Contents

Preface 3
Part One
United State s Nightmare 4
Role of Britain as US ally .5
Why Democracy 7
Part Two
Pakistan s Political Scene and Tug of War between the Two Imperialists .8
The Bhutto Factor in Pakistani Politics ..8
The See-Saw of Power between US and Britain through Nawaz Sharif and
Benazir Bhutto ..9
Part Three
The US and Britain Plot to Bring Back Benazir .11
Rallying the Masses in the Name of Democracy .....12
United States Intentions to Remap Muslim World 12

Conclusion 15

Appendix A: Democracy: A System of the Time of Ignorance . .16

Appendix B: A Note to the Pakistani People 18

References 21

Release Date: 10th January, 2007.

 Preface

I beg for the mercy of Allah Subhanuwatalaa and speak the best of truth which I hold.

Super Powers always have a tendency to control state affairs of other nations, sometimes
it s for peace and other times it s for its own benefits. United States has increased its
political investment in Muslim lands over the past years which has resulted in a chain of
events. In this document an effort is made to present a link of the chain of events in a way
that the reader may understand who has benefited the most.

As a writer, I wanted to express myself as one of the Muslims from Ummah who feels his
responsibility to assess the implications as a witness of history in the making. I held a
different style while writing by providing references to the maximum possible extent in
order to ensure insight to readers and to remain justifiable.

This report should be of interest to analysts, scholars, writers, reporters, journalists,

teachers and students as it helps us in understanding our past in connection with present
and finally leading us to choose our destination in the future.
 Part One

United State s Nightmare

One of the greatest concerns of the United States is survival of its throne in the world that
can only be challenged by an ideology and Islam is the only religious code to hold the
concept of an Ideological state which is known as Islamic state; the Caliphate. Muslims
are today divided into more than 50 countries and hence can form a big weight if and
only if they get united under their religious code; the Caliphate. The biggest trouble that
US face in current times is the war of ideas with Islam.

It is for these reasons that United States not only puts its economy on the line but also
raises an ideological war against the upcoming most feared state i.e. Super Islamic State
Caliphate and it is quite evident from statements of its State Department from time to
time.

United States President George W. Bush has warned repeatedly in speeches on the War
on Terror that the Caliphate is at the heart of radical Islamic ideology. President Bush has
said Iraq is a pivotal battleground in a larger conflict between advocates of freedom and
radical Islamists.

Bush said that terrorists of Al-Qaeda and those who that share their ideology

"hope to establish a violent political utopia across the Middle East, which they
call caliphate, where all would be ruled according to their hateful ideology...This
caliphate would be a totalitarian Islamic empire encompassing all current and
former Muslim lands, stretching from Europe to North Africa, the Middle East
and Southeast Asia." [1]

Many of their reports speak of ways and strategies to stop the Caliphate from being
established. Time and again they call the Caliphate an evil ideology which will take the
human race back to the Stone Age.

In a very popular report released in 2003 by semi-government think tank Rand

Corporation Civil Democratic Islam [2] the US divides the Muslim world into four
categories:
Fundamentalists reject democratic values and contemporary Western culture.
They want an authoritarian, puritanical state that will implement their extreme
view of Islamic law and morality. They are willing to use innovation and modern
technology to achieve that goal.
Traditionalists want a conservative society. They are suspicious of modernity,
innovation, and change.
Modernists want the Islamic world to become part of global modernity. They
want to modernize and reform Islam to bring it into line with the age.
Secularists want the Islamic world to accept a division of church and state in the
manner of Western industrial democracies, with religion relegated to the private
sphere.
In 2004 Rand Corporation came up with another report titled Muslim World after
9/11 [3] in which they refer to political divides within the Muslim countries. After
calling it an evil ideology they themselves give the definition of an Islamic state
according to their understanding:

For example, a Muslim country is one in which the majority of the population
is Muslim, whereas an Islamic state is one that bases its legitimacy on Islam.

In 2004 in a report released by NIC by the name of Mapping the Global Future [4]
the real challenge for US is defined:

A New Caliphate provides an example of how a global movement fueled by radical

religious identity politics could constitute a challenge to Western norms and values
as the foundation of the global system.

In 2007 Rand Corporation comes up with yet another work of 217 pages titled Building
Moderate Muslim Networks [5] in which they emphasize following points of US
agenda for the Muslim world:
Democratic education, particularly programs that use Islamic texts and
traditions for authoritative teachings that support democratic and pluralistic
values.
Media. Support for moderate media is critical to combating media domination by
anti-democratic and conservative Muslim elements.
Gender equality. The issue of women s rights is a major battleground in the war
of ideas within Islam, and women s rights advocates operate in very adverse
environments. Promotion of gender equality is a critical component of any project
to empower moderate Muslims.
Policy advocacy. Islamists have political agendas, and moderates
need to engage in policy advocacy as well. Advocacy activities
are important in order to shape.

George Bush gave a speech on 28th August 2007 few weeks after the International
Khilafah Conference in Indonesia held by a political Islamic group Hizb-ut-Tahrir [6] in
which he vowed to fight those who seek to re-establish the Khilafah. He spoke of
America being engaged in a great ideological struggle -- fighting Islamic extremists
across the globe.' He went on to define these extremists as those who hope to impose
that same dark vision across the Middle East by raising up a violent and radical
caliphate that spans from Spain to Indonesia. [7]

Role of Britain as US ally

Britain is an ally of US only for its own benefits and their struggle is against common
enemy i.e. Islamic ideology which is evident from statements given by British higher
officials.
According to British Home Secretary Charles Clarke one of the things fundamental to
their civilization is opposition to any recreation of the Islamic caliphate. [8]

Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair in his speech on the London bombings that he
delivered at the Labor Party national conference said [9]:

They demand the elimination of Israel; the withdrawal of all Westerners from Muslim
countries, irrespective of the wishes of people and government; the establishment of
effectively Taleban states and Sharia law in the Arab world en route to one caliphate of
all Muslim nations.

In spite of their common enemy they have conflicts and differences with each other and
the two imperialists are struggling to get the bigger portion of the cake. This could be
seen before the Iraq war and even after the Iraq war. Britain always advocated
involvement of UN in the war effort which US kept ignoring hence the two stood in
opposition to each other during the earlier phases of the Iraq war as ABC Radio in
Australia reported in 2003 [10]. According to BBC the US ambassador in Iraq indicated
differences between Britain and the US over a future strategy for Iraq [11]. Andrew
North, a BBC Baghdad correspondent reported in the earlier years of 2007 that for the
first time since the invasion four years ago, Britain and the US appeared to be taking a
'different approach' over Iraq.

Traversing from the book of history the pages speak of US and Britain war in 1812 [12]
[13]. Since then they have realized that using might is in no one s interest; rather a more
viable option is playing political moves and getting the best out of each other for their
own interest. This is what they have practiced for example

Even though US and Britain were allies in World War II yet after the War when
Britain was in a very weak position US took advantage of its weak position and
started emerging as a super power. There were (at that moment) three states that
were climbing the struggle to be superpower: the United States, the Soviet Union,
and the weakening British Empire. The British Empire was the most extensive
empire in world history, which was considered the foremost great power and by
1921, held sway over 25% of the world's population and controlled about 25% of
the Earth's total land area, while the United States and the Soviet Union both
proved their newly gained power in World War II. The British Empire emerged
from World War II significantly weakened and recognized to have lost its
superpower status, while the Soviet Union and the United States were recognized
as the sole remaining superpowers [14].
Another instance of Britain and US conflict is over the issue of peace process in
the Middle East [15]. US is concerned about remapping the Middle East [42] [43]
of course to its advantage as its remapping was earlier done by Britain when it
ruled over the areas that comprise the Middle East. On the other hand Britain is
more interested in ensuring peace and stability in the Middle East region. But
Britain cannot cling onto its stance in an authoritative manner due to its current
weak status in the throne and hence it follows the policy of compromise as it
believes that rather than losing all the cake its better to take a portion of its
cake
British Empire was one of the empires which previously raised an ideological and armed
war on last Caliphate and successfully eliminated it in 1924 and hence they understand
the severity of the problem and its criticality for their own benefits. History remembers
Islam as the only known super power who managed to rule the world for over 1,000 years
and hence it can form a great challenge once it returns; may be other states would have to
wait for a 1,000 more years to achieve supremacy which they certainly do not want to.

Why Democracy?
United States takes politics of Muslim world as their national security concern which is
evident from summary of CRS (Congressional Research Service [16]) report titled U.S.
Democracy Promotion Policy in the Middle East: The Islamist Dilemma [17]

The Bush Administration has made the promotion of democracy in the Middle
East a national security priority, stating that greater political freedom can undercut
the forces of Islamic radicalism and indoctrination. As U.S. democracy promotion
policies have moved forward, policymakers have confronted a significant dilemma:
how to respond to challenges posed by political Islamist movements (i.e. parties and
political organizations that promote social and political reform in accordance with
Islamic religious principles that may lead them to oppose U.S. foreign policy).

Democracy in disguise eliminates Islamic code of conduct from State affairs by enabling
human legislation in State affairs; thereby challenging Islamic Law with human numbers
hence it sharply strategizes the elimination of Islamic state Caliphate by replacing it with
an alternate democratic system as is evident by the guilty US campaign for the support of
democracy when Condoleeza Rice speaks [18]:

No Conflict between Islam and Democracy

Straw, who moderated the Rice s dialogue with the Blackburn residents, called it "a
serious discussion" of cultures, values and political interests -- "one of the best I ve ever
seen." In addition to the immediate political concerns of the Middle East, the discussion
also addressed women s issues. Straw said he found it "fascinating" to hear the U.S.
secretary of state pressed for career advice.

United States and its allies believe that salvation lies only in injecting divide and rule into
Muslims by means of ideas of democracy and secularism. Recently, George W Bush
announced in a series of speeches that he would actively work to bring democracy to the
Middle East [19].

The United States and its allies ideologically fear the return of Caliphate and they can
sniff the threat to their position of superpower once the super Islamic State Caliphate
returns; hence only option that remains is to confront Islam s ideology and replace it with
democratic values. In short US policies are to MAKE DEMOCRACY LOOK LIKE
THE ULTIMATE MODERN GOAL OF THE MUSLIMS so that the Caliphate
becomes a remote possibility.
 Part Two

Pakistan s Political Scene and Tug of War between the Two Imperialists
The land where Pakistan is situated has always been of immense importance to the super
power even before the partition of undivided India. Pakistan is the only known Muslim
populous country to be nuclear power and this fact increases the worth of this cake
from 1947 to now. Before 1947 British defended its interest in this part of the land and
managed it somehow till the newly born Pakistan came into being. Queen of Britain
remained Queen of Pakistan till 1956 [20] and Commander in Chief of Pakistan at that
time was a British General Sir Frank Messervy [21]. In fact when India sent its troops to
the area of Jammu & Kashmir Mr. Jinnah, Governor General of Pakistan then, too
decided to send Pakistan army but the British influence spoke and his own appointed
British Chief of Pakistan Army refused to attack [22]. In fact the British element has
never been wiped off from Pakistan; in fact the laws that are implemented in Pakistan are
a gift of the British Masters.

Ever since 1947 there has been a tug of war between Britain and US over the question of
political control in Pakistan. Right from the beginning the founder of Pakistan sent his
representative to the US government for financial and military assistance. It was during
the Ayub and Zia reign that Pakistan s romance with United States reached its peak [23].
However during Bhutto s era this romance turned into a dirty game of intrigues and
conspiracies as we explore in the next section. In short with regard to the tendencies of
different Governments in Pakistan up to now there has been a see-saw of power
between the two imperialists with some governments being pro-US, some being pro-
British and rest having tendencies towards historic Soviet Union.

For a long time now crucial decisions relating to Pakistan s political affairs have been
made in Pentagon and White House. There has been a strong US factor in Pakistani
politics ever since Musharraf has taken over [24]. We now go on to study in a bit detail
the drifts between Bhutto family and US along with pro-British tendencies of the Bhutto
family.

The Bhutto Factor in Pakistani Politics

The 1970 s gave Pakistan a dynamic leader in the shape of Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto. His
charismatic personality was the real force behind the Pakistan People s Party; his slogan
of Roti, Kapra aur Makaan (Bread, Clothes and House) gave Z.A. Bhutto ever-living
popularity. He served as President of Pakistan from 1971 to 1973 and as Prime Minister
of Pakistan from 1973 to 1977. Unlike his predecessor Ayub Khan he was not so much
popular with the United States as he was an outspoken critique of US foreign policy and
instead aligned himself with the Soviet Union, Arab States and China [25]; he was also in
close relation with Britain. In fact when he was Foreign Minister in 1961, Bhutto
negotiated an oil exploration agreement with the Soviet Union, which also agreed to
provide economic and technical aid to Pakistan [25].
Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto was not quite popular with the United States and in his own book If
I am Assassinated he reveals that the US element was quite strong in his hanging.
Bhutto was the founder of Pakistan's nuclear program:

Under his leadership,

Pakistan developed into the first Muslim State with a nuclear capability.
In his book he revealed how Henry Kissinger had said to him in 1976:
"we can destabilise your government and make a horrible example out of you".
(Cited, Tariq Ali, The Clash of Fundamentalisms: Crusades, Jihads and Modernities,
Verso, London & New York, 2002: p 167) [26] [27]

In the same book Z.A. mentions his close relationships with Britain:

I have been deeply moved by the honourable

shelter given by the British governments and the British people to my
three children and my coMr.ades. [26]

His parting words to his daughter were: You can walk away. You re young. You can go
to live in London or Paris or Geneva. [28] [29]

Z.A. Bhutto stood against capitalistic ideas and was more of a leftist which is clear from
his alignment with Soviets; later Soviet Union was the one who fought war in
Afghanistan and then wanted to embark on to Pakistan. Bhutto had socialistic and Islamic
tendencies. He was the one to have introduced the term Islamic Socialism , where as
Islam itself is a complete code of life and does not need any other ISM for its
implementation. He was a great reformer of the democratic and secular cause; he initiated
Nuclear bomb research in Pakistan and OIC Conference at Lahore in 1974 was his
brainchild but he lacked to realize Islam as the only solution. The PPP s governance
policy never encompassed a theocratic Pakistan, merely a socialist state based on
principles of Mixed Socio-Islamic justice whilst retaining Islam as a personal matter
for the individuals of the state.

Towards the end of Bhutto s tenure it was US who gained the bigger piece of cake
and executed Z.A. Bhutto by hiring services of Zia-ul-Haq, US later used services of
general Zia to claim dominancy over the throne as sole Super Power against Soviet Union
in Afghanistan. Another important pave was Nawaz Sharif who was chief minister of
Punjab during US era leaded by general Zia.

The See-Saw of Power between US and Britain through Nawaz Sharif

and Benazir Bhutto
The 1990 s in Pakistan was a decade of continuous power change between Nawaz Sharif
and Benazir Bhutto. But the backstage players during this change of front faces were US
and Britain. Bhutto family had close and intimate ties with Britain and relations between
the two further improved after Z.A. Bhutto s death. In fact the media often refers to
Britain as Benazir s Bhutto s second home, she herself referred to Britain as her second
home [30]. On the other hand Nawaz Sharif emerged as a strong supporter of United
States during his tenure and openly provided support for US during Gulf War in 1991
[31]. Further during the famous Kargil War he withdrew Pakistani troops at a critical
juncture and this was done under American pressure [32] [33] [34]. When Musharraf
took over on 12th October, 1999 after a bloodless coup Nawaz Sharif was sentenced with
life imprisonment; there were bright chances of his being given a death penalty but it was
Clinton who intervened and got it changed to a life sentence [35]. Sometime afterwards
United States President at that time Bill Clinton played a vital role in an agreement
between Saudi government and Pakistani government to release Nawaz Sharif from
prison and to allow him to go to Saudi Arabia [31].

It was first time in Pakistan that US got such a bright chance to replace one of its service
man Nawaz Sharif with another of its own service man General Musharraf and at the
same time giving people hope for improvement but in actual it was a change of face
while time witnessed an even more stronger hold of United States.
 Part Three

The US and Britain Plot to Bring Back Benazir

After Musharraf s assumption of power the United States has strengthened its influence
in this region and Britain has been unable to regain control for a long time. The US policy
was working well and Musharraf turned out to be a loyal and faithful ally as is evident
from his role against US lead war on terror, stance on Kashmir issue and operations in
Waziristan, Wana etc., pursuance of liberal and secular policies in the name of
Enlightened Moderation. However there emerged a problem people were now
beginning to resent Musharraf due to the dictative measures that he took. This hatred
against Musharraf intensified on the steps taken against Lal-Masjid, sacking of Chief
Justice Iftekhar Muhammad Chaudhary, his moves to curb the media and his imposition
of emergency in Pakistan. US too realized that it would have to bring change very soon
otherwise there could be a threat for US interests by means of real revolution from the
Muslims of Pakistan i.e. ISLAMIC REVOLUTION. The common man was getting more
and more agitated against Musharraf. Musharraf was now under his expiry dates since
face change is must in a certain time period to stop real revolution and give people hope
in the form of a new face and new tenure. There were three major alternatives that US
could go for:

1) To make Musharraf move with his allies from Muslim League-Q and increase
the role played by Q League members.
2) To bring back Nawaz Sharif.
3) To bring back Benazir Bhutto.

US was looking to de-stabilize and eliminate Islamic support within region by replacing
Islamic thoughts with Western ideas. All options were directed towards power sharing
since public opinion was not in favor of loyal servant Musharraf. The first option though
seemingly easy to implement was not logical because Q-League people had a front
Islamic face, so they could not be rallied against Islam since their voters carry Islamic
sentiments. One example of the Q-League sentiments for Islam was seen when Federal
Minister for religious Affairs Ejaz-ul-Haq got emotional in Geo s Capital Talk after the
Red Mosque massacre [36] and Chaudhary Shujaat expressed grief over the tragedy [37].
The second factor was not that easy to implement because Musharraf had expressed his
hatred for Nawaz Sharif on numerous occasions and even if a deal would have been
worked out between Musharraf and Nawaz Sharif then there would have been high
possibility of people getting suspicious and they would not accept it so easily. So things
had to be worked out according to a well-defined plan with minimum risk factor and
Benazir was the best option for this, her vote bank was secular, her stance on
modernization was clear and her regret on Taliban was clear from early ago. Hence US
and Britain hatched a plot to bring back Benazir. The secret was revealed in an
investigative report conducted by The Guardian [38] showing that talks had been
underway between both the leaders for over three years since 2004. There was an
imminent power sharing deal between the two and eventually Benazir came back to
Pakistan as the country s lethal weapon against terrorism and extremism on 18th
October 2007.
Rallying the Masses in the Name of Democracy
Pakistan is a land which was achieved in the name of Islam and Pakistani people have
always had and still have a strong bond with Islam; in fact Islam is in the soil of this land
and in the hearts of its people. That s why we saw that tables for United States were
turned after the Lal Masjid tragedy. Islamic sentiments of the people of Pakistan ran high
on Lal Masjid issue and hence this time US needed another Pearl Harbour [39], 9/11
[40] .

United States was just unable to produce sufficient support for democracy among the
masses in order to undermine Islamic sentiments which could lead into movement for
Islamic State. Benazir was their golden chance even when she was alive she was
considered as a champion of democracy and she was famous for her heroic stance but her
death did the trick for United States. Democracy was proved as an innocent poor soul and
finally sentiments of people were cashed for the support of democracy....and the Lal
Masjid tragedy was soon replaced by the tragic of death of democracy; Benazir s
projection as martyr for democracy further helped the US campaign for democracy [41]
and the sharp plan not only balanced the public sentiments for the two events but
democracy was made to weigh heavier. In short

This time head price of BB was of more worth than her services while living.....

When she was alive her support in public was getting less due to her compromise with
US, deal with dictator Musharraf and her verdict on national hero Abdul Qadeer Khan
that she would be handing him over to US. These measures not only lessened her support
in masses but among her party workers as well; however her death brought bigger cake
for US by not only bringing her party workers back but even the masses with a ratio of
one to many, this service for democracy could never have been made if Benazir would
have lived and by any means Benazir could not have promised a more mouth-watering
offer for US than this one which her death offered.

This time head price of BB was of more worth than her services while living.....

After her exit US has attained much mass support for democracy thereby sideling the
Islamic sentiment and at the same time it targeted Benazir who could have invested more
into Britain block so one shot two birds : increase support for democracy in order to
stop Islamic state s return and reduce Britain s share in the cake.

United States Intentions to Remap Muslim World

In an article The Destabilization of Pakistan by Professor Michel Chossudovsky of

the Center for Research on Globalization [42]; he writes

There are indications that the assassination of Benazir Bhutto

was anticipated by US officials
 Regime change with a view to ensuring continuity under military rule is no longer the
main thrust of US foreign policy. The regime of Pervez Musharraf cannot
prevail. Washington's foreign policy course is to actively promote the political
fragmentation and balkanization of Pakistan as a nation.

Further the article states:

A new political leadership is anticipated but in all likelihood it will take on a very
different shape, in relation to previous US sponsored regimes. One can expect that
Washington will push for a compliant political leadership, with no commitment to the
national interest, a leadership which will serve US imperial interests, while concurrently
contributing under the disguise of "decentralization", to the weakening of the central
government and the fracture of Pakistan's fragile federal structure.

Following shows the proposed map:

Figure 1 Baloch population in Pink: In Iran, Pakistan and Southern Afghanistan

The map has been used in a training program at NATO's Defense College for senior
military officers. This map, as well as other similar maps, has been used at the National
War Academy as well as in military planning circles. [43]

Basic constitution for the survival of United States throne is

Suppress every possible voice of Islamic state, Caliphate re-establishment.

Hire government officials of Muslim land and ignite anarchy through them.
Disintegrate possible self-sustainable united Muslim lands into dependent land
e.g. Pakistan in order to suppress rising wave of Caliphate.
Destabilize Muslim lands before message of Islamic ideology reaches them.
 Convert all Muslim lands into sub-ordinate lands; an example being pursuit of
policies to make Pakistan a sub-ordinate of India.

The remapping plan was first revealed by US Armed Forces Journal in an article Blood
Borders by Ralph Peters in June 2006 [44]. Mr. Peters argues that borders in the Middle
East and Africa were the most arbitrary and distorted in the world and need
restructuring. Four countries Pakistan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Turkey are singled out
for major re-adjustments. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are also defined as unnatural
states . [45]

As Pakistan occupies a very important place in the Muslim world hence US is pushing
hard for Pakistan s disintegration so that there cannot be any Islamic revolution from this
land; in short the more disunited the people of Pakistan get, the more weak Pakistan
becomes and the remoter the possibility of re-establishment of super Islamic state
Caliphate.
Conclusion

The world has seen war of ideology between Capitalism and Communism in the previous
century but now world is witnessing war of ideas between Western ideology and Islam.
Only one ideology will manage to survive in coming time. Muslims are now deprived in
many parts of world but their tomorrow is for all or nothing. They may manage to live
without an Islamic state but in that case their identification will be lost. But if Islamic
state returns world will see Islam as best civilization which previously managed peace,
introduced science, defined literature, built society and made the pillars of the modern
world [46].
The war between Western ideology & Islam is
just of ideologies they believe they want to rule , Islam
believes its made for ruling world. West follows
Capitalism & Islam provides the concept of
Islamic state, both are totally incompatible with
each other. West considers Khilafat as HARAM
and Islam considers everything other than
Khilafat to be HARAM.
 Appendix A
DEMOCRACY: A SYSTEM OF THE TIME OF IGNORANCE

Democracy is a system whose origins can be traced to a period before the advent of
Islam. One of the earliest instances of civilizations with democracy, or sometimes
disputed as oligarchy, was found in the republics of ancient India, which were established
sometime before the 6th century BC, and prior to the birth of Gautama Buddha [47].
Quran s stance is clear on all false ideas of the time of Ignorance:

Do they then seek after a judgment of (the days of) ignorance? But who, for a people
whose faith is assured, can give better judgment than Allah?
[TMQ: Al-Maeda [The Table, The Table Spread]-050]

Democracy is based on foundations of unlimited freedom for the people and grants Man
with exclusive law-making authority. In a democratic setup Sovereignty belongs to
people and people are the source of authority. Whereas Islam gives complete Sovereignty
to Allah (SWT) and command rests with none but Him:

It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when a matter has been decided by
Allah and His Messenger to have any option about their decision: if any one disobeys
Allah and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.
[TMQ: Al-Ahzab [The Clans, the Coalition, the Combined Forces]-036]

What Allah has bestowed on His Messenger (and taken away) from the people of the
townships,- belongs to Allah,- to His Messenger and to kindred and orphans, the needy
and the wayfarer; In order that it may not (merely) make a circuit between the wealthy
among you. So take what the Messenger assigns to you, and deny yourselves that
which he withholds from you. And fear Allah; for Allah is strict in Punishment.
[TMQ: Al-Hashr [Exile, Banishment]-007]

But no, by the Lord, they can have no (real) Faith, until they make thee judge in all
disputes between them, and find in their souls no resistance against Thy decisions, but
accept them with the fullest conviction.
[TMQ: An-Nisa [Women]-065]

To thee We sent the Scripture in truth, confirming the scripture that came before it, and
guarding it in safety: so judge between them by what Allah hath revealed, and follow
not their vain desires, diverging from the Truth that hath come to thee. To each
among you have we prescribed a law and an open way. If Allah had so willed, He
would have made you a single people, but (His plan is) to test you in what He hath given
you: so strive as in a race in all virtues. The goal of you all is to Allah; it is He that will
show you the truth of the matters in which ye dispute;
[TMQ: Al-Maeda [The Table, The Table Spread]-048]

And this (He commands): Judge thou between them by what Allah hath revealed,
and follow not their vain desires, but beware of them lest they beguile thee from any
of that (teaching) which Allah hath sent down to thee. And if they turn away, be
assured that for some of their crime it is Allah's purpose to punish them. And truly most
men are rebellious.
[TMQ: Al-Maeda [The Table, The Table Spread]-049]
 Appendix B
A NOTE TO THE PEOPLE OF PAKISTAN

Never will the Jews or the Christians be satisfied with thee unless thou follow their
form of religion. Say: "The Guidance of God,-that is the (only) Guidance." Wert thou to
follow their desires after the knowledge which hath reached thee, then wouldst thou find
neither Protector nor Helper against God.
[TMQ: Al-Baqarah [The Cow] -120]

O ye who believe! Take not into your intimacy those outside your ranks: They will not
fail to corrupt you. They only desire your ruin: Rank hatred has already appeared
from their mouths: What their hearts conceal is far worse. We have made plain to
you the Signs, if ye have wisdom.
[TMQ: Aal-Imran [House of Imran] 118]

Islam has always been fighting with ideologies. State affairs in the past were under the
command of religion (Christianity, Judaism chiefly) but after abandoning religion in State
affairs we face a challenge from Man-made ideologies chiefly Capitalism and
Communism which openly deny Divinity in State affairs. The common point in the two is
human interference in law-making completely disregarding any Divinity for law-making;
the choice is given to human as super being whereas Islam gives no right to legislate on
any law on which Allah s verdict is clear. It is Allah who is the super being and source of
all power.

They will not fight against you all together as a group except in fortified towns or
behind high walls. Their hostility towards each other is intense. They are full of
bravado in each other s company. You consider them united but their hearts are
scattered wide. That is because they are people who do not use their intellect. (59:14)
[TMQ: Al-Hashr [Exile, Banishment] - 014]

The Quran exposes the mentality of enemy in clear words and one can see this on careful
analysis. The differences that we see between Britain and US have been made evident in
the Quran, since they are people who fight for benefits hence when it comes to
distribution of these benefits they are divided amongst themselves.

Nations that have had a strong ideology have stood firmly because it is ideology that
empowers the people. The enemy understands this very well and all their attempts at
distorting Islamic ideology is a clear manifestation of this understanding. They will not
sit with peace until and unless they destroy and reform the Islamic ideology to their
wishful desires and motives and this is also what the Quran speaks. The West is trying to
weaken Islam from outside and inside. They attack our people and invade our countries
from outside, and they weaken us from within with ideas like secularism, liberalism and
democracy and provoke debates on non-issues like freedom of speech, women liberation,
extremism by ignoring the most important issue: freedom to survive in Iraq and other
lands. They always keep the best tactics on how to keep us divided and hence rule over
us.

Now time has come to break these false idols such as democracy and establish Islam in
totality. We now realize what our enemies want from us and shun everything other than
Islam. They keep on playing dirty games in order to keep us away from Islamic ideology
but the glorious Deen has come to prevail over all other ideologies. We should now be
aware of their manipulations and tricks and choose the system that Allah (SWT)
prescribes for us. The Muslim Ummah is now realizing its goal Caliphate and the
enemies have to play bigger games each time. This is hence a sign that the Khilafah is
very near and they also know it, each time they have to come up with a bigger game to
deviate the Muslims from Islamic ideology.

Do ye not see that Allah has subjected to your (use) all things in the heavens and on
earth, and has made his bounties flow to you in exceeding measure, (both) seen and
unseen? Yet there are among men those who dispute about Allah, without
knowledge and without guidance, and without a Book to enlighten them!
[TMQ: Luqman [Luqman] -020]

One day We shall raise from all Peoples a witness against them, from amongst
themselves: and We shall bring thee as a witness against these (thy people): and We have
sent down to thee the Book explaining all things, a Guide, a Mercy, and Glad Tidings
to Muslims.
[TMQ: An-Nahl [The Bee] 089]

God has promised, to those among you who believe and work righteous deeds, that He
will, of a surety, grant them in the land, inheritance (of power), as He granted it to those
before them; that He will establish in authority their religion - the one which He has
chosen for them; and that He will change (their state), after the fear in which they
(lived), to one of security and peace: 'They will worship Me (alone) and not associate
aught with Me. 'If any do reject Faith after this, they are rebellious and wicked.
[TMQ: An-Noor [The Light]-055]

The promise of Allah in the words of Prophet (PBUH):-

"The Prophecy will remain amongst you as long as Allah wills, then Allah will lift it
when he wishes, then it will be a Khilafah Rashidah(i.e.: The first four Khalifahs) on the
method of the Prophecy, it will remain for as long as Allah wills, then he will lift it when
he wills, then it will be a hereditary leadership (i.e.: the Abbasid and Ummayid dynasties
etc.) for as long as Allah wills then he will lift it when he so wills. Then there will be a
tyrannical rule (i.e.: all the current Kufr regimes of the Muslims) for as long as Allah
wills, then he will lift it when he so wills, then there will be a Khilafah Rashidah on the
method of the Prophecy, then he kept silent."(Musnad Imam Ahmed 4/273)
 After this it is ye, the same people, who slay among yourselves, and banish a party of
you from their homes; assist (Their enemies) against them, in guilt and rancour; and if
they come to you as captives, ye ransom them, though it was not lawful for you to banish
them. Then is it only a part of the Book that ye believe in, and do ye reject the rest?
but what is the reward for those among you who behave like this but disgrace in this
life?- and on the Day of Judgment they shall be consigned to the most grievous
penalty. For Allah is not unmindful of what ye do.
[TMQ: Al-Baqara [The Cow] 085]

O people of Pakistan your elders have sacrificed their life to ensure each and every word
of Quran and Sunnah but what we see after all those sacrifices is deception. O people of
Pakistan you have rallied a sacrifice for the creation of Pakistan, your struggle is still not
over. Will you not trust the whole Book like your elders have and even your elders
before 1400 years in Arab. The whole Muslim Ummah awaits your role people ranging
from Iraq, Palestine, Kashmir, Afghanistan and many other lands. Its you who have to
stand, make a firm decision. Will you be witness of Allah on the land or you will let evil
to stand against Allah?
References
1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate
2) Civil Democratic Islam by Rand Corporation
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monograph_reports/2005/MR1716.pdf
3) Muslim World after 9/11 by Rand Corporation
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2004/RAND_MG246.pdf
4) Mapping the Global Future by NIC http://www.foia.cia.gov/2020/2020.pdf
5) Building Moderate Muslim Networks by Rand Corporation
http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2007/RAND_MG574.pdf
6) http://www.khilafah.com/kcom/activism/asia/international-khilafah-conference-
2007.html
7) http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/08/20070828-2.html
8) http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1605653,00.html
9) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4689363.stm
10) http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2003/s823361.htm
11) http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/23731.html
12) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812
13) http://dspace.dial.pipex.com/town/terrace/adw03/c-eight/france/ang-am.htm
14) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superpower
15) http://www.dawn.com/2003/04/12/op.htm
16) http://www.loc.gov/crsinfo/whatscrs.html
17) U.S. Democracy Promotion Policy in the Middle East: The Islamist Dilemma ,
CRS Report http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33486.pdf
18) http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p=washfile-
english&y=2006&m=April&x=20060401150204retnuhategdirb0.1757471&t=liv
efeeds/wf-latest.html
19) http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/11/20031106-11.html
20) http://www.netglimse.com/celebs/pages/queen_elizabeth_ii/index.shtml
21) http://www.pakdef.info/pakmilitary/army/
22) LoC-Line of Control by Columnist Wing Comd (Retd) Muhammad Irshad
http://www.defencejournal.com/sept99/loc.htm
23) A History of US-Pakistan Relations by Jamshed Nazar Dec 12, 2003
http://www.chowk.com/articles/6843
24) http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/03/20060304-1.html
25) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zulfiqar_Ali_Bhutto
26) If I Am Assassinated by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto
http://www.bhutto.org/Acrobat/If%20I%20am%20Assassinated.pdf
27) http://www.ppp.org.pk/zab/zabbio.html
28) http://www.thenews.com.pk/print3.asp?id=12083
29) http://www.parade.com/benazir_bhutto_interview.html
30) http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2233334,00.html
31) http://socialistworld.net/eng/2007/09/30pakisa.html
32) http://www.indianembassy.org/new/NewDelhiPressFile/Kargil_July_1999/No_en
d_story.html
33) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nawaz_Sharif
34) http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/385432.stm
35) http://www.wrmea.com/archives/June_2000/0006033.html
36) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AtwWa_dkQBs
37) http://masjidlal.wordpress.com/
38) http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreignaffairs/story/0,,2130101,00.html
39) http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/pearl/index.html
40) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7E3oIbO0AWE
41) http://www.asiantribune.com/index.php?q=node/8912
42) http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=7705
43) http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=3882
44) http://www.armedforcesjournal.com/2006/06/1833899
45) http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1690698/posts
46) http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/426
47) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#Hi