Thursday, November 27, 2008

Thursday, September 25, 2008

Toilets to face away from Mecca for 2012 Olympics London

Another example of extent of superstition that has creeped into the psyche of our people:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1061051/Londons-Olympic-Park-toilets-turn-away-Mecca-respect-Islamic-law.html

"Toilet facilities are being built at London's Olympic Park so Muslims will not have to face Mecca while sitting on the loo.

...

Last year, thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money was used to ensure toilets at Brixton prison in London did not offend Islamic law."

I personally don't blame those who end up believing in this since ignorance is widespread, but the so-called scholars who advocate and/or tolerate this sort of nonsensical behavior should be smacked upside down over their heads.

Friday, September 19, 2008

I don't have his heart.

Pakistan is going to be the new Iraq, so to speak in the upcoming months, anyone watching the current news could see it coming.

How good would this be for the US, Pakistan and the rest of the world?

In this program http://pkpolitics.com/2008/09/18/capital-talk-18-september-2008/, (I'm sorry but it's in Urdu) watch this guy who is a social worker from Bajour, Dr Khalil-ur-Rahman, describing how Pakistani helicopters bombed his car and where about 40 people got killed/injured and his son lost both legs (his picture is shown).

What's left me practically flabbergasted is how composed this guy still is and still claims "he loves Pakistan as his country".

Now, what will the free world do in the upcoming months to address thousands of parents like him? As a citizen of the so-called free world, I don't know.

But what I do know is that according to the locals of that area, barely ANY Talibans or Al Quaida's members have been killed in American and Pakistani bombings, they practically all have been civilians. The news reports claiming X number of terrorist died in so and so attacks is all hogwash.

I also know that the locals are swearing that the military solution will only devastate this area further, will kill more civilians, and will strengthen the terrorists by letting them take advantage of legitimate civilian anger.

Sunday, September 14, 2008

Why McCain chose Palin?

People have been shocked/thrilled/disappointed by McCain's choice of Palin as his running mate. There have been several theories circulating in the media as to why did he choose her over other much more experienced and intelligent candidates, but the one theory that I think is the most viable and that jumped at me the moment I saw her was about:

1) Youth (especially compared to McCain)
2) Sex (Hillary set a precedence that Palin could benefit from)

Looks matter a lot more than people think in American elections, and McCain knew that he had lost battle to Obama. So the only chance he had was the VP and he availed it! Which seemed to have worked too, to some extent.

However, I think, come November and Obama will destroy McCain in the debates and will win, hands down, unless something big happens within the next 2 months, dramatically changing the status quo. It's not a coincidence that American forces are moving from Iraq to Pak/Afghan border right about now.

What exactly that drama is going to be is anyone's guess ... but I'll have my popcorn ready, and I suggest you do too, after all it's once in a 4 year occasion so might as well enjoy it :)

Sunday, August 17, 2008

The Ultimate Rejection Letter

I just stumbled it, and thought was worth a laugh :)

=======================

http://www.chaosmatrix.org/library/humor/reject.html

Herbert A. Millington
Chair - Search Committee
412A Clarkson Hall, Whitson University
College Hill, MA 34109

Dear Professor Millington,

Thank you for your letter of March 16. After careful consideration, I
regret to inform you that I am unable to accept your refusal to offer me
an assistant professor position in your department.

This year I have been particularly fortunate in receiving an unusually
large number of rejection letters. With such a varied and promising field
of candidates, it is impossible for me to accept all refusals.

Despite Whitson's outstanding qualifications and previous experience in
rejecting applicants, I find that your rejection does not meet my needs at
this time. Therefore, I will assume the position of assistant professor
in your department this August. I look forward to seeing you then.

Best of luck in rejecting future applicants.

Sincerely,

Tuesday, August 5, 2008

Power of you, the common man.

UPDATE 1: A preliminary hearing of Siddqui's case is set for Aug. 19, 2008 in NY.

UPDATE 2: Siddiqui's lawyer in Pakistan, Iqbal Jaffry's motion aimed at compelling the Pakistani government to disclose what it knows about her status after her disappearance is set for Sept. 2, 2008 in Pakistan.

======================

A 30 year old Pakistani woman, an MIT-trained biologist. March 30, 2003 she disappears with her three kids in Karachi/Pakistan, allegedly picked by FBI and Pakistan’s ISI (FBI equivalent). Agencies either deny any connection to her or claim she was working for Al-Quaida.

A Story about a prisoner 650 in Afghanistan’s Bagram prison surfaces, who has allegedly lost her mind due to years of continuous torture and rape.

It’s suggested by various media outlets and people in the “inner circles” that they are both the same person, Dr. Afia Siddiqui.

Here is her picture http://karachi.metblogs.com/2008/07/30/prisoner-650-dr-afia-siddiqui-missing-since-2003/

For five years, no definite news on Dr. Afia come to light except rumors until yesterday, August 4, 2008. All of a sudden it’s reported that Dr. Afia has been flown to New York from Afghanistan to face charges for assaulting US officers in Afghanistan.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/aafia-siddiqui-arrested-attempting-kill/story.aspx?guid=%7B3A35E6A8-B07A-4D91-BDB9-CEA47FF0E47B%7D&dist=hppr

I have not heard anything about her three kids yet.

What one makes of this story is up to oneself. I just hope that she, along with thousands of innocent victims of this blind and brutal secret machines, gets justice.

I believe the reason for this extraordinary development is that as more and more people found out and questioned the authorities about it, the more pressure it put on them to which they finally succumbed.

People did not let her story die despite of all the odds and as a result she seems to be walking alive today. The power of people seems to have once again won the odds.

If you think this is worth spending your time, here is a very basic list of things you could do, if you can suggest more, please do, I’ll add it to the list (except for facebook which does not allow editing Notes).

1) Sign the Asian Human Rights Commission’s Urgent letter of Appeal http://www.ahrchk.net/ua/support.php?ua=UAC-167-2008 which will send an email to Bush, Karzai, Gilani, Farooq Naek & Rehman Malik

2) Sign the online petition http://www.petitiononline.com/af258633/petition.html for her release

3) Join the two groups in Facebook which are participating in raising awareness for her release http://www.new.facebook.com/group.php?gid=28530506102 and http://www.new.facebook.com/group.php?gid=21777867538

4) Email left-oriented bloggers like DailyKos http://www.dailykos.com/contactus (send email to Markos Moulitsas) and Huffington Post http://www.huffingtonpost.com/contact/ (can email scoop@huffingtonpost.com)

Points you could mention in the emails/calls:

1 - The secret detention program is now well known and we are just starting to learn the facts about how extensive it was.
2 - There is mounting evidence that Aafia Siddiqui was illegally detained at Bagram.
3 - The government's charges against her seem too ludicrous to believe and need to be fully investigated.
4 - Now that she is in the U.S. this is an important opportunity to hear her story and learn the truth.

Monday, July 28, 2008

Save a life, literally!

I got this as an email forward, and thought it would be worth sharing...

STROKE: Remember The 1st Three Letters...S.T.R.

http://www.bio.uci.edu/bsa/stroke.htm

Stroke Identification

During a barbeque, a friend stumbled and took a little fall - she assured everyone that she was fine (they offered to call paramedics) and that she had just tripped over a brick because of her new shoes. They got her cleaned up and got her a new plate of food. While she appeared a bit shaken up, Ingrid went about enjoying herself the rest of the evening. Ingrid's husband called later telling everyone that his wife had been taken to the hospital - (at 6:00 pm, Ingrid passed away.) She had suffered a stroke at the BarBQ. Had they known how to identify the signs of a stroke, perhaps Ingrid would be with us today. Some don't die. They end up in a helpless, hopeless condition instead.

It only takes a minute to read this...

A neurologist says that if he can get to a stroke victim within 3 hours he can totally reverse the effects of a stroke...totally. He said the trick was getting a stroke recognized, diagnosed, and then getting the patient medically cared for within 3 hours, which is tough.

Recognizing a Stroke

Remember the 3 steps, STR. Read and Learn!

Sometimes symptoms of a stroke are difficult to identify. Unfortunately, the lack of awareness spells disaster. The stroke victim may suffer severe brain damage when people nearby fail to recognize the symptoms of a stroke. Now doctors say a bystander can recognize a stroke by asking three simple questions:

  • S: Ask the individual to SMILE .
  • T: Ask the person to TALK to SPEAK A SIMPLE SENTENCE (Coherently) (i.e. . It is sunny out today)
  • R: Ask him or her to RAISE BOTH ARMS.

NOTE: Another sign of a stroke is this:

Ask the person to stick out their tongue. If the tongue is crooked (if it goes to one side or the other), that is also an indication of a stroke. If the person has trouble with ANY ONE of these tasks, call 911 immediately and describe the symptoms to the dispatcher.

http://www.bio.uci.edu/bsa/stroke.htm

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Ending the ban on Offshore Oil Drilling in the US

This seems to be the headlines all over today http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/19/washington/19drill.html?hp

Some claim that this would bring down the oil prices, and decrease American dependence on foreign oil (read Middle Eastern) in general.

Generally it's thought that the less dependent the US economy is on the Middle Eastern oil, the more peaceful ME would be, since the US would not be interested in ME oil anymore.

While the truth is, I think, that as long as oil itself is a valuable commodity and could benefit the competing international powers like Russia, China, Europe, the US would not accept losing 'control' over such a commodity, hence, would not stop meddling in ME affairs.

No other explanation seems to explain US' relentless meddling in the ME for over half a century.

Moral of the story, if you want peace in the Middle east, do whatever it takes to make oil useless. ME millionaire/billionaire sheikhs and American corporations will become poorer (can I get an aww?), but the regular people will not be bombed (chemically and otherwise) and pummeled with tanks and gunship helicopters as much. I have a feeling people will appreciate the change.

PS: On a similar note, check out Chomsky's recent interview http://dissentmag.wordpress.com/2008/05/13/kunstler-and-chomsky-peak-oil-and-the-middle-east/

Thursday, June 5, 2008

Turkey, a secular extremist?

When religion takes a fanatic turn, Taliban/Saudi type societies come into being, when secularism takes a fanatic turn, Turkey-like societies come into being, it seems ...

This was a news headline on BBC today:

"Court annuls Turkish scarf reform"

In other words, if you wear a head scarf, you cannot attend a public university.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7438348.stm

Friday, May 30, 2008

"False Religion": McCain "Spiritual Guide" Says America Founded to See Islam Destroyed

Islam is 'pernicious' and the 'extremists' are the 'mainstream' Muslims, says McCain's spiritual leader.

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=100193

Don't you love the Republicans!

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Syria and Rwanda more peaceful than the US and Russia?

http://www.visionofhumanity.org/gpi/news/24/us-and-russia-ranked-among-least-peaceful-nations/

This bit particularly caught my eye:

"The low ranking of the US, which comes below Syria, Rwanda and Mongolia, reflects its high level of -military expenditure and engagement. It also has proportionally more citizens in jail than any other state."

You can see the rest of the rankings : http://www.visionofhumanity.org/gpi/home.php

Saturday, May 3, 2008

Britains Got Talent - Desi Michael Jackson Dance

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpU7zzteddM

Sunday, April 27, 2008

Challenge the status quo

I stumbled this website just now, it gives a great summary of where, everything we use, comes from an goes. It's a 20 minute video , but worth every minute of it, I promise! Check it out and spread around if you like it :)

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

Saturday, April 19, 2008

Curious GWB - George Bush Raps

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7JX-Bx0BETQ

Friday, April 4, 2008

Brilliance in action!

I came across Kiva.org recently and am so impressed by their work, I wish to become part of them or similar organization one day God Willing ( insha'Allah ;) ).

What they basically do is let people like you and I lend money (starting as low as $25) to anyone around the world too poor to benefit from regular banks etc.. This model is known as microfinance. I just signed up 6 businesses.

This is all you gotta do:

1) Go to http://www.kiva.org/app.php?page=businesses

2) Select someone from the list or refine your search by region, gender etc. and click on "more>>"

3) Click on "Checkout>>", unless you want to add more loans.

4) Donate some money to kiva itself for running this effort, if you like.

5) Go through the sign-up process and bam! You're in business.

The crazy thing is that this is not even a donation, you get your money back as the borrowers pay you back (there is a small risk involved of course should the borrower fail to pay you back on time but turns out microlending has return rates that surprised even the most accomplished of the lenders/bankers!).

So you can use the same money over and over to help more and more people. I personally can't think of a better way to enable people to help each other with minimum physical or monetary input and maximum output, hence, the title. ;)

Good Luck!

Tuesday, April 1, 2008

Tibet/Buddhism VS China/Communism, who is the bad guy?

Since Tibet/China issue is all over the news these days and I did not know much about it, I thought I would do a bit of research. The mainstream media, like always, seems to portray a monolithic image, i.e., "Chinese are the cruel and the monstrous, the Tibetans are the victims". So after some research, I came across an article by Michael Parenti "Friendly Feudalism: The Tibet Myth" (http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html).

I liked the article mainly because it attempted to explore the other side of the picture, which helped me understand the nature of the conflict a bit better.

Article was full of surprises for me, here is a glimpse of it:

1) To start with my favorite paragraph:

"To welcome the end of the old feudal theocracy in Tibet is not to applaud everything about Chinese rule in that country. This point is seldom understood by today’s Shangri-La believers in the West. The converse is also true: To denounce the Chinese occupation does not mean we have to romanticize the former feudal régime. Tibetans deserve to be perceived as actual people, not perfected spiritualists or innocent political symbols. “To idealize them,” notes Ma Jian, a dissident Chinese traveler to Tibet (now living in Britain), “is to deny them their humanity."


2) Tibet's religious leaders and elites (including monks, Dalai Lamas) have a long history of cruel serfdom. To quote:

"The serfs were taxed upon getting married, taxed for the birth of each child and for every death in the family. They were taxed for planting a tree in their yard and for keeping animals. They were taxed for religious festivals and for public dancing and drumming, for being sent to prison and upon being released. Those who could not find work were taxed for being unemployed, and if they traveled to another village in search of work, they paid a passage tax. When people could not pay, the monasteries lent them money at 20 to 50 percent interest. Some debts were handed down from father to son to grandson. Debtors who could not meet their obligations risked being cast into slavery."

It was the Chinese who abolished this heinous practice and gave basic human rights to the serfs, after their invasion of Tibet. If you think China has human rights issues, can you imagine how bad it must have been in Tibet??

3) Oppressive theocracy of Buddhism is not very different from Christianity, Islam etc. Dalai Lamas and the monks are not very different from the preists and the Mullahs. Some are good, some are bad. An example for the latter:

"Journeying through Tibet in the 1960s, Stuart and Roma Gelder interviewed a former serf, Tsereh Wang Tuei, who had stolen two sheep belonging to a monastery. For this he had both his eyes gouged out and his hand mutilated beyond use. He explains that he no longer is a Buddhist: “When a holy lama told them to blind me I thought there was no good in religion.”21 Since it was against Buddhist teachings to take human life, some offenders were severely lashed and then “left to God” in the freezing night to die. “The parallels between Tibet and medieval Europe are striking,” concludes Tom Grunfeld in his book on Tibet."


4) Tibetan resistance has not always been "peaceful" as opposed to what you hear in the media. E.g.:

"The issue was joined in 1956-57, when armed Tibetan bands ambushed convoys of the Chinese Peoples Liberation Army. The uprising received extensive assistance from the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), including military training, support camps in Nepal, and numerous airlifts.27 Meanwhile in the United States, the American Society for a Free Asia, a CIA-financed front, energetically publicized the cause of Tibetan resistance, with the Dalai Lama’s eldest brother, Thubtan Norbu, playing an active role in that organization. The Dalai Lama's second-eldest brother, Gyalo Thondup, established an intelligence operation with the CIA as early as 1951."

5) CIA secretly funneled $1.7 Million/year to the Tibetan exile community throughout the 1960s against the Chinese (surprise!).

6) Dalai Lama does not represent all of Tibet, there are at least three more schools of thought who do not accept Dalai Lama as their sole leader. Hence, the followers of Dalai Lama do not represent the will of all of Tibetans either. I wonder if they even represent the majority?

7) Monks are not exactly "monks", they run harems of women for their pleasure. To quote:

"Kim Lewis, who studied healing methods with a Buddhist monk in Berkeley, California, had occasion to talk at length with more than a dozen Tibetan women who lived in the monk’s building. When she asked how they felt about returning to their homeland, the sentiment was unanimously negative. At first, Lewis assumed that their reluctance had to do with the Chinese occupation, but they quickly informed her otherwise. They said they were extremely grateful “not to have to marry 4 or 5 men, be pregnant almost all the time,” or deal with sexually transmitted diseases contacted from a straying husband. The younger women “were delighted to be getting an education, wanted absolutely nothing to do with any religion, and wondered why Americans were so naïve [about Tibet]."

5) Chinese did undermine Tibetan culture.

So to recap, I would repeat the same paragraph as in the beginning:

"To welcome the end of the old feudal theocracy in Tibet is not to applaud everything about Chinese rule in that country. This point is seldom understood by today’s Shangri-La believers in the West. The converse is also true: To denounce the Chinese occupation does not mean we have to romanticize the former feudal régime. Tibetans deserve to be perceived as actual people, not perfected spiritualists or innocent political symbols. “To idealize them,” notes Ma Jian, a dissident Chinese traveler to Tibet (now living in Britain), “is to deny them their humanity."

Monday, March 31, 2008

All of Turkish government being sued out of power.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7321964.stm

This lawsuit highlights the fear that staunch "secularists" in Turkey posses of religion. The reason I put quotes around secularists is because secularism is supposed to be neutral toward all religions, Turkish folks (although a minority) seem to have taken it to a whole different level, however.

To summarize, the ruling party in Turkey AKP has recently "relax[ed] the rules on the Islamic headscarf.", this (in addition to some other reforms that the party has undertaken over the years) has been seen as an attack on "secular Turkey", hence, despite the fact that AKP won 47% of Turkish votes in the last election, the court is still going to consider AKP's ban from politics.

How is that for a doze of democracy?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7321964.stm

Monday, March 24, 2008

Don't you love Google?

To quote:

"Notice here how Google's lobbying paid off for everyone: Verizon gets the airwaves it wanted. Google gets access to Verizon's customers, who will now be allowed to run the search company's apps on their phones. And we? Right, we get the freedom to do what we want on the wireless Internet. Thanks, Google."

http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2008/03/21/fcc_spectrum/

Sunday, March 23, 2008

Pak's coalition gov't speaking some sense, who could've guessed.

So there was an article today in Guardian about Pakistan's new "coalition government" claiming that they will be willing to "meet with the militants", as opposed to continue the violent confrontation that Musharraf had launched couple of years or so ago.

I personally don't think the new incumbents are doing this because somehow all of a sudden they have developed a concern for the 'good of the people' since they are the same individuals who have raped and pillaged Pakistan for decades. I think the change of heart occurred because they know that by continuing the current "strategy" of use of force, that the US has advocated and required of Pakistan since 9/11, they would only pitch Pakistan into a potential civil war. Being the smart thieves that they are, they know that no Pakistan = no looting!

No matter what the incentive, I think it's a step in the right direction. Would they keep to it or not, only time would tell...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/mar/23/pakistan?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

Saturday, March 22, 2008

Two year old geography whiz

This kid is just two years old, and can practically point out every country on the world map! I especially love the way she takes 'jumping breaks' and then continues on, too cute!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r43yCiKlbCo

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Pakistan toward a Civil War, as we speak

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/mar2008/paki-m19.shtml

People seem to think that more use of force in Pakistan and Afghanistan, as opposed to diplomacy and negotiations, is the solution to the so-called "war on terror".

The only thing I would like to know is where such use of force has actually made things better for a common man? We are not talking about the rich for whom, it's obviously made millions and billions.

As common sense dictates, and many other political/military analysts predict, more use of force in Pak/Afghan region would intensify internal violence, and in case of Pakistan, would push it toward civil war.

To quote form the article below:

"The escalation of US operations can only have a profoundly destabilising impact, not just in the border regions, but throughout Pakistan, which is already wracked by deep political crisis. While the PPP and PML-N won a decisive victory in last month’s election, in part because of their criticism of Musharraf’s collaboration with the US, the mood will quickly turn as the new government seeks to maintain the US alliance amid ongoing American strikes on Pakistani soil."

But like always, those in power are doing what would benefit them as opposed to what would benefit the people, since in the end, if things went down south, the rich and the powerful always have the options of fleeing and living in exile, it's the poor who pay with their livelihood and life for such mistakes.

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/mar2008/paki-m19.shtml

Monday, March 17, 2008

Joke: Modern Medicine

An Israeli doctor says "Medicine in my country is so advanced that we can take a kidney out of one man, put it in another, and have him looking for work in six weeks."

A German doctor says "That is nothing, we can take a lung out of one person, put it in another, and have him looking for work in four weeks.

A Russian doctor says "In my country, medicine is so advanced that we can take half a heart out of one person, put it in another, and have them both looking for work in two weeks."

The Texas doctor, not to be outdone, says "You guys are way behind, we recently took a man with no brains out of Texas, put him in the White House for eight years, and now half the country is looking for work."

Friday, March 14, 2008

Asif Zardari is acquitted, go fabulous Pakistani justice!

Asif Zardari (the husband of recently assassinated Benazir Bhutto), one of the most corrupt officials Pakistan has ever known, has been acquitted of all charges. Just so happens that the same man is known as Mr. 10% in Pakistan for taking massive kickbacks, not to mention the famous incident where he tied a bomb to a businessman's ankle to make him go to the bank and withdraw money to give to Zardari.

Now Zardari can run for an office, including Pakistan's Prime Ministership!

And so the comedy of fucked up Pakistani justice continues...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7296955.stm

Thursday, March 13, 2008

How do I exchange US $ with something else?

So given that the US economy is going into a recession (or already is, depending on who you talk to), the US $ has been and going to further lose its value. Common sense dictates you exchange it something that wouldn't lose it's value as quickly.

It could be Euro, or gold http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7294040.stm

Any suggestions as to how should I go about doing exchanging the currencies or buying gold? If you've done it, do have a preferred dealer (person, website) etc.?

Any economists, business gurus, bankers out there?

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

Dolphin saving whales

Animals are so intriguing, there is still so much to know about them! Another example, where a dolphin came out of nowhere to help two stranded whales where all other efforts almost failed by the humans.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7291501.stm


==============

A dolphin has come to the rescue of two whales which had become stranded on a beach in New Zealand.

Conservation officer Malcolm Smith told the BBC that he and a group of other people had tried in vain for an hour and a half to get the whales to sea.

The pygmy sperm whales had repeatedly beached, and both they and the humans were tired and set to give up, he said.

But then the dolphin appeared, communicated with the whales, and led them to safety.

The bottlenose dolphin, called Moko by local residents, is well known for playing with swimmers off Mahia beach on the east coast of the North Island.

Malcolm Smith
Mr Smith said he gave the dolphin a pat to say thank you
Mr Smith said that just when his team was flagging, the dolphin showed up and made straight for them.

"I don't speak whale and I don't speak dolphin," Mr Smith told the BBC, "but there was obviously something that went on because the two whales changed their attitude from being quite distressed to following the dolphin quite willingly and directly along the beach and straight out to sea."

He added: "The dolphin did what we had failed to do. It was all over in a matter of minutes."

Back at play

Mr Smith said he felt fortunate to have witnessed the extraordinary event, and was delighted for the whales, as in the past he has had to put down animals which have become beached.

He said that the whales have not been seen since, but that the dolphin had returned to its usual practice of playing with swimmers in the bay.

"I shouldn't do this I know, we are meant to remain scientific," Mr Smith said, "but I actually went into the water with the dolphin and gave it a pat afterwards because she really did save the day."

Thursday, March 6, 2008

Guess what makes the headlines.

So a new report by a consortium of British aid agencies says that the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip is the worst in forty years, holding Israel responsible (Israel disagrees) http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-03-06-voa24.cfm, but guess what makes the BBC headlines http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7282269.stm where eight people were killed by two gunmen.

As brutual as this shooting is, it still wouldn't even compare to what Israel has done to Palestinians over the decades. But mainstream media apparently doesn't think so.

Tuesday, March 4, 2008

Beginner's guide to Muslim Bioethics

This was published in a Wired Science blog, nice to see a rather positive (and true) aspect of Islam, as the author says "Interesting stuff, and in some ways more progressive than I expected."

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/03/a-beginners-gui.html

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Religion says, Humanism says, we are all equal, blah blah blah

So this was a headline on BBC today http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/7262830.stm Was this really a news though? This has been going on for decades and given today's economic models (Capitalistic/Globalizatio
n),it will only get worse according to all the analysts that I've read, so what gives?

On the downside, people will keep dieing, but on the upside, others (including ourselves) will get a good feel when we throw some money the poor's way ... Aside from a few, we barely see anyone talking about how irrational and unjust today's wealth distribution is, at national AND international levels, isn't that something?

"A study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research at United Nations University reports that the richest 1% of adults alone owned 40% of global assets in the year 2000, and that the richest 10% of adults accounted for 85% of the world total. The bottom half of the world adult population owned barely 1% of global wealth."

"In the United States at the end of 2001, 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth, and the top 1% controlled 38%. On the other hand, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distribution_of_wealth

Monday, February 18, 2008

Mohajirs, Karachi, and Pakistani politics - part 1

http://gbytes.gsood.com/2007/07/25/karachi-mohajirs-and-pakistani-politics/

[Note: I (author of this blog) don't necessarily agree with all the views expressed here]

Pakistani politics cannot be understood without paying close attention to the deep ethnic cleavages that line its polity. The seminal moments in its brief history – the 1971 war with India which led to the creation of Bangladesh, the horrific violence that rocked Karachi in the mid-90s– both are a reflection of Pakistan’s inability to transcend narrow ethno-linguistic boundaries in either revenue allocation or in crafting policies around language and culture.

Here below, I explicate how the vicious ethnic politics in Karachi, the first capital of Pakistan and a city which contributes 35% (in some analysis 60 plus percent) of all revenue to the central coffers, has come to define the ethno-political dysfunction that has marked Pakistan’s history.

Mohajirs

The Arabic word Mohajir means a refugee and in Pakistan, it generally refers to non-Punjabi Indian Muslim immigrants. One of the reasons why Urdu speaking immigrants are seen as Mohajirs and Punjabi immigrants not is that while the Punjabi Muslim immigrants were able to assimilate very well within the ethnically similar Punjab, the educated Urdu speaking immigrants from the Gangetic plains and elsewhere formed a culturally distinct group in Sindh.

The Mohajirs post partition formed the educated ’salariat’ (Hamza Alavi’s term describing the educated British favoring class during the Raj) in the nation’s capital city, Karachi. They were overrepresented in the bureaucracy, media, and managerial positions in the private sector. Politically, they were ardent nationalists who studiously avoided ethnic politics and favored Islamist parties until the reorganization in mid 1960s. The Mohajirs cynically supported the military and strong central government so as to keep the federalist pressures, as in demands by other ethnicities for ‘fairer’ representation in bureaucracy and elsewhere, at bay. The arrangement fell apart as Bengalis rebelled and won independence in 1971. The same year Bhutto was elected and he ushered in a federalist structure by first revising the Regional Quota system in federal bureaucracy to lower Mohajir quota from 17 to 7.6%, and then by nationalizing some key financial institutions that were owned by Mohajirs. Since then things have changed dramatically for Mohajirs - they have come to be underrepresented in state educational colleges and jobs, and have lost some of their economic muscle.

The rulers and the Mohajirs

Pakistan as a nascent nation got off to bad start. Its ‘father of the nation’ (Baba-e-Qaum) – really a Jawaharlal Nehru and Gandhi rolled in one for that country – died a little more than a year after its creation. Whatever little chance the nation had of enlightened leadership vanished as Liaquat Ali Khan, a close confidant of Jinnah, was assassinated merely four years into his reign as a Prime Minister. Then, after a period that saw 6 prime ministers in 7 years, Mohammad Ayub Khan grabbed power in a coup and steered Pakistan into an alliance with the US. Midway during his rule in 1964, he fought and won elections, which were widely seen as rigged, against Fatima Jinnah, sister of Mohammad Ali Jinnah. Mohajirs sided with Fatima Jinnah in that election and suffered targeted violence at the hands of Gohar Khan, son of Ayub Khan, for such temerity. Just as an aside Ayub Khan’s son Gohar Ayub Khan was Pakistan’s Foreign Minister in the Nawaz Sharif government and Gohar’s son, Omar Ayub Khan, is Pakistan’s current Minister of State for Finance. Ayub Khan in 1964 moved the capital city from Karachi to Rawalpindi on an interim basis and then to Islamabad, its current resting place. The move was widely seen by Mohajirs as a way to marginalize them. In 1969, he turned reigns over to the only second Shiite after Liaquat to lead Pakistan, General Yahya Khan. Yahya Khan of course famously led Pakistan into another losing war with India in 1971 that led to the creation of Bangladesh. Following the 1971, nearly half a million Bihari Muslims, who had moved to East Pakistan in 1947, demanded that they be expatriated to Pakistan. Out of the nearly half a million refugees, Bhutto – the successor to Yahya Khan – only allowed 100,000 before his Sindhi constituency forced him to abandon the rest. The stranded Biharis live in refugee camps in Bangladesh till today. The issue of these abandoned Biharis further alienated the Mohajirs who had vigorously campaigned for them.

Bhutto was elected at a time when Pakistan felt chastened by the independence of Bangladesh. Bhutto felt that his first job was to let of the steam of ethnic pressures within Pakistan by redrafting the quota system for federal bureaucracy and other educational institutions so as to provide for more proportional representation of different ethnicities. Bhutto, who is generally considered an enlightened statesman within Pakistan- and there are good grounds to think that the authoritarian leader was just that, was also a closet Sindhi nationalist. Bowing to his native constituency, the Sindhis, he instituted urban-rural quotas that resulted in a precipitous decline in the number of jobs to which the predominantly urban Mohajirs were eligible. The interesting side note to this controversy is that given that the regional quota system that was based on the demographic strength of each ethnicity, the census became the most politicized document in Pakistan.

After Bhutto’s assassination, Pakistani Politics was run by Zia-ul-Haq singly for about 10 years. Haq’s rule is legendary not only for his fateful decision to involve Pakistan in Afghanistan, but also for his full throttle Islamization that he unveiled to support the prior cause. Haq, a Punjabi, also deeply reviled Mohajirs. The war in Afghanistan led to another refugee influx in Karachi that was to change the dynamics within Karachi to the worse once more. This time the influx of Pathans was also accompanied by wide availability of small arms. “Between 1986 and 1989, the prices of guns went down by 40 to 50% in Karachi. The TT-pistol sold for Rs. 5500 in 1987. In 1989, it was priced at Rs. 3000. In the Frontier, the price of an AK-47 went down from Rs. 40 000 in 1980 to Rs. 16 000 in 1989.”

End of 1988 saw Bhutto being elected as PM of Pakistan in a much feted election. The time period of course ties neatly with the ‘end of Afghan war’ and the reduced utility for US of a military regime in Pakistan. Bhutto, daughter of Zufikar Ali Bhutto, rode to power with a coalition government that included MQM. Post election, Benazir is widely alleged to have run one of the most corrupt regimes. Just to give you a flavor of the bankruptcy of the regime, Madam Bhutto appointed her mother, Nusrat, as a senior minister without portfolio and her father-in-law as chairman of the parliamentary public accounts committee. In addition, ever the Sindhi nationalist and eager to firm up her credentials there, she didn’t throw much rope to Mohajirs. The relationship quickly soured and MQM in turn found an ally in Nawaz Sharif’s Punjabi dominated PML. It is important to note that this proved to be a death knell in terms of Sindhi-Mohajir relations against what many saw was Punjabi dominance, especially post Zia, at the center. Bhutto oversaw the worst of rioting in Karachi in the mid 90s in her second stinct at the helm. Corruption wise things didn’t change much in her second stint as PM either as she appointed her husband, Asif Zardari, as the environment minister. Of course, Zardari did more than merely handle the environment. After moving through an interim prime minister, Sharif eventually came to power in 1997. He in turn was deposed by General Pervez Musharraf, a Mohajir, in 1999 – which brings us to the ‘end’. We can talk about Shaukat Aziz but lets not. Most trace the ascent of Musharraf to the top in a Punjabi dominated military exactly because of his status as a Mohajir - the Punjabi military bosses promoted him for they felt that a Mohajir would never attempt, and much less succeed, in a coup d’etat. Musharraf’s relations with the Mohajir community of course have been on warm terms but that has attracted the ire of nearly all others. The 2007 Karachi riots hence can be seen as a stage managed confrontation between PPP led Sindhis and MQM.

Demographic factors in Karachi

Sindh’s urban society was dominated by Hindus before 1947. The native Muslim population was primarily rural. The emigration of Hindus post partition left a vacuum which was filled by the educated Muslim immigrants from India. In the 1981 census, only 6% of the population identified themselves as Sindhi.

The relative affluence of the Mohajirs was always a rubbing point for the Sindhis.
Post 1971 war with India during which Bangladesh was created, nearly 100,000 Bihari Muslims who had migrated to Bangladesh during partition immigrated to Karachi. Another 300,000 Biharis were left stranded in Bangladesh in over 60 refugee camps as political will ran out as Bihari immigrants became a political liability in Sindh. The Bihari immigrants who speak Urdu have traditionally been seen as part of the Mohajir community.

Then starting with 1980s, Afghan refugees starting pouring into Karachi as Afghan war got underway. The Afghan immigrants were widely alleged to have brought along with them the ‘drug and arms’ mafia and the number of small arms in city just ballooned as ethnic conflagrations became deadlier. The Afghans threw their weight politically behind the Punjabis, and the nexus worked effectively and to deadly effect in the riots in the mid 80s and then again in the mid-90s.

Language and Cultural issues

Urdu was instituted as the official national language at the inception of Pakistan even though only a pitifully small fraction of Pakistanis spoke the language. In the widely cited 1961 census results, it was reported that Urdu was the mother tongue of a mere 3.7% of all Pakistanis (7.5% in West Pakistan), and only 15% of West Pakistanis were able to speak Urdu at all. It is hopefully already clear that Urdu was the language spoken by the Mohajirs and they fought tooth and nail to keep it the only ‘official’ language.

Language has been a key issue in Pakistani politics. In fact one of the major rallying points for East Pakistanis was recognition of Bengali as one of the state languages. In Sindh, there was widespread resentment against Urdu. In 1972, Sindh province (Bhutto) passed a resolution instituting Sindhi as the second official language. The act led to ‘language riots’ as Mohajirs, concerned about losing economic privilege that emanated from their ability to speak Urdu, rioted. Language riots are often seen as a turning point in the city’s history and the relation between Mohajirs and Sindhis.

Revenue Sharing Issue

In 1995-96, Karachi’s estimated contribution to the Federal and Provincial Tax Revenue was Rs 403 billion or just a little over 63%. Karachi metropolitan area’s population of about 12-14 million then was just about 10% of Pakistan’s total population. The Federal Government reallocated just over 2% of the revenues it harvested from Karachi back into Pakistan that year. The imbalance can be largely explained by the redistributive nature of tax regimes in which taxes from rich provinces are often used to provide for public goods elsewhere. While that is largely true, there was also explicit discrimination that led to such neglect of infrastructure that it almost killed the cash cow of Pakistan.

————–
This is part I of a two part article on the issue.

http://gbytes.gsood.com/2007/07/25/karachi-mohajirs-and-pakistani-politics/

Mohajirs, Karachi, and Pakistani politics - part 2

http://gbytes.gsood.com/2007/07/31/mohajirs-karachi-and-pakistan-part-2/

[Note: I (author of this blog) don't necessarily agree with all the views expressed here]

Mohajir Quami Movement

In 1978, Altaf Hussain formed a student organization called the All Pakistan Mohajir Student Organization (APMSO). The nascent student organization quickly leached students from Islami Jamiat-e-Talaba, the student wing of Jamaat-e-Islami. In doing so, it sealed its future as an adversary of IJT. APMSO and IJT regularly clashed on the college campuses in the early 80s, and have continued to battle since then.

In 1984, the Mohajir Quami Mahaz (MQM) set up with by Altaf Hussain. Between 1984 and 1986, Hussain worked to recruit its cadre and then launched itself on national stage with a massive rally in Karachi on August 8th, 1986.

Between 1986 and 1988, MQM worked towards a Sindhi-Muhajir alliance. In 1988, MQM fought national elections (under the name Haq-Parast) in an alliance with Sindhi dominated Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) led by Benazir Bhutto. In the elections it emerged as the third largest party with 13 seats in the National Assembly. MQM also achieved a landslide victory in municipal elections (1987) in Karachi. MQM’s first stint in sharing power was largely ineffectual in delivering real tangible improvements as the governance was marred by both infighting within MQM as well as active sabotage by Bhutto’s PPP. MQM withdrew support from the Bhutto government and fought the next election in an alliance with Nawaz Sharif’s Pakistan Muslim League (PML). The Mohajir-Sindhi alliance provided the only real chance to thwart the Punjabi dominance in Pakistani politics, and PPP’s parochialism and MQM’s need to deliver to its constituents, led to an early demise to the alliance. MQM’s decision to ally with the Punjabis would soon prove to be unfortunate.

The coalition Islami Jamouri Ittehad (IJI or Islamic Democratic Front) rode to power in the 1990 elections. Between 1990 and 1992, MQM got a free reign under Jam Sadiq Ali. But with power came, dissent and party indiscipline. Aamir Khan, a comrade in arms with Altaf, began muscle flexing. In June 1992, the military concerned about MQM’s rising star launched Operation Cleanup to weed out Altaf Hussain. All of this was done with the express consent of Nawaz Sharif. While the Operation was officially to ‘weed out criminal’, it turned into an all out witch hunt against MQM. The military launched not only conducted raids but also led a media assault- it released photos ’showing’ that MQM was a terrorist organization that ran torture chambers, and newspapers, fed by the military, ran expose’ pieces about its gun running operations. Disagreements between Altaf Hussain and the then MQM’s two prominent militant leaders, Afaq Ahmed and Aamir Khan had first surfaced towards the end of 1991. The military led campaign, sidled with a political campaign, helped create ‘mutiny’ within ranks and led to the formation of “Real MQM” or Haqiqi Mohajir Quami Movement (MQM-H) under Aamir Khan. Funnily, the progenitors of the splinter group were also killed by the avid embrace of its parents, the government. The group quickly lost credibility on the street and eventually just became a front group for the government to wage war against MQM.

Soon after the launch of the Operation, MQM withdrew support from the coalition. The same year, Altaf Hussain went to UK ostensibly for ‘medical treatment’ and converted the opportunity in to a voluntary exile. Since then he has led the organization via telephone, faxes, and other modern communication mechanisms. It is important here to note the central role of Altaf Hussain in leading MQM.

MQM is seen as a one man party which deeply relies on the charismatic leadership of Altaf Hussain. Hussain, who was born to lower middle-class background in Azizabad in Karachi, is known as Quaid (leader) and Pir Sahib within the ranks. MQM itself is a cadre based tightly knit organization. The organization prides itself on superb discipline within its ranks. The organization imposes a premium on its cadres for strict adherence to, what it sees, are essential tenets for building a strong organization. In its pamphlet on training workers, it lists four essential elements of a strong movement: “(1) “blind faith” (literal translation from Urdu) in the leadership; (2) elimination of individuality; (3) strong sense of common purpose; and (4) complete knowledge of, and agreement with the ideological basis of the organization.”

MQM boycotted the 1993 elections. The PPP government in 1994 gerrymandered the districts so as to bypass MQM’s ironclad grip on Karachi. 1994 onwards Karachi was under grip of violence as MQM(A) fought pitched battles with ISI supported MQM(H). In November 1994, the army was withdrawn from law enforcement duties in Sindh, but the paramilitary Rangers were reinforced and specially trained police inducted. During 1995 and 1996, hundreds of people were killed by Rangers and police, including hundreds of members of the Muttahida Qaumi Movement.

In 1997, MQM(A) tried to moderate its stance in terms of ethnicity by changing its name Muthaida Quami Movement (United National Movement). Reflecting MQM’s nature (and need) for forming alliances of convenience, MQM again switched partners in 1998. The ruling PML(N)’s troubled alliance with the MQM(A) in Sindh province ruptured during October 1998. Without the MQM(A), the PML(N) no longer had the numbers to govern in the Sindh province, leaving a clear path for the opposition Pakistan People’s Party of Benazir Bhutto to join with the MQM(A) to form a majority in the Sindh assembly. Within a year, Musharraf was at the helm of Pakistan as its CEO.

Transportation Riots

The Soviet Army invaded Afghanistan in 1979. Almost right away Pathan refugees started pouring into Karachi. Pathans, on coming to Karachi, largely went into the transportation, rental, and money-lending businesses. Up until 1979, the informal housing market in Karachi was controlled by Punjabis and Mohajirs. Starting 1980, Pathans started taking over the informal housing sector. This created tensions between Pathans and the predominantly Mohajir (Bihari) renters of Orangi. These tensions came to a boil in 1985 during the transportation riots.

Between 1984 and 1985, Karachi minibuses, called the ‘yellow devils’, were responsible for on average two deaths per day. In 1985, a Pathan bus driver skipped a light and ran into a group of students of Sir Syed College. The Mohajir and Punjabi student activists from the Islami Jamiat-e Tuleba, the student wing of the Jama’at-e Islami rioted. Bihari basti dwellers of Orangi also joined the transport riots. The rioting saw Mohajirs in pitched battles with Pathans, who formed a partnership with the Punjabis – an alliance cemented by arms trade between Punjabi dominated military and the Pathans. The alliance between Pathans and Punjabis still stands; Pathans are seen as henchmen for the Punjabis in Karachi.

Analysis

The Mohajir conflict is not an ethnic conflict as Mohajirs don’t belong to a certain ethnicity but come from a variety of different ethnicities. The uniting cultural glue, if there is one, is the shared language – Urdu. The major thing that bound them together, especially initially, was economic interest. Economic interest was also what led them to mouth nationalist slogans as a way to propagate the status quo that distinctly advantaged them. The other part of Mohajir identity – the one which made them see as a different nationality- was formed in the era post mid 1960s, when ethnic aspirations had started battering Pakistan’s political landscape with gale force winds. Mohajir ‘identity’ formed under the pressure of Sindhi nationalism, and the Punjabi and Pashtun ethnic movements, and most importantly under the economic pressures created by limited resources and ‘unequal’ distribution. Certainly Sindhis felt that they had legitimate grievances for they believed that it was ‘their land’ and ‘their resources’ that were being ‘preyed’ upon by outsiders. Meanwhile, the Punjabis felt threatened by the economic ascendancy and dominance of the Mohajirs within Pakistan. Additionally, post ethnic quotas, the only way Mohajirs could demand economic rights legitimately as a group was to be considered a separate nationality on par with that of Sindhis, Punjabis, Pathans, and Balochs. And Mohajirs did just that. Given that Mohajirs were ethnically, and to a large degree –especially post immigration of poor Biharis- economically diverse, mobilizing them as a “nationality” proved tricky. The earliest mobilization attempts hence were focused around the style of clothing. It is often called the ‘Kurta-Pyjama’ mobilization.

The trajectory of Karachi and Pakistan could have been different had it not involved itself in Afghanistan. The Islamization unleashed by Haq to service the Muhajideen pipeline had a deep impact on the political and cultural fabric of Pakistan – an impact whose ripple effects are still being echoed in the demolished minarets of Lal Masjid, and Shia-Sunni relations in particular. Zia regime, which came at a time when concern about Iranian revolution was high, armed the Sunni extremists within Pakistan and helped perpetrate horrific violence against the Shias in mid 1980s. Zia’s regime also saw vicious persecution of other minorities like the Ahmaddis. The Afghan war also made available huge amounts of small arms within the country, something which was abused to deadly effect in ethnic clashes.

The Future

In 1998, Mohajir, Baluch, Pashtun and Sindh parties allied to form the Pakistan Oppressed Nations Movement (PONM), which seeks to challenge Punjab hegemony in Pakistan’s political life. Another group that represents Mohajirs, Sindhis, and Baluchis is the Grand Democratic Alliance. While these alliances proved ineffectual, there is now likelihood that Mohajir-Sindhi-Pathan alliance may take shape with Benazir-Musharaf and possibly ANP coming together to fight elections.



http://gbytes.gsood.com/2007/07/31/mohajirs-karachi-and-pakistan-part-2/

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

The Truth: Gujarat 2002: Thousands died, horrific Video

Bu-luuuuudddddd! Cutest Video

Are they really Muslims?

This is something I posted about a year ago (2/19/2007) on a different website, but unfortunately, it still stands true ...

==================================

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6375749.stm

"The train, running from Delhi to Lahore in Pakistan, was hit by two blasts at about midnight (1830 GMT Sunday) near Panipat, 80km (50 miles) from Delhi."

"It is thought three-quarters of the 750 people on the train were Pakistanis, as were most of the dead."

"But the fact that so many of the dead on the train were Pakistani Muslims may indicate that the devices were intended for a different target, or exploded prematurely, she says."

"The reaction from both governments suggests the prime suspects might be groups such as Lashkar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad..."

======

This train service was long awaited by Pakistanis and Indians as a sign of mutual cooperation, understanding etc. between the two countries.

So the mainstream media like always is going to put the blame on some "Islamic militant group" and most of us would probably buy that, nod our heads in disgust and move along - but what I REALLY want to know is, are they really a bunch of religious, motha-fuckin bastards who think blowing these children, women and men up would get them closer to God? Or the culrpits are purely politicaly motivated whose interests are better served by chaos than peace? And if so, who are they?

I know we are generally fan of Occam's razor but I just don't think this is one of those times ...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6375749.stm

Islam & America: Through the Eyes of Imran Khan

Hey guys,

http://blip.tv/file/515474/

Here is a 30 minute documentary by Imran Khan (Renowned Pakistani cricket player turned politician http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imran_Khan).

After watching it, if you think you did not learn anything new, I'm sure you could think of folks who could benefit from it, hence this note :) So spread the word as much as you can!

And remember this video attempts to only present the other side of the picture, so even if you don't agree with some or all of it, it's only trying to show the state of affairs as it is, as opposed to how should it be.

http://blip.tv/file/515474/

-Asif.

George Galloway interviews Imran Khan

Video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8546300751033754955

George Galloway (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Galloway) is a British Member of Parliament who is a very controversial figure due to his unorthodox political views in general, and on Middle East and South Asia in particular.

In this video he interviews Imran Khan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imran_Khan) on June 11, 2007 and discusses the current situation in Pakistan. It's an hour long interview so make sure you got your popcorn ready ... I think it's a must-see for anyone interested in Pakistani politics.

Video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8546300751033754955

Enjoy!

Feedom of Media in the West was better in the mid 1900s??

So I came across this interview of Noam Chomsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noam_Chomsky) and thought would post this part of it, it's pretty interesting, to say the least. It talks about history of media in the West and how today's internet age relates to it.

=====================

http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20070921.htm

CHOMSKY: Well, the history of media in the west is interesting. I mentioned that the period of the freest press in the US and England was the mid-19th century, and it was rather like what you were describing. There were hundreds of newspapers of all kinds, working class, ethnic, communities of all kinds, with direct active participation, real participation. People read in those days, working people. Like a blacksmith in Boston would pay a 16 year old kid to read to him while he was working. These factory girls coming from the farms had a high culture, they were reading contemporary literature. And part of their bitter condemnation of the industrial system was because it was taking their culture away from them. They did run extremely interesting newspapers and it was lively, exciting and a period of a really very free vibrant press, and it was overcome slowly, most true in England and the United States, which were then the freest countries in the world.

In England they tried censorship, it didn't work, there were too many ways around it. They tried repressive taxation, again it didn't work very well, similarly in the US. What did work finally was two things: concentration of capital and advertiser reliance. First the concentration of capital is obvious then you can do all kinds of things that smaller newspapers can't do. But advertiser reliance means really the newspapers are being run by the advertisers. If the source of income is advertising, the main source, well that's of course going to have an inordenent influence. And by now it's close to 100%. If you turn on television, CBS doesn't make any money from the fact that you turned on the television set, they make money from the advertisers. The advertisers are in effect, the corporation that owns it is selling audiences to advertisers, so of course the news product reflects overwhelming the interests of the corporation and the buyers and the market, which is advertisers. So yeah, and that over time, along with concentration of capital, has essentially eliminated or sharply reduced the diverse, lively and independent locally based media. And that's pretty serious.

In the United States, which has had no really organized socialist movement, nevertheless, as recently as the 1950s, there were about 800 labor newspapers which probably reached maybe 30 million people a week, which by our standards were pretty radical, condemning corporate power, condemning what they called the bought priesthood, mainly those who run the media - the priesthood that was bought by the corporate system offering a different picture to the world. In England, it lasted into the 1960s. In the 1960s the tabloids - which are now hideous if you look at them - they were labor-based newspapers in the 1960s, pretty leftist in their orientation. The major newspaper in England that had the largest circulation, more than any other, was The Daily Herald, which was a kind of social-democratic labor-based paper giving a very different picture of the world. It collapsed, not because of lack of reader interest, in fact it had probably the largest reader interest of any, but because it couldn't get advertisers and couldn't bring in capital.

So what you're describing today is part of the history of the west, which has been overcome slowly by the standard processes of concentration of capital and of course advertiser reliance is another form of it. But it's beginning to revive in the west as well through the Internet and through cheap publishing techniques. Computers, desktop publishing is now much cheaper than big publishing, and of course the internet. So the new technologies are giving opportunities to overcome the effects of capital concentration, which has a severe impact on the nature of media and the nature of schools and everything else. So, there's revival, and actually the major battle that's going on right now is crucial, as to who is going to control the Internet. The Internet was developed in places like this, MIT, that's the state sector of the economy, most of the new economy comes out of the state sector, it's not a free market economy.

The Internet is a case in point; it was developed in the state sector like here, actually with Pentagon funding, and it was in the state sector for about 30 years before it was handed over to private corporations in 1995 under Clinton. And right now there's a struggle going on as to whether it will be free or not. So there's a major effort being made by the major corporate centers to figure out some ways to control it, to prevent the wrong kinds of things from their point of view from being accessible, and there are now grassroots movements, significant ones struggling against it, so these are ongoing live battles. There is nothing inherent in capitalist democracy to the idea that the media have to be run by corporations. It would have shocked the founding fathers of the United States. They believed that the media had to be publicly run. If you go back to the...it’s hard to believe now…

http://www.chomsky.info/interviews/20070921.htm