Serving Brigadier arrested for suspected links with Hizbut Tahrir

[Hulk]

The fact of matter is world only recognizes nation as your identify. e.g. when you go out you have to produce passport. I have not seen any nation even talking about treating people based on ummah.

 

[iPhone]

i will tel u again that i am Not HT .
pakistan is more dearer to you then the whole islamic world?

Yes, absolutely!!

Pakistan nay sari Islamic duniya ka theka nehi utha rakha. You feel so much pain about them then go to libya or palestine and fight off the "infidels" there. Leave Pakistan and Pakistan army alone.

 

[1 ummah]

pakistan or pak army nay bs amrica or us ki islam khilaaf jang ka thayka utha rkhaa hai!!

 

[Naveed M]

This article from BBC gives some good insight into the topic.
BBC News - Brigadier Ali Khan: Pakistan's dissenting army officer

Brigadier Ali Khan: Pakistan's dissenting army officer
Brig Ali Khan Brig Khan has a long and distinguished record
Continue reading the main story
Taliban Conflict

Will US cut reverse Afghan gains?
border 'a house without door'
Eight weeks to face the Taliban
Taliban tactics spark panic

Brigadier Ali Khan, the Pakistani officer detained for his alleged links with the banned extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, had been highly critical of the Pakistani army's high command over its relationship with the US, reports BBC Urdu's Asif Farooqi.
Colleagues of Brig Ali Khan, who did not want to be named because they are still in service, say he was an officer with a distinguished career, a gold-medallist who was consistently promoted.
But he had been exerting strong pressure on the top echelons of Pakistan's military to stop co-operating with American forces in the fight against Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents, army officers who served with the brigadier during his 32-year career told the BBC.
Pakistan's military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas said that there was compelling evidence against the brigadier owing to his contacts with the banned group.
The brigadier joined the army in 1979 and came from a humble background in Pakistan's Punjab province.
But his career hit a roadblock when he openly criticised Gen Pervez Musharraf when he was still army chief-of-staff.
Passed over
At an army course at a prestigious military college in Quetta, Brig Khan asked Gen Musharraf why he would not divulge the details of an agreement with the US to the Pakistani public. Pakistani soldiers with weapons confiscated from alleged militants in the Mohmand tribal region (June 2011) Brig Ali wanted the army to be less co-operative with the US. The brigadier also said the "limits" of co-operation with the US on "the war on terror" should be clearly defined.
A senior military officer who was present at the occasion told the BBC that Gen Musharraf was clearly unhappy with the questions, and had asked around about the officer.
A few weeks later, the army promotion board held its regular meeting under Gen Musharraf. Brig Ali, who had been tipped for promotion to major general, was passed over.
Successive promotion boards rejected Brig Ali while his colleagues and subordinates continued to rise up the promotion ladder, overtaking him. Indeed, to date, Brig Khan is the oldest brigadier in the Pakistani army.
His colleagues thought he would be unable to withstand a career going nowhere and would seek early retirement. But they were soon proved wrong. The brigadier told his colleagues he had more to accomplish in his job.
It soon became clear what he meant by that.
Continue reading the main story
“Start Quote

The army is a cult in itself, so it's intolerant towards any other cult within"”

Maj Gen Athar Abbas
Brig Khan started writing letters to army generals, some of whom were his former colleagues, with suggestions on how to become "self reliant" and "to purge the army of the American influence".
He told senior officers such as Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani that Pakistan's "unconditional" support to the Americans was causing resentment in the lower ranks of the army.
He said that "growing" American involvement in Pakistan - especially in its military affairs - was negatively affecting the morale of the armed forces.
An officer who received one of these letters said that after coming to know that Gen Kayani wanted this sort of correspondence to end, he spoke with his former colleague and politely told him to refrain from annoying the senior leadership.
"But Ali wouldn't listen to us. He thought his input was necessary to save the institution he was serving and loved," the officer said.
Anger vented
Brig Ali even wrote to the President Asif Ali Zardari suggesting ways to make Pakistan economically self-reliant by freeing the country of American aid.
After the US Special Forces raid on Osama Bin Laden's compound on 2 May, Brig Khan finally got the opportunity to vent his anger.
On 5 May, he was invited to a meeting by his former student and now his boss, Lieutenant General Javed Iqbal at the army headquarters.

The question that officers were asked at this meeting was how to pursue an inquiry into the 2 May raid.
Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani (fie photo) Gen Kayani's attitude towards the US was criticised by Brig Khan
One officer present in the meeting said all had been going well until it was Brig Khan's turn to speak. In his opinion, the culprits who had hidden Bin Laden and allowed the Americans to get away with breaching Pakistan's sovereignty were to be found within the army.
Gen Javed Iqbal was furious at the end of the meeting. As it turned out, Brig Khan's views were not those of a lone wolf - he had managed to persuade some of his fellow officers of the veracity of his case.
Gen Iqbal promptly told the corps commanders what had happened the following day at a meeting chaired by Gen Kayani. That same evening Brig Khan was arrested.
Army officers who have worked with the brigadier say that nobody who knows him seriously believes that he has been involved in anything illegal.
"But the problem is that his anti-American views and [opinions on] self reliance were getting popular with middle and lower ranking officers," one remarked. In an interview with the BBC's Urdu service Maj Gen Athar Abbas commented: "The army is a cult in itself, so it's intolerant towards any other cult within".
It looks as is Brig Khan's cult was growing too rapidly and too dangerously.

 

[1 ummah]

I have not seen any nation even talking about treating people based on ummah.

i have !!
samuel huntingdon "this centuries old military interaction between the west and islam is unlikely to decline.it cud becom more virulent"

British Prime Minister Henry Bannerman in 1906: “There are people (the Muslims) who control spacious territories teeming with manifest and hidden resources. They dominate the intersections of world routes. Their lands were the cradles of human civilizations and religions. These people have one faith, one language, one history and the same aspirations. No natural barriers can isolate these people from one another … if, per chance, this nation were to be unified into one state; it would then take the fate of the world into its hands and would separate Europe from the rest of the world. Taking these considerations seriously, a foreign body should be planted in the heart of this nation to prevent the convergence of its wings in such a way that it could exhaust its powers in never-ending wars. It could also serve as a springboard for the West to gain its coveted objects.”

 

[notsuperstitious]

i have !!
samuel huntingdon "this centuries old military interaction between the west and islam is unlikely to decline.it cud becom more virulent"

British Prime Minister Henry Bannerman in 1906: “There are people (the Muslims) who control spacious territories teeming with manifest and hidden resources. They dominate the intersections of world routes. Their lands were the cradles of human civilizations and religions. These people have one faith, one language, one history and the same aspirations. No natural barriers can isolate these people from one another … if, per chance, this nation were to be unified into one state; it would then take the fate of the world into its hands and would separate Europe from the rest of the world. Taking these considerations seriously, a foreign body should be planted in the heart of this nation to prevent the convergence of its wings in such a way that it could exhaust its powers in never-ending wars. It could also serve as a springboard for the West to gain its coveted objects.”

Hey the Brits even aided the partition, what we are one nation now?

 

[President Camacho]

One officer present in the meeting said all had been going well until it was Brig Khan's turn to speak. In his opinion, the culprits who had hidden Bin Laden and allowed the Americans to get away with breaching Pakistan's sovereignty were to be found within the army.
Gen Javed Iqbal was furious at the end of the meeting. As it turned out, Brig Khan's views were not those of a lone wolf - he had managed to persuade some of his fellow officers of the veracity of his case.
Gen Iqbal promptly told the corps commanders what had happened the following day at a meeting chaired by Gen Kayani. That same evening Brig Khan was arrested.
Army officers who have worked with the brigadier say that nobody who knows him seriously believes that he has been involved in anything illegal.

At this age and rank, few people are driven by emotions. He certainly must have displayed some strong reasoning and evidences to make others accept his line of thought.

"But the problem is that his anti-American views and [opinions on] self reliance were getting popular with middle and lower ranking officers," one remarked.

^^^Is not that the ongoing inevitable phenomenon throughout Pakistan? Even the General has shown it in his own subtle ways, what went wrong when the Brigadier showed it a little explicitly?

 

[Irfan Baloch]

som 1 asked abt democray...n hijrat u mentioned was b4 prophet (s.a.w) established islamic state...once the state was est muslims worked to expand it ,Y? why dint the lived in non-muslim lands without spreding islam,y we did jihad ? y we had state stretchin from spain to Indonesia??

sorry


I beg to disagree here
What you describe is not Jihad, that was conquest and expansion like any other Empire. Those were actually Muslim kings that had the title of a Caliph but their actions were no different to any Roman, Persian , Byzantine and Greek empires.
Just like any quest for typical kingship, the history of the muslim Caliphates (bar the first 4) is filled with treachery, murder and deceit. Case in point.

The Abbasid Caliphate, When they sized power after throwing out the Umayyad “Caliphs”, they didn’t just stop there, they even dug out the graves of the former Umayyat caliph /kings and desecrated their corpses. Banu Umayyats in their times never spared any moment to inflict as much pain and misery to the family of the Holy Porphet Muhammad in order to honor the pledge of their mother Hinda to spill the blood of Banu Hashim as a revenge of battle of Badr.

While in Spain the Umyyat Caliph famously sent back chopped head of the diplomat sent by the Abbasid Caliph in Bagdad who had demanded that the Umayyat Caliph declare allegiance and subordination to Caliph of Bagdad. How Islamic is that act? Want me to go through the bloody and horrific history of the “Muslim” Mughal kings of India or should I start from central Asia and give you a taster of Taymur Lung? Who made Hitler and Sadam like human right activits?

Sorry to say but what you describe Jihad is nothing but a war and conquest. A jihad on other country can only be declared by the Prophet. Muslim is only allowed to go to war for self defence.

 

[muse]

the history of the muslim Caliphates (bar the first 4) is filled with treachery, murder and deceit.

Why bar the first 4? even in the first 4, political violence was a given, consider Osman and Ali

Anyway, lets not get lost in the idiom of the Islamist, full of lies and distortions -- Pakistan armed forces are duty bound to the Pakistani state, not to any foreign intelligence grown Hibz or Jaish or something else with an arabic label

 

[1 ummah]

Hey the Brits even aided the partition, what we are one nation now?

divide and rule ...they want muslims to remain divided they giv us idea of nations!!

 

[1 ummah]

sorry


I beg to disagree here
What you describe is not Jihad, that was conquest and expansion like any other Empire. Those were actually Muslim kings that had the title of a Caliph but their actions were no different to any Roman, Persian , Byzantine and Greek empires.
Just like any quest for typical kingship, the history of the muslim Caliphates (bar the first 4) is filled with treachery, murder and deceit. Case in point.

The Abbasid Caliphate, When they sized power after throwing out the Umayyad “Caliphs”, they didn’t just stop there, they even dug out the graves of the former Umayyat caliph /kings and desecrated their corpses. Banu Umayyats in their times never spared any moment to inflict as much pain and misery to the family of the Holy Porphet Muhammad in order to honor the pledge of their mother Hinda to spill the blood of Banu Hashim as a revenge of battle of Badr.

While in Spain the Umyyat Caliph famously sent back chopped head of the diplomat sent by the Abbasid Caliph in Bagdad who had demanded that the Umayyat Caliph declare allegiance and subordination to Caliph of Bagdad. How Islamic is that act? Want me to go through the bloody and horrific history of the “Muslim” Mughal kings of India or should I start from central Asia and give you a taster of Taymur Lung? Who made Hitler and Sadam like human right activits?

Sorry to say but what you describe Jihad is nothing but a war and conquest. A jihad on other country can only be declared by the Prophet. Muslim is only allowed to go to war for self defence.

ya i know history!!
u shud know most of the lands were conquered during hazrat umer's khilafat!! n in islam we call this jihad ...in case u forgot..muslim's leader sent invitation to non-muslim countries (gov) asks them to embrace islam as it is deen e haq in case they reject ...they r asked to live under islamic system as non musliims ,paying jizya..(because to implement islamic system is must) and if they refuse that then muslim army invades them (and the rule for this jihad is not to kill innocent civilians or cut trees,which means destroying cities/buildings)

 

[1 ummah]

Why bar the first 4? even in the first 4, political violence was a given, consider Osman and Ali

Anyway, lets not get lost in the idiom of the Islamist, full of lies and distortions -- Pakistan armed forces are duty bound to the Pakistani state, not to any foreign intelligence grown Hibz or Jaish or something else with an arabic label

yo pak army go fight for war against islam! that wat u gave opath for! serve american interests

 

[niaz]

Before I say my 2 cents worth, I would like to quote an article written by Irfan Hussein in todays Dawn.

Quote

My enemy’s enemy…Irfan Husain
(14 hours ago) TodayYOU can win many battles, and still lose the war. And you can win the war and lose the peace.

The ultimate outcome depends on clarity of vision, and a unity of purpose. The goal needs to be clearly spelled out, and must be within our military and economic means. Internal political support and a diplomatic effort to isolate the adversary are other crucial factors. All these combine to formulate a winning strategy.

Gen Musharraf was fond of boasting that he had a ‘strategic vision’ for Pakistan. Sadly, he was a tactician at best, and not a very good one at that. His one active foray into planning and executing a military operation ended in disaster among the peaks and valleys of Kargil. The fact that he thought Pakistan could really get away with the unprovoked attack betrays his ignorance of the way the world works.

What does a poor, middle-sized country with a large, powerful, potentially hostile neighbour and massive internal security problems do? Does it seek to befriend the world’s only superpower that has offered it military and economic assistance, or does it snarl at its benefactor and turn its back in a perpetual sulk?

If this country is Pakistan, it’s a no-brainer: of course we snatch at the aid on offer with one hand, while raising the other hand’s middle finger. Sadly, this childish gesture of defiance is greeted with admiration from an increasing number of media pundits, populist leaders and a misguided public.

According to a WikiLeak, a large number of senior officers at Pakistan’s National Defence University are virulently anti-American. This was lent credence when Hussain Haqqani, our man in Washington, spoke at the NDU: when the officers attending the course were asked who they considered their major foe, apparently 30 per cent named the United States.

I presume this number has gone up since the SEALs operation in Abbottabad last month that rid the world of Osama bin Laden.

Indeed, any suspicion of supporting America’s ongoing battle against jihadist forces in the region is met with immediate charges of being on CIA’s payroll. And yet, returning to the theme of strategic clarity, how is this war not our war? Any commander with an iota of sense would accept help from any source in a battle for survival. And yet Pakistan constantly cavils at the alliance it’s in by its own choice.

If our military leadership genuinely feels it does not need American help, it should have refused all the cash and equipment it has been getting from Washington for years. After all, nobody is forcing it to accept the shiny new weapons systems that allow it to remain a credible fighting force. The Americans are replacing the Orion naval surveillance planes so carelessly frittered away recently; why don’t we say no?

The reality is that our defence forces desperately need constant infusions of dollars and advanced weapons from America.

Pakistan simply cannot afford to pay for all the military hardware being acquired through our alliance with the United States.

But in an effort to eat our cake and have it too, we bristle at the necessity of accepting this assistance, and bare our fangs to show that we are independent.

But we can be independent and accept this help more graciously: all countries operate on the basis of their self-interest, and America is no different. Of course, it’s helping us because Pakistan is strategically placed, and because there is a real danger that a meltdown here would have major regional and global repercussions.

Instead of seeing to what extent our respective interests overlap, and cooperating on this basis, we are continuously conflicted in our dealings with the United States. From the Kerry-Lugar Act that nets Pakistan billions in aid to the wretched Raymond Davis affair, we insist on behaving like immature children who are resentful of adults trying to cure it of a life-threatening fever.

And this fever is the extremism that is eating away at the country’s foundations. Those complaining about perceived American arrogance and slights would do well to reflect on the reality of the real threat we face today. The other day, we learned of a nine-year old girl who was reportedly kidnapped, drugged and had a suicide vest tied on. By a stroke of luck, she escaped and lived to tell the tale. This is the real enemy we face today. It’s not America, and it’s not India.

In any calculus of threats, we have to prioritise, placing immediate dangers above remote ones. In this rational analysis, most reasonable people would conclude that the most urgent and real threat to Pakistan today comes from the jihadi groups of different stripes that have slaughtered thousands of Pakistanis indiscriminately. Whenever the state has tried to negotiate with them, they have invariably broken their promises and used talks as tactical pauses. This is not a fight we have picked, but one that has been thrust upon us. To defeat this enemy, we need not only military force, but political unity and public support.

Clearly, as long as there is confusion within the country and its institutions, no headway can be made. And so it has proved: in the last decade, things have got worse, not better.

And to add to our woes, we have decided to do our best to alienate the US. Already, voices are being raised in Washington, questioning aid to a country that is increasingly viewed as hostile and duplicitous.

A trite but true cliché of international relations is ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend’. Thus, it makes eminent sense to cooperate with America in the common battle against extremism. We don’t have to share its values, just as we don’t share many of China’s. But while we cherish our alliance with China, we forget that Beijing, too, bases its relations with Pakistan on the basis of its hostility to India. It’s all about being an enemy’s enemy at the end of the day.

irfan.husain@gmail.com

My enemy

Unquote


Many posters including me keep repeating: PAKISTAN FIRST: I and all other so called liberal fascists are also Muslims thru countless generations. Try getting to any of the Middle Eastern countries for a job with Pakistani passport you would realize that pan Islamism and universal Muslim Ummah is a myth.

Very few would want a secular Pakistan but if someone is against Khilafat it doesn’t mean that he is against Allah and just because his view of Islam is different does not mean that he is ‘Wa jib ul Qatl’. A few days ago a Gold Medal winning boxer was killed in Quetta by Lashkar Jhangvi just because he was a Shia. Did anyone write a column of discuss this on TV? For heaven’s sake come down to earth and realize that you first priority lies with your country. How do you expect Allah to reward you if you are helping those who are killing innocent Pakistanis?

But alas to no avail. Salafin, Takfiris, Kkalifat lovers (IMO all these elements are interlinked) have brainwashed a section of the society. These naïve brainwashed people would rather see Pakistan destroyed but would not come out their cocoon of conspiracy theories and dream of a Dark Age khilafat. Why can’t you accept that parliament is modern form of ‘Majlis Shura? What better way of selecting an Amir than adult franchise? Must your Amirul Momeneen be an uneducated Mulla Omer? Why not an educated progressive Prime Minister /President who puts interests of Pakistani nation as top priority.

Armed Services cadre come from the society and there would be as many people supporter terrorists there as there are in the general populace. This has to true as evident from Osama hiding in Pakistan and ISI nurturing jihadi elements for the last 30 years.

If Pakistan is to survive, this cancer has to eliminated ruthlessly from the armed services as a start.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Why bar the first 4? even in the first 4, political violence was a given, consider Osman and Ali

Anyway, lets not get lost in the idiom of the Islamist, full of lies and distortions -- Pakistan armed forces are duty bound to the Pakistani state, not to any foreign intelligence grown Hibz or Jaish or something else with an arabic label

I 100% agree, I think from the selection process to the passing out of both the soldiers, sailors and airmen to the commissioned officers, every single one of them should be made to swear and take an oath of not being a part of any other organisation no matter how innocent or noble cause that might have and be kept reminded thought the service of exemplary punishment. And that should also include not attending or participating in any activity of Jamat Islami & its clone organisations and Tablighi jamaat as well.

Looking at the letter of that Brigadier I am amazed at the audacity of that chap who is so openly inviting the fellow officers to mutiny if that’s the measure of dedication to the armed forces (as is said in the media about this career) then boy this is panic time.


I must admit you are bolder than I am. well let me raise the bar and say that unfortunately only 1 out of first 4 Caliphs had a natural death.

what I meant to say by ( bar 4 ) was at least their nomination and Ascend to the Amir Al Momineen/ Caliph was not as controversial as the following Omyyat and Abasid Caliphs that followed.

what started from the assassination of Hazrat Usman and used as a basis to wage war against Hazrat Ali and his assassination has brought us the cult of Khawarij that has spilled the innocent blood throughout history, their name and place might have changed but their methods haven’t. Add on top the Najadi fitnna that was prophesied by the Prophet PBUH, this group includes almost all the kings of the Arabian peninsula and have used their wealth and fatwas to spread their influence in the rest of the Muslim world. The Indian subcontinent is their favourite stop as the people are gullible and easy to manipulate when the deceit and propaganda comes under the guise of a revered Arab any doubt is washed away with generous use of wealth

But yea I will stop here I was just forced to respond to Mr Ummah who mentioned Jihad and caliphate as a way towards ultimate righteous way of life under Islam and I decided to put the record straight.

 

[pak-marine]

pakistan or pak army nay bs amrica or us ki islam khilaaf jang ka thayka utha rkhaa hai!!

i use to beleive that as well but u know what lagta hai pakistanio nay ummat e muslima or arabs ka theeka utha rakha hai ... time to shove this bakwas policy in the garbage bin