Blog

Use the link in the sidebar to leave your comments.

Topics

  1. May 05, 2012 - New Book: Operation Geronimo
  2. June 18, 2011 - Misquoted in New York Times
  3. July 11, 2010 - Mustaqbal Pakistan
  4. May 18, 2010 - Dr. Younush Sheikh Controversy

New book: Operation Geronimo

May 05, 2012

My search for the truth behind the assassination of Osama bin Laden, culminated in this book titled, Operation Geronimo: the Betrayal and Assassination of Osama bin Laden and its Aftermath. It can be found on the Amazon Kindle Books, priced at $9/- for the convenience of Pakistani readers.

  • Back to the top
  • Misquoted by the New York Times

    June 18, 2011

    I read the article in The New York Times on June 15, 2011, which quotes me (but gets my name wrong) and creates an erroneous impression that a “colonels’ coup” was a possibility and leaves the impression that I might have said so, which is also erroneous. I emphatically stated, and explained, why, in fact, it was not a possibility. I make this effort to explain why such an event is very far from being a possibility.

  • Back to the top
  • Mustaqbal Pakistan

    July 11, 2010

    A few days ago, I decided to join the political party Mustaqbal Pakistan because it expressed a dream for this beautiful country and it's people - a dream I share; one that intends to improve the future of the common man. But far more importantly, it is a party which consists of ordinary, unknown individuals - no tried politicians, no rural or urban feudal lords, merely individuals from the middle and upper middle class. In fact, most of them, like me, have no desire to enter Pakistan's political arena, but have decided to do so merely because they have realised that evil will continue to prosper, if we all sit back and do nothing.

  • Back to the top
  • Dr. Younus Sheikh Controversy

    May 18, 2010


    On April 7, 2004, I learnt that Dr. Younus Sheikh accused me of being responsible for his sufferings under the blasphemy law in Pakistan after a Panel Discussion on Apostasy, Human Rights, Religion, and Belief. I had already heard about his case and he enjoyed my entire sympathy for his sufferings. The version I was made aware of was that he had told his students that circumcision did not begin with Islam but with Judaism; which is a fact, and for this statement he was accused of blasphemy; which is ridiculous. However his accusation of my being responsible for this is manifestly untrue. The following facts are easily verifiable:

    1. I have never served in the ISI or any other intelligence agency.
    2. I have never been employed by the SDPI or the Jama'at-I-Islami.
    3. My views are well known and have been carried in op-eds by our daily (The Daily Times Pakistan) and internationally by Reuters, among others (ref: External Links in the sidebar).
    4. These views are virtually identical with the views Dr Sheikh claims to have expressed to cause my annoyance.
    I have had to jog my memory to recall our meeting. I did address the South Asian Union forum on Indo-Pak relations under the Nuclear Umbrella; I do not recall the date, but am quite ready to accept the date that Dr Younus has suggested. He did ask a question repeatedly and rather rudely. On his repetitive rudeness I responded by telling him that like him, I too could be rude but arguments are not won like that, or words to that effect. I can state unequivocally that I did not ever threaten him, despite my uncertain memory of the events of that day - because I never threaten people to win arguments. Furthermore, it should be an easy matter to find corroborating testimony from the South Asian Union.

    A number of people have read his statement over the internet and particularly on the UNHCR website and the IHEU website and have raised queries. In light of UNHCR's refusal to protect my human rights by placing my response alongside his accusation, this is my effort to put my version forward. I am fully prepared to, and encourage an independent inquiry.

    Despite the foregoing, my sympathy for Dr Sheikh’s suffering remains undiminished.

  • Back to the top
  • Comment: Basharat Qadir (Advocate) - July 11, 2010

    While I applaud Dr. Sheikh for standing up against bigotry, it is unfortunate that he would leave his readers with the impression that Shaukat is an adversary rather than an equally outspoken rebel of the same persuasion. Shaukat’s illustrious career has been consistently free of any compromise with or concession to any form of obscurantism or bigotry. As and when the occasion arose, he (Shaukat) has invariably stood fast and firm in resisting those that he encountered of such forces that abound in our country. For anyone who has ever known Shaukat in any capacity, it is inconceivable that he would either be an instrument, or use the forces, of obscurantism and bigotry.

    Why Dr. Sheikh has made this calumnious allegation, only he can say. Further factual falsehood in his report, however, is that throughout Shaukat’s career, never at any stage was he in, with, or employed by the ISI (Inter-Services Intelligence), MI (Military Intelligence) or any other military or civilian intelligence agency. Perhaps Dr. Sheikh mistook one of the Army’s most intelligent officers for an “intelligence” officer – intelligence, alas, is rare in “the intelligence”. Again, as a matter of fact, Shaukat has never been in, with, or employed by SDPI – not that such employment would be a source of embarrassment, but it simply never happened. Of course, he has been invited to seminars, inter alia, at SDPI.

    In conclusion, I sincerely hope that the rest of Dr. Sheikh’s narrative supporting his heroism is free of factual error - so that our respect for him is diminished only for his falsehoods and not for his heroism.

  • Back to the top