Letter to Pakistan's Ambassador Hon. Husain Haqqani and Pakistani Scholars

Dated: October 28, 2009, 3:00 pm PST

Dear Ambassador of Pakistan Hon. Husain Haqqani, Dr. Pervez Hoodbhoy, Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa, and Directors at the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada,

Salaam Alekum,

I would most respectfully like to draw your kind attention to the appended perspective which cites your respective scholarship, and in the case of the named organization (hitherto quite unknown to me), of a Mr. Abul Hassaan but circulated in that organization's name.

As an important government functionary, and also concerned scholars and/or plebeian citizens of Pakistan watching our beloved nation disintegrate by forces which are far more powerful than each one of us individually, we would surely like to acutely comprehend how to collectively arrest the descent of our nation from its planned dismemberment. What is it that ails Pakistan? Is it the mosque, the mullah, the military, the politician, radical Islam, or “imperial mobilization”?

Hon. Ambassador Husain Haqqani, you had indeed so very perceptively observed in June 2008 while speaking to a group of riled up concerned citizens in Washington DC, and which I have subsequently taken under considerable advisement after reading about it in the newspapers: '“Foreign relations are not discussed in poetry, ... Saddam Husain’s last speech was also full of poetry but it could not save him or his nation.”' (Dawn, June 29, 2008)

It is precisely that grotesque bit of truism so forthrightly uttered by you which also compels me to write this letter. I have indeed appreciated your straightforward candor Mr. Ambassador, and I hope that you, as well as others addressed here, will also appreciate mine. Being only of limited acumen and of largely plebeian traits, I pray that you might overlook whatever faults that might exist in my prose, and directly address its substance.

FYI: This letter is being sent to news media outlets.

It is also archived here:

The perspective appended below is also published here:

And just in case this letter ends up in your junk mailbox, I will also be re-emailing it from my private MIT address. I apologize in advance if you should see it twice.

Thank you.

Best wishes,

Zahir Ebrahim
Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
California, United States.

Letter to Pakistan's Ambassador Hon. Husain Haqqani and Pakistani Scholars By Zahir Ebrahim, Project Humanbeingsfirst.org, October 28, 2009

Response to 'Fighting the Terrorists But Supporting Their Ideology'

By Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org

October 26, 2009 | Revised Nov. 03, 2009 |
There is an article circulating on email among Muslims written by a Mr. Abul Hassaan of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada with a very informative title. I would like to respond to that article publicly since I believe it is of much pertinent interest to unraveling current affairs and the justification du jour for the perpetual 'war on terror' as its equally informative subtitle betrays: “Fighting the Terrorists But Supporting Their Ideology”. The emailed article is appended below.
I responded to the article to a fellow Muslim in this way as soon as I had read the exposition:
“Interesting, except that the analysis of causality is incorrect. Other
aspects of history are only mostly right, but not entirely - that
you'd know of course. His sentiments are laudatory, and his heart is
in the right place. However he is not political science literate.
That's why he got the most important part of analysis wrong. He posits
it as blowback, inadvertence, or due to greed. Try manufacturing
terror in order [to] fight terror in a WW IV, using the Salafi/Whahabis
indoctrinaires to fabricate fodder for it.”
This morning, October 26, 2009, I received a request for evidence. I would like to offer that evidence from my own ample prior writings which sufficiently elaborate upon the aforementioned short note in case anyone is interested in acutely understanding why the disease has been unfortunately mis-diagnosed – even though, it all sounds so perfectly correct. These writings are based on my experiences as a justice activist since 2001 and I boldly preface my response in the artistic rendering of a playwright's perceptive words of Socrates during his trial for his many “heresies”:
“Agree with me if I seem to you to speak the truth; or, if not, withstand me might and main that I may not deceive you as well as myself in my desire, and like the bee leave my sting in you before I die. And now let us proceed.”
For immediate pertinence to Pakistan and for acutely comprehending the “insurgency” being manufactured, please see The Decapitation of Pakistan by its own Military! Revised Nov. 02, 2009, after Hillary Clinton's visit to Pakistan and her “vigorous” questioning by the public:
Please see the following analysis for pertinent data on why “Islamofascism”, “militant Islam”, and other similar Daniel Pipes' preferred appellations du jour have little to do with the 'war on terror':
The footnotes [2] [3] and [5] in that aforementioned analysis – circa April 2003 I might add – are particularly noteworthy:
Especially, please see Michael Springman's testimony cited in [2] above as a visa officer in the US Embassy in Saudi Arabia – it is far more than is captured by Mr. Abul Hassaan's naive statement: "interference in the affairs of Muslim countries".
The well written article by Mr. Abul Hassaan of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada, implies that the ahle-Saud is an independent entity which the hegemons shrewdly harness. It is not. It is their own creation and they actively sustain it by both hard (military occupation) and soft (proxy client-states) means. The hegemons also deliberately sustain and fuel that hideous ideology of Wahabi/Salafism to continually re-sow and re-harvest the “doctrinal motivation and intellectual commitment” (Zbigniew Brzezinski's words), which the article does accurately convey however. The fact that "Saudi petro dollars" are only in proxy service to their masters' voice is no state-secret.
But the article grossly misdiagnoses the blood-drenched katputli tamashas (puppetshows) being enacted in our nations. The article unfortunately betrays its author's lack of knowledge of diabolical political science when he writes: "the suicide bombings and killings of innocent civilians must be a bigger concern for all Muslims." The author apparently knows nothing of Hegelian Dialectics, or Machiavelli, nor has he perhaps enjoyed the Starwars episode “Revenge of the Sith”. He is mostly mainstream of “dissent” in his perception and articulation of the problem-domain.
Thus, Mr. Abul Hassaan will notably find some things in common with another Pakistani, the distinguished physicist, Pervez Hoodbhoy, in writings such as “Between Imperialism and Islamism” (cached)1 despite their obvious differences in personal religious persuasions (Hoodbhoy is a 'leftist' atheist). Similarly, there is key commonality with notorious gadfly of Pakistan, the former Director of Naval Research for the Pakistan Navy, Fellow of many a worthy Western institution, widely published essayist, Dr. Ayesha Siddiqa, in writings such as “Between Military and Militants” (cached)2; and with Pakistan's own neo-con Ambassador in Washington, Hudson Institute Fellow, Hon. Husain Haqqani's book “Pakistan: Between Mosque And Military” (CFR's pitch, neo-con's Commentary Magazine's review, chapter1, cached)3. They of course, each have their own cheering fans among the colonized Pakistanis, are routinely applauded in the West, published by the Council on Foreign Relations' Foreign Affairs, invited to give talks at famous Western think-tanks, and all carry some grain of truth. And all, without exception, personally benefit from their narratives by promulgating the empire's own axioms. And none of them ever tell the entire story. As the famous late essayist and behavioralist Aldous Huxley had insightfully observed:
“Great is truth, but still greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By simply not mentioning certain subjects... totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much more effectively than they could have by the most eloquent denunciations.”
I believe that the disease is improperly diagnosed when all one sees are only independent pirates and marauding emperors in a “Clash of Fundamentalisms” – like another famous Pakistani gadfly to power, Tariq Ali notably penned in 2003. To my mind, they, perhaps only inadvertently (to be charitable), lend credence to Daniel Pipes when he so audaciously proclaimed (cached)4: “[It is] Not a Clash of Civilizations, It's a Clash between the Civilized World and Barbarians”. And also only add to the vulgar propagandist's5 purported analysis of “What Went Wrong: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East”.6 I invite the reader to read my version of “Between”, and my equitable distribution of “fascism”:
Therefore, based on the aforementioned analyses, it follows that the cure that is identified in Mr. Abul Hassaan's otherwise notable article, is a cure, I am sure, to something, but not for the first-cause of disease that plagues humanity today: "Unless the Pakistani government brings back Ahle Sunnat Wal Jama’t into the mosques and supports them, the elimination of fanatics and extremists will be impossible."
It is of course arguable that government meddling in religion, any religion, is a good thing. To my mind, it is a recipe for abuse of religion to create a preferred social order for the interests of the ruling oligarchy. That is entirely the history of Islam, and of all religions for that matter. Whose version of religion, or Islam, should a government legislate or support? And what happens to other citizens who believe differently? Isn't a government that is agnostic on matters of individual personal faith a fairer choice for all its citizens rather than it legislate someone's else faith upon everyone else? Islamic states, like the Jewish state, somehow haven't produced any on the ground realities that one might point to as the zenith of civilization worthy of emulation, at least in modernity, despite all the lofty Ten Commandments on paper. But that commonsense too isn't immediately pertinent to unraveling the causality which actually governs modernity to a large measure. Religion becomes a red herring when personal beliefs entirely govern thought – as is often the case – for analyzing political science based modernity which deftly harnesses it. The evidence is empirical: Zionism, Christian Zionism, Militant Islam, RSS, Secular Humanism, Atheism, the list is quite long, and rather obvious.
Please see Project Humanbeingsfirst's exposition of Modernity Simplified:
and the evidence for it:
The recent editorial of October 19, 2009 further attempts to coherently put it all together in the broadest context possible, within which, I believe as an engineer turned activist turned social-scientist, is situated the planting, germinating, and harvesting of "militant Islam":
Mr. Abul Hassaan's article is of course entirely worthy in its spirit of identifying Muslims' own cracks and lacunae which are continually harvested – and have been so throughout the ages – and his analogy with "Khawarij" is apropos (to the extent that it goes). I further appreciate his keen desire for introspection and for searching for causes which make us so gullible. Indeed, since time immemorial.
But the respected author grossly misperceives, like almost every Muslim I know, the difference between gardeners and weeds. Focussing on weeds, no matter how eruditely, is inconsequential if the diabolical gardeners who secretly water it without revealing their role (wit Brzezinski “God is on your side”)7, and often also manufacture it (wit Zionism, Islamism)8,9, are not dealt with first. Their 'ubermensch' mind will always cultivate or synthesize newer varieties as deemed necessary for “imperial mobilization”. The problem is not the weeds. The problem is their gardeners. These “weeds” do not grow to this level of social and political penetration all by themselves. They are nurtured and harvested for an agenda, often times as red herrings. While the spectators' attention is focussed on the weeds' attention-grabbing plays in the left-field, the real game goes on in the right-field!
The excellent book “Dying to Win”, subtitled: “The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism” by Prof. Robert A. Pape, 2005, lays to rest, by empirical examination of data, some myths about suicide bombings, including that it is primarily religiously motivated. It lends credence to the empiricism that it is a political statement when genuine. And I have argued that patsies and disgruntled victims whose tabula rasa has been shattered within seconds before their very eyes, lend themselves to astute political harvesting by the Machiavelli. One can at least harvest ten in every ten thousand. Tortuous religious beliefs only facilitate in that project. And so does bombing peoples to smithereens, taking over their homes, lands, desecrating their mosques, whatever is sacred to them, etc. Brzezinski quite successfully employed this harvesting once before in yesteryear, and it is being repeated again.
Indeed, in 2007, I had challenged two Pakistani Generals (very recently retired ones of course, as serving ones don't seem to want to spend 3-1/2 hours over lunch exclusively being interlocuted by a plebeian) that I could craft for them any suicide bomber to their specification of ht., wt., eye color, sex, and even size of the unmentionables. One of them had surprised me by responding: “Zahir you are asking too much, I can do it for $2000”.  Please see:
Lastly, my latest book available online as an Ebook, a compilation of my essays and letters on the predictable travails of Pakistan, puts the manufactured 'Terror Central' in full global context. Of particular attention is the July 2007 report titled Saving Pakistan from Synthetic 'Terror Central'. The 2nd edition suitable for hardcopy printing will be available on Halloween Day 2009:
The aforementioned body of evidence proves that 'militant Islam' in modernity is a diabolically harnessed political effect, not a first-cause. That, while it is true that Muslims, like many other cultures and peoples, including Jews, Christians, Hindus, (leaving anyone out is purely unintentional), can surely benefit from some reformation from within to discard their abhorrent cultural and bigoted baggages – struggles that must surely be waged in every generation as the march of “civilization” appears to have continuous hystereses – but only when its external gardeners have been boldly neutered. Or, at least simultaneously neutralized as commonsense dictates. And not before. The respected author, Mr. Abul Hassaan, has got the causality wrong.
The article by Mr. Abul Hassaan, exactly as received in this scribe's email inbox, is reproduced below as per fair-use.

[1] Pervez Hoodbhoy, http://web.archive.org/web/20150406081242/http://humanbeingsfirst.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/cacheof-pervez-hoodbhoy-between-imperialism-and-islamism.pdf
[2] Ayesha Siddiqa, http://web.archive.org/web/20150406081242/http://humanbeingsfirst.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/cacheof-ayesha-siddiqa-between-military-and-militants.pdf
[3] Husain Haqqani, http://web.archive.org/web/20150406081242/http://humanbeingsfirst.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/cacheof-husain-haqqani-pakistan-between-mosque-and-military-ch01-final.pdf
[4] Daniel Pipes, http://web.archive.org/web/20150406081242/http://humanbeingsfirst.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/cacheof-daniel-pipes-world-renowned-expert-on-islam-its-not-clash-of-civilizations-its-a-clash-between-civilized-world-andbarbarians.pdf
Source http://www.danielpipes.org/4264/its-not-a-clash-of-civilizations-its-a-clash-between
[5] Noam Chomsky's knighting of Bernard Lewis: “we know he's just a vulgar propagandist, not a scholar”, in interview to Evan Solomon of CBC, Part 2 of 2, segment starting minute 4:35 to 5:59, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bieFwutoqvA
[6] Bernard Lewis, What Went Wrong: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East
[7] Zbigniew Brzezinski, Video http://sites.google.com/site/humanbeingsfirst/download-pdf/god_is_on_your_side.wmv
[8] Zionism http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2009/02/letterto-dalitvoice-which-god.html
[9] Islamism http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2007/04/open-letter-to-daniel-pipes.html
- ### -
[APPENDED article - elided for brevity]
Links fixed, links Added, October 06, 2018

Response to Islamic Supreme Council of Canada's 'Wahabization- Salafization of Pakistan and Muslim Ummah : Fighting the Terrorists But Supporting Their Ideology' By Zahir Ebrahim

Letter to an Iranian Expatriate on the Iranian Question

October 23, 2009
I composed this letter especially with you in mind, dear Iranian expat. living in the West. I feel it might be of at least some interest to you. Please share it with your many Persian as well as Occidental friends, colleagues, co-workers, and also family members living in the West. It examines the Iranian Question which has been prominent in the Western newsmedia ever since 911. But of late, the war-rhetoric is rapidly ratcheting up in many a public relations campaign of the Mighty Wurlitzer and is imperiling almost everyone's commonsense.
Many (but surely not most) Iranians living in the West since the Iranian Revolution, are the 'Shah' vintage. What that pertinently means is that some among them are easily harvested as dupes, patsies, and  'native informants' to speak against, and work against, their own native nation in the name of bringing it “democracy”, disarming it of its self-defense options, and what have you. This is of course called “secular humanism” in the West, and “enlightened moderation” in Musharaf's Pakistan. Most Iranian authors on the proverbial left, i.e., those dissenting with empire's barbarianism, are often quite anti-Iran in Iran's present dispensation.
For them, to oppose the crimes of empire is not necessarily to also not share in its aspiration of bringing Iran the West's 'white man's burden',  its 'la mission civilisatrice', or in plain language, “democracy” western style. A perfect example of this ideological subversion disguised as lauded dissent is http://velvetrevolution.us (see http://www.velvetrevolution.us/#091609 , flyer pdf , protest video), even assuming it isn't a “Soros” (also see) or “CIA Revolution. Many native as well as second generation Iranians are part of this Hegelian dialectics seeded game, knowingly or unknowingly, as patsies or mercenaries, only they can tell.
I have unfortunately discovered that most Iranian authors become either inadvertently aligned with the hectoring hegemons which naturally colors their outlook/analysis/perspective on Iran to shades which are entirely under the same primary color scheme of the aggressors who wage endless wars – some obviously loud ones with signature-bombs, but many more silent ones by way of deception – or are outright ideological mercenaries and work against Iran. Here is an example of each. Surely one can come up with one's own favorite names in each category.
Someone who is ostensibly an anti-imperialist: the young Dr. Trita Parsi ( see http://www.tritaparsi.com/bio ). Same with the highly celebrated elder academic and dissent-chief Dr. Juan Cole (a Bahai) on Informed Comment ( see http://www.juancole.com/about ). If you forensically examine their work, it remarkably retains all the same sacred-cow axioms of empire, and mainly disagrees (dissents) with the empire in the “How” and to “what extent”. In their often erudite commentaries, they analyze the blood drenched puppet-shows enacted by the empire in great depth, analyze its impact upon the victims, analyze the victims' options, sometimes blame the victims intransigence, but to my knowledge, never proclaim, for instance, that 911 was an inside job, that the prime-mover of all the tensions and threats to the world is imperial mobilization and therefore, its prime harbingers, the Hectoring Hegemons, are the main problem as supreme war criminals; that they would all hang at Nuremberg; and the issue is not with Iran, Pakistan, Lebanon, Afghanistan, who are all its victims, or militant Islam, radical Islam, etc. which is a manufactured boogieman only to sustain its new transformational war, World War IV. See for instance, this response to Juan Cole's belated ex post facto discovery in March of 2008 that the invasion of Iraq was a conspiracy! Whereas, the un co-opted, or perhaps only the ordinary plebeians, protesting in the streets seem to know that even in 2001-2003, before it became a fait accompli.
An example of someone who is unabashedly an imperialist, like the Afghani-born neocon Administrator of Afghanistan and Iraq, Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad, and Pakistani-born neocon Ambassador of Pakistan and Hudson Institute Fellow, Hon. Husain Haqqani, is the pathetic war-mongering native-informant son of the distinguished Iranian Sufi-Muslim scholar Prof. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Dr. Vali Nasr. This pathetic excuse for a hominid, like all the rest of the war-mongers, is routinely published by the Council on Foreign Relations' Foreign Affairs magazine and is the Iranian version of Islamophobe Daniel Pipes cheerleading the mantra of “clash of civilizations” ( see for instance Foreign Affairs article: “When the Shiites Rise” reprinted at http://www.mafhoum.com/press9/282S26.htm ).
In my experience, between the two categories, they together often color even the lenses of well meaning Iranians in the West, never mind the mostly ignorant Westerners, especially the Americans. There are numerous Iranians I know who don't seem to comprehend modernity at all. In fact, sadly speaking, despite their high education and affluent lifestyles, I have found them to be no different in their perceptions than many an ordinary mainstream American. What is most pathetic, I find that they have a few things also in common with “Uncle Tom” in their apologetics. Similar patterns, unfortunately enough, also exist among the expat. communities of Pakistanis, Arabs, Turks, and other minority immigrant communities whose native nations are under assault by their adopted nation.
The best example of the latter is the well known whistleblower Sibel Edmonds of Turkish/Iranian origin, and the new darling of Western dissent. To illustrate the convoluted interlocking of dissent-space with the pernicious bringing “democracy” aims of empire, the co-founder of the aforementioned VelvetRevlution.us is among Sibel Edmonds most ardent exponents as the founder of bradblog.com where he prominently features her travails. Here are my two letters of March 18 and March 27, 2008 to Sibel Edmonds regarding her whistleblowing-revelations. Indeed, I was recently accused by an MIT co-alumnus for not being patriotic to America, for not being grateful enough to America for providing me with much success (Preface). The master social science of manufacturing consent and dissent can victimize and/or co-opt even the smartest of people under its Hegelian Dialectics of Deception.
Below are some contrarian but rather humble writings from Project Humanbeingsfirst pertinent to Iran. These differ from the aforementioned acclaimed authors' in their initial premise, which automatically leads to acutely differentiating war-mongering aggressors from their pathetic victims, and higher order independent variables from lower order dependent variables in the calculus of foreign policies of conquest vs. rights to self-defense and exercise of self-determination. These also keep in mind the pithy maxim attributed to the Head of the CIA for Counter-Intelligence Operations from 1954-1974, James Jesus Angleton: “Deception is a state of mind and the mind of the state”. This maxim is true for ALL states, but more so for the sole-superpower out for “full spectrum dominance” in cold blood.
Note that these few writings are only a sampling of the perspectives being brought to bear on global crises. All of Project Humanbeingsfirst's work covers modernity, and beleaguered Iran, like beleaguered Iraq, Pakistan, Lebanon, Afghanistan, the entire Brzezinski's “Global Zone of Percolating Violence” in Central Asia, and also of course the United States people, is an integral part of that as its victim. Also note that Iran has just proposed, in a very small measure, what was outlined in the Missing Link in August 2007 and the Press Release May 2008 (see below).
I hope this alternate perspective is useful to you. One does not have to agree with all points of detail in these writings in order to benefit from them. If one only perused what one generally agreed with, it would shortly reduce one to merely reading and quoting one's own self (as G. Edward Griffin puts it). FYI, the author's bio is here in case anyone is interested.
With Best Wishes,
- ### -
First Published October 23, 2009 | Last Updated: 10/26/09 12:00 pm 1499

Related: Manufacturing a revolution or genuine aspirations?

Related Added: 01/14/10 12:00 am 1670
Links fix November 5, 2016

Letter to an Iranian Expatriate By Zahir Ebrahim October 23, 2009


Last Updated Monday, August 1, 2011 04:20 pm
(The index hasn't been fully updated in a while – sorry for the inconvenience)

All material copyright (c) Project HumanbeingsfirstTM, with full permission to copy, repost, and reprint, in its entirety, unmodified, for any purpose, granted, provided the full URL sentence and the copyright notice contained within each Document are also reproduced verbatim as part of this license, along with any embedded links within its main text, and not doing so may be subject to copyright license violation infringement claims pursuant to remedies noted at http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap5.html. All figures, images, quotations, and excerpts are used without permission based on non-profit "fair-use" for personal education and research use only in the greater public interest. The usage is minimally consistent with the understanding of laws noted at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of US Copyright Laws, you are provided the material from Project Humanbeingsfirst upon your request, and taking any action that delivers you any of its documents in any form is considered making a specific request to receive the documents for your own personal educational and/or research use. You are directly responsible for seeking the requisite permissions from other copyright holders for any use beyond “fair use”. Exclusion: All rights are expressly reserved for the usage of the terms (c) HumanbeingsfirstTM and (c) HumanbeingfirstTM which are the copyrighted and trademarked intellectual property of Project HumanbeingsfirstTM. Reproduction Note: It is acceptable to reproduce any document in smaller serialized parts provided the full URL sentence and the copyright notice within each document are also reproduced in each part and the entire document is reproduced. Please read http://humanbeingsfirst.org/#Legal-Disclaimer-Notice.
Please be advised that Project HumanbeingsfirstTM fully cooperates with all law enforcement and other governmental agencies worldwide in rooting out Terrorism in all its nuanced shades and stripes in order to end its Neanderthal reign of terror upon all who are human beings first. Project Humanbeingsfirst does not distinguish between terrorists clad in turbans and those wearing suits, nor between the predatory rampages of the pirates vs. the emperors, albeit each is apportioned the measure of crime and guilt commensurate to their respective station of power and impact on their victims. Law enforcement personnel worldwide, but especially in the United States and the West, are encouraged to participate with Project Humanbeingsfirst. It is essential for all nations' state security apparatus to learn how to forensically identify the monumental supreme terrorists hiding in plain sight among us under legal cover, the real merchants of death, while they dutifully chase down the easy to spot handful of often deliberately manufactured pirates at sea.

Last Updated on Monday, August 1, 2011 04:20 pm 5582