Pakistans Permanent Revolution

#228 by hamidm2

They have done none of the abominable things you list. Re closing video shops, that is untrue as well. All they have done is to warn the stores not to distribute pornography otherwise they`ll shut them down. I think the video-stores have taken heed to that.

#203 by Salim_Chauhan,

I stand corrected. I checked and turns out you are right. As per wikipedia, the name Ottoman derives from Osman I, son of Ertuğrul, who became the first Bey when he declared the independence of the ``Ottoman State`` in 1299.

But I do remember reading somewhere it was after the Caliph Usman. Was Osman1 named after the Caliph? I would think so.

Re: # 227

zeemax,

`In fact, the students are not agitating for anything radical`` ???????

...... i guess you don`t consider shutting down video stores, stoning adulterers, beheading munafiqs, and driving pigs and ahmedis into the sea radical ! ........ i find that quite disgusting, as do the pigs

#212 by kaalchakra

Religious students and their supporters might have (possibly) played their hand prematurely.

Interesting you should say that. In fact, the students are not agitating for anything radical, which may come as a surprise to you and others here. Their move is very carefully calibrated in that their demand is for ``Supremacy of the Constitution`` along with the guarantee it already provides of Islam being the ultimate source of all legislation in Pakistan. Perhaps Manto will provide the relevant clauses.

The `Nizam-e-Mustafa` they want is already there in the constitution placed there by Zia-ul-Haq. All they want is its implementation.

This way, they can have their cake and eat it too. They can`t be blamed for being anti-state, while at the same time they get credit for fighting for democracy and rule of law, also obviously envisaged in the constitution.

I do believe their timing is correct. At this time the political opposition is not only divided, but also frantically searching for a fresh message to replace the lost ones in the ineffective, half-hearted and disgraced liberalism of Benazir, the rejected urban middle-class morality of PML (N) which readily switched sides for the most part after musharraf`s coup, and the loss of credibility of the MMA having backtracked shamelessly after threatening resignations over the women`s bill just to remain in power in two provinces.

So the field is wide-open for a new independent appeal in this election year. Another few years would see this entire movement hijacked (or otherwise neutralized) by one of the above three, or its agenda set by other Islamist powers from outside the country.

Of-course all of above assumes Musharraf will not formally impose Martial-Law or Emergency, citing internal/external threats to the federation, which is a real possibility.

#225 (add-on)

I always knew that Pakistani ladies were good at fighting!

One should never judge a whole country by the conduct of its men alone!!!

Run for your lives, Pakistani khakis!

You have met your match - and then some!

Lathi meets lathi - and you have encountered what you have forever feared!

Here come the burqa-clad ladies!

It is not the Pakistan of yesterday - but the Pakistan of tomorrow that stares you in your face.

Run, khakis, run! (And take the Manto with you - for his protection.)

#90 Masadi

[It is not that the US has lost its faith in him, if they had he wouldn`t be in office right now, it is that they want to bring him back in line, the are merely warning him to align more precisely to their demands, and in my opinion the issue of Iran is at the center of this entire so-called crisis.]

Masadi sahib, what about those burqa-clad warriors - were those also snuck in by the Uncle Sam to further restrain the Mushy to retain firm alignment with the ``line``?

#222 Tauheed sahib

With all due respect, Mian Masadi did not direct his #196 to you therefore, your retort is rather harsh and may be unwarranted.

From a grammar point of view, you have used too many initial caps - but the level of detail in #222 is quite impressive!

Masadi: Dear Running Sore on the Rear End of the Flea That is Feasting on the Poop Left by the Dog of the Peon Whose Sole Job is to Bring Samosa and Chai for the Bald, Overweight College Clerk With Rotten Teeth who Steals From the Scholarship Fund At Government College Mian Channu Where the Roof Drips and the Teachers Show Their Unwashed Faces in College on the First of Every Month to Collect Their Salary.

I hope the above responds adequately to the your unsolicited insults addressed to me. :-)

#196 Masadi

[Stay away from people who can look through your dimwit mentality, or you end up making a damn fool of yourself]

Sir, you are so undervalued around here – you, who minces no words!

You – who only minces your opponents!

Now, if only you could make the likes of the Hamidm2 and the Mantos and the Tauheeds see the light!

They would stop their fight and start immediate flight!

And they would address the legitimate needs of individuals such as you instead of pouring all that money into the pockets of the Towns!

Such clowns!

If only they could see what you can see!

Whatever it be!

If only they could see what you can see!

For sure, they would flee – those fleas!

anil #197: - Part 1: Militant Islam is sitting on the fence at the moment. Political Islam is certainly on the rise. There isn`t much any moderate Muslim can do about that. This is what I try to keep explaining. The reasons behind this rise is not in control of the moderate Muslims, as explained below:

The post-WW II end of colonialism/occupation had the largest affect on Muslims. More Muslim states emerged than any other (?). Muslims, as a whole, came out of hundred to two hundred years of colonization. One could argue that Hindus came out of 1000 years of occupation, but there were two differences:

a) Muslims had been occupied by Christians - a group, which the Muslims had historically fought against, for superpower rights of the world. Hindus had never been in such a conflict, with Christian for superpower rights. Only Jews and Muslims had.

b) Muslim were (are) divided into 55+ states, each coming out of colonialism separately. Hindus came out, through one major geographically contigouos major state (with an odd connected one or two minor ones). No, ``Hindu`` land remained occuppied.

The secular govts. of the new independent Muslim states became very elitist, and tilted towards the West for their personal benefits. They became dictatorships, which had no regard for the common man. Due to the very low literacy rates of the Muslims (far lower than any other religion) and a very corrupt elite, Muslim states became quite dysfunctional.

This problem was further compounded by the fact that oil was discovered in Muslim countries. This lead to further Western interventations in propping up the status quo of Muslim elites.

Eventually, in some of the more intellecually developed Muslim states - the non-Arab ones like Iran, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Turkey etc. - these staus quos were brought down to some extent. However, the total system was never completely broken.

The desire of the Muslim citizens to create a more equal society domestically led to a natural phenomemon - rising up against the elites. This rise was led by various different factions. Initially it was the left which was the strongest. Labour unions, communists etc. The liberal intelligensia etc. There was also religious forces, rising up. The fomer represented the urban educated class, while the later represented the poorer rural classes.

The Muslim ruling dictatorial elite - in many cases with the help of Western forces - was able to supress all these forces, militantly, other than the Islamic forces. The Islamic forces concept of, ``jihad,`` where death is simply an intermediate state, is pretty much impossible to supress in a militant conflict. Eventually these Islamic forces became the sole anti-govt. forces in many, if not most Muslim countries. The only exceptions were places like Pakistan, where the govt. never went after the Islamic opposition militantly, and gave it breathing room to operate, thereby not allowing it martyr status. But in countries like Iran, Iraq, Turkey, Egypt, Algeria etc. - the more pro Western liberal states - the Islamic forces faced govt. militancy and became martyrs and the primary anti-govt. forces.

NOTE: The supporting of corrupt elitist dictators (including the ones who weren`t corrupt but were still elitist - like Musharraf) was the first big mistake the West made in Muslim countries. Through this, the West received short term cheap oil and/or subordinate regimes in Muslim countries, however, it has obviously led to long term problems, in the form of a very anti-West population.

Eventually the political opposition in many Muslim countries became solely Islamic forces. These forces became militant, once the ruling govt. of the countries became militant against them. Thereby leading to domestic militant Islam. In some countries, where some sort of election were allowed, Islamic forces took over, i.e. Iran, Iraq, Turkey. In others, they will will take over if dictatorships end and elections are held - Egypt, Algeria etc. In a third group - which includes Pakistan - they are on the rise, but not strong enough to take over yet.

So far, none have been able to take over through domestic militancy, however, that point may not be too far ahead. They certainly are taking over through the ballot box, though.

This is not say that it is solely the West`s fault. It is only to highlight how all this impacts the West, and how the West has played its cards incorrectly, taking short term benefits for long term losses and conflicts. And, most of all, to highlight the forces behind militant Islam, and why moderate Muslims cannot do much about them. Many moderate Muslims have tried to convince the West of not supporting elitist dictatorial govts. in Muslim countries, but to no avail. They have tried, ``moderate`` oppostion in their own countries, but these same pro-West govt. have suppressed such opposition, thereby, leaving Islamic forces as the only surviving opposition. Egypt being a good example. Saudi Arabia will be another one. As are so many examples.

Part II later......on how foreign occupations of Muslim lands has further led to Islamic militancy........And why most countries would be wise to end these occupations, if they want militant Islam to die down........

Yeh Faqa-kash keh maut se darta nahiN zara
Rooh-e-Muhammad (pbuh) iss ke badan se nikal duo.


Why deniers of Sunnat & Hadith are so active these days: