Self Talk

C urrent politicians vs judiciary crisis of Pakistan has attracted extensive coverage in the local media. The decisions of the superior judiciary also make headlines in some foreign outlets too owing to their far reaching consequences. What I want to discuss is the validity of the criticism the apex court is being hurled at for issuing show cause notice to the nascent prime minister. While the court has made its position clear by passing the verdict in Mr Gillani's case, that a failure to abide by its previous orders will be deemed as crime, it is totally baseless to expect them to take a different line on the very issue in a space of few weeks. How can they forgive the current PM for not doing something that they punished the ex-PM for. It seems as the politicians are themselves showing the red cape to the judges in order to fix the blame of their failure on other institutions. This is similar to the fact that a bill for legislation against terrorism lies forgotten in t

According to latest statistics released by US agency New America Foundation, drone strikes have killed 150 supposed militants in Pakistan this year with zero civilian casualities so far. The stated precision of intelligence and strike technology seems incredibly good. In contrast to previous years, the strikes have been hitting bull's eye this time around. Or perhaps the definition of those being killed has changed. According to Russian Tv the criteria on which  the Obama administration decides whether an individual is classified as a terrorist or otherwise. As ironical as it can be, this pain is taken only after killing the suspects. And the definition itself speaks volumes about the accuracy of strikes as well as figures. It states " All military age males in a strike zone count as militant unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving their innocence i.e. they have to prove their innocence after death". In other words, any male, who is in the age of servi