Pakistanis in Afghanistan, Nothing New

kim--13

It is this `education`` which is the real bane of our society.The guys here were trained to earn a living,by doing repetitive tasks,which they mistake for an education.

Those who earn more money and have more poerful jobs are considered ``educated`` in slave-lands.A propensity to adopt kanjar attire,speak contorted & ventriloquistic english,express a proud inability to read/write urdu/farsi/arabie,condoning adultery/drinking/fornication/deviancies and being mortified at loving their own parents.

This is called ``education`` in Indo-Pak.The other kind are obscurantists,back-ward,Parent loving,children-caring,and RELIGIOUS.

But they do somehow know they they WILL be accorded religous last rites.In the end they do have firm faith in the goodness of the pious ones.

SPM #11

``being educated and still believing bs like that?…. ….serves them right…``



Semipresciousme

So an educated man cant make mistake ?

What about thousands of other educated (doctors & engineers)who made the right discision of choosing to go to Canada & America but ended up as phlebotomist, physician assistant ,drafts man ,cook,mechanics,plumbers..or even non professional work . Should you not pity them for ``for believing bs like America & canada is heaven ``

If you have not heard of people who went back disillusioned & thousands more tired of dole in U.K. & Canada...... may be some one should compile the non talked about & unwritten stories of unsuccessfull dejected ``educated who made the right discision of throwing there lot, hook sink anchor with the west but came back empty ``

In hind sight everyone can be 100% correct .When `joan of arc` let herself be burnt she probably also is served right for believing in bs that burnt her alive.

One thing that needs repetition is the fact that the famous Fatwa to migrate was given by none other than the Mullah Azad, who is considered a great Indian Nationalist leader by the Indian revisionists.

Revisionism is a disease not uncommon to many other countries... but we should strike it down in our own Pakistan.. because it has impeded our progress. Once again, I must thankyou Mr.Khar for so eloquently expressing my deepest feelings :)

Sincerely

“Immigration to Afghanistan) Early part of the twentieth century large number of clergy from the Subcontinent gave a Fatwa that India is Dar_ul_harb because it is ruled by the British and Muslims should migrate to a Muslim countries. Thousands of Muslims took the advice as a word of God. Sadly many of them were professionals, like Doctors, Professors and civil servants, who sold all their belongings and headed towards the Afghan Border. Many were not allowed to cross and had to return to nothing but to start afresh. The unfortunate who made it across did not live happily ever after. Many educated professionals were forced to do menial labor, while some who managed to get jobs faced a comical situation”

…being educated and still believing bs like that?…. ….serves them right…

“Dr Israar- It is hard to conjecture whether he is a worst medical doctor, a profession he never practiced or a worst Mullah. Although Dr Sahib himself did not feel the need to cross the border but was the most prolific in interpreting the Hadith of the Mahdi coming from the caves backed by black turbaned youth, vis-à-vis bin laden aided by the Taleban.Dr Israar a man of dubious character, extremely sectarian in philosophy, had his daughter married on the 10th of Muharram, igniting sectarian riots in Lahore.”

….ah yes, the estimable mulana israr….according to him everything, right down to the poverty in pak, is a jewish conspiracy…but to be fair, he runs a couple of quran schools/colleges in lhr which provide a pretty balanced education by teaching english, math, computers etc along with the quran….

…. have fun dueling it out with our resident mulanas hydra, afaqui and co…

dear Mr. Khar

This piece did not have to be so unbalanced for you to have made your point, one with which I believe a majority of Pakistanis would agree. What a sad. incrdible and ignorant cast of characters. God carries Pakistan in the palm of his hand, how else can we explain the devastation at the hands of the obscuritanists, that we have avoided.

``Tolerance is the major ingredient missing in present day religious education. There can be no unity till Muslims learn to respect each other for their diverse beliefs, there is no one kind of Muslim and no Muslim has a right to judge another Muslim, we are different but one in the eyes of the compassionate and merciful God.``

to which we should add pluralism, and the pluralism of salvation of individual adherents of varing faiths which forms the moral framework for the freedom of conscience.

Which sane, God loving, God fearing, Pakistani would challenge this??

Back to Jinnah

By Ardeshir Cowasjee

When, on that rare occasion, we have heading this country a liberal man who preaches tolerance and who tells us that Pakistan was envisioned by its founder as a modern, free-thinking, liberal, secular state, in jump the mulla-maulvi faction, the obscurantists, the thesis writers, the great thinkers, some of whom were not even a gleam in their mother`s eye when Jinnah was around, who flail their arms and shriek `treason` at the word secular, and who with their narrow-minded thinking, intolerance and bigotry claim falsely that they are `Islamic`.

In a recent interview with Newsweek, Musharraf spelt out his vision of what Pakistan`s founder had in mind for his country, a vision he intended to bring to material form. Naturally, editorials were written expressing horror, protests poured in from all sides, and then entered his obsequious spokespeople with the inevitable `clarification`. And so it will continue, for much time to come, for as long as this nation is kept illiterate and uneducated and unable to reason, think, look around at the world it inhabits, and comprehend what it must do to fit into it. But we must never give up; we must continue to press home the points pressed by the man who gave this nation a homeland.

Three months before the partition of the subcontinent, in an interview with Doon Campbell of Reuters, Jinnah firmly stated: ``The new state will be a modern democratic state with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of religion, caste or creed.`` He repeated this on August 11, 1947, whilst addressing the members of his Constituent Assembly, making it doubly clear to them that religion is not the business of the state. He told them: ``You are free, free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State.`` He could not have been more explicit.

Our learned men have it that the first steps taken in the Republic of Pakistan towards the framing of a constitution was the moving of the Objectives Resolution in the Constituent Assembly on March 7, 1949, by the prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan. The view is that this Resolution was intended to be a mish-mash of the general principles of an `Islamic` state and the accepted concepts of a modern `democratic` state. What the mish-mash has resulted in is a variety of conflicting interpretations, the orthodox and the obscurantists claiming that the Islamic tenets dominate and the more progressive, forward-looking plumbing for the democratic parliamentary way of governance.

When it was moved, the non-Muslim members of the Assembly expressed their fears that were the Resolution to be passed maulanas would gain the upper hand, and some questioned the phrase stipulating that the ``state will exercise authority within the limits provided by Him.`` What are the limits proscribed by God, they asked, and who will define those limits? Will it be the mullas or the gentlemen of a more liberal bent of mind? Could a non-Muslim become the head of state, for example? Liaquat Ali Khan`s response was rather ambivalent--in an Islamic state, he said, it would be ``absolutely wrong to say that a non-Muslim cannot be the head of administration under a constitutional government.`` Maulanas held differently and firmly : ``The Islamic state means a state which is run on the exalted and excellent principles of Islam [and it] can be run only by those who believe in those principles....``.

Dispute and divergence of view, disagreement and differences from day one. Yet, the honourable gentlemen of the Assembly, most of whom must have been present on August 11, 1947, when Mohammad Ali Jinnah laid down for them the principles which he wished to be embodied in the constitution of his country, took it upon themselves that day to repudiate the man responsible for putting them where they were.

Hasan Zaheer, of the erstwhile all-powerful CSP, in his book `The Separation of East Pakistan`, writing on constitution making, has this to say on the contentious Resolution: ``Liaquat Ali Khan, while moving the Objectives Resolution, claimed that since it provided for the exercise of power and authority of the state `through the chosen representatives of the people`, the Resolution naturally eliminates any danger of the establishment of a theocracy.

Little did he realize the opening that the Resolution was giving to the obscurantists and what the Munir Report called `political brigands and adventurers, even nonentities` to exploit the name of Islam in mundane political affairs and jolt the foundations of the state from time to time. None of the three covenants of the Muslims of the subcontinent, which spelled out the unanimous demand for a separate Muslim homeland, or homelands--the Lahore Resolution of 1940, the Madras Resolution of 1941, and the Pakistan Resolution of the Legislators` Convention of 1946--or the debates leading to these resolutions had mentioned anything about an Islamic state. Over the years, the Resolution proved a perennially divisive point of reference in the polity of Pakistan.``

It is this Resolution which forms the preamble to the Constitution of 1973, and it is this Resolution which, as Article 2A, is a substantive part of the Constitution, and which has more than proven that it is indeed not only highly divisive but also destructive. And, to boot, our great makers, breakers and amenders cannot even get it right. In the preamble, in one sentence, the original resolution has been adhered to: ``Wherein adequate provision shall be made for the minorities freely to profess and practise their religions and develop their cultures;`` whereas in Article 2A which forms the Annex to the Constitution in the very same sentence the word ``freely`` has been omitted. Whether this was done wittingly or unwittingly is not known, but the question is that after the passage of 16 years since 2A was inserted by PO No.14 of 1985 why has it not been corrected? Is there a motive behind the omission of the highly pertinent and important word? Were our amenders plain sloppy, or were they wicked?

Musharraf rode in on horseback, and now is riding high. So far he is on the right track. His reflexes are sound. He has not yet heard messages from on high. But he does need to shun the oleaginous perennial sycophants who equate being with him as being in the presence of greatness, or who praise him fulsomely for his penetrating mind, his iron resolve, his calm demeanour. He does not need to be glorified or exalted. He needs to be supported.

Mallik Shanawz Khar

So there are many Mullah & Maulanas with varied opinions......Who is forcing or Putting Gun in your head to follow them...

There are even more diverse interpretations of Indian history &Hinduism..Arya Samaj ,Brahmo Samaj,Anand Margi ,Bhagvan Rajnesh,Krishna murthi ,Satya Sai Ba Ba ,Ram Krishna Pramahansha,Swami Vivekananda,Not to speak of Vrinda Van,Advaity Dvaitya followers ,Smiritis & manusmiritis in hinduism......Yet Indians go about there business .

Why should Israr or Fazlu,or Sami or Brailli bother you .You have everyright to disagree with there opinions as you yourself know that any ordinary muslim can do everything that a ``Moulana`` can do from birth to death ritual including Namaz.

AAMEEN!

A warm welcome to CHOWK Mr. Khar

The question now is: Who will listen?

I enjoyed your writing very much!

Ras

re: shrinker

{{Wow! you could have fooled me:) The same guy who confidentally stated Pakistan will be the next Singapore in 10 yrs.}}

...that was before someone pointed out the ridiculous GDP growth rate needed to achieve that...so much for his `logic and fact-based` posts here...

Romair,

{{This is not saying much, since I have generally been pessimistic. But I am now cautiously optimistic.}}

Wow! you could have fooled me:) The same guy who confidentally stated Pakistan will be the next Singapore in 10 yrs.

{{Everyone (except me and a few other people) greatly underestimated Musharraf.}}

Yada yada yada...you`ve said that about a zillion times now; flip the chapati over, Nostradamus:)

__________________________________________________

Hi Zeemax! Welcome back! Dont be such a stranger anymore... We need a pessimist like you to balance Gen Optimist Romair...

Very interesting article.

It is good to see constructive criticism, instead of pure hatred against one group or another. Usually, the secularatics (secular fanatics) and the relgionatics (religious fanatics) go after each other from the two extremes, with hate-based arguments directed only towards the destruction of each other, while the other 90% of Pakistanis (the non-fanatic secularists and the non-fanatic religionists) suffer. One group wants to bring a revolution in Pakistan because of fifteen century Europe, the other because of eighth century Arabia. One wants to convert Pakistan into Turkey, the other into Saudi Arabia. One defines his character on his relationship with a liquid called wine, the other with a piece of bark called maswak. Both lost in their self-centered world, that only revolves around their extremist views, with total disregard for what most Pakistanis want. Anyone who builds his whole argument on hatred against any other group has nothing much to offer, I am afraid.

Pakistanis, rightly or wrongly, in my opinion want a moderate, tolerant, sectarian-free but religious society. They want quite a bit of religion in their private life, and some religion (not a whole lot, but some) religion in their public life also. But most of all, they want economic growth and physical security. Anyone who can bring such growth to Pakistan, will be popular, regardless of his/her religious or secular tendencies.

It is a well accepted fact that Pakistanis do not want the current religious leaders in elected office (that is different from wanting some religon). I certainly don`t. They never vote for them. And now with the new policies of the current govt., these leaders are completely through. They won`t even get the little support they use to get. The Bachelor degree rule is specifically targeted towards them, by Musharraf (and towards the feudals). In one sweep, he has disqualified almost all the top religious politicos and 60% of the current feudals. The women seats at local and national level will also hurt the mullahs. Elected women will never support mullahs, after seeing how women were treated under the Taliban.

At the same time, one cannot use hatred of mullahs as a badge of character and honor. Pakistan has been ruled by secular individuals (except Zia), and has been destroyed by them, and not by mullahs (mullahs would probably have destroyed Pakistan also, but they never had any power). If the only thing a person has to offer is his/her secularism and hatred of mullahs, then I am afraid he/she should get the boot also.

What Pakistan needs is a leadership, secular or religious, that can raise the economic standard of the poorest Pakistani. Plain and simple. It needs an Ata-Turk whose main claim to fame is not shipping Mullahs to sea, but to ship poverty to sea (something no Turk has been able to do). It needs an Amir-ul-Momineen whose claim to fame is not introducing Shariah, but introducing universal education (something no Arab has been able to do).

I was never more pessimistic about Pakistan than during the Nawaz Sharif days. BB and NS, and their cronies were robbing Pakistan silly. I have never been more optimistic about Pakistan, in my whole life, as I am today. This is not saying much, since I have generally been pessimistic. But I am now cautiously optimistic. Everyone (except me and a few other people) greatly underestimated Musharraf. He has completely turned the beaurecracy on its head. He has split up the corrupt business politicos. He has put the mullahs into retreat. He has not tried to turn Pakistan into Turkey (even though his own personal views are inline with the Turkish society), and he is cleaning out the miltitary. The large number of promotions to General ranks yesterday, will include people, whose ideology is perfectly inline with Musharraf`s. Now if he can only get rid of the feudals and their politically ambitious kids.

I raised my rating of Pakistan from sell to neutral about one year ago. Now I am raising my rating of Pakistan`s future from neutral to cautious buy.

Good article. We need to see more articles like this regarding religion. Instead of the extremist religous hate or love articles we always see.

``The effect of this policy would be twofold. It attacks the heart of the Molvi Industry . This policy decentralizes the extremely centralized structure of Molvism. More innovation is required in the field like handing over marriage ceremonies to professional lawyers, instead of Mullahs, with the pretext that they memorize the required Ayats for marriage. If a Muslim can perform all the culturally ritualistic acts himself or without the Mullah, like making a child Muslim, burying the dead, then the interaction between the Mullah and the ordinary citizen is minimized. The more the government cuts back on the opportunities available to the Mullah to interact with the citizen, the more the government is cutting back on the Mullahs sources of revenue, sources of mithai. The more long-term effect it will have on curbing the spread of this medieval plague by making the industry less lucrative and attractive.``

Well said! Welcome to Chowk.

Aisha Fayyazi Sarwari

Mr.Khar,

Nicely Done. I loved the examples:

``(Immigration to Afghanistan) Early part of the twentieth century large number of clergy from the Subcontinent gave a Fatwa that India is Dar_ul_harb because it is ruled by the British and Muslims should migrate to a Muslim countries.``

More specifically it was Mullah A K Azad, the `progressive secular nationalist` and the `intellectual` of the Indian revisionist Historians dream who gave this famous fatwa. Ha ha .. what a drumming down :)

``- The Khilafat Movement, spearheaded by the Jauhar Brothers and Mr Gandhi. Hundreds of thousands, if not millions took to the streets for a drunk Turkish Khalif, languishing in his harem. Mr. Jinnah did not join the Khilafat movement and criticized Gandhi for dirtying the politics of the subcontinent with religion. Eventually the Turks led by Attaturk booted out the Khalifa and brought the movement to a humiliating end.``

I remember once reading my cousin`s Matric Pakistan Studies book, and I asked him after reading about Khilafat Movement, if he knew why Jinnah`s name was never mentioned in the entire Chapter... the poor kid didn`t have a clue.

Thank God my parents put me in a British School where even for Pakistan Studies we had books like `The Formative Phase` and `Pakistan studies a Political Economy` both Oxford Published excellent books which presented the facts as they were and weren`t hesitant in criticizing leaders like Gandhi, Jauhar Brothers and Jinnah. Mr. Hamza Alavi and Mr.Khaled Bin Syed are the only famous Historians in Pakistan with a nationalist Pakistani view who takes a negative view of the Khilafat Movement other than moi ofcourse :)... Mr.Jinnah`s view of the Khilafat Movement was justified and vindicated.

``- Sayed Saheed Braili. A man completely illiterate but enthusiastic for war. Fervently rallied the Muslims in the present day NWFP region to wage Jihad against the Sikhs. Many battles were fought, won and lost. Mr. Braili himself was martyred while fighting the Sikhs. Legend has it, his head was cut while fighting and his body fell into the river. End result, the natives of the region, predominately Sikhs and Muslims were so weak after endlessly waging of religious war against each other that it paved the way for British to dominate the region.``

Not for the same reasons, but for others, I have an eternal dislike for figures like `Ahmad Shaheed` and Syed Barelvi, and Shah Wali Ullah.

What a drumming down of the Mullahs, Mr.Khar you are my kinda guy ... Here is an article I wrote on revisionism by Pakistani Historians in particular relation with Mr Muhammad Ali Jinnah our founder who incidentally never mentioned `Pakistan Ideology` during his struggle for Pakistan :

http://www.eden.rutgers.edu/

Nice write up, dude!!

Marginalize the Mullah(s).

Add one item. Since in Pakistan, the military calls all the shots, why not make it obligatory for everyone born in Pakistan to serve atleast 2 years in military service.

This way, every ordinary pakistani can get all the perks, privys, pay associated with military or atleast claim it. Just like OBL had access to dialysis in nice military hospital, even though he was not a pakistani citizen, atleast ordinary people can get treatment as well.

Thanks