rural Turkey.

A police commissar (Yilmaz Erdogan, left) and a junior officer (Murat Kilic, right) are among the men shepherding a confessed murderer (Firat Tanis) as he tries to track down the body he's supposedly stashed in the vast landscapes of rural Turkey. The Cinema Guild A police commissar (Yilmaz Erdogan, left) and a junior officer (Murat Kilic, right) are among the men shepherding a confessed murderer (Firat Tanis) as he tries to track down the body he's supposedly stashed in the vast landscapes of rural Turkey.

Turn the movie this way, and it's a police procedural that's tragicomically heavy on minutiae while slyly suggesting that official evidence always lies. Turn it that way, and it's an existential fairy tale set in a nocturnal netherworld, a landscape lit in a thrilling chrome yellow and filled with unreliable narrators, signs and portents, secrets and lies — not to mention a couple of gorgeous mystery women to serve as vessels of desire and paranoia.

The immediate problem is that the body can't be found: Every hillside looks the same, and the suspect claims he was drunk when it was buried. Beyond that, he retreats into a silence that may be cowed or defiant, who can tell? His interlocutors — a garrulous local police commissioner, his Arab driver, and a suave, world-weary prosecutor — more than make up for the man's silence with seemingly peripheral talk about their health, their marriages, the disenfranchisement of the country as compared with the city, even Turkey's chances of being accepted into the European Union.

Much of this is mordantly funny, though there's an edge of panicky farce, and gradually the willfully digressive detail piles up into a pervasive unease whose source you can't quite put your finger on.

A handsome young doctor looks on, his quiet impassivity touched with skepticism and flashes of anguish. The seemingly unflappable prosecutor tells him of a woman he knows who predicted her own death from a heart attack. Medically impossible, the doctor assures him — suggesting, with less irony than you might imagine, that the prosecutor retell this incomprehensible event as a fairy tale.

By the time the men stop for a meal in the village that's home to the suspect and the dead man, just about everyone is starting to unravel. Let's just say that neither the presence of the village elder's beautiful daughter nor the hair-raisingly rocky performance of an autopsy help to calm the waters.

Before the lights go up there will have been a formal confession of sorts, plus several others wedged into the busy ancillary activity. There will be moments of goofy kindness, and in the doctor's mournful gaze after the shapely figure of a woman, a hint at another confession that may never be made. In this, as in all of Ceylan's films, it's the distractions and elisions, not the official stories, that carry the existential weight of the days of our lives. (Recommended)

Movies

Subscribe to Movies podcast via:

iTunesZune

Or use this URL:

This podcast

close

Movie Reviews

Subscribe to Movie Reviews podcast via:

iTunesZune

Or use this URL:

This podcast

close

Jonathan Safran Foer's novel is now a film starring Tom Hanks.

Jonathan Safran Foer's novel is now a film starring Tom Hanks.

Tran Anh Hung (The Scent of Green Papaya)</em> adapts a classic novel by Haruki Murakami. <strong>(Recommended)</em></strong>

Tran Anh Hung (The Scent of Green Papaya) adapts a classic novel by Haruki Murakami. (Recommended)

Turkey's Oscar contender is a deliberate police procedural that's awash in style. <strong>(Recommended)</strong></em>

Turkey's Oscar contender is a deliberate police procedural that's awash in style. (Recommended)


View the original article here