Culture & Arts Original Articles

Liberal fascists support drone strikes against Hazrat Abu Yazid and Hazrat Baitullah Mehsud – by Riaz Malik Hajjaji

Related post: Protest against silence on drone attacks! – by Riaz Malik

Dear all,

Please unite urgently against this petition http://www.change.org/petitions/petition-resume-drone-attacks-on-taliban-al-qaeda-and-sipah-e-sahaba. This is a blasphemy to the sacred memory of Al Qaeda and TTP Shaheeds like Hazrat Baitullah and Hazrat Abu al-Yazid.

After the brave efforts of Hazrat Imran Khan against the liberal facists militants, our ghairat was restored and our brave Pakistani Arab, Pakistani Chechen, Pakistani Uzbek, Pakistani Uighar and Pakistani –German-British-Egyptian were spared the indiginity of further drone attacks. Further to this report by Jang, “Halt in drone strikes helping militants” peace has been restored and our assets have regained their ghairat and the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan and FATA has regained its sovereignty. For many years, Hazrat Imran Khan bravely bore the taunts of Farhat Taj and Dr. Taqi, often at great risk to his afternoon siesta. He had to bear the indignity of seasonal fruits wrapped in the Daily Times newspaper and on one occasion after unwrapping a case of mangoes, his eyes fell on a Farhat Taj column on drones – that incident nearly cost Imran Khan a gain of 10 IQ points!

Special thanks also to Meera Ghani, Fundy Kasuri and Samad Khurram for staring down the threats that were coming their way from the Octagenarian Lyari Women’s Club and Multan Centenarian Association of Knitters. Pacifist groups like Islami Jamiat Tulaba and the ISI have often been the victims of these groups but they stood by Imran Khan and his youth brigade and anti-droni activists.

Just when we were approaching the DAWN that was promised by pious Jamaat-e-Islami poet Faiz and just when our Iqbalian Ghazis were regaining the right to take the lives of Rafzis/collaborators/girl students and the non=PTI supporting mud people, along comes this petition, Save us from terrorist Petition: Resume Drone Attacks:

“Based on statistical evidence, such Jihado-sectarian terrorists are responsible for hundreds of attacks on Afghan soldiers and civilians, NATO officials and soldiers, Westerns citizens in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Sufi (Barelvi) Muslims in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Shia Muslims (including but not limited to Hazara Shias) in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Ahmadi Muslims, Christians, Hindus and other ethnic or religious minority communities in the region. Jihadis trained in Taliban-Sipah-e-Sahaba controlled areas are also known to have conducted terrorist operations in various European countries.

Recently (in November 2012) , USA and NATO have put a halt to their sophisticated drone attacks on Al Qaeda-Taliban-Sipah-e-Sahaba hideouts in FATA buckling under strategic and diplomatic pressure of Pakistan army. The absence of the drone attacks has enabled the Jihado-sectarian terrorists to reorganize and reinforce their attacks against Western, Pakistani and Afghan targets.

This fact has also been reported in the international media. For example, the New York Times (8 January 2012) reports that:

A nearly two-month lull in American drone strikes in Pakistan has helped embolden Al Qaeda and several Pakistani militant factions to regroup, increase attacks against Pakistani security forces and threaten intensified strikes against allied forces in Afghanistan and elsewhere”

Human Rights Petition: Resume Drone Attacks

Dear pious Muslims and pretty PTI trolls,

General Pasha kay sadqay, we need you to Un-Sign this petition.

Syed Riaz Malik Qasimi Hajjaji, a proud descendant of Mohammad bin Qasim and his uncle Hajjaj bin Yusuf who are also set to join PTI, posthumously

About the author

Jehangir Hafsi

17 Comments

Click here to post a comment
  • Bold post by Riaz Malik. The shameful petition has been written by those who have sold their faith and integrity to their gods in CIA and RAW.

    It is statistically proven that more than 90 percent of drone attacks are killing innocent children and women.

  • Shahid,

    What is the source of the 90% figure?

    Civilian casualties’ is the most important aspect in drone problems. No humanitarian law or law of war permits that. Its repercussions like having negative impact on War on Terror and breeding more extremism come later. The loss of innocent human life is ab initio wrong. It is widely believed and quoted that hundreds of civilians are dying annually in drone attacks. Interestingly this assertion has been refuted by researches carried out by Aryana Institute for Regional Research Advocacy and by some independent researchers including Matthew Fricker, Avery Plaw, Brian Glyn Williams, Shahid Saeed and Awais Masood. They have shown not only that civilian casualties are quite fewer but also that drones are pretty popular among ordinary people of FATA. But since there have also been evidences on the contrary including some victims who came on media, it is for certain that innocents have died though their number is not sure. In contrary to the falsified narrative of urban middle class, that the Talibanization is the expression of Pukhtun nationalism and radicalism is an inherent Pukhtun trait, the reality is far more unlike. Pukhtun intellectuals, political activists and civil society have always unequivocally supported the Drones as measure of relief. At the end of the day they are Pukhtun people and their elected representatives, at the helm of affairs, who have offered most sacrifices in combating the Talbanization.

    http://criticalppp.com/archives/48058

  • Demystifying the drone — I —Shahid Saeed and Awais Masood

    The figures cited by a leading newspaper were so erroneous that their account of the total militants killed was less than the number of militants killed in a single drone strike that they themselves had reported. Such unethical exaggerations and fabrications should be unacceptable in journalism and they construct the wider narrative about drone strikes in the public opinion

    http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2010%5C10%5C27%5Cstory_27-10-2010_pg3_5

  • Empirical data: (credits Awais Masood, Shahid Saeed)

    Drone strikes have evolved to become a national political issue with the media and public opinion constantly pressing the government to take up the issue with the US. Opposition to drone strikes is mostly based on ill-conceived notions of sovereignty, ghairat (honour) and figures that seem to suggest that drone strikes are inaccurate and lead to a high number of civilian casualties (not to suggest that there cannot be any informed opposition to drone strikes). From Imran Khan to Munawar Hassan, right wing political parties and religious groups have used drone strikes to forward their agenda by misguiding people through erroneous, fabricated and fictional data. As a result, thousands of people have been mobilized across the country to oppose these strikes.

    Papers published such as “The CIA’s Covert Drone War in Pakistan, 2004-2010 : The History of an Assassination Campaign, “New Light on the Accuracy of the CIA’s Predator Drone Campaign in Pakistan” and “Sudden Justice? Evaluating the U.S. Predator Campaign in Pakistan” have already challenged the exaggerations and fabrications of these parties and media groups. The figures they provide, contradict the ones thrown at us. The casualty rates are 13.56 militants:1 civilian:3.35 unknowns according to one paper, the New America Foundation put civilian deaths at 24% and the Long War Journal at 9%. The figures cited by a leading newspaper were so erroneous that their account of the total militants killed was less than the number of militants killed in a single drone strike that they themselves had reported. Such unethical exaggerations and fabrications should be unacceptable in journalism and they construct the wider narrative about drone strikes in the public opinion.

    An online database of suicide bombings and drone strikes in Pakistan is maintained at a website called Pakistan Body Count (hereinafter referred to as PBC) by Dr. Zeeshan Usmani, a former Fulbright Scholar and currently Assistant Professor at GIKI. Fulfilling the tradition of the lack of intellectual integrity and dishonesty, his data has been used by various media outlets without giving him credit. The data reports that as of late September 2010, only 32 Al-Qaeda militants have been killed by US drone strikes in comparison to 1,778 civilians giving a paltry 1.76 percent strike rate accuracy. As we shall show categorically, much of this data is erroneous, flawed and plagued by numerous transgressions. Academic credentials alone cannot guarantee lack of bias and the use of technology cannot assure authenticity of data.

    The first problem is that Dr. Usmani has only two entities in his data i.e Al-Qaeda and civilians. Where do the Taliban fit in, precisely the Afghan Taliban, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) and Lashkar-e-Islam (LI)? Where does targeting monsters like Baituallah Mehsud and Qari Hussain Mehsud fit in this scenario? There is no justification for including TTP, LI or any other militant groups in the same category as civilians. Such gimmicks are only being used to mislead the whole world and any such defence of the flawed data is misleading and unacceptable. We cannot claim whether the data is manipulated and purposely flawed for ideological reasons. What we can assert is that this alone leaves a serious flaw in his data collection and since the Government of Pakistan officially declares TTP, LI and associated groups as terrorists and has been pursuing an active military campaign against them, including their deaths amongst civilians is a serious distortion of the truth, erroneous and contrary to acceptable logic. Their deaths are and should be included as a part of the accuracy of drone strikes.

    As can be seen from the errors mentioned below, casualties of Taliban and many other militant groups are included amongst civilian. The data is highly unreliable and use of this data for making any claims about drone accuracy would have severe epistemological implications. Moreover, the data, at multiple occasions, ignores reports of Al-Qaeda leaders and associates killed in attacks and the casualties are again reported as civilians. Even if Dr Usmani believes that the Afghan Taliban are not terrorists, militants or any other word as such, data collection on this issue should not classify them as civilians since they are the target of US forces and their death at the hands of a drone should count towards the success of the drone – regardless of the ideological leaning of the personal compiling statistics. If in his defence, Dr Usmani could claim that listing somebody as Al-Qaeda would require names i.e. confirmation that a certain person has died than this argument too falls apart since in their defence, opponents of drone strikes must bring names and information about each and every civilian killed in the strikes. The fact of the matter is that data collection on these issues is difficult but newspaper reporters use their local and intelligence sources to ballpark figures. Militant deaths are not reported by name unless it’s a leading figure whose death is celebrated by as martyrdom by militant groups themselves. Farhat Taj has already challenged the opponents to bring data to back their claims, and now so do we.

    There lies no factuality in the rhetoric that strives to create a cause and effect relationship between drone attacks and suicide bombing. These are shallow assertions with hollow foundations and no proof to back them up. They can, they are and will be used as a motivating factor, but they are just one amongst the hundreds of motivating factors used by militants. There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that any suicide bomber has been linked to or a potential bomber that has been apprehended had any acquaintance that died in a drone attack. We challenge the other side to bring forward any news report, intelligence report or a case report that states that the person caught or who carried out the bombing had any relative that died in a drone attack and he was avenging his family members. Most of the times, this assertion is made without any evidence. One of the cited examples is of Faisal Shahzad but that it is unbelievable since his life story as is tells how he was led to the TTP. Baituallah Mehsud once claimed that a suicide attack was in revenge for a particular drone strike but it is unbelievable that he and the group of his monsters wouldn’t have carried it anyway.

    The prime reason militants fight and suicide bombers exist is the world view of clash of civilizations, an ideological assertion of one’s one faith over the other’s and the view all military operations conducted by our forces are being conducted on the “behest of the US”, where they view death for their “greater cause” as the ultimate achievement and where life itself remains just a step towards a better eternal life they imagine. They view the state’s involvement in the war on terror, including the Operations in Wana, Tirah, Orakzai, Mohmand, Bajaur, South Warizistan, Operation Silence and Swat as only for “pleasing the US”, as guided by infidels. The drone attacks are an additional factor but in no way the prime motivating factor. The toxic religious dogmas of declaring everybody not cooperating with you as Kafir and liable to death is a major factor, not drones.

    The recent survey of public opinion in FATA by the New America Foundation sheds light on the issue. On the issue of drone strikes, overall 1 in 6 thinks they kill only militants and one third believe they kill both civilians and militants. However, among those with greater than 12 years of education, one in three thinks they kill only militants. The youngest age group thinks along the same lines as well. While 70% of the people polled strongly oppose drone strikes and only 1 in 10 lends his/her support to them, among those with greater than 12 years of education, 1 in 4 supports drone strikes.

    When it comes to views about targeting US forces, in Mohmand and North Waziristan three in four people think bombing US military forces is justified. A small percentage (1 in 6) but far higher compared to other areas in South Waziristan thinks that targeting Pakistani civilians is justified as well. The people of Orakzai do not seem to think that targeting Pakistani security forces or civilians or American security forces is justified at all. When it comes to the war itself, the highest support for US led war on terror comes from Bajaur. In contrast, the Afghan Taliban have the highest support in Mohmand. Pakistani Taliban have the support of nearly nearly half of the people polled from NWA.

    While some findings contradict that of the Aryana Institue survey – supported by Farhat Taj – we do not feel that the Aryana survey was anymore ethical or better in it’s sampling than this one.

    It is time that we form a responsible opinion about drone strikes, formed by statistics and facts and not emotions. All efforts must be undertaken to minimize collateral damage, including better intelligence and careful use of deadly force. There is just a smokescreeen of fake sovereignty that seems to be the main issue of concern to a lot of people. Based on the available facts, the ones not fabricated or distorted, militants have suffered heavily because of this remote targeting technology. Drone strikes are very much precise, based on intelligence that both sides often share and carried out based on mutual agreement and trust. The recent Campaign for Innocent Victims in Conflict (CIVIC) report recounts tales of some of the victims of drone attacks, hearty wrenching stories of people caught in the line of fire in a war of massive proportions. While the drone victim’s stories have been recounted in newspaper and report mentioned in the media, the tales of the people whose houses were demolished by the military when they razed entire villages or mistook the identity of the person have been avoided. Minimizing collateral damage is necessary, but forming any opinion based on concocted facts that can lead to a pause in the war is self-defeating.

    The media group referenced is Jang Group. In April 2009, they published figures that 687 civilians and only 14 Al-Qaeda leaders were killed in the drone attacks. Militants who were not top leaders were lumped up into civilians as usual. These two were erroneous and a large amount of data was the intellectual property of Dr Zeeshan Usmani that they used without giving him credit for.

    Data will continue to be updated as the entire data set has not been completed. We will provide a final account of what percentage of PBC data is accurate, including under-counting.

    Any omissions and errors on our part are highly regretted and will be corrected upon being pointed out. Certain dates have been adjusted since PBC mostly lists date when event is reported not when it occurs, causing a delay of one day.

    2004

    June 18. Wana. Nek Muhammad Wazir is killed in a suspected drone strike. PBC lists 1 Al-Qaeda and 4 civilian casualties. Accurate according to reports.

    2005

    May 14. Toorikhel, NWA. 2 including Al-Qaeda leader Haitham al-Yemeni are killed. PBC does not list strike.

    November 30. Asoray, NWA. PBC reports 1 Al-Qaeda and 5 civilian casualties. NYT reports death of High Value Target and 3rd in command of Al-Qaeda Abu Hamza Rabia. No details of collateral damage are provided. Somewhat accurate report.

    2006

    January 13. Damadola. Al-Qaeda’s second in command, Ayman al-Zwahiri escapes drone strike. Eighteen dead were locals. PBC reports 18 civilians. Accurate.

    October 26. Bajaur. Gunship helicopter attack by Pakistan Army (officially claimed although doubt remains) that killed 80 suspected militants is included as a US drone strike by PBC.

    November 2. Danday Darphakhel, NWA. Five people are killed. No claims of Al-Qaeda or militant linkages by NYT or CNN. Should be assumed to be civilians. Not reported by PBC.

    2007

    January 16. Salamat Kelay, NWA. Suspected drone strike kills 20-30 militants according to BBC and Reuters. Locals claim at least 8 were wood-cutters. Being officially opposed to foreign presence in Pakistan, Army spokesman claims it was a Pakistan Army helicopter gunship. PBC lists 30 civlians.

    April 28. Danda Saidgai, NWA. Daily Times reports three civilian deaths. Dawn reports four. PBC lists 3 civilian casualties. Accurate.

    June 19. Mami Rogha, NWA. PBC lists 20 civilian casualties (date erroneously mentioned as May 20). Reuters lists 32 militant deaths. Army claims it wasn’t an aerial attack but an explosion (denying foreign involvement to save face). Ambiguity over claims.

    November 2. Miram Shah. NYT reports 5 militant casualties as attack was on a Haqqani Madrassa. PBC lists 5 civilians.

    2008

    January 9. Mir Ali. PBC lists 6 civilian casualties. No mention in Af-Pak or any other listing.

    January 29. Mir Ali. Al-Qaeda leader and spokesman Abu Laith al-Libi is killed in the strike. BBC reports death of seven Arab and six Central Asian militants. PBC lists 1 Al-Qaeda and 11 civilian casualties.

    February 28. Azam Warsak, SWA. Dawn, citing AFP, reports death of 13 Al-Qaeda and Afghan Taliban militants. PBC lists 12 civilian casualties.

    March 12. Lwara Mundi, NWA. AFP reports 4 civilian casualties. PBC does not list strike.

    March 16. Dhook Pir Bagh, SWA. AFP and Telegraph report 16 militant casualties. Ambiguity whether they were militants. PBC lists 16 civilian casualties (erroneous date of March 19). Accurate.

    May 14. Damadola. PBC lists 1 Al-Qaeda and 11 civilian casualties. High Value Target Abu Sulayman Jazairi is killed. Lack of claim over rest of the people should allow ambiguity. Accurate to a certain extent.

    June 13. Makeen, SWA. Geo reports casualty of one person after drone was fired at with a RPG. Ambiguity over claim whether casualty was a militant or civilian. Not listed by PBC.

    July 28. Azam Warsak, SWA. Abu Khabab Al Masri is killed alongwith 3 other militants. 3 civilian deaths reported as well. Reuters reports 5 Al-Qaeda militant deaths. PBC lists 1 Al-Qaeda and 5 civilian casualties.

    August 6. PBC lists 13 civilian casualties in NWA. No link/source provided as usual. Possible August 12 drone strike listed on a Vietnamese news archive. Af-Pak does not list.

    August 13. Bhagar/Angor Adda, SWA. 9-25 militants including commander Abdul Rehman and Islam Wazir. Geo reports death of three Turk and several Arab militants as well. PBC lists 22 civilian casualties.

    August 20. Wana. 8 militants killed according to AFP. PBC does not report event (there is a August 28, 4 civilian injuries listing for Gangikhel that does not correlate with any other archive).

    August 30. Korzai, SWA. Daily Times reports five militant deaths possibly including two foreigners.

    August 31. Rappi, NWA. Geo reports death of 6 including a women and a child. PBC lists same. Accurate.

    September 4. Chaar Khel, NWA. Dawn lists death of 10 militants including Al-Qaeda leader Abu Wafa Al Saudi. Possibly 4 civilian casualties.

    September 5. Goroverk, NWA. Geo reports deaths of 7 including 4 children. PBC lists 6 civilian casualties on September 5 and another 6 for September 6. September 4 strike has a Qaeda leader and militants amongst dead. Error in one report at least.

    September 8. Danday Darpakhel. PBC reports 23 civilian casualties. CNN reports death of Al-Qaeda’s Pakistan chief Abu Haris and another three Arab fighters amongst 25.

    September 12. Tol Khel, NWA. AFP reports 12 Al-Badr militant casualties. Dawn lists casualties as associated with Qari Imam group. PBC lists 12 civilians.

    September 17. Baghar Cheena, SWA. Al-Qaeda leader Abu Ubaydah Al-Tunisi an 5 other operatives are killed. PBC lists 7 civilians.

    October 1. Khushali Toorikhel, NWA. Geo reports 4 casualties possibly militants who fired at the drone. PBC lists 6 civilian casualties.

    October 3. Datta Khel, NWA. Two strikes (one possibly jets not drones) kill 21 militants including 16 foreigners according to Geo and another four in the jet/drone strike according to Reuters (identity ambiguous). PBC lists 18 civilians.

    October 9. Reuters reports deaths of 6 militants including three Arabs. PBC lists 9 civilians.

    October 11. Miramshah. Geo reports 5 casualties. AFP reports target was a Qaeda/Taliban meeting. Ambiguous reports whether dead were militants. PBC lists 5 civilians. Accurate.

    October 16. Taparghai, SWA. NYT and CNN report Al-Qaeda leader Khalid Habib and 4 other casualties, possibly civilian or Arab. PBC lists 2 Al-Qaeda and 4 civilian casualties.

    October 22. Danda Darpa Khel, NWA. NYT reports 4 civilian casualties. Reuters reports “scores”. PBC lists 10 civilians.

    October 26. Shakai, SWA. CNN reports 7 and Geo reports 8 casualties. Ambiguity over claims over militants. PBC lists 20 civilians casualties.

    October 31. Wana and Mir Ali. Geo reports 6 militants, all foreigners killed in Wana strike. BBC reports 20 including an al-Qaeda leaders Abu Akash and Abu Jihad Al-Masri in Mir Ali strike/ PBC lists 2 Al-Qaeda and 13 civilian casualties as one.

    November 7. Kumsham, NWA. AFP reports 11-14 militants, mostly foreigners being killed. PBC lists 1 Al-Qaeda and 12 civilian casualties.

    November 14. Garyom, NWA. Geo reports 11 casualties. No claims they were militants. Reuters says 5 were foreigners. PBC lists 12 civilians.

    November 19. Bannu. Al-Qaeda leader Abdullah Azzam al Saudi is killed. CNN reports local confirming three foreigners being killed. Reuters reports. PBC does not list strike.

    November 22. Ali Khel, NWA. Al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubair Al-Masri and terrorist at large Rashid Rauf alongwith 3 others killed. PBC lists 1 Al-Qaeda and 4 civilians.

    November 29. Chashma, NWA. CNN reports 3 casualties. No claims they were civilians. PBC lists 3 civilians. Accurate.

    December 6. PBC lists 3 civilian casualties in Mir Ali Strike. Express News reports 6 as militants.

    December 11. Azam Warsak, SWA. Reuters reports 7 militant casualties, possibly foreigners as well (Geo reports 3 foreigners). PBC lists 12 civilian casualties.

    December 15. Miramshah, NWA. Geo reports 3 casualties. PBC lists 2 civilian casualties.

    December 22. Karikot, SWA. ToI and VoA report 8 militant casualties. PBC lists 7 civilians.

    2009

    January 1. Karikot, SWA. PBC report 2 Al-Qaeda and 2 civilian casualties. Al-Qaed’s chief in Pakistan, Osama al Kini and Sheikh Ahmed Salim Swedan are killed. The Nation reports 5 Taliban deaths.

    January 2. Laddha, SWA. Geo reports 4 casualties. No claims they were militants. PBC lists 1 Al-Qaeda and 4 civilian casualties. Inaccurate about Qaeda death.

    January 23. Mir Ali, SWA and Zera, NWA. 20 militants, including four foreigners are killed according to Geo. Washington Post reports 10 insurgent casualties. PBC lists 13 civilian deaths.

    February 14. Laddha, SWA. Daily Times reports 28 militant casualties including two Arabs, several Uzbeks. Paper quotes Taliban spokesman as accepting 28 were “mujahideen”. PBC lists 30 civilian casualties.

    February 16. Sur Pul, Kurram. This paper reports 30 casualties. Attack targeted an Afghan refugee camp, specifically meeting of Taliban. PBC lists 30 civilian casualties. Ambiguity over claims of being militants. Somewhat accurate.

    March 1. Sararogha, SWA. NYT reports death of 8 militants. This paper reports 5 Taliban casualties. PBC lists 12 civilian casualties.

    March 12. Barjo, Kurram. Dawn reports 25 casualties. Conflicting reports as it cites a security official stating some injured were foreign militants but rest were locals. PBC lists 14 civilian casualties. Somewhat accurate (should have listed more civilians).

    March 15. Jani Khel, Bannu.Target is local militant commander Taj Ali Khan according to NYT. BBC quotes a local saying all were militants, including two Arabs. PBC lists 5 civilian casualties.

    March 25. Makeen, SWA. Dawn reports death of 7 Arab militants in an attack on a vehicle. Tis paper reports eight Taliban and Al-Qaeda operatives. PBC lists 7 civilian casualties.

    March 25. Esokhel, NWA. AFP reports 4 casualties and that target was local pro-militant elder Malik Ghulab Khan. PBC lists 4 civilian casualties. Ambiguity over affiliation of the dead. Somewhat accurate.

    April 1. Drone Strike in Khadezai, Orakzai. PBC reports 12 civlian deaths. Dawn and a host of international news agencies report 12-14 militant deaths.

    April 4. Miramshah. PBC tells us 13 civilians died. Geo TV report says 3 foreigners amongst dead. Reuters and AFP report anywhere between 4 and 10 militants killed. Ambiguosness is reported as civilian casualty because of some unknown reason.

    April 8. Gangikhel, SWA. Four militants who opened fire at a low flying drone killed. Reported by Reuters, Dawn and Geo. PBC lists all four as civilians.

    April 19. Gangikhel, SWA. PBC lists 3 civilian casualties. International wire agencies report suspected militants.

    April 29. Kani Garam, SWA. Dawn reports 6 militants including 2 foreigners dead in drone strike. All six listed as civilians in PBC data.

    May 9. Sararogha. Daily Times reports anywhere between 5 to 10 Taliban militants dead. 10 civlian casualties in PBC data.

    May 12. Sra Khawra, SWA. Dawn and a host of international wires report 6-9 militants possibly Al-Qaeda killed. PBC lists 8 civilian casualties.

    May 16. Khesoor, NWA. PBC lists 2 Al-Qaeda and 23 civilian casualties. Target assumed to be a seminary may have killed upto 23 Al-Qaeda militants according to NYT. Al-Jazeera reports 10 militants including 2 Arabs. This paper reported 25-28 local militants leaving for fighting in Afghanistan.

    June 14. Laddah, SWA. Dawn reports 3 Taliban killed in their vehicle. International agencies report 5. PBC lists 5 civilians.

    June 18. Shah Alam, SWA. PBC lists 11 civilian deaths. This paper report 12 Taliban casualties and Al Jazeera reports five deaths targeting house of militant commander Malang Wazir.

    June 23. Makeen, SWA. Two drones strikes in one day including one on the funeral of Niaz Wali kills 51 Taliban according to Daily Times. Other reports list anywhere between 45 and 83. Dr Usmani’s data shows a total of 91 civilians and only 6 Al-Qaeda deaths.

    July 8. Laddah. Two strikes leave 45 militants dead according to Dawn. Geo reports convoy of militants’ vehicles being targeted. PBC reports 50 civilian casualties.

    October 24. Damma Dola. Daily Times report 22 terrorists being killed in a drone strike. Taliban commander Maulvi Faqir left minuted before strike. PBC lists 18 civilian casualties.

    December 8. Aspala, NWA. 2-3 militants including Al-Qaeda leader Saleh al-Somali are kiilled. PBC does not list this strike.

    Decemeber 17. Datta Khel. 10-15 militants including Al-Qaeda leader Zuhaib al-Zahibi. PBC reports 17 civilians.

    December 31. Machhikhel. Dawn reports six including three militants who security officials suggested maybe Al-Qaeda. Geo reports three militant casualties. PBC lists 33 civilian casualties.

    2010

    Januray 1, Ghundikala village, NWA- DAWN reports that three militants in a vehicle were killed. PBC claims three death of three civilians quoting the news story from BBC Urdu which does not make any claim regarding the identity of those killed.

    Januray 3, residential compound of Jehan Roze in Mosaki village of Mirali tehsil, NWA, destroying its guesthouse. DAWN reprots five killed, three of them Arabs. According to AFP:“There may have been an important figure hiding in the house,” a security official in Miramshah said. “Five militants have been killed Two are local and three are foreigners. One among the foreigners is an Arab”. PBC reports 5 civilian deaths.

    January 6, NY times reports 20 to 25 dead in two strikes in NWA. DAWN reports that 17 were dead in an attack on a militants training camp(fort). “It was a huge, fort-like mud-house. They were using it as a training centre and the training centre belonged to Hafiz Gul Bahadur,” a Pakistani intelligence official said. PBC claims 20 civilian deaths.

    January 8, Tappi Village NWA, kills 5. PBC reports 5 civilians. Accurate

    January 9, Ismail Khan village NWA, PBC claims that 4 civilians were killed and two injured. Associated Press (Washington Times January 14, 2010, p. 7) reports that Mahmoud Mahdi Zeidan, bodyguard for al Qaeda leaderSayeed al-Masri, was reported killed in either the January 8 or 9 airstrike. LA Times claims that Jamal Saeed Abdul Rahim who was allegedly involved in hijacking ofPan Am Flight 73 in 1986 was also reported killed in this strike.

    January 13, Pasalkot village, NWA. DAWN reports 12 dead in attack on militant hideout in Skaktoi area, SWA adjacent to North Waziristan. Reports rumours that Hamik ullah Mehsud was target and the rumours that he died in the attack. PBC reports 15 civilian deaths.

    January 15. Zanini, NWA and Shaktoi. 7-12 militants killed including militant commander Azmatuallah Muawiya as per reports from Dawn, AP and Reuters. PBC lists 22 civilians casualties.

    January 16/17, Shakoi, NWA, PBC claims 22 civilians dead and 12 injured. BBC Urdu reports 15 militants killed in the attack.

    January 29, Mohammad Khel, NWA. DAWN reports that 9 militants were killed when three missiles hit a compund and a bunker. NY Times reports 15 killed including four Arab and two ethnic Uzbek fighters were killed, along with local militants. PBC reports 6 civilians dead.

    February 2. Geo reports target was a militant compound and Dawn reports 16 militant casualties. PBC lists 29 civilian deaths.

    February 14, Mir Ali, NWA,.DAWN reports 4 foreigners (reportedly Uzbek) and three militants killed. Compund was used for training insurgents. Reuters claim 5 deaths. CNN reports 6 dead. PBC does not mention the attack.

    Februar 15, Miram Shah, NWA. Geo reports AlQaeda linked leader Abdul Haq al-Turkistani, leader of a group called the Turkistani Islamic Party killed. DAwn reports him being killed among three militants. PBC claims four civilian deaths and 1 civilian injured. Quotes Express (Urdu newspaper) story as reference.

    February 17, Tappi, NWA. DAWN reports top al-Qaeda leader of Egyptian origin Sheikh Mansoor killed. Geo reports 4 killed. PBC claims 4 civilains dead and 2 injured

    February 18, Dandey Darpa Khel, near Miram Shah, NWA. DAWn reports son of Jalaluddin Haqqani was killed among three other militants. PBC lists 4 civilian deaths and 5 civilians wounded.

    February 24. Dargi Mandi, 2.5 miles north of Miram Shah, North Waziristan. Mohammad Qari Zafar killed. PBC lists 13 civilians dead and 10 injured.

    May 11. Datta Khel and Gorwek, NWA. Geo reports 24 militant casualties, NYT reports 14 in two strikes. PBC lists 30 civilians.

    June 19. Enzer Kali, NWA. PBC lists 1 Al-Qaeda and 15 civilian casualties. Dawn, The News and all major news sources report at least 16 militants including Al-Qaeda leader Abu Ahmed Tarkash.

    June 29. Karikot. Drone strike on house of local commander Halimullah leaves 6 dead as per international news wire reports. PBC reports only 1 Al-Qaeda dn 9 civilian casualties.

    September 3. Two drone strikes kill 12-15 militants. Dawn reports 6 local militants being killed in first strike. Samaa reports death of Taliban commander Inayatllah in second strike. PBC reports 13 civilian deaths.

    http://dronedata.wordpress.com/

  • @Mussalman

    Majority of Pashtuns support the drone attacks against Pakistan army-backed Punjabi, Uzbek and Arab terrorists who have held them hostage for many years:

    Drone attacks — a survey

    Farhat Taj
    Thursday, March 05, 2009

    3

    The Aryana Institute for Regional Research and Advocacy, a think tank of researchers and political activists from the NWFP and FATA, conducts research, surveys and collect statistics on various issues concerning the Taliban and Al-Qaeda terrorism and human security there. AIRRA research teams go deep inside Taliban- and Al-Qaeda-occupied areas of FATA to collect information. Most of the areas are not accessible to journalists.

    Between last November and January AIRRA sent five teams, each made up of five researchers, to the parts of FATA that are often hit by American drones, to conduct a survey of public opinion about the attacks. The team visited Wana (South Waziristan), Ladda (South Waziristan), Miranshah (North Waziristan), Razmak (North Waziristan) and Parachinar (Kurram Agency). The teams handed out 650 structured questionnaires to people in the areas. The questionnaires were in Pashto, English and Urdu. The 550 respondents (100 declined to answer) were from professions related to business, education, health and transport. Following are the questions and the responses of the people of FATA.

    — Do you see drone attacks bringing about fear and terror in the common people? (Yes 45%, No 55%)

    — Do you think the drones are accurate in their strikes? (Yes 52%, No 48%)

    — Do you think anti-American feelings in the area increased due to drone attacks recently? (Yes 42%, No 58%)

    — Should Pakistan military carry out targeted strikes at the militant organisations? (Yes 70%, No 30%)

    — Do the militant organisations get damaged due to drone attacks? (Yes 60%, No 40%)

    A group of researchers at AIRRA draw these conclusions from the survey. The popular notion outside the Pakhtun belt that a large majority of the local population supports the Taliban movement lacks substance. The notion that anti-Americanism in the region has not increased due to drone attacks is rejected. The study supports the notion that a large majority of the people in the Pakhtun belt wants to be incorporated with the state and wants to integrate with the rest of the world.

    The survey also reinforces my own ethnographic interactions with people of FATA, both inside FATA and the FATA IDP’s in the NWFP. This includes people I personally met and those I am in contact with through telephone calls and emails. This includes men and women, from illiterate to people with university level education. The number is well over 2000. I asked almost all those people if they see the US drone attacks on FATA as violation of Pakistan’s sovereignty. More than two-third said they did not. Pakistan’s sovereignty, they argued, was insulted and annihilated by Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, whose territory FATA is after Pakistan lost it to them. The US is violating the sovereignty of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, not of Pakistan. Almost half the people said that the US drones attacking Islamabad or Lahore will be violation of the sovereignty of Pakistan, because these areas are not taken over by the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Many people laughed when I mentioned the word sovereignty with respect to Pakistan.

    Over two-thirds of the people viewed Al-Qaeda and the Taliban as enemy number one, and wanted the Pakistani army to clear the area of the militants. A little under two-thirds want the Americans to continue the drone attack because the Pakistani army is unable or unwilling to retake the territory from the Taliban.

    The people I asked about civilian causalities in the drone attacks said most of the attacks had hit their targets, which include Arab, Chechen, Uzbek and Tajik terrorists of Al-Qaeda, Pakistani Taliban (Pakhtun and Punjabis) and training camps of the terrorists. There has been some collateral damage.

    The drones hit hujras or houses which the Taliban forced people to rent out to them. There is collateral damage when the family forced to rent out the property is living in an adjacent house or a portion of the property rented out.

    The Taliban and Al Qaeda have unleashed a reign of terror on the people of FATA. People are afraid that the Taliban will suspect their loyalty and behead them. Thus, in order to prove their loyalty to the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, they offer them to rent their houses and hujras for residential purposes.

    There are people who are linked with the Taliban. Terrorists visit their houses as guests and live in the houses and hujras. The drones attacks kill women and small children of the hosts. These are innocent deaths because the women and children have no role in the men’s links with terrorists.

    Other innocent victims are local people who just happen to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

    People told me that typically what happens after every drone attack is that the Taliban and Al-Qaeda terrorists cordon off the area. No one from the local population is allowed to access the site, even if there are local people killed or injured. Their relatives cry and beg the terrorists to let them go near the site. But the Taliban and Al Qaeda do not allow them. The Taliban and Al Qaeda remove everything they want from the site and then allow the locals to see the site.

    The survey conducted by AIRRA and my ethnographic interactions contradict the mantra of violation of the sovereignty of Pakistan perpetuated by the armchair analysts in the media. I have been arguing on these pages that analyses of those analysts have nothing to do with the reality of the FATA people. For some reason they take FATA for granted. They feel they are at liberty to fantasise whatever they like about FATA and present to the audience as a truth. Some of those armchair analysts also have a misplaced optimism about themselves. They believe my challenge to their fantasies about FATA is because I like to give them time! I give time to the land I love–FATA and the NWFP–and to the state I am loyal to–Pakistan.

    What is happening in FATA is destroying the lives and culture of the FATA people, threatening the integrity of Pakistan and world peace. Fantasies of the armchair analysts are helping no one but Al Qaeda and the Taliban–enemies of the land and culture I love, and our state. I will therefore continue to challenge the fantasies of the armchairs analysts, whenever possible.

    The writer is a research fellow at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Gender Research, University of Oslo and a member of Aryana Institute for Regional Research and Advocacy. Email: bergen34@ yahoo.com

    http://thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=165781&Cat=9&dt=3/7/2009

  • Some more empirical evidence:

    New Light on the Accuracy of the CIA’s Predator Drone Campaign in Pakistan
    Publication: Terrorism Monitor Volume: 8 Issue: 41November 11, 2010 03:37 PM Age: 1 yrs
    By: Brian Glyn Williams, Matthew Fricker, Avery Plaw

    Widely-cited reports of the inaccuracy and disproportionality of civilian to militant deaths in the CIA’s ongoing Predator drone campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaeda in Pakistan are grossly misleading. The most detailed database compiled to date, assembled by the authors of this article, indicates (among other important findings) that the strikes have not only been impressively accurate, but have achieved and maintained a greater proportionality than either ground operations in the area or targeting campaigns elsewhere. [1]

    This finding is striking because highly critical reports over the last year, emanating in particular from the Pakistani press, have impugned both the accuracy of the CIA’s drone strikes in the tribal areas of that country and the proportionality of the civilian collateral damage they cause. In April 2009, for example, the Pakistani daily The News published an article by terrorism expert Amir Mir reporting Predator strikes had killed only 14 high value al-Qaeda targets but were responsible for 687 civilian fatalities – a 1:49 ratio of terrorist to civilians (The News [Islamabad], April 10, 2009; see also Terrorism Monitor, February 19). To put it another way, Mir’s report suggested that 98.14% of fatalities associated with the Predator strikes were civilians. On February 1 of this year, Mir added that in January 2010 alone 123 Pakistani civilians had been killed in ten errant CIA drone strikes, while only three al-Qaeda targets had been eliminated (The News, February 1). These shocking statistics were picked up and widely reported in the Western press (New York Times, May 16). Along similar lines another Pakistani daily, Dawn, reported in January 2010 that “of the 44 Predator strikes carried out by U.S. drones in the tribal areas of Pakistan over the past 12 months, only five were able to hit their actual targets, killing five key al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders, but at the cost of over 700 innocent lives. For each al-Qaeda and Taliban terrorist killed by the American drones, 140 civilian Pakistanis also had to die” (Dawn [Karachi], January 2). Such reports have reinforced the notion that drone strikes are not only inaccurate, but seem to kill innocent civilians in wildly disproportionate numbers. However, even a cursory investigation of The News and Dawn’s own reports of Predator strikes on a case by case basis reveals that the great majority of fatalities are reported as “militants” or “suspected militants.” These discrepancies highlight the need for a thorough, independent and verifiable investigation of the reported toll of the U.S. drone campaign.

    Methodology

    The authors of this article have compiled a database over the last year that draws extensively on Pakistani newspapers (in their English language versions), and Western newspapers of record (primarily the New York Times and Washington Post). Only cases in which it was possible to compare multiple independent reports of drone strikes have been included. Where reported numbers of fatalities differed, we have favored the most detailed and updated account, always using low-end estimates of suspected militants slain. [2] All children under 13 and women were assumed to be civilian, along with all of those specifically identified as civilians, bystanders or locals uninvolved in the fighting. Where it was impossible to determine whether a person killed was properly categorized as a suspected militant or civilian, we assigned them to the category of “unknowns.” By systematically applying these simple rules to the universe of available information, we have assembled what we believe to be the most comprehensive and credible database of Predator drone strikes in this operational region currently available.

    The Findings

    According to our database, as of June 19, 2010, there have been a total of 144 confirmed CIA drone strikes in Pakistan, killing a total of 1,372 people. Of those killed, only 68 (or 4.95%) could be clearly identified as civilians, while 1,098 (or 80%) were reported to be “militants” or “suspected militants” (see Figure 4). As these terms are used somewhat interchangeably by the Pakistani press, we simply classified all of them as “suspected militants.” This category of suspected militants includes 50 high value targets – that is, al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders, whether local commanders or senior militant chiefs. The status of the remaining 206 (or 15% of) individuals killed in drone strikes could not be ascertained, and consequently they were assigned to the category “unknown.” The inclusion of this indeterminate category is admittedly frustrating but unavoidable given the limited and sometimes contradictory reports emanating from the inaccessible tribal areas. It is important to stress, however, that even if every single “unknown” is assumed to in fact be a civilian, the vast majority of fatalities would remain suspected militants rather than civilians – indeed, by more than a 4:1 ratio. [3] On the more precise count of civilians (leaving “unknowns” aside), we found an even more imbalanced ratio of approximately 16.5 suspected militant fatalities for each civilian death. [4] Equally striking, we found a 1.36 to 1 (or close to 1 to 1) ratio of civilians to high value target fatalities (in stark contrast with Mir’s 49 to 1 report). Finally, in contrast to Mir’s report of 123 civilian casualties in January 2010 (with only 3 al-Qaeda targets killed), we found 0 civilians, 85 suspected militants and 16 unknowns killed in that month.

    We also wanted to be careful to address any concerns that Western papers, including those of record like the New York Times and the Washington Post, might be underreporting civilian casualties, and that by relying at times on their stories we were introducing a downward bias into that element of our data. We therefore ran a second analysis, applying the same categories and criteria solely to the Pakistani news sources (specifically, Dawn, The Daily Times and The News). The results were even more striking. We found reports of 1,061 suspected militants killed, 48 civilians, and 251 unknowns, for a ratio of 22.1:1:5.2. Although some ambiguity is suggested by the slightly higher number of unknowns, the lower absolute number of civilians in the Pakistani data along with the higher proportion of suspected militants to civilians indicates that, if anything, leading Western news sources are leaning towards over-reporting the number of civilian casualties and underreporting suspected militants killed, at least in relation to representative local news sources. At any rate, we take this result based solely on Pakistani data to reinforce our main finding of a surprisingly high reported rate of suspected militant fatalities to civilians, particularly in the light of a number of widely circulated stories sharply to the contrary.

    Indeed, even our main finding of a 16.5:1 suspected militant to civilian fatality ratio significantly exceeds that recently reported on CNN for the period of 2006 to 2009 by Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann, who suggested that around two-thirds of those killed in the campaign were suspected militants. [5] Some (although not all) of the variance here can be accounted for in a difference of methodology: where Bergen and Tiedemann appear to assume that all of those who are not clearly reported as suspected militants must be civilians, we allowed that in some cases the available data is insufficient to be confident one way or the other. We also focused on the most updated and credible reports, while Bergen and Tiedemann simply compiled all reports into loose ranges of possible fatality levels. The result of our more rigorous and comprehensive approach is a substantially more lopsided ratio in favor of suspected militant fatalities.

    Our data also revealed that despite a substantial intensification of the Predator strikes starting in 2008 and accelerating through 2009 into 2010, and the broadening of target categories to include low level Pakistani Taliban, the ratio of suspected militant to civilian fatalities has remained steadily high and has gradually (if unevenly) improved. [6] After incremental increases in attacks from one in 2004 and three in 2005, 2006 and 2007, strikes escalated drastically to 33 in 2008, 54 in 2009 and 30 in the first three months of 2010 alone (See Figure 3). Still, far from showing a reduction of accuracy as the campaign has accelerated, our data shows that the ratio of suspected militant to civilian deaths has improved from the approximate 6:1 and 7.8:1 ratios that characterized 2004 and 2006 respectively, to 13:1 in 2005 and 14.067:1 in 2008, peaking in 2007 and 2010 (up to June 19) when no confirmed civilian deaths were reported (see Figure 2). [7]

    Moreover, the campaign’s overall ratio of suspected militant to civilian fatalities appears to be substantially better than both that of ground operations in the region undertaken by the Pakistani Army and of non-drone operations executed in the area by U.S. forces, as indicated in Figure 1 below (columns 1-4). It has also greatly exceeded the efficiency of the Israeli targeted-killing campaign conducted in the West Bank and Gaza in response to the second Intifada, according to figures collected by B’Tselem, a well-established human rights organization active in the area (column 5). [8] Not surprisingly in light of the foregoing, the CIA drone campaign has also bettered the most oft-cited proportionality statistic for armed conflict in general at the end of the twentieth century (column 6). Indeed, as Figure 1 suggests, the closest contender in terms of militant to civilian proportionality is the reported impact of the Pakistani Army’s Swat offensive in 2007, which was just over one quarter the ratio in terms of suspected militant to civilian deaths. At the other extreme, the most often cited statistic for armed conflict in general at the end of the twentieth century is less than 1/150th the ratio.

    Conclusion

    One conclusion that can be confidently drawn from this brief analysis of our database is that the available evidence on the CIA’s Predator campaign suggests that it is neither inefficient nor disproportionate in terms of civilian casualties, at least in relation to alternative means of conducting hostilities and/or other recent targeting campaigns for which credible numbers are available. This conclusion does not, of course, resolve the ongoing debate over the use of Predator drones. Other objections are certainly being raised, perhaps most interestingly that their use may make going to war too easy, and thus result in a proliferation of armed conflict. [9] We hope, however, that it does move the debate forward by shedding a more balanced light on the numbers of civilian casualties reported by the Pakistani media.

    Notes:

    1. The database is a comprised of news stories available at the time of its compilation and is subject to ongoing amendment as new information becomes available.
    2. So, for example, if a story says most of the dead were suspected militants, we have counted only half plus one; if a story says three to four militants were killed, we have counted three.
    3. The exact ration is 3.6981132:1.
    4. The exact ratio is 19.215682745:1.
    5. Peter Bergen and Katherine Tiedemann, “Pakistan Drone War Takes a Toll on Militants,” CNN, edition.cnn.com/2009/OPINION/10/29/bergen.drone.war/. Bergen and Tiedemann estimate 615 militants and 292 civilians; for Bergen and Tiedemann’s full dataset, see counterterrorism.newamerica.net/drones.
    6. Adam Entous, “CIA Drones Hit Wider Range of Targets in Pakistan,” ABC News, May 5, 2010, abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory.
    7. The ratios here do not include “unknowns.”
    8. It must be cautioned that B’Tselem uses the categories of “target” and “non-target” fatalities, as indicated in the cells of Figure 1. We are assuming, for the purposes of comparison, that the “targets” category gives at least a baseline account of suspected militants, while the “non-target” category represents a high estimate of civilian casualties. It is of course possible that some “non-targets” are in fact “suspected militants,” in which case the Israeli targeting campaign has been more accurate than our ratio suggests. It is impossible, based on the data gathered by B’Tselem to determine exactly how significant this distortion is, and our policy is to resolve grey areas in favor of higher accounts of civilian casualties. It seems extremely unlikely, however, that any distortion would be significant enough to raise a 1.529:1 ratio into the area of a 19.21:1 ratio. Our finding that the CIA campaign appears to be more accurate therefore remains secure.
    9. For example, Peter W. Singer, Wired for War: the Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century (New York: Penguin Press, 2009), p. 316.

    *Fricker/Plaw/Williams Drone Campaign Database
    1. Based on data gathered by the Institute for Conflict Management (http://www.satp.org/).
    2. Based on B’Tselem Statistics (http://www.btselem.org/English/Statistics/Casualties.asp).
    3. See, for example, Mark Osiel, The End of Reciprocity (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), p. 143; Mary Kaldor, New and Old Wars (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2001), p. 8. A recent data set, offering an avowedly conservative assessment of civilian deaths in armed conflict around the world, gives a significantly different assessment. Taking Lacina and Gleditsch’s (2005) dataset for battle-deaths as a basis for comparison, Kristina Eck and Lisa Hultman (2007) find that over the 1989-2004 period, battle deaths exceeded deaths form one-sided violence (a rough indicator of civilian casualties) by a ratio of two to one – Kristine Eck and Lisa Hultman, “One-Sided Violence Against Civilians in War: Insights from new Fatality Data,” Journal of Peace Research 44(2), 2007, p. 241; and Bethany Lacina and Nils Gleditsch, “Monitoring Trends in Global Combat: A New Dataset of Battle Deaths,” European Journal of Population 21 (2/3), p. 145-165. Still, even on Eck and Hultman’s conservative estimate, the apparent proportionality of Predator drone strikes exceeds the norm for combatant to civilian proportionality for 1989-2004 by a factor of more than ten to one.

    http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=37165&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=7&cHash=cdd658051e

  • LOL!!!!!! Check out the comments. Many of them have taken this brilliant spoof of jihadis and PTI trolls seriously!!! Hahahaha!!! Article massy ka tha, par comments are the real unintentional satire. I thought only NFP could pull off something like this. LOL!!

  • Personally I agree with the critics that there is hardly any thing humanitarian or legal about drone attacks, particularly when we know that some innocent lives are lost (the exact ratio or number is in question).

    However, we need to consider that drone attacks are happening on a region where there is no writ of Pakistani State.

    We also need to consider that there’s not much humanitarian about any war. Drone attacks are an act of war by NATO against a combatant enemy (Al Qaeda, Taliban etc).

    The best way to stop drone attacks is by Pakistan army regaining control of the Taliban controlled areas, and establish the writ of the State.

    However, the evidence is to the contrary.

    For example, this report published in today’s newspaper:

    Taliban receiving Pakistan military equipment, U.S. investigation reveals http://www.thehindu.com/news/article2786017.ece?homepage=true

  • No drone attacks, diplomatic office in Qatar? Taliban return the favor by slaughtering 10 more soldiers in Orakzai:

    http://tribune.com.pk/story/318825/bodies-of-10-missing-fc-personnel-found-in-upper-orakzai/

    9 January 2011: PESHAWAR: The bodies of 10 Frontier Constabulary (FC) personnel, who went missing during a clash with militants on December 22, were found near Dabori area of Upper Orakzai Agency on Monday, confirmed an official. An official said, “This morning, we found the bodies of the men near Dabori. They were part of an advancing party that came under attack from the militants.”

    No group has claimed responsibility yet; however, it is believed by officials that it was the Tehreek-i-Taliban chapter in the area that was behind the killings.
    At least 22 security personnel, including a major, were injured and 10 personnel had gone missing after a clash in the Orakzai Agency on December 22.

    In a similar incident, 15 FC personnel were killed last week and their bodies were found in the area bordering North Waziristan and Orakzai. The Taliban had claimed responsibility for the killings, and had said that it was in revenge of the security operation taking place against the militants.

  • AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    Taliban are slaughtering Pakistani soldiers while Pakistani generals keep supporting them: bit.ly/AxAk4q

    However, we don’t respect the Jamaatia homophobe types who oppose the drones but never oppose the Taliban and Taliban Khan.

    My utmost respect to friends who oppose drones based on ethical and legal principles. I disagree with them but respect their stance.

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @Chiltan On this point, I agree. Drone attacks have no connection with human rights. They are an act of war.

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    9 Jan 2011: Bodies of 10 missing FC personnel found in Upper Orakzai, slain by the Taliban: bit.ly/zBny9z

    There is nothing humanitarian about any war. Drones are an act of war by NATO against a combatant enemy. No writ of Pakistani State!

    Yes, drone attacks have an unintended human cost. But that cost is hugely exaggerated by the same lobby whose assets are being eliminated.

    Rhetoric aside: Some more empirical data on the effectiveness of drones: bit.ly/zUV0X4

    Majority of Pashtuns support drone attacks. Survey by Farhat Taj: thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDet…

    Empirical data on the effectiveness of drone attacks: dronedata.wordpress.com

    De-mystifying the inaccuracy of drone attacks dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?pa…

    Human cost of no-drones is much higher than drone attacks. At least 25 Pakistan army soldiers haver been killed by Taliban in five days.

    No drone attacks, diplomatic office in Qatar? Taliban return the favor by slaughtering 10 more soldiers in Orakzai: bit.ly/zBny9z

  • AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @Chiltan Farhat Taj’s and Aryana Institute’s are our indigenous reports.
    4 minutes ago Favorite Reply Delete

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @Chiltan The Bureau Report comprises 2004-2010 data (except one year) which has been demystified here: dronedata.wordpress.com
    6 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    It’s the same CMC which is completely silent on the total number of Balochs, Shias and anti-Taliban Pashtuns target killed by army & proxies
    11 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    It’s the same CMC which issues a funny report “Significant Decline in Suicide Attacks in Pakistan” while wiping out total number of deaths.
    12 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    Most of the recent misleading data and reports on drones are by CMC cmcpk.wordpress.com An ISI-ISPR production!
    13 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @Chiltan You may wish to know that CMC is a sub-agency of ISI-ISPR. Its data on drones are as credible as are ISPR’s briefs on Balochistan.

    ———

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri I have the right to oppose the making/ supporting of a petition in the garb of human rights
    1 minute ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri I really don’t care whether it’s Farhat or whoever we will be happy to debate with her if she has written something recently
    1 minute ago

    razaawaraich Raza
    @
    @Chiltan not sure if someone sitting in their comfy sofa should b voting on #drones It must b ppl in line of fire. #justathought
    12 minutes ago
    Retweeted by Chiltan

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri I am sorry I don’t agree.
    6 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri there’s no single source now except fr Americans denying human cost; since I m not a liberal I don’t speak american language
    7 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri yester i quoted bureau of investigative journalism & brookings institute also (btw CMC has derived from it)
    12 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    🙂 Let’s confuse Taliban (our enemy and your enemy) with civilians and go on merry go round!
    28 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri Fine but let’s not ask for resuming drones under Human Rights Please! completely unacceptable.
    31 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    I don’t have any problem with friends supporting #drones (freedom of opinion) but they need to update themselves!
    32 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @AbdulNishapuri there is the american data which u say is ’emperical’ and there is data by indeepndent institutes which u say is ‘rhetoric’
    34 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri “used to” support
    36 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri I am sharing with you the analysis and data of 2011-2012 and you still sharing 2010…let’s accept new realities
    36 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri but what about the number of soldiers killed during Drone Attacks????????????
    38 minutes ago
    »

    Chiltan salma jafar
    Drone Attacks Remained Ineffective against Militant Leaders cmcpk.wordpress.com/2012/01/09/2011
    40 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply

    Chiltan salma jafar
    US, Pak officials deliberately overlooking high #civiliandeath toll in #droneattacks sify.com/news/us-pak-of…

    tatom2k Tatom
    If ne 1 knw n e other much reached petition plz share & sign tht 2 petitiononline.com/1481947/petiti… #StopDrones #Pakistan

    MureedBizenjo Mureed Bizenjo
    at least 2292 people had been killed in US drone attacks since 2004, 160 of which were said to be children huffingtonpost.co.uk/nabeela-zahir/… #StopDrones

    MureedBizenjo Mureed Bizenjo
    During Obama’s presidency there have been a total of 236 attacks; that is one every four days which killed civilians & children #Stopdrones

    ArooojZahra Arooj Zahra
    @
    @MureedBizenjo just 8 militants were killed by the #US drones in 2011, rest of the people were innocent…..

    MureedBizenjo Mureed Bizenjo
    168 children killed in #US drone strikes account for 44 per cent of the minimum figure of 385 civilians reportedly killed by the attacks.

    MureedBizenjo Mureed Bizenjo
    A native of waziristan documenting drone strikes says more civilians killed than millitants in US drone strikes goo.gl/Fuqvh

    Chiltan salma jafar
    people are not collateral damage, they are people who are killed, injured, maimed- whose lives are destroyed #drones
    12 hours ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    In any warfare civilians have to be given advanced warning, in case of #drones this doesn’t happen
    12 hours ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    International Humanitarian Law doesn’t exempt even if Human Shields are used there are clears standards given. #Drones
    12 hours ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    Collateral damage is desensitized vocabulary for war crimes #Drones
    12 hours ago
    »

    Chiltan salma jafar
    HRW has termed it as Arbitrary Execution that will come back to haunt US #drones
    12 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

    Chiltan salma jafar
    Brookings Inst claims 10 civilians are killed in #drone strikes for every militant that dies.

    munir104 Munir Khan
    Firing a missile at fellow citizen who has not been charged,tried in a court of law is illegal.Why doesn’t US use drones in US to stop crime

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @ijazkhan neither do I so have already called it a day @AnjumKiani @DaDemagogue please untag Prof sahib further @Laibaah1
    13 hours ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @AnjumKiani ask saudis to cut their funding @ijazkhan @DaDemagogue @Laibaah1
    13 hours ago
    »

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @AnjumKianiso am I Kiyani so please stop bringing taliban in & if you want to kill them find another mode @ijazkhan @DaDemagogue @Laibaah1
    13 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @ijazkhan this is extremely sweeping so we cant discuss this with u excuse me! anyone else willing to @AnjumKiani @DaDemagogue @Laibaah1

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @ijazkhan I also invite u 2 chk brooking institute and bureau of investigative journalism research @DaDemagoguehave @AnjumKiani @Laibaah1
    14 hours ago
    »

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @ijazkhan we have never asked to stop them but inviting them? @DaDemagoguehave @AnjumKiani @Laibaah1
    14 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @ijazkhan am afraid not so; read any intl human rights organizations stance on drones it is the same @DaDemagoguehave @AnjumKiani @Laibaah1

    ——

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @Chiltan sorry no affront intended, but really I do not see any point in continuing @AnjumKiani @DaDemagogue @Laibaah1

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @Chiltan yes it killed the innocent wife along with Baitullah @AnjumKiani @DaDemagogue @Laibaah1
    13 hours ago

    rashid_zafar Ahmad Rashid
    RT @ijazkhan hard times ahead-better sense tells me to shut up
    14 hours ago
    Retweeted by ijazkhan

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @AnjumKiani @Chiltan @DaDemagoguehave @Laibaah1 luk guys its gud discusion&respect ur views&HRs legal basis bt kno enuf 2 frm sorces I trust
    14 hours ago

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @DaDemagogue @AnjumKiani @Laibaah1 I think all of us have said what v think is right. now v r just point scoring and repeating. thank you
    14 hours ago

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @DaDemagogue you must me right about yourself Even if u know I am correct u ‘ll not agree 4 reasons known to u @AnjumKiani @Laibaah1
    14 hours ago

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @feeraz_khan @AnjumKiani sometimes a precise one house in the middle of a village or even a room is targeted
    14 hours ago

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @feeraz_khan yes it is surprising accurate. do not confuse it with normal artillery or aerial bombardment. @AnjumKiani
    14 hours ago

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @AnjumKiani it is those writers of those reports that have no direct access to FATA @DaDemagoguehave @Laibaah1
    14 hours ago

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @DaDemagogue and have relatives, friends and students from FATA @AnjumKiani @Laibaah1
    14 hours ago

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @DaDemagoguehave been, geo news is the biggest source for the misinformation that drones kill innocent. @AnjumKiani @Laibaah1
    14 hours ago
    »

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @DaDemagogue agree on this one @AnjumKiani @Laibaah1
    14 hours ago Favorite Retweet Reply

    ijazkhan Ijaz Khan
    @
    @DaDemagogue general public has not been murdered by drones @AnjumKiani @Laibaah1

    steven_metz Steven Metz
    Lull in U.S. Drone Strikes Aids Pakistan Militants: nyti.ms/wKlBJQ

    ———-

    Favorites
    Following
    Followers
    Lists
    »

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 My support or no support to Drones does not carry any weight. Let me think further. Thnx @Chiltan @DaDemagogue @MureedBizenjo
    5 minutes ago Favorite Reply Delete

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @Chiltan Good idea @DaDemagogue @ShahidQazi1
    7 minutes ago

    Chiltan salma jafar
    @
    @DaDemagogue and I request a petition we take a deep breath or start yoga! @AbdulNishapuri @ShahidQazi1
    8 minutes ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue I agree. @Chiltan @ShahidQazi1
    7 minutes ago

    DaDemagogue Shahmeer Khan
    @
    @Chiltan @AbdulNishapuri @ShahidQazi1 and i request a petition that all differentiate a Pukhtoon from a Talib !
    9 minutes ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 @Chiltan @DaDemagogue I respect yours and @MureedBizenjo’s principled stance on Drones. He offered detailed reasons, all valid.
    8 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 Please check DM.
    11 minutes ago

    ShahidQazi1 Shahid Qazi
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri @DaDemagogue I will Insha-Allah personally take that petition to United Nations!!!
    11 minutes ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    ShahidQazi1 Shahid Qazi
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri @DaDemagogue YES in capital letters…let’s make a petition against army’s Generals, ISI and MI (military Intelligence)!!!
    13 minutes ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 Thank you. Lets work on a petition against Pakistan army generals as agreed. @DaDemagogue
    14 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 With respect I disagree with your views on ANP. @DaDemagogue
    17 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue Let’s respect the fact: ANP is the largest Pashtun political party free from Talibanist ideology. @ShahidQazi1
    20 minutes ago Favorite Reply Delete

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 @DaDemagogue Yes. In fact, I think the drone attacks should start from Muridke, Mansoora and Jamia Binooria.
    21 minutes ago

    ShahidQazi1 Shahid Qazi
    @
    @DaDemagogue @AbdulNishapuri I’ll SHOW him the HQ of LET in Lahore and GHQ in rawalpindi…will Abdul ASK for Drone STRIKES???
    23 minutes ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 Excellent. Please DM me your email address so that we could work on a joint draft.
    22 minutes ago

    ShahidQazi1 Shahid Qazi
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri YES, I’m with you and the 1st person to sign it and raise my voice for it…
    23 minutes ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue @ShahidQazi1 This is a Pashtun perspective based on data: bit.ly/xt4hMk
    23 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 Let’s work on such petition. Pakistan army generals need to be tried for Crimes against Humanity.
    25 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 How can innocent civilians resist the power of the military state. 1000s of anti-Taliban Pashtuns killed already!
    29 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 Rhetoric aside, the human cost of drones is hugely exaggerated by the same generals: dronedata.wordpress.com
    30 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 Please read this: bit.ly/zIGLvg We are already standing up against generals!
    31 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 To be exact, it is Pakistani generals.
    33 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 ISI is a sub-agency. It is Pakistan army!
    34 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 I totally agree with this. Pray tell how can we control the ISI, in fact army?
    36 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @ShahidQazi1 Please re-read my tweet.
    36 minutes ago

    ShahidQazi1 Shahid Qazi
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri By punishing the ISI NOT by killing MORE Pashtoons by Drones…CONTROL the ISI, killings will END!!!
    39 minutes ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue @KhadimDurrani Need to step out. Thanks for the candid exchange.
    40 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue It was a failure because one party was never sincere in getting rid of the menace of terrorism. Eyewash!
    43 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @KhadimDurrani I disagree with your Christian-Muslim argument. It’s not only NATO but also foreign Arab, Chechen, Uzbek who need to leave!
    44 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue It is a multilevel war which will be fought on many fronts. Power of ideology as well as power of war will be needed.
    46 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue Who will let you educate them? What did army/ proxies do to Hasan Jan (Deobandi), Sarfraz Naeemi (Barelvi), Dr Farooq (Gahmdi)?
    51 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue Let’s accept that terrorists are structurally & institutionally supported by Pakistan army & affiliates (judiciary, media etc).
    53 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue Perhaps you are not aware of the fact that Punjabi Taliban are dominated by Sipah-e-Sahaba / Lashkar-e-Jhangvi.
    55 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue The boundaries between TTP, LeJ, JeM etc are amorphous and overlapping. They share the sub-sect, madrassahs and real masters.
    56 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue Urgent human rights situation. At least 25 Pak soldiers and 100 Shias have been killed in AfPak since Nov 2011.
    59 minutes ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue We agree with some of your concerns about drones. Plz provide us with a non-violent solution to bring Taliban-LeJ to justice.
    1 hour ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @KhadimDurrani Socio-political campaigns may offer a solution in the long run but not in the immediate future. How can we save more lives?
    1 hour ago

    KhadimDurrani Khadim Durrani
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri: by running socio-political campaigns agnst the ‘jaahiliya’ mindset of those who back each other-widout encouraging violence
    1 hour ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    DaDemagogue Shahmeer Khan
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri i do. but drones are not the panacea brother.violence shouldnt beget violence when innocent citizens are receivers frm both!
    1 hour ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    DaDemagogue Shahmeer Khan
    @
    @AbdulNishapuri cut down their supply lines. if we dont provide them they’ll die fasting. but it wont happen 🙂
    1 hour ago
    Retweeted by AbdulNishapuri

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue How can we cut down their supply line if the almighty army treats them as a strategic asset? I hope you see the dilemma!
    1 hour ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    @
    @DaDemagogue True. Still the question is: How can we punish the Taliban? Any suggestion?
    1 hour ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    Pashtuns have lost noblest and bravest of their leaders by systematic target killing by ISI-backed Taliban. How can we punish the killers?
    1 hour ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    There is no war which is humanitarian. Similarly there are no drone attacks which are humanitarian. Yet, how else can we punish the Taliban?
    1 hour ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    How can we hope to get rid of Taliban when ISI provides sanctuaries, judiciary ensures safe release & opposing leaders (ANP,PPP) are killed?
    1 hour ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    How can we stop further suicide attacks on Barelvis, Shias, Ahmadis, Christians etc by those who are hiding in ISI-provided sanctuaries?
    1 hour ago

    AbdulNishapuri Abdul Nishapuri
    How can we punish those who are attacking our mosques, imambargahs, markets, schools, those who are hiding in safe havens provided by army?

  • In Parachinar, we believe that drones are Allah’s Ababeels to save us from Haqqani Taliban and Punjabi Lashkar-e-Jhangvi militants.