Monday, November 30, 2009
Asif Zardari faces being engulfed in Pakistan corruption scandal
By Saeed Shah in Islamabad
Asif Zardari, Pakistan’s president, faces being engulfed in a damaging corruption scandal which threatens to distract the country from its battle with the Taliban.
Asif Zardari: Mr Zardari is himself on the list but is protected from prosecution by presidential immunity. Photo: AFP
The Pakistani leader and members of his fragile pro-Western government will be hit by a string of criminal allegations when an amnesty protecting high-ranking politicians expires on Saturday.
Hundreds of court cases could be revived just as the nuclear-armed government battles a stubborn Taliban insurgency.
The publication of a list of more than 8,000 politicians covered by the amnesty has disclosed it covers bureaucrats, senior ministers and ambassadors who are charged with offences ranging from murder to embezzlement.
The Supreme Court has ruled the amnesty on charges dating back to the 1990s, which was introduced in 2007, will end on Saturday.
Mr Zardari is himself on the list but is protected from prosecution by presidential immunity.
However some lawyers believe they could prove him unfit for office and cases could be renewed against allies including Rehman Malik, interior minister, and the ambassadors to London and Washington.
The end of the amnesty has alarmed the West which fears lengthy politically-motivated trials could distract their key ally in Islamabad from the Pakistani army’s war with the Taliban in Waziristan.
Mr Zardari has become a critical part of Western efforts to defeat the militants and hunt al-Qaeda in the borderlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The amnesty was introduced through a decree by former President Pervez Musharraf in 2007 under a plan to share power with Mr Zardari’s wife and former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.
Mr Zardari gained the nickname “Mr Ten Percent” from accusations he received kickbacks while awarding lucrative contracts during his wife’s two stints in office in the 1990s.
he publication of a list of more than 8,000 politicians covered by the amnesty has disclosed it covers bureaucrats, senior ministers and ambassadors who are charged with offences ranging from murder to embezzlement.
The Supreme Court has ruled the amnesty on charges dating back to the 1990s, which was introduced in 2007, will end o
He spent years in jail on the charges, and while he was never convicted, the allegations have continued to pursue him.
The 8,000 names on the list are dominated by politicians from the ruling Pakistan Peoples’ Party (PPP) and its coalition partner Muttahida Quami Movement.
Mr Zardari’s supporters believe the publication of the list of names and successful challenge of the amnesty is a military backed plot to oust him.
In a speech this week, Mr Zardari said that: “We are not afraid of conspiracies”, adding that “it is the right of the PPP government to complete its term”.
Despite presidential immunity, some lawyers have argued Mr Zardari is not protected from charges stemming from the period before he took office.
Even if his immunity protects him, the regurgitation of old corruption allegations will add greatly to the political pressure on him to step down.
To try to placate his critics, Zardari may be forced to give up most of his powers to the prime minister.
Arif Nizami, a political analyst, said: “It seems sometimes like a witch-hunt,” he said “Zardari is perceived as too dependent or too pro the United States, and sometimes not quite in agreement with the strategic view of the army.”
Several court petitions are prepared, including cases against Mr Zardari’s right to be president and lawsuits that will test the limits of presidential immunity.
One lawsuit will even challenge the president’s mental health – another ground for removal from office.
AK Dogar, a lawyer preparing to sue the president, said: “The president is not protected for his personal actions, only for whatever he does through the office of president.
“The idea of anyone being above the law is wrong.”
Man marries a videogame
I now pronounce you husband and what?!
In another sign that the world is about to collapse, multiple blogs are reporting that a fan of the Nintendo DS dating sim Love Plus (you know, the really creepy one) liked his virtual lady so much that he decided to marry her. For real.
Apparently, a Japanese gamer known as ‘Sal9000′ was officially wed to Nene Anegasaki, one of the game’s three virtual girlfriends, in what must have been the weirdest ceremony in the history of ceremonies. We can only assume that Ms. Pac-Man was the maid of honor.
While the two aren’t planning a honeymoon — after all, one of them is a VIDEO GAME — they did hold a small ‘reception’ in Japan for friends, family and the media, indicating that this is most likely little more than the looniest video game publicity stunt we’ve seen in some time. Check out this video recap by Boing Boing, complete with footage of the happy, er, couple:
Who’s to blame for attacks in Pakistan?
In a surprising move, the Pakistani Taliban has denied responsibility for the recent attacks in Pakistan. Instead, they blame Xe Services as well as the country’s own security forces. Author and investigative journalist Webster Tarpley gives his take on the situation.
First indigenously manufactured JF-17 Thunder handed over to PAF – November 23, 2009
NRO list out, 34 politicians among 8,000 beneficiaries
ISLAMABAD: A majority of the NRO beneficiaries have been bureaucrats and government officials as a list, released by the government on Saturday, contained names of only 34 politicians out of a total of 8,000.
According to the list, almost 97 per cent of the beneficiaries are from Sindh. The ordinance will lapse on Nov 28 in the light of the Supreme Court’s July 31 verdict in the PCO judges case.
The list shows that a total of 8,041 people — 7,793 from Sindh — have benefited from the National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), promulgated by former president Pervez Musharraf on Oct 5, 2007.
These people have got withdrawn 3,478 cases (3,320 in Sindh) registered against them on charges of corruption, financial bungling, misuse of authority and criminal charges.
Gen (retd) Musharraf promulgated the NRO after striking a deal with PPP leader Benazir Bhutto in order to grant amnesty to all those against whom politically-motivated cases were registered between Jan 1, 1986, and Oct 12, 1999.
Mohammad Afzal Sindhu, the Minister of State for Law and Justice, released the list at a news conference soon after a meeting with Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani.
In reply to a question, the minister said the government would not defend or protect any NRO beneficiary.
Earlier this month, the PPP had to withdraw its earlier initiative of presenting the NRO before parliament following a vociferous protest by the opposition and the decision of all its major coalition partners not to support the bill in the legislature.
The NRO is among the 37 ordinances about which the Supreme Court, in its July 31 verdict, had decreed that their fate should be decided by parliament within 120 days.
There are no surprises in the list as most of the prominent names had already appeared in the national press over the past few days.
Interestingly, the list provided by the minister contained the breakdown of only those withdrawn cases that pertained to the Muttahida Qaumi Movement. The document is silent about the number of cases registered against other beneficiaries.
The minister said there were only 34 politicians among the NRO beneficiaries, belying the insinuation that it was the politicians who had benefited the most from the amnesty.
Mr Sindhu said President Asif Zardari enjoyed indemnity under Article 248 of the Constitution and no new or old cases could be opened against him as long as he was in the Presidency.
‘In my opinion relief once granted cannot be reversed under the law. However, the government will implement the Supreme Court’s decision on the matter in letter and in spirit.’
He recalled that two petitions challenging the NRO were already pending before the apex court.
According to Mr Sindhu, several cases in Sindh were disposed of on the recommendations of a review board that had been set up under clause 2 of the NRO.
He said PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif had himself admitted that most of the cases against President Zardari and PPP leaders were politically-motivated.
The two parties had agreed in the Charter of Democracy, signed by Ms Bhutto and Mr Sharif in 2006, to withdraw all politically-motivated cases. He said the name of the prime minister’s wife was not there in the list.
The list showed that MQM chief Altaf Hussain had got withdrawn the highest number of cases against him – 72, including 31 on murder and 11 on attempt to murder charges.
Dr Farooq Sattar, the MQM’s parliamentary leader, occupied the second slot. A total of 23 cases were withdrawn against him, including five on charges of murder and four on attempt to murder.
The third biggest beneficiary appeared to be provincial minister Shoaib Bukhari, of the MQM, against whom 21 cases were withdrawn, including 16 on murder and attempt to murder charges.
The Federal Minister for Ports and Shipping, Babar Ghouri, Sindh Governor Ishratul Ibad, Imran Farooq, Saleem Shahzad, Waseem Akhtar and former MNA Kunwar Khalid Yunus are other prominent MQM leaders who benefited from the NRO.
Among the beneficiaries belonging to People’s Party were Interior Minister Rehman Malik, Defence Minister Chaudhry Ahmed Mukhtar, Nawab Yousuf Talpur, Mir Baz Khetran, Sindh provincial minister Agha Siraj Durrani and Senator Jehangir Badar.
Salman Farooqi, secretary-general to the president, Pakistan’s Ambassador in Washington Hussain Haqqani and Wajid Shamsul Hasan, High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, were prominent in the section that had names of individuals other than politicians.
Although PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif had been claiming that no member of his party had benefited from the NRO, the list showed that at least four PML-N members had got relief.
They are MNA Chaudhry Shaukat Ali, Rana Nazir Ahmed, former MNAs Chaudhry Abdul Hameed and Haji Kabir, and former MPA Chaudhry Zulfiqar Ali.
Despite the official release of the list, a number of “beneficiaries” denied that they had taken any relief under the NRO.
The parliamentary leader of the MQM in the National Assembly and Federal Minister for Overseas Pakistanis announced that his party was ready to face all cases in courts.
Pakistan’s High Commissioner to UK Wajid Shamsul Hassan told a private TV channel that he was not an NRO beneficiary and that he would take up the matter with the prime minister.
Hussain Haqqani, the ambassador to Washington, also protested innocence. Senator Jehangir Badar, the PPP secretary-general, also contested the inclusion of his name.
The following is a list of other prominent NRO beneficiaries:
Nusrat Bhutto (PPP); Haji Nawaz Khokhar (former deputy speaker of National Assembly); Malik Mushtaq Awan (PPP); Mian Mohammad Rasheed; Tariq Anees; Anwar Saifullah Khan (MNA); Sardar Mansoor Leghari (ex-MNA); Aftab Sherpao (MNA); Habibullah Kundi (former NWFP minister); and Ahmed Sadiq (ex-principal secretary to PM).
Zardari in the Crosshairs
Pakistan’s leader is losing grip on his presidency and the opposition parties are waiting in the wings. As his popularity plummets, his political fate — as well as that of the Pakistan Peoples Party and the nation — hang in the balance.
BY ARIF RAFIQ | NOVEMBER 19, 2009
Afghanistan’s election crisis has temporarily abated, but Pakistan could soon face a volatile political transition of its own. President Asif Ali Zardari is under ever-increasing pressure to resign. His influence and power is dwindling and will likely continue to diminish in the coming months. By this spring, the Zardari presidency could meet its end.
There have been several waves of pressure on Zardari this year, coming primarily from the Army and segments of the private media — both see Zardari as inept, corrupt, and unpatriotic. And it appears that the Army is entering into a decisive final stage in its power struggle with Zardari, which began with the latter’s attempt last year to put the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, the military’s chief spy service, under civilian control. Until now, Zardari has called his opponents’ bluff, and they, lacking the constitutional means to remove him, have faltered in their attempts to oust him. But cracks in Zardari’s political coalition are emerging and he is more vulnerable now than ever.
Pakistani politics has historically been marked by extreme bandwagoning around an ascending power broker. Smaller parties ride it to the top, but once the political peak has been reached, they vacate their defensive positions and join the attacking side.
Zardari is fast falling prey to this dynamic. In a recent television interview, for instance, Altaf Hussain, head of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) — a second-tier political party and member of Zardari’s coalition government — asked the president to resign. Hussain has since backtracked after MQM parlays with Zardari’s Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP). But the MQM and other parties successfully prevented the PPP from renewing the 2007 National Reconciliation Ordinance (NRO), an amnesty bill that benefitted Zardari and other members of the coalition government.
Without this parliamentary protection, Zardari and his allies are now exposed, wounded, and the sharks smell blood in the water. Some would like to leave him limbless – without meaningful constitutional powers to impact the political process — but alive enough to make key concessions and serve as a figurehead. Others are aiming for the jugular.
The Pakistani Army, by all indications, would like to see Zardari go, having tried to push him closer to the exit door in March and August of this year. Zardari’s accidental presidency, which was produced by his wife’s assassination and political deal making to secure an indirect election, was never quite accepted by the Army, which sees him as overly dovish, if not “traitorous,” on security issues, like India, and is on edge about the president’s attempts to impose civilian oversight over the military.
The scheduled retirement of Chief of Army Staff Gen. Ashfaq Kayani in November 2010 is likely to add further strain to this relationship. Zardari, as president, has the power to appoint the head of the Army and other military services. His dysfunctional relationship with the Army could create a sense of uncertainty within the institution and fear that its corporate autonomy and monopoly over shaping national security policy are under threat. As Pakistan battles a hydra-headed insurgency in its Pashtun belt and the United States seeks an endgame in Afghanistan, healthy civil-military relations in Pakistan are critical.
Most political elements — including Zardari’s own prime minister and his party’s vice chairman, Yousuf Raza Gilani — would settle for him to be constitutionally neutered, ending the president’s ability to dissolve parliament and appoint military service chiefs. Gilani seeks an empowered premiership. And toward this end (some Pakistani commentators speculate, with good reason), he has been colluding with the Army and elements of the opposition to weaken Zardari’s position.
However Gilani is playing his cards, he has a difficult balancing act to maintain, for he could be discarded if and when Zardari is ousted by the Machiavellian maneuvering of opposition leader Nawaz Sharif, who covets a third shot at the premiership. Gilani could, at least for the next year, be an asset for Sharif — serving to neutralize Zardari and constitutionally empower the presently weakened office of prime minister. It would make political sense for Sharif to then push for midterm elections just after the economic and security climate bottoms out and once the prime minister’s office is fully empowered. (One can almost hear Sharif’s advisors saying, “Let Gilani, Zardari, and the PPP do the dirty work.”) To serve as prime minister for the third time, Sharif would need a constitutional amendment passed by a two-thirds majority in parliament to lift a two-term limit on the premiership. Sharif can only get this passed via deal making with other political parties, but the Army can also get in the mix, make some deals of its own, and shut out Sharif.
But when it comes to Zardari’s fight for political survival, it’s the second-tier political parties, such as the MQM, that are the true wildcards. Since no party in Pakistan currently holds a parliamentary majority, the smaller parties have a veto power on parliamentary votes (such as for impeachment). Not surprisingly, these parties are using their wild-card status — coupled with Zardari’s vulnerability — as a bargaining chip in order to influence his actions to their benefit. The MQM, for example, would like governorship of Sindh and to retain administrative control over urban areas of the province. But it and other small parties generally side with the dominant or rising power broker. The recent MQM push against Zardari signals, at least, a political consensus in favor of a weakened Zardari.
If these parties continue to successfully manipulate Zardari he will become a ceremonial president, which would result in nothing short of a political prison. It would deny him tangible power and delay his eligibility for a run for the National Assembly, and thus for the premiership, until two years after his presidential term ends. What’s more, internal divisions within the PPP are sure to increase as Zardari’s capacity to influence events declines and alternative power centers grow in his place.
Zardari’s decline has serious implications for U.S. policy toward Pakistan. His political neutralization would deny the United States a local civilian lever against the Pakistan Army. Restraining the Army’s praetorianism, some in Washington argue, will markedly reduce its support for militants in Afghanistan and India, as Pakistan’s major political parties (particularly the PPP) are far more inclined toward normalizing ties with neighboring states.
As the challenges in Afghanistan grow and Zardari weakens, Washington becomes increasingly dependent on the Pakistani Army. In fact, U.S. success or failure in Afghanistan will, in part, be decided by the Pakistani Army, which can influence the tempo and trajectory of the war with its control of supply routes from the Arabian Sea into Afghanistan and unparalleled access to Afghan insurgent groups.
Although the United States could try to use Sharif — a vocal advocate of civilian control over the military — he has a long history of leveraging anti-American sentiment and has been unwilling to adopt a firm position against the Taliban. Furthermore, if Washington indelicately shifts its patronage from Zardari to Sharif, the Army could intercept the telegraphed pass.
Within the next few years, Zardari’s political demise could also impact Pakistan’s ideological balance of power. Without meaningful internal reform, the future of the PPP — Pakistan’s largest center-left party — is at stake. Zardari’s unpopularity and inability to legitimately lay claim to the Bhutto name has weakened the PPP in Punjab, Pakistan’s most populous province. But he, at least, provides some nominal continuity from the Bhutto era as Benazir’s widower.
Internal elections and a reinvigorated push for social justice could bring the PPP back to relevancy. But without that change, the PPP could be reduced to a feudal strip in southern Punjab and rural Sindh, and of declining importance in an increasingly urbanized Pakistan. Indeed, for Zardari, the greatest challenge is not to save his presidency, but to save his party.
The PPP is both a family enterprise dominated by the Bhuttos and Zardaris and a national institution that anchors Pakistan’s secularists and leftists. If the PPP sank along with Zardari, Pakistan would be without a truly national party — the remaining major parties are ethnic or regional — and the odds of ethnic and political fragmentation would increase dramatically. A leaderless left would also embolden the nationalist and Islamic right as Pakistan confronts jihadis at home and debates whether to continue supporting them in the region. And so as Zardari ponders his political future, let us hope that he does not bring down his party, which is critical to his nation’s stability, in a bid to save his imperiled presidency.
How do you solve a problem like Meera?
Shahrezad Samiuddin
How do you, indeed? Meera does the rounds via SMS jokes about her English. Meera helps a damp squib sink to the bottom of the Indian box office. Meera’s alleged husband turns up demanding his house and crores back. Meera predicts she’ll be linked to Musharraf and Clinton next (you wish, M). Meera is the opposite of Humayun Saeed, says Mahesh Bhatt with tongue in cheek. And most recently, Meera interviews photographer Tapu Javeri in her very own talk show.
If, after seeing that clip, you cringed and wrote ‘Not funny,’ or ‘Not her language’ under the link on Facebook, this blog is for you. And if you hooted and laughed, read ahead anyway.
When was the last time you heard about the woman actually doing what she originally became famous for? Remember Meera the actress? No? That’s because last time you saw her she was a wannabe talk show host. As the maybe-been-to-school Meera tried to interview Javeri (of all people) in English (of all languages) one really began to wonder whether she was dropped on her head as a baby.
And before you say she was set up, let’s pause for a moment and accept that some producer hatched the plan with a few friends, laughed about it with his colleagues, and then gave Meera a call in the morning. How cruel. But only if she had been kidnapped, dragged by the hair to the studio, and shown a gun. My point is, Meera did the show willingly, in that slinky black dress with immaculate makeup and a camera in the room. She spent hours there knowing, better than us, that she didn’t know the language. You and I wouldn’t plunge ourselves headlong into a made-for-Filipino-audiences talk show in Tagalog. At least not before some solid language lessons.
The fact is, despite her shenanigans, Meera remains important. Her importance is the same as the importance of the village idiot in a, well, village. She completes the landscape. And for everyone going out on a limb to defend her by citing her ‘lacks’ (of education, background, upbringing) the moment has arrived, post-talk show clip, to just drop it. Stop feeling some elitist guilt about her ‘lacks.’ Delete that ‘Not funny’ that you wrote on Facebook, hold your stomach, throw your head back, and truly laugh for a change. There are very, very few moments that make us laugh in this country, so cherish one when it is provided.
Despite the illiteracy and tastelessness that rules the roost in what’s left of Lollywood, few of its divas make such obvious public blunders with such ridiculous regularity. Time was when Reema would roll out memorised English at award shows to sniggers from all the angrezi-medium types. But Reems has been earning our admiration (because English earns that sort of thing here) as she speaks the language nearly flawlessly, if a little formally, today. The woman has used her time and money wisely to get what she wants.
Saima, another Lollywood mainstay, once admitted in a TV interview that she had never been to school. But really, do you care when you see her light up the silver screen when you watch a Pakistani flick for a laugh and find out that you really can’t laugh at her skills? And Resham who is just too busy wowing us with her metamorphoses in TV play after TV play, and who just doesn’t have the time to worry about English or her lack of it. And their scandals? If ever they leak out, these actresses handle them in a manner that is usually informed by the knowledge that they are public figures. These same actresses, with all their ‘lacks,’ handle it better than Paris Hilton, who incidentally had access to the best education, a privileged background in the most privileged country in the world, and an upbringing by educated, if not sensible, parents as well as a host of educated nannies.
It is not Meera’s circumstances, as the Meera-bachao brigade have put forward, but a politically incorrect ‘lack of intelligence.’ And hence, everything.
This is not a rant against Meera. It is about accepting that she, like Hilton, is missing a couple of million grey cells. More importantly, this is about accepting that when her next big scandal explodes, We, the people, will watch it again in all its trashy glory. It’s also about accepting that a lot of people will laugh. She’s a celebrity for goodness sake. And celebrities who put themselves out there do so knowing that people can and do laugh. Even Meera, as she stumbles over all English in the YouTube clip, has the foresight to remark that ‘mera record lagay ga.’
Hilton, Raakhi Sawant, and Malika Sherawat. Since the world turned into a global village, around the world, pop culture’s been cultivating celebrities to fulfill the role traditionally played by the courtjester.
For all her ‘lacks,’ Meera is an adult who has had the exposure reserved for the top one percent of this country. She scores extra points on exposure, because she has actually risen from nothing. It’s not her deprivations which have made her stupid. It’s her wickedly brilliant luck and drive that have made her famous. And still the learning curve flatlines. Does she love the attention? Doesn’t Paris Hilton?
So please don’t cry for ‘poor little Meera.’ She’s not a babe in the wild, wild woods. She’s certainly not the proverbial deer in the headlights (even though she looks as pretty as one sometimes). She’s not a bechari. To think that makes us patronising and sorely lacking in humour.
She is, on the other hand, our Paris Hilton. Our Malika Sherawat. Our very own village idiot. Which brings us back to the original question, how do you solve a problem like Meera? And the answer to that is a firm: ‘You don’t.’
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Pakistan ranked 139 in global corruption list
BERLIN: Graft watchdog Transparency International hit out at rich countries over shady banking practices on Tuesday as it published its annual rankings naming and shaming the world’s most corrupt countries.
‘Corrupt money must not find safe haven. It is time to put an end to excuses,’ said the Berlin-based group’s head Huguette Labelle.
‘Even industrialised countries cannot be complacent: the supply of bribery and the facilitation of corruption often involve businesses based in their countries,’ the report said.
In the wake of the financial crisis, the Group of 20 (G20) industrialised countries turned up the heat on tax havens, targeting rich countries with long-held banking secrecy laws like Liechtenstein and Switzerland.
But Labelle said extra efforts were imperative, calling for more bilateral treaties on information exchange in order to ‘to fully end the secrecy regime.’
Overall, the 2009 corruption list is ‘of great concern,’ the organisation said, with the majority of countries scoring under five in the ranking, which ranges from zero, highly corrupt and 10, which is very clean.
With a score of 2.7, Pakistan was ranked 139 out of the 180 countries on the list, a position it shares with fellow South Asian nation Bangladesh, the SE Asian country Philippines and the Baltic state of Belarus.
The bottom five nations — Somalia, Afghanistan, Myanmar, Sudan and Iraq — show that ‘countries which are perceived as the most corrupt are also those plagued by long-standing conflicts, which have torn apart their governance infrastructure,’ TI said.
The five countries seen as least afflicted by corruption were New Zealand, Denmark, Singapore, Sweden — and Switzerland.
New Zealand scored 9.4 points whereas Somalia scored 1.0 points.
The score is based on perceptions of the degree of corruption as seen by business people and country analysts. —AFP
Taliban issues video denial of recent attacks in Peshawar
News CENTRAL/S. ASIA
Pakistan Taliban airs video denial
Attacks that have continued across Pakistani towns and cities are being blamed on Tehreek e-Taliban, Pakistan’s Taliban.
However, the group has issued its first video statement denying involvement in targeting civilians and has blamed external forces for at least two recent blasts.
Azam Tariq, a spokesman of the Tehreek e-Taliban, posted the video statement on YouTube on Monday.
The message refers to a bombing at the Islamic University in Islamabad, which the spokesman said was orchestrated to prepare the ground for a military operation in South Waziristan, a stronghold for Pakistan’s Taliban fighters.
He also said his group had no role in the bomb blast in a Peshawar market that killed at least 100 people as well as an attack in Charsada, a town located in Pakistan’s North West Frontier Province.
Tariq said Taliban attacks never aimed to target civilians, but that the explosions were linked to Blackwater activities in the country.
Blackwater is a private military and security company founded in the United States.
Propaganda war
Kamal Hyder, Al Jazeera’s correspondent in Islamabad, said: “Even when those bomb blasts did happen, the Taliban denied they had anything to do it.”
He said: “It was surprising to see that it [the video message] came up on the al-Sahab video. That is the Al-Qaeda wing of media publicity.”
Blackwater has denied having any contracts in Pakistan.
Hyder added: “There is a growing anger among Pakistanis. If one looks at the type of attacks that have been taking place – indiscriminate attacks – the first thing that came out, even reported by local media, was the blaming of Blackwater and other American agencies.
“The public opinion has turned against the Americans. The video that has appeared today would be trying to capitalise on that.”
Gilani 38th Most Powerful Person: Forbes
“I love power. But it is as an artist that I love it. I love it as a musician loves his violin, to draw out its sounds and chords and harmonies.” –Napoleon Bonaparte
Barack Obama
Hu Jintao
Vladimir Putin
Ben S. Bernanke
Sergey Brin and Larry Page
Carlos Slim Helu
Rupert Murdoch
Michael T. Duke
Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz al Saud
William Gates III
Pope Benedict XVI
Silvio Berlusconi
Jeffrey R. Immelt
Warren Buffett
Angela Merkel
Laurence D. Fink
Hillary Clinton
Lloyd C. Blankfein
Li Changchun
Michael Bloomberg
Timothy Geithner
Rex W. Tillerson
Li Ka-shing
Kim Jong Il
Jean-Claude Trichet
Masaaki Shirakawa
Sheikh Ahmed bin Zayed al Nahyan
Akio Toyoda
Gordon Brown
James S. Dimon
Bill Clinton
William H. Gross
Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva
Lou Jiwei
Yukio Hatoyama
Manmohan Singh
Osama bin Laden
Syed Yousaf Raza Gilani
Tenzin Gyatso
Ali Hoseini-Khamenei
Joaquin Guzman
Igor Sechin
Dmitry Medvedev
Mukesh Ambani
Oprah Winfrey
Benjamin Netanyahu
Dominique Strauss-Kahn
Zhou Xiaochuan
John Roberts Jr.
Dawood Ibrahim Kaskar
William Keller
Bernard Arnault
Joseph S. Blatter
Wadah Khanfar
Lakshmi Mittal
Nicolas Sarkozy
Steve Jobs
Fujio Mitarai
Ratan Tata
Jacques Rogge
Li Rongrong
Blairo Maggi
Robert B. Zoellick
Antonio Guterres
Mark John Thompson
Klaus Schwab
Hugo Chavez
Posts
