The Panel of Vendettas at UC Berkley

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Harimau 31,

And they in turn took it from you, as in, Dalits cannot live with Shudras, who must not live with Vashiyas who will not live with shatriyas who, in no condition, must marry the brahmins etc etc etc

U get the point, don`t you?

re: ylh

{{ my mother is a direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad and her family tree has been authenticated by a few dozen authorities in this regard. }}

dude, thanks for the laugh, i needed it...

...this $hit`s getting old and boring fast...

Hinduism is awake today...

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/05/international/asia/05INDI.html?pagewanted=print

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38276-2002Mar4.html

and I am a Hindu no more.

Ms. Sarwari

Congratulation, a well written article. I totally agree with you that we Pakistani’s are too self critical. For some reason we think that our problems are unique to us. A little more optomism in our future would not hurt. I for one am sure that our future as a nation is secured and bright.

Rsridhar,

``Whining kind of takes away objectivity.`` You know precious little about being objective when you say Advani is only doing what makes Pakistanis twitch, if you think the issue of an identity is laughing matter, turn to one single story of a victim of communal violence in your sacred land today. The most scary thing about giving an opinion is the fact that you get involved with people like you, who lecture on objectivity and Kashmir.

pmishra2

Actually I understood the high ethics of secularism about this time last year. It was not post Sep 11th as you assume. Gilani is perhaps reacting to the freedom of his people that your government suppressed for over 2 decades before the insurgency occurred. Now I agree that everyone`s hands are dirty but that doesn`t give you the license to dispense everything on the assumption that we are communal and you secular. That is a problem I have with the Kashmir issue. Stuff all the lies both our governments tell. What does amnesty international have to say about the people who are tortured, raped and murdered? Can`t we make a change in our thinking for them? And it goes for Pakistan too. But If 90% of these human rights abuses happened in the hands of your army, you have the gall to say so, atlast acknowledge it. Give us a sign you`re human?

Aisha

Mr. Harimau #31

[After all, you guys took Jinnah`s statement that Hindus and Muslims cannot … ]

Just like you guys took Gandhi’s statements about “Ram Rajya” to it’s logical next step ……

Who should have been there at UC Berkeley to represent Pakistan? Maleeha Lodhi speaks for Pakistani government and must be pitted against Indian government envoys. Retired Military officers turned specialists are more specialized in militaristic angle of Pakistan than all of what Pakistan represents. The people who claim to represent Pakistan most represent Pakistan as secondary to (or a factor of) Islam and ummah. You can not make claim about Kashmir without bringing Islam in between. Otherwise it is a human rights issue.

Pakistani point of view according to ideology is best represented with no opposition as in TNT, separate electorate for Muslims, separate family laws for Muslims, separate dietary laws for Muslims and within Pakistani madrassahs.

Debating on non-Islamic ground is open to questioning of secular nature for which Pakistani side responding on the basis of religion will fall on deaf ears.

Just uttering two sentences repeatedly do not need a specialist or even a participant. The two non-religious sentences representing Pakistani pomit of view are: 1. Kashmir must be solved according to UN resolution number ??? and 2. Military takeover was a necessity because elected Prime minister was corrupt who happened to have honestly appointed the ``smartest`` general as COAS. Hahaha

Obaid Ullah Jan will be more interested in criticizing US actions in Afghanistan and Shireen Mazari would be more interested in defending Musharraf. Who speaks for Pakistan? Pervez Hoodbhoy? He would have said samethings as Khaled Ahmed.

Why not accept the weaknesses of your mistaken stands and learn to improve them by not repeating them.

By the way, another doctor, a kidney specialist was gunned down yesterday in Karachi and guess what Moin Uddin Haider said. Same statement he has been repeating since he was governor of Sindh, appointed corruptly by the corrupt prime minister upon the advice of smartest, honest and fiercely nationalistic general.

Urstruly,

``What Sarwari is suggesting here is that why aren`t we as coniving, as deceiving, and as untruthful as the rest, especially like Indians.``

You weren`t there, you don`t know what it was like. The thought of being a helpless spectator of facade was not something I aspire to or even tolerate. Khalid Ahmed should have added to his talk 1. A context of the cold war, 2. the fall out on Pakistan, Just today the Baluchistan governor was talking of how every attempt to eradicate preventable diseases went useless because of the floods of Afghan refugees. This is just one of the many chains to our progress. Hundreds of these factors come to play on the decisions we took, on the helplessness of the fundamentalist ideals. Having said that, no we shouldn`t be any easy on ourselves than we should be happy about our achievements. I am all for a dissection of our blunders, but not to people who use it against you, to enforce a self-fulfilling prophecy of failures and fanatics. But to people who care to make a difference, that audience is easily got by the print media within the geography of the target area.

I am just sick of the put-downs each opportunity these Indians get. After a while they become looking glass self for our people. And I think there must be some opposition to it.

Aisha

Re ylh #28

``The conduct of the self proclaimed liberal Congressites like P-mishra have made me realize that Urstruly was right about the Indians all along``

Just because you do not agree with someone`s views, it does not give you the right to tar their nationality. I enjoy reading the posts of a number of Pakistanis, even the one which are critical of India. On the other hand there are those which I would rather avoid - what does it make me think about the Pakistanis? The same as about everyone on this planet - there are good and bad people everywhere....humm words of the Paul McCartney/Stevie Wonder song come to mind ``Ebony & Ivory..``

Oh well back to the salt mines

Subroto

sarwari #26: Your feelings are understandable, and probably correct. However, you need to look at the broader context, and not just at what happened at Berkeley. The more Pakistan gets kicked around verbally, the better it is for Pakistan, at the moment. Indians have a very tough task on their hands in defending their indefensible Kashmir position. That is why they always turn on the heat. However, one report from Amnesty International is enough to expose the Ganguly`s of the world.

Pakistan`s intellectual community has spent so much of its time concentrating on the Mullahs, that they haven`t spared the time to look at Pakistan`s other`s problems, as well as looking at Pakistan`s strengths.

Based on this argument, these intellectuals became anti-anything that had even slight religion in it. This combined with Pakistanis` inherent desire to criticize any leadership (good or bad) actually brought them to a point where they started agreeing with many of the stances India had. Nothing wrong with that, as long as they are agreeing with Indian stances based on human rights etc. However, in many cases, they agreed with Indian stances because they disagreed with anything in Pakistan which had religion or the Army in it (even if meant defending thier own land). You will find people like that on this site also.

I feel these guys overdid the religious angles. There were talks of Pakistan turning into Talibanland etc., in a few years or so. I always stated, when push came to shove, the Taliban of Pakistan would crumble. Which is what happened.

I think there will be a shakeup of the thought processes of the Pakistani English speaking intellectuals now. They are begining to realize that there are good people in the Army also. They are begining to realize that Pakistan was never as close to Talibanization as they predicted. And they are starting to understand that maybe they don`t have all the answers either. And they should understand that Pakistan`s solutions should be according to the wishes of the common man, not according to the wishes of the intellectuals.

Now that they don`t have the extreme religious parties and the Army as their punching bags any longer, they will have to take on and discuss the real problems of Pakistan, i.e. feudalism, social lack of cohesion, etc. They will soon have to come to terms with the fact that they cannot run with the hares and hunt with the hounds.

Also, now that Pakistan is getting world attention, these guys will have to face and debate at the world level with international intellectuals. They will realize that they are not the only ones who can speak English, and have elitist education. I don`t think they are ready for this, and they are now begining to realize this. Hence their poor show at international forums, like the one you mentioned.

Based on this, what Musharraf has been able to accomplish is incredible. He is now the symbol of Pakistan in the Western media. Just like when the West pictures Iraq, they think Saddam (= bad guy), when it pictures Pakistan, it thinks Musharraf (= good guy). This is now the image of Pakistan in the average American grandmother`s mind, and all the Ganguly`s of the world will not be able change it, provided we play our cards correctly.

I have seen very very few serving Generals, of any country, in my life who are so apt at dealing with the press, in such a straightforward manner (perhaps Colin Powell is another). Just take a look at how tongue-tied the US Generals get when they talk to the US media. I don`t know where Musharraf picked this up, because it certainly isn`t taught in any military I know of.

So based on that, all this kicking around is actually good for Pakistan. It is good for Pakistani intellectuals also. They are begining to realize what it takes to play in the big leagues. A Friday Times article may make one an intellectual in the eyes of the 1.5% English speaking public of Pakistan, but it takes a lot more to make an impact at the Berkeleys of the world.

So a lot of what you may have heard from Khaled Ahmad may not have had anything to do with his views. It may have been that he is still stuck in the, ``mullahs and army are 90% of the problem`` mindset. Hence his views coincided with the Indians` views, even though Pakistan has moved beyond this stage, while India (and perhaps Khaled Ahmad also) are still stuck there, and haven`t changed their views about Pakistan yet. And he was probably completely out of his league in front of experienced people like Sumit Ganguly.

He`ll get better as time passes. He should take a few lessons from Musharraf. One of the best debators I have heard is Tariq Ali. Many people don`t like his socialist tendencies, but the guy is a master when it comes to discussions.

re:Reply #: 30

harimau,

I am surprised at the way many pinko journalists and academicians in India are crying hoarse about BJP rewriting the Indian history. I really need to look at the new history book and see what is so bad about it.

If rewriting history means knowing more about Hindu culture, about sages and saints, i am all for it. History can be written in many ways. It is only a question of changing the emphasis. If BJP writes history highlighting the much neglected ancient culture of India (based on objective evidence),i am all for it. On the other hand, if there is an attempt to create a particular mindset and create a kind of rift between hindus and the minorities, i will be opposed to such a change. History, as has been taught in schools nowadays, definitely needs to be rewritten for the simple fact that it has always been so boring!

Sridhar

re:Reply #: 3

Romair,

Do me a favor. Take a break from Chowk. You are full of Bull. And all you say passes of as rational.

``People like Mr. Ganguly will prove to be the downfall of India. Once a country starts believing in an unrealistic and false description of situations (like the BJP, Kashmir, etc.), it loses touch with reality.``

Most people in India have not even heard of this guy Ganguli. He may shape the opinion of some in US but has no influence whatsoever with the policy makers in India. How can he fall India`s downfall. His belief is personal.

What does India believe about BJP that will cause its downfall? Did you see the latest assembly election results? India voters are mature enough to know what is going on with BJP. They, and not Mr Ganguli, will decide the fate of BJP.

``So although the event you attended at Berkeley may seem like a negative for Pakistan, it is actually more of a negative for India. India will never be able to solve its internal problems if it does not rely on logic, but relies on propoganda.``

Phew, i have not read anything that is a greater balloney in my life. The first sentence is wishful thinking. What is bad is actually good for Pakistan! Pakistan screwed up big time but you know what? It is not so bad after all. I will say, keep dreaming or smoking that stuff which i am sure is now a household item.

``Pakistan is now moving ahead of India in these areas (Pakistan used to be way behind).``

Which areas are you talking about, dude? The editor of ``The news`` (who has fled Pak to US) was asked in ``Hardball`` in MSNBC if Mushy was sincere in his efforts against the terrorists and if he thought US should send in troops in Pakistan like it did in Afghanistan to flush out the terrorists. The implication is very clear. Mushy has been given a long rope. He can either extricate himself and his country from the present mess or he can hang himself with that rope. We need to wait and see what he does. The editor of ``The News`` also said in Hardball that Mushy boy does not have complete control over all the terrorist elements. This is a scary situation, then. Musharraf has no doubt cracked down on a lot of jehadi elements. But Pearl`s killing has been very bad for him. He will be forced to do more.

Sridhar

Omar Shaikh not to be extradited (March 5)

http://www.dawn.com/2002/03/05/top4.htm

Why am I not a bit surprised? :)

Omar Shaikh himself has all along been ``supremely confident`` that he would not be extradited.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A58168-2002Feb23?language=printer

Peter Baker and Kamran Khan (February 24).

There is a world of difference between asking some people to stay put in rest houses and handing them over to another country for investigation. Pakistani military knows that.

re:Reply #: 2

hobbyty,

All i heard from this lady is whine, whine and more whine. There is no clear headed thinking, as far as i am concerned.

Sridhar