unflinching idealism ... since 1997 archivessitemapabouthelpfeedback
ideas, identities and interactions
  • Home
  • InFocus
  • Themes
  • Columns
  • Articles
  • Fiction
  • iLogs
  • Gallery
  • Unplugged
  • Writers
  • Interactors
  • Tags
Sign in | Join Chowk
web chowk
  • Article
  • Interact
  • read writer comments
  • add to favorites
  • get rss feeds
  • print
  • email this link

Burqa Vaganza – A Satirical Backlash

Mohammad Gill May 2, 2007

Latest comments   flat   threaded   latest   oldest   all
listing 1-16   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

#434 Posted by shehzadkhawar on July 22, 2007 10:29:21 am
Asslamualaikum Sir,
I hope you will be fine. I am currently publishing a local Student's Magazine based in Pakistan. I need great articles to publish them. I have got good content so far. I have seen your article on Burga and I found it good to include in my magazine. I hope you will give us permission to publish it with your name in our Magazine.
Our magazine is distributed in all the universities of capital of Pakistan and in the market.

My email address is khawar.shehzad@gmail.com

Your earliest response will be highly appreciated.

Khawar Shehzad
Chief Editor
Student's Mag
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#433 Posted by teshah on May 14, 2007 6:36:05 pm
Re: # 432

zeemax

How can you say that?

In any case it is shameful to meddle in a case to just put it in a limbo causing unjustified and unlimited incarceration for the other party. Do you think it is justice?

As regards CJ, Iftikhar Choudary, I may clarify that I am against the reference made against him as I think he was singled out by Mush for some ulterior motives. Otherwise I think all judiciary, with a few exceptions, is corrupt and must be held to account.

As for the requirement of four eye-witnesses, I support it fully as a measure of great `hikmat` in Quran as in the absence of this provision any whore can charge any one of rape. The idiotic WPB has opened up a flood gate of rape charges by `low-caste` women hoping to get the `injustice` like Mai. I come across many such cases in daily life and in media also. Only yesterday I read a feature in the Urdu Daily Express about a rape scandal titled `Muhallah Islam Pura (Jehlam) ijtimaei ziaditi ka muamila`. The other day an alleged rape victim, a girl from Sialkot, was speaking on TV. She accused every body with raping her who she contacted for seeking `justice`. She accused even the police walas of raping her when she went to the police station to report the case. The WPB has evidently given her a licence to a free use of the rape charge (tohmat) against any body with no check.

In fact, the object of the Quranic injunctions in case of `zina`, including of cource rape, is to save people from `tohmat` and to avoid publicity of immorality, which is verily the real `fahaashi` which no honorable person would like to indulge in.



reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#432 Posted by zeemax on May 14, 2007 5:40:44 am
#430 by teshah,

...and the CJ who had taken suo motu action in the matter himself stands charged, in a reference, with misconduct...

Mr. Teshah ... you ignoramus. How do you expect me to interact with you except just exposing you for what you are?

It was not Chief Justice Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry who took suo moto action in Mukhtaran`s case. It was Chief Justice Nazim Hussain Siddiqui.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#431 Posted by zeemax on May 14, 2007 5:32:40 am
#422 by hamidm2 Re: # 421

..... you are a shameless hypocrite !

No I am NOT!.

....... on the one hand, people of your ilk oppose the `women`s protection bill`

I don`t oppose the `women`s protection bill`. Only that it is quite unnecessary and merely an exercise in make-believe and to fool others.

Do you think women have protection now after the `women`s protection bill`? Women protection bill is a sham and cosmetic. The problem always lay with the thana culture and continues to do. There was a loophole in the previous law which was used for extortion by thanedars. This has now been removed but women still don`t have `protection`, because there`re plenty of other methods at their disposal ... like simply picking someone up and not entering the arrest in thana records till they deem fit.

... and want to impose the barbaric hudood laws that would make it impossible for a woman to press charges of rape against a momin ...

Will you stop parroting that now because four witnesses are no longer required? Rape is now outside the purview of Hudood after introduction of your `women`s protection bill`. Or are you not aware of that? That seems pretty ignorant to me ...

...and on the other hand you are championing mukhtar mai`s cause .......

So? Where is the contradiction? Noone asked her to produce four witnesses and her rapists are in Jail with a death penalty hanging over their heads. At the time there wasn`t even any `women`s protection bill`. So how come she got some kind of justice? Did any Islamist oppose the Supreme Court`s action in setting aside High Court`s judgment because there weren`t four witnesses?

On the other hand, see below from just yesterday`s news:




It is amazing people accept the prevailing Jirgas and Punchayats in Pakistan but are up in arms over the mere mention of `Shariya`. Why is that?

It is because they`re scared it is applicable to all, not just to the poor and the helpless. Only imposition of Shariya can rid the society of social ills as above.

...... she is a great woman who has done more for the women`s cause than any one else in recent history ..........

No doubt she is, because she `stood` up. Just as much as the Hafsa girls who `stood` up after having been kicked around, but you abuse them as being prostitutes.

Now who is the hypocrite?

What if Mukhtaran wore a `burqa`? Would you have then agreed with teshah that she did it all as a show and ulterior motives?

I would really like you to answer the above question. Though I suspect if Mukhtaran was not paraded around Europe and US by liberal NGOs, but was actually a simple burqa-clad who stood up, or had taken refuge in Hafsa, you would say she was a prostitute to begin with.

........ as for zab, i think that inspite of his shortcomings and weaknesses he was a great leader ........

No doubt he was. One of the greatest leaders in history.

.......... his biggest fault was in giving in to the mullahs on the ahmedi issues ...

Remember there was an assembly at the time and extensive hearings were held on the issue. Mullahs constituted a small minority in that assembly with ZABs party dominating all legislature with a 2/3rd majority. What was the Mullah`s hold on ZAB back in 1973? Actually it was `zero`. It was the same ZAB who had built a Casino in Karachi for the Gulf Arabs.

Qadianis were declared non-Mulsims because they ARE non-Muslims. Mullahs or no Mullahs, ZABs party resolved the issue once and for all. They`re not considered Muslim in any Muslim country BTW and are not allowed Hajj etc by Saudis as well.

... and his biggest sin against mankind was the imposition of prohibition - it has caused many of us great personal hardship ........

He did NOT declare prohibition. Haven`t you seen the booze stores in every locality in Karachi? He only restricted alcohol to non-Muslims, even which was and still isn`t practically enforced. In fact, the alcohol in Pakistan is more liberal than your cherished Dubai where there`re no liquor stores at all but available only for rich FDI types in hotels. Who then is a bigger hypocrite? ZAB or Shaikh Muhammad Bin Al-Maktoum?

........ the biggest villian in pakistan`s history was your pir and murshid, hazrat zia - the man who opened pandora`s box to let out the denizens of hell ...........

I fully agree Zia was the biggest villain ... but not for what you accuse him of ... it was for his murdering ZAB while locked-up through supposed judicial means like a coward and not willing to let him out of jail for all of two years to face him on the street. Zia was scared of ZAB to no end. Zia was the biggest villain this country has ever seen in its entire 60 years of history. So we agree so far on this issue.

But did Zia open the pandora`s box to let out the denizens of hell? If he did, it was again solely by hanging ZAB and widening the existing polarization in the country, and not by anything else. After all, what did he do other than funnel CIA money to Hikmatyar after keeping a due cut for himself and Musharraf`s key minister Humayun Akhtar`s dad Gen. Akhtar Abdur-Rahman? Religious fundamentalism as you would term it (or unadulterated Islam as I would term it) emerged much later after Zia was dispatched to hell and during Benazir`s first term after her return from exile with emergence of Taliban. Lal Masjid phenomenon is a natural progression and a much improved one from that of Taliban.

Hamidm. I`m disappointed in you. You don`t know enough facts to pass judgments on me. If you`re an apostate, and hate Islam and Muslims, that`s ok.

But, you`re a liar, Sir. And ignorant on top of that.

Cheers.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#430 Posted by teshah on May 13, 2007 7:09:53 pm
tahmed32

zeemax
I started Mai debate with tahmed but zeemax jumped in to support the former`s view-point. This made me rather wondering and a bit confused. How these two could be one in supporting Mai`s rape as though they were both eye-witnesses of the case in Sharrayei terms.

As far as I know the case is pending with the Supreme Court and the CJ who had taken suo motu action in the matter himself stands charged, in a reference, with misconduct. We can only wait and see the result of either case.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#429 Posted by teshah on May 13, 2007 6:30:14 pm
Re: # 421

zeemax

So you forgot your Islamic up-bringing and started showing your genetic meanness. So you say the alleged rape of Mai was mandated by the Panchayat Court, she was dragged (allegedly) to a room by Mastoies in compliance with the orders of the court but all her family sat smug watching the operation. I cannot believe this all to be a case of rape. It was perhaps a case of mere tribal vendetta.

Any how I see you and your ilk, like Hafsa Brigade, ignore Islam whenever it is convenient. Shariah requires four eye witnesses who saw the penis going in and out of the victim`s vagina to be a valid evidence for zina but none could perhaps be produced in this case. So all accusers of zina in this case are liable to be held guilty of `Qazaf` with all its consequences.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#428 Posted by tahmed32 on May 13, 2007 5:23:35 pm
tejpal: i took the trouble of reading this so i could tell you what it is, and this is what it is - a load of mullah propaganda. i.e., the write-up whines that no one called the virginia tech killings terrorism, then lists a bunch of pakistani universities and how they have violence and arms and no one cares, and then ends with claiming that the innocent female students of hafsa have been the target of police brutality.

so, dont worry - you are missing nothing other than a load of bs.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#427 Posted by tejpal on May 13, 2007 4:30:44 pm
I will appreciate if whenever a verse or quote is inserted in foreign language , which in this is Urdu, a translation ,however imperfect, should be included so that those who are not conversant with , say urdu, can make out the meaning of the quoted passage.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#426 Posted by tahmed32 on May 13, 2007 3:58:22 pm
I meant credulous, not incredulous. (damn. so much for trying to approach the intellectual heights of masadi by using big words!!) :-(
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#425 Posted by tahmed32 on May 13, 2007 3:56:34 pm
hamidm: i think someone added this piece to your post while you were taking a coffee break (since i cannot imagine you would ever be so incredulous as to say such a thing): he (ZAB) liberated the common man - the nai, dhobi and rickshaw wala - and gave him back his essential human dignity

what you mean is: zab gave the poor false hopes as an election stunt when in fact he never intended to keep it. One example: ZAB steadfastly refused to introduce proper land reforms (which would have changed the socio-economic landscape of rural pakistan) despite being urged to do so from many quarters.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#424 Posted by Raw_Dust on May 13, 2007 3:04:54 pm
zeemax: it was kaalchakra minus the kaalchakraisms like ``internal consistency of islamic message``. He (your guru) called in a moment of candor Islam e.v.i.l. So, spare your misdirected anger on me. :-)

GT: yea, sure. But I will disappoint you. I have nothing remotely new to say on ``Religion``.

peace.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#423 Posted by echoboom on May 13, 2007 10:54:07 am

Burqa Vaganza – A Satirical Backlash

and then there is the KanjarR Vaganza

afsose that the Ba Ba Blacksheep from the KanjarR-school system
will not be able to read this..because they are anparRhs(illiterates)
................................................................................................................................



reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#422 Posted by hamidm2 on May 13, 2007 6:07:38 am
Re: # 421

zeemax,

..... you are a shameless hypocrite !

....... on the one hand, people of your ilk oppose the `women`e protection bill` and want to impose the barbaric hudood laws that would make it impossible for a woman to press charges of rape against a momin, and on the other hand you are championing mukhtar mai`s cause ....... i doubt she would want to be associated with men like you ...... she is a great woman who has done more for the women`s cause than any one else in recent history .......... you mullahs cannot have your halwa and eat it too ......

........ i don`t know where teshah is coming from, but he is wrong ...........

........ as for zab, i think that inspite of his shortcomings and weaknesses he was a great leader ........ he liberated the common man - the nai, dhobi and rickshaw wala - and gave him back his essential human dignity ........ in this respect he is the `father of democracy` in pakistan ..........as for his misplaced and mismanaged socialistic ideas, that was the `fashion` in the developing countries at that time - everyone from nehru to nyerere fell prey to this disease .......... his biggest fault was in giving in to the mullahs on the ahmedi issues instead of exterminating the scum ........ and his biggest sin against mankind was the imposition of prohibition - it has caused many of us great personal hardship ........

........ the biggest villian in pakistan`s history was your pir and murshid, hazrat zia - the man who opened pandora`s box to let out the denizens of hell ...........
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#421 Posted by zeemax on May 13, 2007 2:51:52 am
#420 by teshah,

There were not four but dozens of witnesses. The Jirga had mandated a public gang rape which was carried out. If those dozens of witnesses refused to testify, that was another matter which Supreme Court took into account while setting aside the bail by the High court and sending the culprits back to jail.

However, if you`re worse than a `Nali ka Keera`, I can`t help you. So my advice to you would be to get lost.

You are one of those like hamidm and t32 who no longer should have any claim over Pakistani identity and would be swiftly taken care of quite cruelly if you try to claim otherwise.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#420 Posted by teshah on May 12, 2007 7:48:46 pm
Re: # 415

zeemax

You seem otherwise to be a quite sensible man but why do you insist on rape of Mai as though you were an eye-witness of the operation seeing Mastoies` going in and out or a co-sharer in the spoils. Do you know Sharia requires four qualified eye-witnesses if you make an accusation of zina against some body and if you fail to produce the required number of witnesses you are held as a certified liar to be punished by 80 straps. Let Shariah, with which you flirt often, come and you will sure get those 80 straps and held liar for ever.

You are in fact the limit of lowness.

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#419 Posted by zeemax on May 12, 2007 3:27:54 pm
#418 by tahmed32,

Don`t be evasive like a snake with a forked tongue.

Do you support ZABs hanging? Yes or no please. Spare me the inanities.

If it is yes, I stand vindicated with all my allegations against you proven correct.

If it is no, you will be lying and I can produce a hundred posts where you have cheered that hanging. So I will still stand vindicated with all my allegations against you proven correct.

Best course will be for you not to answer at all.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#418 Posted by tahmed32 on May 12, 2007 3:11:32 pm
#417 zeemax: i told you that strong language is not a substitute for weak arguments.

you say i speak with a forked tongue - and the best you could come up with is confusing bhutto`s slogan of ``roti, kapra aur makan`` with bhutto`s actions which did the opposite by destroying pakistan`s economic progress at that time.

i point this out, and you change your tune to say it is his ``judicial murder`` that you claim i support.

anyway - i am not in the habit of having ``discussions`` with individuals who are abusive one minute and ``my friend`` the next. go look at the mirror if you want to see a forked (not to mention filthy and abusive) tongue.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#417 Posted by zeemax on May 12, 2007 2:59:47 pm
#416 by tahmed32,

My point is not ZABs performance or lack of it during his reign. My point is his judicial murder which you support and at the same time use his slogan to express wishes of the people.

Above is being a fake with a forked tongue.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#416 Posted by tahmed32 on May 12, 2007 12:13:15 pm
#414 zeemax: as i have pointed out many times on chowk, ZAB proved to be an egotistical landlord, and in fulfilling his ego he destroyed the vibrant pakistani economy of that time by nationalizing banks and seeking government control over other enterprises. so, despite the fact that he used the slogan ``roti, kapra aur makaan``, the fact is that it was a lie and he was as fake as the corrupt and jahil mullahs who claim piety.

and as such, i am perfectly consistent in condemning ZAB while saying that ``roti, kapra aur makaan`` are the only real issues, not music cassettes or any of the other ``mullah issues`` that musharraf expertly plays on to stay in power.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#415 Posted by zeemax on May 12, 2007 4:59:13 am
#411 by teshah,

I guess you can`t fall any further than terming the gang rape of a low-status rural woman mandated by a tribal jirga in penance for her brother`s alleged sin as being concocted by her for her personal gain.

You`re just a `nali ka keera`. Tough to be lower than that but you can try, imbecile.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#414 Posted by zeemax on May 12, 2007 3:33:28 am
#413 by tahmed32,

... zeemax is merely throwing back the same words at me....

Nope. What I`m throwing back at you is your consistent glee and persistent cheering over the ZAB judicial murder which even the consenting judge Naseem Hassan Shah has publicly admitted to having been on trumped up charges, alongwith his further clarification that had the bench not consented, Zia would have thrown out the entire judiciary ...

And then, you proclaim in post # 150:

#150 by tahmed32 :

... The fact is that for the average Pakistani, ``roti, kapra or makaan`` for himself and his children is far more important ...


Where is this coming from if not from a dishonest forked tongue?:)
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#413 Posted by tahmed32 on May 11, 2007 8:20:07 pm
teshah #411 mere words not backed by substance mean nothing. when i called urstruly a fake, i did that when he claimed that he hates adultery etc. in any form by reminding him that he wrote one of the most lewd articles on chowk. zeemax is merely throwing back the same words at me. only difference is - i dont make tall claims like urstruly and i dont write lewd article like urstruly.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#412 Posted by tahmed32 on May 11, 2007 8:15:46 pm
hamidm: dont take these rantings so seriously.

Here is one little jab at mullahism to report: we have a pakistani grocery store owner who will yell ``brother, brother`` at top volume when you enter his shop and keep ranting ``bismillah, bismillah`` as you shop and everything about him says ``Fake as a Khhota Paisa``. despite my better judgement i went to his shop today at wife`s request and decided to beat him at his own game by yelling ``brother how are you today`` before he had a chance to yell the same thing to me. the man seemed pleased and later at the cash register tried to chat by yelling ``Bush is a big liar, big liar``. That was the last straw (reminded me too much of Urstruly the Lewd Puritan) so I yelled back ``So he is a good muslim then!!``

The reaction was interesting. He turned pale, and quickly switched his tune: ``Brother you have said the right thing. Muslims lie and cheat more than any other people and pretend to be pious.`` and said he was so happy with my honesty that he claimed he gave me a 5% discount. This is the depth of the convictions of these ``brothers``!!

So what do you make of these nuts?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#411 Posted by teshah on May 11, 2007 8:07:19 pm
Re: # 371
tahmed

I am just trying to fathom the limit of lowness to which a human being can fall.

Here is a description of you by Zeemaxat #375:

``However what you say above in 1,2 & 3 is true in case of most others, and particularly the ones you name i.e. tahmed, hamidm and arjun, because the first is a dishonest fake with a forked tongue......``
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#410 Posted by hamidm2 on May 11, 2007 7:52:42 pm
Re: # 405

......... the hudaybia principle: the end justifies the means and laws and treaties made with/by ``kafirs`` are not worth the camel skin they are written on ........

``But even if all the demolished mosques are proven to be built illegally, we should resist and protest their demolition at this time for the very fact that this dastardly act of demolition is being done by a kafir and munafiq government ``

............. hitler was a novice at this game
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#409 Posted by KaalChakra on May 11, 2007 7:49:45 pm
Besides, some forms of protest and resistance are ``better`` for whom?

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#408 Posted by KaalChakra on May 11, 2007 6:59:02 pm
But HisExcellency, rulers always want all others to be peaceful and not violent in the least. :(
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#407 Posted by HisExcellency on May 11, 2007 5:43:21 pm
Re: #405

{{But even if all the demolished mosques are proven to be built illegally, we should resist and protest their demolition at this time for the very fact that this dastardly act of demolition is being done by a kafir and munafiq government}}

Resistance and protest is everybody`s right. But some forms of protest and resistance are better than others :)) Suppose the roles are reversed and Mullahs are in power. How would you like the liberals to protest mullah actions? With dandas, klashinokovs and abductions? Or with dharnas?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#406 Posted by GT on May 11, 2007 2:47:22 pm
Re: # 387

Raw_Dust:

I might not be able to frequent chowk over the next week or so. But when I come back, I would like to know more about your thoughts on religion etc.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#405 Posted by Urstruly on May 11, 2007 1:12:58 pm
Re: # 395

May be so. But even if all the demolished mosques are proven to be built illegally, we should resist and protest their demolition at this time for the very fact that this dastardly act of demolition is being done by a kafir and munafiq government which promotes zina and enforces corruption in an Islamic country while pushing an evil agenda of their foreign masters.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#404 Posted by rahul_capri on May 11, 2007 12:45:39 pm
Re: # 403
What t32 suspected him of saying i.e. what you said to R_D in 394.
I saw humor in it because I wont be surprised if R_D uses the exact words.Anyway my flippancy seems out of place here.So you guys carry on.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#403 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 12:38:07 pm
#402 by rahul_capri,

Said what? The idiot didn`t say anything after #387.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#402 Posted by rahul_capri on May 11, 2007 12:29:04 pm
Re: # 401
What I meant was if R_D had actually said that ( of which there is a fair chance).
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#401 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 12:23:25 pm
#400 by rahul_capri,

No. It`s t32 still trying to figure out #395 was by whom addressed to whom.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#400 Posted by rahul_capri on May 11, 2007 12:17:30 pm
#398 lol
Is this like a totem pole hierarchy of name calling, or what?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#399 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 12:15:11 pm
... actually #395 was HisExcellency addressing Urstruly ... but the confusion and panic is understandable my friend with the forked tongue ... :)
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#398 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 12:12:45 pm
#397 by tahmed32,

Predictable confusion. never mind. Happens.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#397 Posted by tahmed32 on May 11, 2007 12:06:26 pm
Damn!! I wrote #396 too quickly. On rechecking I see that it was not Raw Dust addressing me but Zeemax addressing Raw Dust.

My apologies Raw Dust. The invitation to debate is still open.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#396 Posted by tahmed32 on May 11, 2007 12:02:13 pm
#395 Raw Dust: Good answer!! (since it proves you to be a windbag who cant back his insults to other people`s beliefs with anything other than namecalling).

I rest my case. :-)

You can re-join the show already in progress at the mental asylum now.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#395 Posted by HisExcellency on May 11, 2007 10:59:06 am
re: #390 Urstruly

Why didn`t Jamia Hafsa involve the media? There are half a dozen television channels in Pakistan, some of them more than eager for a story.

Better still, the Jamia Hafsa student could have organized a dharna (sit in). If so many people were upset with Aunty Shamim, the dharna would have been a spectacular show of strength and major embarrasment for the govt.

Aunty Shamim was just an excuse for the maulanas to vent out their anger at demolition of 7 mosques that were built on govt land. The Ghazi brothers wanted the govt to take them seriously and causing trouble was the best way to get noticed. Ziaul Haq in the 1980s and Nawaz Sharif in the 90s used to patronize religious elements by giving them govt land for mosques. Now that the govt is withdrawing state patronage from mullahs and trying to use public funds for more secular goals, these mullahs are finding excuses to stir up civil unrest.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#394 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 10:52:10 am
#387 by Raw_Dust,

I don`t engage with morons. I did before as you will recall, but not anymore.

So eff off.

Rgds.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#393 Posted by tahmed32 on May 11, 2007 10:34:12 am
Raw Dust: you write ``Zeemax will never debate with me about anything Islamic cos I will expose his Allah and Mohammad to be the alter-egoes of an arab pervert megalomaniac. ``

Forget zeemax. Debate me. Here is your first question: On what basis do you make the above statement?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#392 Posted by tahmed32 on May 11, 2007 10:29:14 am
hamidm #386 I guess you decided to join kaalchakra in throwing peanuts at the mental asylum inmates. :-)
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#391 Posted by shishapa on May 11, 2007 10:16:14 am

``What else could you do when government is in it in promoting bay hayayee and prostitution??``

Attack the government? That way, you may get rid of many more
Aunty Shamims and her likes instead of just one?

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#390 Posted by Urstruly on May 11, 2007 10:10:50 am
Re: # 389

Easier said than done. The fact of the matter is that people of the area has been complaining about Aunty Shamim`s flesh trade for the longest time. The police instead of helping them terrorized them with beatings and threatened them with dire consequences. Not only police but this prostitute`s goons also terrorized people of the street. Currently, government is cancelling the plot allotments to all of those who are suspect of opposing Aunty Shamim. What else could you do when government is in it in promoting bay hayayee and prostitution??
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#389 Posted by HisExcellency on May 11, 2007 9:57:55 am
re: #364 kaalchakra

First, influential Muslims should report the ``illegal`` activity to local authorities (who may be non-Muslim). If the authorities are unable to take any action, they should give explain their reasons (insufficient evidence?? pressure?? false accusation??) to complainants. If it is proven beyond doubt that illegal activity is taking place & authorities are unwilling to act, Muslim residents should boycott all persons who have business/personal relations with the accused. If majority of residents oppose an activity, their boycott will force the accused to either stop or move out of the area.

Prophet Muhammad said that majority of his followers will neither condone a wrongful practice nor agree to a unjust action.

If Aunty Shamim was such a notorious ``madam`` and majority of residents were unhappy with her activities, why was she still doing business in that area?? Was it perhaps the case that Jamia Hafsa was the only party that had an axe to grind with her??

Vigilantism and violence are usually employed by the minority against a few individuals, when the majority is indifferent.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#388 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 9:17:44 am
#382 by GT,

Thanks GT.

My conviction towards Islam does not stem from blind faith being a born Muslim. It stems from having been convinced after extensive due-diligence, that it is such a comprehensively perfect system along with built-in durability, that it could not have been devised by any mortal being, much less so by an illiterate bedouin.

Some of my friends may have an objection to the above, but it is the truth.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#387 Posted by Raw_Dust on May 11, 2007 9:15:46 am
GT:
Instead of trying to have a communication with the resident Allah-fetishist zeemax, I would like to invite you to go and read the sources of the devilish ideology (i.e., Quran, Bukhari, Shia and Sunni historical sources of early Islamic period) by yourself and THEN make opinions. Zeemax`s been taking along for the ride by kaalchakra every other day and he thinks kaalchakra is here for understanding ``Islam`` and that from a Munafiq like Zeemax whose interest fed body is primed for the fires of Hell. Zeemax will never debate with me about anything Islamic cos I will expose his Allah and Mohammad to be the alter-egoes of an arab pervert megalomaniac. Anyways,



Here is a snippet from kaalchakra`s true thoughts on Islam:

kaalchakra as his other avatar Ralph:


``#94 One Day At a Time on October 17, 2004
All religions are full of dogma, absurdities, oppressions, and injustices. Islam more than most other religions but not uniquely so.

Islam`s uniqueness, and its greatest evil, lies in darkening the hearts and minds of `moderate` and `dormant` Muslims.

The `moderates` and `dormant` followers of other religions work hard to escape the limits of outdated dogma, economic, social, political injustices and divisions prescribed by their religions. The `moderate` and `dormant` Muslim dedicates his or her life divining justifications of these Islamic evils and absurdities.``
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#386 Posted by hamidm2 on May 11, 2007 9:14:39 am
Re: # 384

zeemax,

..... if you remember, i had not labelled ALL burqa wearing women as prostitutes - only 93.7% which i later revised to 46% ...........

...... and you have to remember that my grandma lived on gurdat singh road in quetta, which makes things a little different ........... but even then, she would go out with the hood up and when she came to visit us in pindi she would discard it completely ......... but you are right - in a way, she was ``prostituting`` herself ........ may the good lord forgive her and bless her soul - she was surrounded by men like you ............
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#385 Posted by HisExcellency on May 11, 2007 9:11:47 am
Re: #363

Agreed. But justifying an illegal action also hampers justice and rule of law. When vigilantes take law into their hand even for a noble cause, they become part of the problem instead of the solution. Those who steal themselves cannot accuse others of theft either.

It`s only natural that secular and liberal politicians will now become spokesmen for rule of law, while mullahs and generals will be seen as villains.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#384 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 9:01:58 am
#378 by hamidm2,

Your dishonesty is clear in your post #1 and the ones following that where you first branded burqa wearing women as prostitutes and then backtracked when reminded your own grandmother wore one as per your stories and you had proudly described its texture and perfume. Was she a prostitute? I hope not.

You had been hoping the bunker busters will help you. They didn`t. You thought the `surge` will help you. It didn`t. You thought enlightened moderation will help you. That backfired too. Now your god-parent bLiar is leaving office and soon the other one Buck Fush will leave too. Dunno about the third one i.e. Bill O`Reilly who`ll probably be around for a bit more but probably change his tune. So what`re you counting on now? Santa Claus?

Look, apostasy is not a crime as long as you keep it to yourself and don`t go around advocating it. If you mix it further with blasphemy, well ... you know what Muslims think of that :)
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#383 Posted by hamidm2 on May 11, 2007 8:51:35 am


Appeasers Beware and remember that the treaty of Huddabiya is considered to be precedent and justification for breaking of agreements and treaties!

When we were convinced, as we became convinced, that nothing any longer would keep the Sudetenland within the Czechoslovakian State, we urged the Czech Government as strongly as we could to agree to the cession of territory, and to agree promptly. The Czech Government, through the wisdom and courage of President Benes, accepted the advice of the French Government and ourselves. It was a hard decision for anyone who loved his country to take, but to accuse us of having by that advice betrayed the Czechoslovakian State is simply preposterous. What we did was to save her from annihilation and give her a chance of new life as a new State, which involves the loss of territory and fortifications, but may perhaps enable her to enjoy in the future and develop a national existence under a neutrality and security comparable to that which we see in Switzerland to-day. Therefore, I think the Government deserve the approval of this House for their conduct of affairs in this recent crisis which has saved Czechoslovakia from destruction and Europe from Armageddon.

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#382 Posted by GT on May 11, 2007 8:19:55 am

Zee:

That was a very good write-up.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#381 Posted by echoboom on May 11, 2007 8:12:32 am
#378:
I consider myself to be a `good` muslim who is just a little bit skeptical about people who claim to walk on water or talk to winged creatures ..........


Hamidm2-..muslim without Allah & prophets?...HAAN JEE

bin pahyyay gaarRee?.....haanjee!
bin aurat saarRee?..........haanjee!
bin aam kee guttlee?.......haanjee!
bin aankh kee puutlee.....haanjee!

abay yeh bachhaa, h2, kahaaN sey aayaaa?


Watch Hamidm2 fighting Islamic-Terrorism


reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#380 Posted by Urstruly on May 11, 2007 8:04:29 am
Re: # 378

I think `garbage recycling mussali` would be a more appropriate title. As a matter of fact you could get a kyoto award for the best recycler of the decade. For crying out loud grow out of of your recycling heap of `heeng`, `head wagging`, `walking on water`, `winged creatures`, `unwashed masses`, `I wish I was Michael jackson`, ......and list just goes on ad nauseum. You sure can do better than that.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#379 Posted by echoboom on May 11, 2007 7:51:40 am
Comin back FULL circle

Burqa Vaganza – A Satirical Backlash


Oh! the fun never stops.
``Iss chaman meiN kabaab kee boo hai
Dil-e bulbul jala diyaa kis nei?``

tr: This garden reeks of barbecued roasts
Did someone burned the bulbul`s heart?

To Liberaloons

Aanaa hee pUrRay Gaa,
Aana hee pUrRay Gaa
sUr ishque kay quadmoaN meiN
jhhukana hee pUrRay Gaa
Aana hee pUrRay Gaa.

naghma mera har saans mein ras ghol raha hai
is saans ke parday mein khuuda bole raha hai
chherRay hai agar saaz to gaana hi parRay Gaa
sar ishq ke kadamon pe jhukaana hi parRay Gaa
aana hi parRay Gaa
aana hi parRay Gaa




Move over BURQUA, Here comes BURKINI!``


`I felt more welcome in the Bible belt`


Manal Omar had used her five-piece `Islamic-style` swimsuit for years - in Rio, Washington and Kuala Lumpur - and it had never brought her more than a curious glance. Then she went for a dip in Oxford ...


Friday April 20, 2007
The Guardian


``````Manal
Manal Omar in her Islamic swimsuit
 

One Sunday last month I went for my afternoon swim at my local David Lloyd`s fitness club wearing the Islamic-style swimsuit I have been wearing for years. The swimsuit has recently been celebrated by media outlets from Newsweek to National Geographic as an innovative way for Muslim women to become more active. As an American-Muslim woman, I have always been determined to be active without compromising my faith. I have been swimming in capital cities across the world from Rio de Janeiro to Washington DC to Kuala Lumpur, and now London. Although I get curious stares, I have never had any awkward moments when I head out for a swim.



That is, until I came to Oxford.


As I was getting ready to head home from my Sunday swim, I heard a loud voice from a man stating that he needed to speak to the manager about dress code. I picked up on it, but didn`t really give it too much thought, until I heard him yelling about ``that woman over there`` who was wearing the ``burkini``, the gist of what he was saying seemingly being that it was inappropriate. What the hell is that? The burkini? I could feel a rising indignation at the man`s audacity in singling me out in this way. Who had died and declared him the pool police? There were several lifeguards on duty who had seen me swimming there over the previous six months, and none had objected to the swimsuit. It`s been nearly a year since I moved to Oxford, and frankly, I had had enough of the anti-Muslim rhetoric in British political life. Now that I was in the middle of it, I refused to stand on the sidelines.
I walked up to the burly, middle-aged man who had been pointing at me a minute before and asked, ``Are you guys talking about me?``


He turned towards me, and waved a dismissive hand: ``This has nothing to do with you.``
``Are you talking about me? Because if you are, this has everything to do with me.``
He then confirmed he was indeed talking about me, but not talking to me. He was talking to the manager.


By this time I was irate, and the fact that he was using his dirty shoes as a pointer while he was yelling at me didn`t help the situation. ``But you have just singled me out in front of everyone, and in a voice loud enough for me to hear. How can this have nothing to do with me?``
At this point he referred to me as a ``silly little girl``, which I found amusing, considering that I am a 32-year-old, 5ft 10in, professional senior manager for an international NGO. This man was clearly a closed-minded bigot and a sexist to boot, and there wasn`t much I could do to change that.


This turned my focus of anger towards the manager. His response should have been quick and succinct: ``We have lifeguards who determine what is appropriate. If you have a concern, please do not single out one of our members, but put it in writing and we will send you an explanation.`` But he did not. Instead, he allowed this man to go on publicly challenging my choice of clothing, while publicly humiliating me.


Now, I realise that my swimsuit stands out a bit. And I know it`s quite unusual: the week before last I lost my swimsuit and I did feel a bit awkward answering the receptionist`s question - one piece or two pieces? ``Well, actually, it`s a five-piece,`` I said. The woman across the desk stared back at me in disbelief. I described it as a long wetsuit with a very short mini-dress on top. (It turned up a few days later.)


I admit, it`s different. Some people might think it`s overkill. But it`s my choice. I choose to wear the hijab in my daily life, and it has never stopped me from being active, and this Muslim swimsuit was the perfect solution. I was so excited when I saw it for sale online.


Previously, there had always been a sort of unspoken agreement between me and my fellow swimmers that my swimsuit didn`t really matter - we were all there to swim and relax. I was not forcing my swimsuit on them, and they were not forcing their choice on me. In fact, my choice of swimwear has been quite a success globally - it`s one of the bestselling items for PrimoModa.com, where I bought it. It`s made of ordinary swimsuit material and the Boston Globe recently praised it, among many other papers, in an article headlined, ``High-tech fabrics keep Muslim women in the swim.``


Yet that`s not how the journalist at the local newspaper in Oxford, the Oxford Mail, decided to approach the issue. Her article was titled ``Row over fully dressed woman in sauna``. The main interview in the article was with Ian Caldwell, the man who verbally attacked me in the lobby. There was no attempt to find out the full story. A so-called ``Muslim community leader`` called Taj Hargey called it ``political correctness gone crazy``.


At no point had the journalist contacted me. She seemed to have decided to take a similar approach to the man in the swimming pool - talking about me, not to me. As did David Lloyd`s, which had backed up his story without consulting me. At no point did they bother to inform me, a paying member, that such an article was being written. I contacted the Oxford Mail, offering them my side of the story. I never heard back.
Of course, that would have destroyed the theme of the article. Nobody in Oxford would be interested in new swimming suits with hi-tech material, but a crazy Muslim woman jumping into a pool fully clothed and potentially suffocating in the sauna was much more interesting. Since when have facts been important to journalists covering stories involving Muslims?


Needless to say, I was shocked to find out a week later that my swimming habits had caused not only a ``row``, but a huge online debate. Perhaps the most daunting part of the experience was the strong reactions from those who read the article. It was the website`s ``most viewed article`` even two weeks after the incident. The comments ranged from attacks on me (from both Muslims and non-Muslims) to full xenophobic attacks on all immigrants in Europe. At no point did any of the readers question Caldwell`s version of events; nor did the majority of readers question his motivation for highlighting the issue. There was a blind acceptance that some random Muslim woman had done something, as one commentator described it, ``a bit stupid``. British Muslims piped up in apologetic tones, and everyone else openly attacked.
My routine visit to the gym had suddenly sparked a crisis: it was all about immigration, asylum! As one person commented, ``This multicultural society is now becoming a multidirectional mess.`` Another commentator went as far as to write, ``All the time people seem to be burying their heads in the sand and allowing our once great country to be taken over by others. I hope you one day will wake up when all our beautiful churches are being demolished and mosques built in their place.`` A tad drastic for a woman taking a swim, don`t you think? (Mind you, it`s all relative. I had one email from a woman in Sweden saying she found it disgusting that people in Britain went swimming wearing any clothing at all.)


Nobody saw how ridiculous the article itself was. Nobody except for one man. His nickname on the online board was Mr Town, but I would probably have nicknamed him Mr Angel. He posted a comment explaining, ``I saw this woman swimming at DL and it was not dangerous or offensive. She wore a full-length suit, like the Aquablade they wear in the Olympics with a tabard type thing over it with a short hem bit that went into a skirt . . . This man obviously has some other motive.``
The fact that only one person responded in such a way was more traumatic than the public humiliation Caldwell had subjected me to on the morning of March 4.
It is at this point that I get a bit perplexed by what exactly the British public wants. On the one hand, they are always complaining about Muslims refusing to integrate and be part of the ``mainstream`` community. On the other hand, it`s become painfully clear that when we do come out into the mainstream, we make them uncomfortable. Granted, my swimsuit may not blend in, but the refusal by people like Caldwell to allow Muslim women to create a middle ground of interaction in the UK forces them into the extremes.
The online debate has created in me a sense of fear, and as a result I have not been back to the gym in the past month, even after assurances from the general manager at David Lloyd`s Oxford branch that his management team would do their best to ensure I had safe access. The general manager agreed with me that things had spiralled out of proportion, and after I showed him my swimsuit, not only stated that it met swimsuit standards, but that it was now being offered for purchase at all David Lloyd`s clubs throughout the UK. But Caldwell`s actions had the desired effect: I stayed at home.


Having spent my entire life in the United States, as a veiled Muslim woman I am no stranger to discrimination. In fact, as a child, I grew up in the hardcore territories of the south in the US, known as the Bible belt. Although I faced comments and questions, my personal lifestyle and space never felt invaded. In fact, the churchgoing community I lived in as a child welcomed me, and after my experience in the UK I want to go back to the local priest and kiss him on the forehead for not only preaching about respect but putting it into practice.
Looking back, what disturbed me the most about the debate was that my very identity was reduced to a cluster of cliches about Muslim women. I was painted in broad strokes as an oppressed, unstable Muslim woman. I was made invisible, an object of ridicule and debate, with no opinion or independent thoughts. The fact that I had dedicated the past 10 years to working on women`s issues on a global level, led a delegation of American women into Afghanistan in 2003, and put my life on the line in Iraq struggling for women`s constitutional rights were clearly beyond anyone`s imagination. The part of my life where I had the opportunity of meeting leading women from Queen Rania of Jordan to Hillary Clinton was erased.


When I chose to wear the headscarf nearly 15 years ago, I promised myself it would never hold me back from my two passions: travel and sport. Neither my mother nor my sister had worn the headscarf, and my family raised us with the gift of freedom of choice. To this day my sister and I enjoy the outdoors, each never giving a second thought to our choice of dress - her bikini or my ``burkini``. It strongly disturbs me that I was disregarded as an individual, and demeaned to a one-dimensional stereotype. For many of those involved in the debate, the fact that I covered my head and my body seemed to make them forget that I had a brain.
The truth of the matter is that as a Muslim woman living in the US - and I was in Washington DC on September 11 2001 - I never felt so isolated and discriminated against as I have these past few weeks in Oxford. Given that this is supposed to be one of the great seats of western civilisation, that should give British citizens something to chat about.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#378 Posted by hamidm2 on May 11, 2007 7:23:09 am



Re: # 375

zeemax,

....... i really resent the title of ``apostatized enemy of Islam and Muslims`` .............. I consider myself to be a `good` muslim who is just a little bit skeptical about people who claim to walk on water or talk to winged creatures ..........

......... you sound like the little five year old boy next door who started crying when my daughter told him that santa claus did not exist ........ ”but he came last night and ate the cookies and drank the milk!” ............ my precocious five year old who wouldn’t put up with such nonsense snapped back , “why do you think your father is so fat? he ate them !” ….... the little boy, who had been her soul mate since they learned to walk, pulled her pigtail and she slapped him ........... with tears rolling down his pink cheeks, he said, “i want my pokeman cards back – i don’t want to be your friend any more” ........... she slapped him again and said, “ they are mine and santa clause does not exist”............ ” i hate you and I am never going to come to your house again “ ............ with that he stalked off sobbing inconsolably ......... but the next day he was back and they continued to be the best of friends until he moved to california – i guess he was not willing to give up chicken tikka and pink lemonade for a fat guy in a red suit .......... sometimes i wonder if he still believes in santa claus ...........

p.s. when my daughter turned seven and started loosing her teeth, she asked me to tell the tooth fairy to increase the payment to five dollars per tooth - a buck wasn`t enough
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#377 Posted by Urstruly on May 11, 2007 7:05:20 am
Re: # 373

``Extra-ordinary rendition``, this just takes the cake:)

I also like the Punjabi police terminology ``lit-ter parade``. There is an unparalleld ``Chashni`` in the language.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#377 Posted by Urstruly on May 11, 2007 7:05:21 am
Re: # 373

``Extra-ordinary rendition``, this just takes the cake:)

I also like the Punjabi police terminology ``lit-ter parade``. There is an unparalleld ``Chashni`` in the language.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#376 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 5:24:15 am
GT,

I hope TOMORROW, you and me do not regret the opportunity provided by chowk TODAY to communicate better.

April 29, 2007:The Pakistani Liberal`s dilemma
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#375 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 4:28:12 am
#372 by GT

Yet zee, you do not care to communicate your thoughts with composure because of: (1) laziness; (2) anger, and (3) contempt for those who you wish to communicate with.

Huh? Where did you get this idea? In fact I always have a good communication with serious interactors who are not completely Islamophobic by instinct alone, and who would not come down to abusive character assassination of iconic Muslims. Problem is such interactors are rare. You are one, Kaalchakra is another, and I even rate sadna as one because even though a bit Islamophobic, she never resorts to character assassination or abuse and usually has valid questions. Even sattar2 when he`s not in the `Issa in the Sky` mode. I have had lengthy discussions with all of the foregoing `with composure` :)

However what you say above in 1,2 & 3 is true in case of most others, and particularly the ones you name i.e. tahmed, hamidm and arjun, because the first is a dishonest fake with a forked tongue, the second is an apostatized enemy of Islam and Muslims, and the third is a cheap propagandist. I agree I have nothing but a lazy contempt for these because they are here not for any sort of understanding, but for the sole purpose of defamation and ridicule.

Anyway, I don`t remember you asking me anything recently. Did you? :)
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#374 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 4:02:53 am
#364 by kaalchakra

A minor technical clarification would be very helpful in understanding the term ``Islamic vigilantism.`` Does Islam suggest that if some Muslims holding some power see a grave wrong being committed they should (a) report the matter to (Muslim) political authorities, and (b) should nothing come of option (c), quietly accept the grave wrong, or at best carry out a peaceful jihad, assuming that Hijrat is not an option for these Muslims?

My take on the above is `no` if (b) follows (a). Resorting to (c) would be the least in Faith (remember the hadees of `If you see a wrong, stop it with your hand` etc... ?) PROVIDED the wrong is not accepted but still believed to be a wrong in heart.

There is no vigilanteism allowed in an Islamic Society/State. The condition is of-course that it MUST be Islamic. The emphasis here is to note that there cannot be an Islamic State unless it establishes an Islamic society, therefore the two terms become interchangeable and cannot be mutually exclusive. If the conditions are such, then (a) above would be applicable and any digressions would be punishable by law. If these are not such, then rebellion against the rulers would become mandatory and a virtue, let alone vigilantism.

A significant example is Imam Hussain`s rebellion against Yazid. Yazid was the Caliph and the legitimate authority, but Imam Hussain rebelled against him (at the call of the Kufis with complaints of un-Islamic ways of the Caliph) and sacrificed his entire clan (except for Zain-ul-Abideen) for which he is revered till this day. He was as much of a vigilante as the Hafsa people.

Rgds.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#373 Posted by zeemax on May 11, 2007 3:33:34 am
#363 by Urstruly Re: HisExcellency

Actually, aunty shamim was subjected to `extraordinary rendition`. That isn`t abduction ... you know ...
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#372 Posted by GT on May 10, 2007 9:16:56 pm

Zee:

You do know very well that push comes to shove I shall be with tahmed, hamid and arjun standing against you (I think I have had already mentioned this to you in a post sometime back). This does not upset me. What upsets me is the fact that, here in chowk where we can try to understand each other we refuse to do so because of our own egoes. I would rather stand with you in this fight because of your honesty. You do not hide your true self even in this anonymous forum. Yet zee, you do not care to communicate your thoughts with composure because of: (1) laziness; (2) anger, and (3) contempt for those who you wish to communicate with.

These facts may seem trivial to you as we all take a forum like chowk for granted. But, my dear friend, history teaches us a lot about abrupt changes. I hope TOMORROW, you and me do not regret the opportunity provided by chowk TODAY to communicate better.

Regards.


reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#371 Posted by tahmed32 on May 10, 2007 8:39:57 pm
one more thing, high caste dangar teshah: also - what is the point you are trying to make in your post? it is nothing but gibberish as far as i can tell.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#370 Posted by tahmed32 on May 10, 2007 8:13:27 pm
teshah: The question is what are you now? A high caste muslim?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#369 Posted by teshah on May 10, 2007 7:45:04 pm
Re: # 356

Tahmed32

Thank you dear gujjar for coming to senses and insisting that the gujar can also be `thrashed` and a gujri can even be gang raped when her family is watching without offering any resistance whatsoever. You boasted of your Islamic breeding in your previous post but do you know what Quran says about accusation of `Zina`. You talk also of gujar gheirat but have no objection to the media publicity of an alleged rape of a gujri as it is serving her vendetta and enriching and glorifying her, becoming in fact the envy of the other rape accusers.

I agree with you that gujars` was once a great nation even before the advent of Aryans. Even the god, Krishnah Gopala, who is obviously a blackish Gujar, was adopted by the conquering Aryan nation like the Mongols who had adopted Islam as it suited them well. But the question is what are they now?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#368 Posted by tahmed32 on May 10, 2007 7:14:27 pm
hamidm #367 kaalchakra needs to stop amusing himself at the expense of the inmates.
:-(
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#367 Posted by hamidm2 on May 10, 2007 6:47:54 pm
Re: # 366

tahmed,

...... i don`t know about france, but if i was kaalchakra i wouldn`t encourage these megalomaniacs ..........

reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#366 Posted by tahmed32 on May 10, 2007 5:48:18 pm
hamidm #365 Wow!! You think Zeemax will attack France next, like Hitler did?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#365 Posted by hamidm2 on May 10, 2007 5:15:54 pm


echoes of munich in 1922 ............ zeemax says:


`Once I really am in power, my first and foremost task will be the annihilation of the Kafiroon, Munafiqoon and Murtadoon. As soon as I have the power to do so, I will have gallows built in rows - at the Lal Masjid in Islamabad, for example - as many as traffic allows. Then the Kanjars, Homosexuals and Aunty Shamims will be hanged indiscriminately, and they will remain hanging until they stink; they will hang there as long as the principles of hygiene permit. As soon as they have been untied, the next batch will be strung up, and so on down the line, until the last Kafir and Murtad in Islamabad has been exterminated. Other cities will follow suit, precisely in this fashion, until all Pakistan has been completely cleansed of Kafiroon, Munafiqoon and Murtadoon............. Allah O` Akbar` ``
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#364 Posted by KaalChakra on May 10, 2007 9:43:20 am
HisExcellency, Echoboom dada

A minor technical clarification would be very helpful in understanding the term ``Islamic vigilanteism.``

Does Islam suggest that if some Muslims holding some power see a grave wrong being committed they should (a) report the matter to (Muslim) political authorities, and (b) should nothing come of option (a), quietly accept the grave wrong, or at best carry out a peaceful jihad, assuming that Hijra is not an option for these Muslims?

Thanks for helping us all understand these important matters and motivations.




reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#363 Posted by Urstruly on May 10, 2007 9:41:43 am
Re: # 362

Of course it was `abduction`, what else could it be. But you have to see it in the context of society. In a law abiding society where law is evenly enforced, such act is called `abduction`, `infringement on basic and constiutional rights`, and a `criminal act`. But in a society where might is right is the law, where state institions of law enforcement and justice have failed, where obedience of law in general is considered stupidity rather than a virtue, where an extremely well armed military mafia rules, such act is called ``self-defence``. The students of Jamiah Hafsa saved the community from this social evil by taking this prostitute into ``protective custody`` and shutting down the bordello of flesh.

In principle, in the context of our society as described above, not taking such an action to protect your community, women and children would have been a criminal act instead. And looking the other way upon such social evil would have been a rebellion against God and his Prophet (pbuh).
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#362 Posted by HisExcellency on May 10, 2007 8:59:28 am
re: Urstruly #360

The transcript you posted clearly indicates that Lal Masjid students were responsible for abducting Aunty Shamim. The person being quoted says Lal Masjid was approached by concerned citizens about this woman.

Who authorized Lal Masjid administration to interfere in this matter?
Are they public officials?
Why did they send students to close down Aunty Shamim`s house?
Is this not tresspassing on private property by Islamist vigilantes?
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#361 Posted by HisExcellency on May 10, 2007 8:47:52 am
re: #349 by echoboom

{{To avail oneself of one`s father`s most favoured kaneez is bad policy from ``secular`` as well as Islamic point of view}}

Perhaps if Shaikhu and papa Akbar were religious, they wouldn`t have kept any kaneez in the first place. Even so, Shaikhu didn`t marry the kaneez Anarkali. So which mixed marriages were you really alluding to??


reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#360 Posted by Urstruly on May 10, 2007 7:32:45 am
JAMIAH HAFSA - FAQs
Since Lal Masjid website has been banned in Pakistan by the unlightened motherate government who belives in freedom of press, here is FAQ on Lal Masji by Lal Masjid for Pakistani Muslims:




reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#359 Posted by echoboom on May 10, 2007 7:31:42 am



Mirror , Mirror! On the wall




PITY THE NATION*

Pity the nation that is full of beliefs
and empty of religion.


Pity the nation that wears a cloth it
does not weave,


eats a bread it does not harvest,

and drinks a wine that flows not from its
own wine-press.


Pity the nation that acclaims the bully
as hero,


and that deems the glittering conqueror
bountiful.


Pity a nation that despises a passion in
its dream,


yet submits in its awakening.

Pity the nation that raises not its voice


save when it walks in a funeral,

boasts not except among its ruins,

and will rebel not save when its neck is
laid


between the sword and the block.

Pity the nation whose statesman is a fox,


whose philosopher is a juggler,

and whose art is the art of patching and
mimicking.


Pity the nation that welcomes its new
ruler with trumpeting,


and farewells him with hooting,

only to welcome another with trumpeting
again.


Pity the nation whose sages are dumb with
years


and whose strong men are yet in the
cradle.


Pity the nation divided into into
fragments,


each fragment deeming itself a nation.



*author`s name with held
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#358 Posted by zeemax on May 10, 2007 2:44:27 am
abu_safwaan.Urstruly,

None of the 7 demolished mosques were built illegally. That`s why I had asked abu_safwaan to check his facts. All this press reporting about the madrassa trying to occupy land forcibly is propaganda and organized disinformation, while the factual position was available on the Jamia website before it was shut down, as well as clarified in all media interviews of the Ghazi brothers.

The demolition of the mosque adjoining the madrassa was the last straw which precipitated the current movement. This mosque was not in the original Islamabad masterplan but sanctioned later personally by Zia, and the Jamia has papers to prove it. CDA does not deny it either. However the sanction was revoked for road widening and notices given to the Jamia. When these notices were not honored, CDA demolished it. That`s when the girls occupied the library next door (which is in fact just one 14x12 room ... hardly a building) to protest and things took on their own momentum after that.

Only the adjoining mosque was in management and control of the Jamia. It didn`t have anything to do with the other six. They nevertheless included all demolished mosques in their demand to rebuild obviously for unselfish reasons.

The current position is that the Government has agreed to build 4 out of the seven mosques in their original locations, while 3 will be relocated. Work is continuing on the adjoining mosque and prayers will commence soon when the occupation of the `library` will end.

However, there is certainly expansion/extension by the madrassa on extra land in excess of that allotted to it, which they acknowledge and for which they have been offering to pay at market rates, but CDA doesn`t want to sell it to them. Nevertheless that is not the contentious issue at the moment. The issues are the mosques which are perfectly legitimate.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#357 Posted by zeemax on May 10, 2007 2:07:34 am
#355 by dullabhatti re #332

... but my feeling is it was a figure of speech....

Your feeling is quite wrong. CJ is referring to and reaffirming the preamble to the constitution (tamheed) which says exactly what he said in urdu. This preamble has been reproduced on many boards and extensively discussed recently, but you have obviously missed all that.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#356 Posted by tahmed32 on May 10, 2007 1:24:40 am
teshah #353 Mukhtaran Mai`s family no doubt lacked the gunmen necessary to inflict revenge upon those who attacked her. That simply means her family is weak in the ``might is right`` environment of the Pakistani village, it does not mean that her family lacked ``ghairat``. The entire world has in fact applauded her courage, and the Washington Post had an article titled ``A courageous Pakistani woman``. The only beghairat in Pakistan are individuals like you who think it is OK for a woman to be raped if she is from a poor socio-economic status.

As for your referring to me mockingly as ``dear gujjar`` - I realize that many gujjars are considered ``low caste`` by many Pakistani ``muslims``. Rest assured, however, that that does not bother me. I dont have a need to claim to be of the Quresh khandaan or a Syed or of Arab or greek descent in order to bolster my self-esteem.

And in any case, gujjars have a proud history and have nothing to be ashamed of - they came to India in the 5th century AD, and by the 9th century were the dominant empire in india, the gurjara-pratihara empire, that fought of the invading arab armies under mohammed bin qasim, forcing the arabs to go north from sindh rather than east. They fell only when attacked on both sides, by the turkish invaders from the north and the Rashtrakutas from the south in what is now maharashtra in india. It was a gujjar (Gujjar Singh) who ruled over lahore and saved it from the marauding pathans of ahmed shah abdali. It was because gujjar troops in delhi were the first to rebel against the british in 1857 at meerut, and so were declared a mutinous tribe and stripped off their land by the british and thus pushed into the low socio-economic status that many gujjars live in. In the India-Pakistan wars, gujjars have fought bravely on both sides, earning highest military honors (vikram chakar in india, and the first nishan-e-haider in pakistan). Khem Karan (the only major indian town ever to fall to the pakistan army) was captured by a brigade led by a gujjar. I could go on, but you get the picture.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#355 Posted by dullabhatti on May 9, 2007 11:36:39 pm
#332 Thanks Zeemax. My urdu reading skills are not that great but it does seem to say that in the last 2 sentences of the text. Is it a calcualted idealogical point he is making or regular muslim habbit of bringing allah and Islam into to the argument to make, whatever point it is being made, unrefutable? if it calculated point of principle put forward by teh CJ then you are correct. but my feeling is it was a figure of speech.
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#354 Posted by teshah on May 9, 2007 9:53:02 pm
Re: # 313

DM

You are quite right dear. Ek hadees he ``Hazoor ne farmaya `Aurat sheitan ka jaal he. Agar shehwat na hoti to insan har giz is ke jaal mein nah phansta`. Hamein yih hadees ab nazar aai jab shehwat ka jaala hamari aankhon se uttar gaya. Rona to yahi he kih ham in ke bagheir reh bhi naheen sakte. Ghalib ne kia khoob kaha he:

``Mohabbat mein naheen kuchh farq jeene aur marne mein
Ussi ko dekh kar jite hein jis kafir pih dam nikle``

regards
reply to this interact write a new interact add to favorites flag objectionable content
#353 Posted by teshah on May 9, 2007 9:36:12 pm
Re: # 305

tahmad32

Sorry dear tahmad my post # 301 about Mai hit you unintetionally. My comments were based purely on media reports which did say that Mai was an illiterate low-caste woman. I did not know that she was a gujjar as you are. Gujjar, I know, are a very `ghayyur` qou