What's new

Guy holding AK in Blue Area Islamabad

now police is reporting to Interior minister Ch Nisar that Zamurd Khan was stoped by police but after some time he sneaked and went close to the terrorist by him self

police has nothing to do with it.
 
.
سکندر نے ملک کو بدنام کیا، سخت سزا دی جائے، والدہ کا مطالبہ


اسلام آباد ڈرامے کے مرکزی ملزم ملک سکندر کی والدہ نے وزیراعظم اور چیف جسٹس سے مطالبہ کیا ہے کہ سکندر نے ملک کو بدنام کیا، اسے سخت سزا دی



SOURCE:

DUNYA NEWS


http://dunya.com.pk/index.php/dunya-headline/188330_1#.UhEE3z9YWAU
 
. .
I will not even goto see my son, Sikander’s mother Interview​



 
Last edited by a moderator:
.
One of the best comments on this pointless drama.


Zamurrad’s sin: adding insult to injury...Islamabad diary


Ayaz Amir
Tuesday, August 20, 2013


Zamurrad’s sin: adding insult to injury...Islamabad diary
The emperor without his clothes; Government of the Mandate made to look foolish, in full view of a bemused and disbelieving nation; a lone gunslinger, with wife and children, at the centre of it all; and the government’s talk champion, undisputed in his field, Nisar Ali Khan, otherwise holding forth on everything from foreign policy to the state of the nation, missing from the scene of this heady performance. Not only not to be seen but, amazingly, not even to be heard.

This drama – for once the word drama not out of place – goes on and on, for more than five hours…the setting, Jinnah Avenue in Islamabad but the audience, prime-time audience too, the entire nation, the government’s role throughout outstripping the bounds of the serious and becoming wild comedy.

And if this wasn’t hilarious enough, into the TV frames walks Zamurrad Khan, patting the kids and, using this as a feint, lunging at the gunman, Sikander. Shots are heard and it’s all over. From the government’s point of view not only is this the wrong end to the drama, this is rubbing it in, because Zamurrad’s pedigree is all wrong. He, the St George to the rescue, instant hero hailed as a hero across the nation, is from the hated, discredited, not-to-be-mentioned PPP. If a script had to go wrong it couldn’t get more wrong than this. This is adding insult to injury.

Stunned into silence…all quiet on the PML-N front. But if most PML-N leading figures have not been able to bring themselves to say a good word about Zamurrad they have had the decency to remain quiet. Not so the party’s Admiration Wing, the media qawwals with soaring voices who sing Mian Nawaz Sharif’s praises day and night. Foam on their lips, wild anger in their eyes: how dare Zamurrad, and by extension the PPP, steal the honours of this comic evening?

There’s almost a campaign afoot to malign Zamurrad. He was being stupid and foolhardy and it could all have gone horribly wrong. The gunman could have opened fire, blood would have flowed, and then who would have been responsible for the consequences? It’s hard to figure out what’s more funny, the drama as it unfolded, showing the best of our officialdom in a coma, or this wild-eyed reaction.

It could have gone so horribly wrong. Ah, so true, as in every act of daring – a lone act like Zamurrad’s or something reckless on the battlefield – there is always the danger of things going wrong. But does anyone have to tell the qawwals that this is what risk-taking means? You take your chances. You know that your head might hit the rocks, that the chances of success are slight and the margin of error great. And yet the brave soul, the intrepid soul, the foolhardy soul who if he had any sense would stick to his bed or his armchair, takes his chance, plunging into the swirling waters.

Have the qawwals never heard of Danton? At the height of the French Revolution, in the midst of internal turmoil and external invasion (the Austrian army was attacking from the east), what was Danton’s prescription to save the situation? “…il nous faut de l’audace, et encore de l’audace, et toujours de l’audace” – “We need audacity, and yet more audacity, and always audacity.”

Much on similar lines Marshal Foch’s famous battle-cry in the First World War: “My centre is giving way, my right is retreating, situation excellent, I am attacking.”

Let not the musicians forget that fortune favours the brave. Did fair lady ever warm to a timorous man? You can’t get a lady onto the dance floor, forget about anything more spectacular, without some pluck and daring…a smile on your lips, a slightly rakish manner. Horses don’t care for nervous riders. Women have never cared for cowards or narrators of cautionary tales (one reason for my less than stellar success in this sphere).

Yes, Zamurrad’s folly could have triggered a minor massacre. But then Tariq bin Ziyad could have been defeated before the Rock of Gibraltar and, having set fire to his boats himself, never an action more foolhardy, how would he have escaped? Hannibal crossing the Alps, the Mongols riding so far away from home, Babur venturing into unknown India …(examples from history which are legion), foolhardy moves that could easily have gone wrong. And then who would have been responsible for the consequences?

The Islamabad pantomime should have been allowed to go on. Zamurrad had no business trying to put on the stunt he did. But he pulled it off, at great personal risk to himself. Of the crowd gathered there he alone proved to be the man of the moment. That is what matters. The rest is irrelevant. And he was lucky, not a small matter. Napoleon, other things apart, wanted his generals to be lucky.

Of course there will be more attempts to belittle Zamurrad. The PML-N has always been good at this sort of a thing. And the interior minister, with his gift for manoeuvre, will keep trying to obfuscate the issue. But the more he does so, the more he hurls threats at police officials for allowing Zamurrad to get near the gunman (and more on the same lines), the more attention will he draw to the comic performance of his own departments that eventful evening.

But he is his own best judge and will do what he thinks is best. As close Nawaz Sharif adviser in 1998 he was instrumental in gifting Musharraf to the nation as army chief. He hasn’t apologised for that. He won’t apologise for this latest fiasco. Expect him instead to keep painting Zamurrad as the chief villain of this piece. Reminiscent of Goebbels really: keep repeating a thing, however outrageous, and people will come to believe it. Only problem in this case is that the nation was witness to this farce… in real time too. So the scope for revisionism, or exaggeration, becomes a bit limited.

But think of the larger canvas. The PPP down and out, to the extent that no one ready to take its name in polite company; and the PML-N on the summit of things, expected to perform the unlikeliest of miracles. Now this shot-in-the-arm for the PPP; and for the PML-N a downsizer, revealing both party and emperor in their naked glory…all because of a character from Hafizabad called Sikander. Strange are the ways of Providence.

Of the qawwals and their choreographers we need to put some questions. At this juncture of our history, Pakistan beset with as many perils as France was during its revolutionary period, turmoil within and the enemy not only at the gates but spread all over, does the country need more Nisar Ali Khans and Imran Khans, going round and round in circles, unable to give things their proper name, prophets of caution and dithering, or do we need some foolhardy souls as role models, who can come forward, holding their lives in their hands – role models like the winsome Malala Yousafzai or the overweight Zamurrad Khan?

Our hearts should go out to Nawaz Sharif. He’s always had a transparent face, quick to show joy and depression. These days he looks so confused. And counsellors with a gift of the gab, always ready with silver-tongued answers, don’t help matters. He would have made a passable prime minister for ordinary times. If only these were ordinary times.

But let us not lose heart and let us pray for some pale reflection of a Danton – we won’t get the real article – to teach a nation not too familiar with audacity the virtues of audacity. So here’s to Malala, and here’s to Zamurrad Khan, and in the desert of our desires may there be more like them.

Email: winlust@**********

Zamurrad
 
.
Sometimes it seems that Ayaz Amir takes it across the line, and starts to spew personal vendetta.

It has been awfully visible on TV for the past few days. Especially regarding this specific incident where every other person has become an expert in hostage situation.

missing from the scene of this heady performance. Not only not to be seen but, amazingly, not even to be heard

What is this supposed to mean? He was in transit and was only supposed to give broad outlines, kill the person or not. The rest of the operational matters are with the officer in the place, because he knows best. No need to get in every other person and make a mess.

Even though I am a PTI fan, I used to listen a lot to Ayaz Amir even when he was in PML. But since he left PML, he has been on a personal vendetta it seems, highly disappointing.

Oh and BTW for all the people crying over that why this thing took 9 hours...Germany: Hostage Crisis Ends After Police Raid

The great German Police also took 9 hours...where are the criticizers here? Yes, run away. These hostage situations always take this long. I don't see German media or any other media criticizing the Germans for it. Because they know that these things are best left to people who actually know this stuff, and not to 2 bit media anchors who are jack of all trades.
 
.
It will be an intellectual dishonesty to ignore a different point of view where argument are soundly based. I would only add that there is a very fine dividing line between 'Heroism' and 'Madness'. A normally sane person would think twice before putting himself in a situation where death is the most likely outcome. This makes all heroes borderline mad.


Madness as heroism


Iftikhar Ahmed
Tuesday, August 20, 2013


We live in a country where one’s greatest enemy is a neighbour who belongs to a different ethnicity; where a religion of peace has become the instrument of violence; and where loss of life has become nothing more than a footnote to our daily routine.

But even in this reality, what happened in Islamabad on the evening of August 15 was beyond belief. Like a scene from some low-budget Lollywood movie, the episode of the lone gunman named Sikandar marks a new low in the way our law enforcement, civil society, media channels, and political representatives behave in times of crises.

The events, as they unfolded during six hours of live telecast by all local channels, culminated in more than a simple drop-scene of one man’s arrest. Despite the ‘heroics’ (madness?) of Zamurrad Khan, the entire episode raises more questions than it answers. The brittle mettle of all our democratic institutions – including the police, politicians, media and civil society – stands exposed, and must be reassessed.

Let us first get the obvious out of the way: the likes of Sikandar exist all over the world. One keeps hearing of incidents where acts of individual madness have held even the most secure societies hostage. What is important, however, is the manner in which institutions react during such events.

The one question that has been asked the most by theatrical TV anchors (and responded to quite unprofessionally by their reporters) is how a heavily armed person could penetrate an otherwise supposedly high security area? Why was the gunman not stopped at one of the many roadblocks that are sprinkled across Islamabad?

Debate about the virtues (or lack thereof) of the ‘roadblock mindset’ aside, it is pertinent to be mindful of the fact that each day almost 200,000 vehicles enter Islamabad from different directions. Even if all available police personnel were deployed on the roads, it would be humanly impossible to physically check everyone entering Islamabad. In fact, the chaos, delays and disruption caused in the process of thoroughly checking every tenth vehicle (20,000 vehicles) would paralyse the entire city.

But this does not absolve the police of their responsibility to keep our streets safe by employing some other, lesser intrusive method. A rethinking of our ‘naaka’ culture must be employed. And this initiative, while in conjunction with the political leadership, must emanate from the police leadership.

It is hard to imagine the decision of the police authorities to not cordon a ‘larger’ area of the scene? Why not push the crowd back to a distance where there could not be danger of crossfire casualties? In such situations, security must override the public’s instinct to view the drama? Is it not reasonable, even required, to sacrifice the idea of unlimited media access at a crime scene, in case it compromises safety of the public?

What about the reasonability on the part of the public? Armed with mobile cameras and the desire to declare ‘I was there’, have we, as a society, lost all perspective of distinguishing between excitement and danger? Is this simply a consequence of lack of education among the masses, or is there a deeper impulse among our people to be seduced by sensationalism?

Who creates a market for this sensationalism? Must our media channels, in a race to outdo each other, continuously try and get closer to the scenes of such events, even if it is traumatising for (some of) the viewers and dangerous for themselves? In this day and age, when the power of ‘free’ media reigns supreme, can a police constable really be expected to hold back these forces of ‘freedom’ in the interest of public safety?

Have we turned our media-waves into an assembly-line machine that craves and feeds on ‘breaking news’… all the while blaming law-enforcement agencies and undermining any progress that could be made towards peaceful negotiations? Is there a vested media interest to highlight acts of madness and in the process discredit all efforts of law-enforcement agencies as a legitimate way of creating ‘news’? Does the media have no responsibility beyond reporting? Should the media not shift its focus from ‘ratings’ to becoming a responsible partner of the state and its people in times of crisis?

What about individual political personalities attempting to turn the scene of crisis into an opportunity of personal grandeur? Notwithstanding the bravado of Zamurrad Khan, could he not have significantly worsened the situation and lost his life in the process? What legal authority do individual parliamentarians have in dictating the terms of a law-and-order situation? In such events, the law already provides a chain of command for restoration of order. Why distort it to accommodate political mileage? Are these parliamentarians trained hostage negotiators? Could they, in the process, not send mixed signals to the culprit and destroy all hope of a peaceful settlement?

And in case the situation becomes worse due to the interference of these individuals, who would be held responsible? Will it not still be the police and local administration? Does the interference of political personalities not weaken the institution and credibility of the police, and erode the confidence of the people in law-enforcement agencies? And is that not damaging the project of institution-building in Pakistan?

During those six hours where was the legal apparatus – the Police Act 1861 (district magistrate and his magistracy) – under which the Capital Territory is administered? Was it not their responsibility to spearhead the negotiations taking place to safeguard the life and property of the public? Why did the operational police command or the district magistrate not have the autonomy of action rather than being remotely controlled from the ministry of interior for strategy or tactics to deal with the issue? And what was the need to summon the Rangers for this event when the ICT police was well-equipped to deal with the situation?

This episode – and the conduct of all stakeholders – has demeaned us as a society and lowered the esteem of our institutions. For better or worse, the gunman and his demands had the captive ear of our entire nation for six hours. The events proved a sad reality for us all: taking a part of society hostage is an effective way for anyone to have his voice heard and demands considered, particularly when the demands are not worth considering. Our inefficient law enforcement, dramatic media and theatrical polity turned the madman into a hero whose every move had to be watched.

If Pakistan is to become a modern, stable nation, we must – all of us – resist the temptation to jump on the bandwagon of sensationalism and anarchy. We must empower institutions, instead of being left to the whims of individual political negotiators. We must strengthen our police, and restrain our media. And above all, we must divorce ourselves from our animal instinct, and start believing in planned processes, instead of individual acts of ‘heroism’, as a long-term strategy to combat violence in our society. Perhaps, in this way, we can one day stumble upon some measure of peace in our land.

The writer, a former inspector general of police, is the managing director of Public Policy Review Center in Islamabad.Email: iftikhar_ahmed@pprc.com.pk
Madness as heroism - Iftikhar Ahmed
 
.
p1_37.jpg
 
.
This is a much better analysis...which focuses on the real issues rather than crying over why it took 5 hours.

Just a small correction, Sikander was indeed intercepted by a Police Mobile and a traffic Policeman, just before a checkpoint. So saying that he alluded authorities and entered without a challenge would be intellectual dishonesty.

Here is what I said a few days before, and the above article says the same:

1- Not blocking the SIM of the attacker. This should have been done in the first instance. Within half an hour they had got a complete background and made contact with the relatives. They could have gotten the phone number or something...they also did an easy load on his phone around Maghrib.

The lines of comm should have been blocked without any time wasted, this would also have prevented the media getting to him. The media only angered him more by their trash talk.

2- The media and spectators should have been kept at least 700 m back. If they don't listen by soft talk, then give them a stick up the backside. It is the state doing it's work, who are you to butt in.

3- The politicians and unrelated persons should never been allowed to talk. Shadi main Abdullah deewana. Who is Nabeel Gabol to come and talk? This way, any Jack and Jill can come on his own and say that he couldnt bear it on TV. They should have been told of F off.

But to be fair to the police, they also had their hands tied. The politicians and media rule over Police like kings. When a policeman stops a politician (that too like Nabeel Gabol), he says "Oa tu kaun hota hai, pata hai main kaun hoon? Main MNA hoon, abhi tera thana badalwata hoon". And the policeman backs off.

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/social...-ak-blue-area-islamabad-98.html#ixzz2cV3YU2zs

Not keeping the public and media back and politicians away was a failure of the police, but it stems form the culture we have generated in the past few years, where media controls all. Nobody dares question the media, not even the judges or ministers.
 
.
One of the best comments on this pointless drama.


Zamurrad’s sin: adding insult to injury...Islamabad diary


Ayaz Amir
Tuesday, August 20, 2013


Zamurrad’s sin: adding insult to injury...Islamabad diary
The emperor without his clothes; Government of the Mandate made to look foolish, in full view of a bemused and disbelieving nation; a lone gunslinger, with wife and children, at the centre of it all; and the government’s talk champion, undisputed in his field, Nisar Ali Khan, otherwise holding forth on everything from foreign policy to the state of the nation, missing from the scene of this heady performance. Not only not to be seen but, amazingly, not even to be heard.

This drama – for once the word drama not out of place – goes on and on, for more than five hours…the setting, Jinnah Avenue in Islamabad but the audience, prime-time audience too, the entire nation, the government’s role throughout outstripping the bounds of the serious and becoming wild comedy.

And if this wasn’t hilarious enough, into the TV frames walks Zamurrad Khan, patting the kids and, using this as a feint, lunging at the gunman, Sikander. Shots are heard and it’s all over. From the government’s point of view not only is this the wrong end to the drama, this is rubbing it in, because Zamurrad’s pedigree is all wrong. He, the St George to the rescue, instant hero hailed as a hero across the nation, is from the hated, discredited, not-to-be-mentioned PPP. If a script had to go wrong it couldn’t get more wrong than this. This is adding insult to injury.

Stunned into silence…all quiet on the PML-N front. But if most PML-N leading figures have not been able to bring themselves to say a good word about Zamurrad they have had the decency to remain quiet. Not so the party’s Admiration Wing, the media qawwals with soaring voices who sing Mian Nawaz Sharif’s praises day and night. Foam on their lips, wild anger in their eyes: how dare Zamurrad, and by extension the PPP, steal the honours of this comic evening?

There’s almost a campaign afoot to malign Zamurrad. He was being stupid and foolhardy and it could all have gone horribly wrong. The gunman could have opened fire, blood would have flowed, and then who would have been responsible for the consequences? It’s hard to figure out what’s more funny, the drama as it unfolded, showing the best of our officialdom in a coma, or this wild-eyed reaction.

It could have gone so horribly wrong. Ah, so true, as in every act of daring – a lone act like Zamurrad’s or something reckless on the battlefield – there is always the danger of things going wrong. But does anyone have to tell the qawwals that this is what risk-taking means? You take your chances. You know that your head might hit the rocks, that the chances of success are slight and the margin of error great. And yet the brave soul, the intrepid soul, the foolhardy soul who if he had any sense would stick to his bed or his armchair, takes his chance, plunging into the swirling waters.

Have the qawwals never heard of Danton? At the height of the French Revolution, in the midst of internal turmoil and external invasion (the Austrian army was attacking from the east), what was Danton’s prescription to save the situation? “…il nous faut de l’audace, et encore de l’audace, et toujours de l’audace” – “We need audacity, and yet more audacity, and always audacity.”

Much on similar lines Marshal Foch’s famous battle-cry in the First World War: “My centre is giving way, my right is retreating, situation excellent, I am attacking.”

Let not the musicians forget that fortune favours the brave. Did fair lady ever warm to a timorous man? You can’t get a lady onto the dance floor, forget about anything more spectacular, without some pluck and daring…a smile on your lips, a slightly rakish manner. Horses don’t care for nervous riders. Women have never cared for cowards or narrators of cautionary tales (one reason for my less than stellar success in this sphere).

Yes, Zamurrad’s folly could have triggered a minor massacre. But then Tariq bin Ziyad could have been defeated before the Rock of Gibraltar and, having set fire to his boats himself, never an action more foolhardy, how would he have escaped? Hannibal crossing the Alps, the Mongols riding so far away from home, Babur venturing into unknown India …(examples from history which are legion), foolhardy moves that could easily have gone wrong. And then who would have been responsible for the consequences?

The Islamabad pantomime should have been allowed to go on. Zamurrad had no business trying to put on the stunt he did. But he pulled it off, at great personal risk to himself. Of the crowd gathered there he alone proved to be the man of the moment. That is what matters. The rest is irrelevant. And he was lucky, not a small matter. Napoleon, other things apart, wanted his generals to be lucky.

Of course there will be more attempts to belittle Zamurrad. The PML-N has always been good at this sort of a thing. And the interior minister, with his gift for manoeuvre, will keep trying to obfuscate the issue. But the more he does so, the more he hurls threats at police officials for allowing Zamurrad to get near the gunman (and more on the same lines), the more attention will he draw to the comic performance of his own departments that eventful evening.

But he is his own best judge and will do what he thinks is best. As close Nawaz Sharif adviser in 1998 he was instrumental in gifting Musharraf to the nation as army chief. He hasn’t apologised for that. He won’t apologise for this latest fiasco. Expect him instead to keep painting Zamurrad as the chief villain of this piece. Reminiscent of Goebbels really: keep repeating a thing, however outrageous, and people will come to believe it. Only problem in this case is that the nation was witness to this farce… in real time too. So the scope for revisionism, or exaggeration, becomes a bit limited.

But think of the larger canvas. The PPP down and out, to the extent that no one ready to take its name in polite company; and the PML-N on the summit of things, expected to perform the unlikeliest of miracles. Now this shot-in-the-arm for the PPP; and for the PML-N a downsizer, revealing both party and emperor in their naked glory…all because of a character from Hafizabad called Sikander. Strange are the ways of Providence.

Of the qawwals and their choreographers we need to put some questions. At this juncture of our history, Pakistan beset with as many perils as France was during its revolutionary period, turmoil within and the enemy not only at the gates but spread all over, does the country need more Nisar Ali Khans and Imran Khans, going round and round in circles, unable to give things their proper name, prophets of caution and dithering, or do we need some foolhardy souls as role models, who can come forward, holding their lives in their hands – role models like the winsome Malala Yousafzai or the overweight Zamurrad Khan?

Our hearts should go out to Nawaz Sharif. He’s always had a transparent face, quick to show joy and depression. These days he looks so confused. And counsellors with a gift of the gab, always ready with silver-tongued answers, don’t help matters. He would have made a passable prime minister for ordinary times. If only these were ordinary times.

But let us not lose heart and let us pray for some pale reflection of a Danton – we won’t get the real article – to teach a nation not too familiar with audacity the virtues of audacity. So here’s to Malala, and here’s to Zamurrad Khan, and in the desert of our desires may there be more like them.

Email: winlust@**********

Zamurrad
http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...crisis-friday-incident-analysis-solution.html
 
.

Zamurd Khan inquiry makes sense, but why inquire why shots were fired?

Sikander shot 3 times from one of his guns, fourth time the bullet jammed in the barrel. So he was prepared to shoot and was lethal a that time. His bullet also hit his wife. Then he started to run to his left, when you have your hands up and are surrounded, you don't run.

All this made him a valid target for the police officials. If anybody gets suspended for this, then the morale of Police will go down like a rock, and the Police will not shoot anybody (not even the clear robbers or terrorists), as Rangers do it now. You got the result of all these actions in QUetta, where one FC got killed on a checkpost.
 
.
This is a much better analysis...which focuses on the real issues rather than crying over why it took 5 hours.

Just a small correction, Sikander was indeed intercepted by a Police Mobile and a traffic Policeman, just before a checkpoint. So saying that he alluded authorities and entered without a challenge would be intellectual dishonesty.

Here is what I said a few days before, and the above article says the same:



Not keeping the public and media back and politicians away was a failure of the police, but it stems form the culture we have generated in the past few years, where media controls all. Nobody dares question the media, not even the judges or ministers.

Then I suggest you to inject your desired mindsets and channels to counter response,tit for tat.

Best Regards,
Slav defence
 
.
Zamurd Khan inquiry makes sense, but why inquire why shots were fired?

Sikander shot 3 times from one of his guns, fourth time the bullet jammed in the barrel. So he was prepared to shoot and was lethal a that time. His bullet also hit his wife. Then he started to run to his left, when you have your hands up and are surrounded, you don't run.

All this made him a valid target for the police officials. If anybody gets suspended for this, then the morale of Police will go down like a rock, and the Police will not shoot anybody (not even the clear robbers or terrorists), as Rangers do it now. You got the result of all these actions in QUetta, where one FC got killed on a checkpost.

Because according to your source,police has not allowed to shot,if police has not issue order then how?the main point of their question is that who has violated police's command?they are questioning of lack of discipline mainly,I assume.

Best Regards,
Slav Defence
 
. .
Because according to your source,police has not allowed to shot,if police has not issue order then how?the main point of their question is that who has violated police's command?they are questioning of lack of discipline mainly,I assume.

Best Regards,
Slav Defence

7hrs to negotiate ......but enough bro......day before yesterday your all news channel was discussing only this incident even in entire prime time..............but i assume things got delayed because kids was with him.....other wise, if will be alone, your police could control situation with in 30 min.....because of one incident , can't say entire system is collapse.......ho jata hai
 
.
Back
Top Bottom