The Commonality of ’Fundamentalisms’
Beena Sarwar October 11, 2004
#35 Posted by rajsinghi1 on October 16, 2004 12:12:49 pm
Post#26
`` What hard questions are being asked here? ``
Read the debate and all the posts on the subject and one can find the questions asked, and addressed. Don`t expect from me to do your own homework.
Quote:
`` Cutting and pasting pages of text does not contribute to any discussion. It is bad netiquette. ``
On its own, a fair comment. However, I do not see anybody raising question/objection when day in and out, article after article is posted here when it comes to Gujrat riots. Why this bhashan/lecture on etiquette (spl?)netiquette now? Lectures/bhashans only when suitable to one`s own whims, is called being biased/prejudiced.
Quote:
`` If you wish to draw attention to some debate raging in some other forum then please post the link to that other debate. Otherwise there is no difference between your posts and the ramblings of MBZI.``
If you want others to believe that you really know and have netiquettes, you would have made a general comment about copy pasting in general and not directed specifically at me. Especially when so many other articles have been posted on Gujrat riots and you kept silent at that time. Otherwise, there is no difference between ramblings of a biased/prejudiced person and your post, on the subject.
So keep this lecture of netiquette to yourself. First, lead with example.
Quote:
`` It is frustrating for other interactors to come to a board and find people doing meaningless cut-and-paste. ``
Quite a fair comment, in general.
`` What hard questions are being asked here? ``
Read the debate and all the posts on the subject and one can find the questions asked, and addressed. Don`t expect from me to do your own homework.
Quote:
`` Cutting and pasting pages of text does not contribute to any discussion. It is bad netiquette. ``
On its own, a fair comment. However, I do not see anybody raising question/objection when day in and out, article after article is posted here when it comes to Gujrat riots. Why this bhashan/lecture on etiquette (spl?)netiquette now? Lectures/bhashans only when suitable to one`s own whims, is called being biased/prejudiced.
Quote:
`` If you wish to draw attention to some debate raging in some other forum then please post the link to that other debate. Otherwise there is no difference between your posts and the ramblings of MBZI.``
If you want others to believe that you really know and have netiquettes, you would have made a general comment about copy pasting in general and not directed specifically at me. Especially when so many other articles have been posted on Gujrat riots and you kept silent at that time. Otherwise, there is no difference between ramblings of a biased/prejudiced person and your post, on the subject.
So keep this lecture of netiquette to yourself. First, lead with example.
Quote:
`` It is frustrating for other interactors to come to a board and find people doing meaningless cut-and-paste. ``
Quite a fair comment, in general.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#34 Posted by Siddiqua on October 16, 2004 7:16:49 am
arjun_m
satyamvada
1. You seem to be missing the point that this particular thread is about ``fundamentalism`` and the path of its ascendancy in Pakistan and not what the army has been doing to Pakistan and Pakistanis.
2. It is not only the English press that has failed its duties but the entire press in Pakistan. Contrary to a lot of what is said by the press in self-praise, the Pakistani press has a continuing history of pandering to dictators and autocrats. There have been a few, very notable exceptions among the journalist community, but they have only served to prove the rule.
satyamvada
1. You seem to be missing the point that this particular thread is about ``fundamentalism`` and the path of its ascendancy in Pakistan and not what the army has been doing to Pakistan and Pakistanis.
2. It is not only the English press that has failed its duties but the entire press in Pakistan. Contrary to a lot of what is said by the press in self-praise, the Pakistani press has a continuing history of pandering to dictators and autocrats. There have been a few, very notable exceptions among the journalist community, but they have only served to prove the rule.
#33 Posted by arjun_m on October 15, 2004 1:29:20 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#32 Posted by satyamvada on October 15, 2004 7:15:02 am
Arjun,
You are probably under the assumption that the only mass-killing of the Paki army
was in 71. Not true.
The Paki Army killed thousands in Balochistan in the late 70`s. A Few years ago
in the Northern areas - many hundred were killed. In Karachi also a couple
of thousand have been killed. Of course no one knows what is happening
currently ..
In addition - in the the 50`s there were massive riots against Ahmediyas in Pakiland.
Ever since partition (even before) there was a constant chorus for labelling
ahmediyas as non-muslim.
The neat think about the Paki english media - is that they dont cover bad things
happening in Pakiland. You have to learn to read their Urdu language press to
get a better idea of the history of Pakiland.
#31 Posted by Siddiqua on October 14, 2004 10:34:11 pm
m-arjun
you are talking about the Pakistan that was, I am talking about the Pakistan that is.
The killings in East Pakistan occurred in 1971, during the army rule of Pakistan fronted by General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan. I have already mentioned that the Jama`at Islami was organically linked to that government. There are no two opinions about the Jama`at`s being part and parcel of the atrocities juggernaut that was let loose on the East Pakistani populace, particularly the liberal intelligentsia and the student community. The Jama`at`s Al-Shams and Al-Badr brigades served as the civil executions arms of the Martial Law.
1974 was the year when democracy itself was murdered, by the then National Assembly of Pakistan.
you are talking about the Pakistan that was, I am talking about the Pakistan that is.
The killings in East Pakistan occurred in 1971, during the army rule of Pakistan fronted by General Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan. I have already mentioned that the Jama`at Islami was organically linked to that government. There are no two opinions about the Jama`at`s being part and parcel of the atrocities juggernaut that was let loose on the East Pakistani populace, particularly the liberal intelligentsia and the student community. The Jama`at`s Al-Shams and Al-Badr brigades served as the civil executions arms of the Martial Law.
1974 was the year when democracy itself was murdered, by the then National Assembly of Pakistan.
#30 Posted by arjun_m on October 14, 2004 1:29:14 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#29 Posted by Siddiqua on October 14, 2004 9:51:34 am
Upon re-reading my last post it occurred to me that there had been a grievous oversight.
1974 will always be written down as a black year for democracy, human rights, and freedom of belief in Pakistan.
It is a great tragedy that the then government, led by the so-called liberal-democratic Pakistan Peoples Party, presided over the excommunication of a part of Pakistan`s Muslim populace.
Mullahs of various hues, shades, descriptions and denominations had been waging an ahitation, almost unabated since the early years of Pakistan, against the followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian.
These people, variously calling themselves Ahmadis, Qadianis and Lahoris, were declared non-Muslims by a special committee of the National Assembly, which comprised of the entire National Assembly itself. All of Pakistan`s elected representatives at the highest elected forum became part of the persecution of this miniscule minority.
1974 will always be written down as a black year for democracy, human rights, and freedom of belief in Pakistan.
It is a great tragedy that the then government, led by the so-called liberal-democratic Pakistan Peoples Party, presided over the excommunication of a part of Pakistan`s Muslim populace.
Mullahs of various hues, shades, descriptions and denominations had been waging an ahitation, almost unabated since the early years of Pakistan, against the followers of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian.
These people, variously calling themselves Ahmadis, Qadianis and Lahoris, were declared non-Muslims by a special committee of the National Assembly, which comprised of the entire National Assembly itself. All of Pakistan`s elected representatives at the highest elected forum became part of the persecution of this miniscule minority.
#28 Posted by Siddiqua on October 14, 2004 9:51:33 am
1974 is the most glaring example of how the mullah holds Pakistan`s polity hostage.
If one casts even a cursory glance at the history of Pakistan, the regression is hurtfully obvious. The anti Qadiani riots of 1953 were a show of strength by the mullah on the streets. It was then that parts of Pakistan experienced its first martial law, ostensibly ``in aid of civil power`` but in effect a rehearsal of bigger things to come, the army seizing upon an opportunity to discredit and deride civilian government.
The army`s adventure under Ayub`s stewardship, further strenghthened the mullah`s hold on society, though, seemingly the two were at loggerheads. It was during Ayub`s rule that the state first required Islamic Studies to be part of curricula at all levels, tresspassing into the realm of individual freedom of belief and opening wide the doors of fissiparous tendencies which concretized as the Judagaana Shia Deenyaat movement, which later evolved into Tehreek-e-Nifaz-Fiqah-e-Jafria.
Some social commentators have dubbed this step as a classic example of divide et empera.
The Yahya episode exacerbated the socio-religious divide simply due to the fact that Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan was a Shia.
During this period, in the then West Pakistan, one can see the scaling up of the aggressive stance and militancy of the Jamiat Ulemai Islam, [one led by Abdullah Darkhwasti, the second by Ghulam Ghous Hazarvi], and Jamiat Ulemai Pakistan lead by Shah Ahmad Noorani. The Jama`at Islami too, with its ties to the militray junta, had a field day, but its activities were more concentrated in the then East Pakistan.
After Pakistan`s defeat the 1971 war and the change of guard in Islamabad, it seemed that the country was in for some changes in its socio-political matrix. There were, but only to strengthen still more the mullah`s stranglehold on society. What was dubbed as a public relations exercise, the regular juants to Pakistan of clerics from the Haram Shareef and Madina Munnawarah in fact went a long way to enhance the credibility and hence the influence of the mullah in public life.
Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto paid the price for this, when in 1977, a motley crowd of the opposition parties, ganged up with the so called ``religious political`` parties, and formed the Pakistan National Alliance, whose street power component as well intellectual ammunition was provided by the Jama`at Islami, a faction of the Jamiat Ulemai Islam [headed by Mufti Mahmood, the sire of today`s leader of the opposition, Maulana Fazlur Rahman.] and Shah Ahmad Noorani`s Jamiat Ulemai Pakistan.
There have been various interpretations of the PNA movement; the net result was a martial law once again, fronted by Zia ul Haq, and proclaimed after the PNA and the PPP had reached an agreement.
The most naked breastfeeding of the mullah by the Pakistani state happened in Pakistan during July 1977 - Dec 1988.
If one casts even a cursory glance at the history of Pakistan, the regression is hurtfully obvious. The anti Qadiani riots of 1953 were a show of strength by the mullah on the streets. It was then that parts of Pakistan experienced its first martial law, ostensibly ``in aid of civil power`` but in effect a rehearsal of bigger things to come, the army seizing upon an opportunity to discredit and deride civilian government.
The army`s adventure under Ayub`s stewardship, further strenghthened the mullah`s hold on society, though, seemingly the two were at loggerheads. It was during Ayub`s rule that the state first required Islamic Studies to be part of curricula at all levels, tresspassing into the realm of individual freedom of belief and opening wide the doors of fissiparous tendencies which concretized as the Judagaana Shia Deenyaat movement, which later evolved into Tehreek-e-Nifaz-Fiqah-e-Jafria.
Some social commentators have dubbed this step as a classic example of divide et empera.
The Yahya episode exacerbated the socio-religious divide simply due to the fact that Agha Muhammad Yahya Khan was a Shia.
During this period, in the then West Pakistan, one can see the scaling up of the aggressive stance and militancy of the Jamiat Ulemai Islam, [one led by Abdullah Darkhwasti, the second by Ghulam Ghous Hazarvi], and Jamiat Ulemai Pakistan lead by Shah Ahmad Noorani. The Jama`at Islami too, with its ties to the militray junta, had a field day, but its activities were more concentrated in the then East Pakistan.
After Pakistan`s defeat the 1971 war and the change of guard in Islamabad, it seemed that the country was in for some changes in its socio-political matrix. There were, but only to strengthen still more the mullah`s stranglehold on society. What was dubbed as a public relations exercise, the regular juants to Pakistan of clerics from the Haram Shareef and Madina Munnawarah in fact went a long way to enhance the credibility and hence the influence of the mullah in public life.
Zulfiquar Ali Bhutto paid the price for this, when in 1977, a motley crowd of the opposition parties, ganged up with the so called ``religious political`` parties, and formed the Pakistan National Alliance, whose street power component as well intellectual ammunition was provided by the Jama`at Islami, a faction of the Jamiat Ulemai Islam [headed by Mufti Mahmood, the sire of today`s leader of the opposition, Maulana Fazlur Rahman.] and Shah Ahmad Noorani`s Jamiat Ulemai Pakistan.
There have been various interpretations of the PNA movement; the net result was a martial law once again, fronted by Zia ul Haq, and proclaimed after the PNA and the PPP had reached an agreement.
The most naked breastfeeding of the mullah by the Pakistani state happened in Pakistan during July 1977 - Dec 1988.
#27 Posted by Siddiqua on October 13, 2004 5:38:05 am
#24 Dost-Mittar
All the progress that mankind has seen so far has been brought about by cynics and doubters.
All the progress that mankind has seen so far has been brought about by cynics and doubters.
#26 Posted by scott on October 13, 2004 5:38:04 am
What hard questions are being asked here?
Cutting and pasting pages of text does not contribute to any discussion. It is bad netiquette. If you wish to draw attention to some debate raging in some other forum then please post the link to that other debate. Otherwise there is no difference between your posts and the ramblings of MBZI.
It is frustrating for other interactors to come to a board and find people doing meaningless cut-and-paste.
Cutting and pasting pages of text does not contribute to any discussion. It is bad netiquette. If you wish to draw attention to some debate raging in some other forum then please post the link to that other debate. Otherwise there is no difference between your posts and the ramblings of MBZI.
It is frustrating for other interactors to come to a board and find people doing meaningless cut-and-paste.
#25 Posted by Siddiqua on October 13, 2004 5:38:03 am
In the Pakistan context, religion most often means Islam. And that further necessitates the question, which Islam?
The first, and the most basic schism in Islam surfaced right at the time of the demise of the Prophet of Islam. Since then, there have been schisms galore.
In the course of time, there have surfaced forms of Islam which are not only militant, but downright virulent. The Islams of Muhammad Abdullah Abdul Al-Wahab, Hasan-al-Bana`a, Syed Qutub, Syed Abul Ala Maudoodi and Ruhullah Khomeini, just vary in degrees of virulence.
Now, the mullahs in Pakistan.
Jinnah was no democrat, but he was secular, and may have become a democrat, had his tuberclosis allowed him time. After his demise, the fascist tendencies in the ascendant clique in the then Muslim League gained further sway, and found a ready ally among the mullahs.
The Objectives Resolution is proof of that.
With the passage of the Objectives Resolution, the mullah gained a de facto supra constitutional role. Come Zia`s army usurpation, and this abomination was incorporated into the Constitution of Pakistan, further consolidating the mullahs position.
At the time of Partition another socio-political development took place, which has had far-reaching consequences on Pakistan`s fortunes, and particularly on the evolution of a free and sane society in the country.
The Jama`at Islami grafted itself into Pakistan, and as a matter of conscious policy, infiltrated key sectors of the state apparatus, viz: the armed forces, the state educational system, the information and broadcasting ministry, and also the print media.
On the other hand, having seen and faced a number of electoral battles, pre and post-partition, the self-styled ``religious political`` parties had reached the fearsome consclusion that the poeple will not vote them into power.
An unholy alliance, therefore, took shape between a section of the civil bureacracy, the mullah, and the military.
Time and history have their own ways of correcting aberrations in social development. Today the wheel seems to have come full circle, with a large section of the mullahs pitted against the ruling clique in the army.
What escapes notice of most people is that the mullahs pitted against the army are of highly differing hues. The Jama`at, The two Jamiats, a section of the Shias, etc. etc. According to the announced precepts of each, all the others do not qualify to be labeled Muslims.
Wa ma ilayna ill al balaagh al mubeen.
The first, and the most basic schism in Islam surfaced right at the time of the demise of the Prophet of Islam. Since then, there have been schisms galore.
In the course of time, there have surfaced forms of Islam which are not only militant, but downright virulent. The Islams of Muhammad Abdullah Abdul Al-Wahab, Hasan-al-Bana`a, Syed Qutub, Syed Abul Ala Maudoodi and Ruhullah Khomeini, just vary in degrees of virulence.
Now, the mullahs in Pakistan.
Jinnah was no democrat, but he was secular, and may have become a democrat, had his tuberclosis allowed him time. After his demise, the fascist tendencies in the ascendant clique in the then Muslim League gained further sway, and found a ready ally among the mullahs.
The Objectives Resolution is proof of that.
With the passage of the Objectives Resolution, the mullah gained a de facto supra constitutional role. Come Zia`s army usurpation, and this abomination was incorporated into the Constitution of Pakistan, further consolidating the mullahs position.
At the time of Partition another socio-political development took place, which has had far-reaching consequences on Pakistan`s fortunes, and particularly on the evolution of a free and sane society in the country.
The Jama`at Islami grafted itself into Pakistan, and as a matter of conscious policy, infiltrated key sectors of the state apparatus, viz: the armed forces, the state educational system, the information and broadcasting ministry, and also the print media.
On the other hand, having seen and faced a number of electoral battles, pre and post-partition, the self-styled ``religious political`` parties had reached the fearsome consclusion that the poeple will not vote them into power.
An unholy alliance, therefore, took shape between a section of the civil bureacracy, the mullah, and the military.
Time and history have their own ways of correcting aberrations in social development. Today the wheel seems to have come full circle, with a large section of the mullahs pitted against the ruling clique in the army.
What escapes notice of most people is that the mullahs pitted against the army are of highly differing hues. The Jama`at, The two Jamiats, a section of the Shias, etc. etc. According to the announced precepts of each, all the others do not qualify to be labeled Muslims.
Wa ma ilayna ill al balaagh al mubeen.
#24 Posted by dost_mittar on October 12, 2004 5:01:09 pm
``Unfortunately, they tend not to stick to the actual ‘fundamentals’ that are common to all religions – truth, justice, and compassion.``
...to some cynics, there is no compassion in islam, no justice in hinduism and no truth in any religion.
...but what do the cynics know?
...to some cynics, there is no compassion in islam, no justice in hinduism and no truth in any religion.
...but what do the cynics know?
#23 Posted by rajsinghi1 on October 12, 2004 1:21:42 pm
When unable to answer questions asked, fail to back up the claim/s, indulge in time tested tactics...and that is to attack the individual..Great! But then, nothing new in this..
#22 Posted by saint on October 12, 2004 1:21:42 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#21 Posted by arjun_m on October 12, 2004 9:22:09 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#20 Posted by Modern_Dharma on October 12, 2004 8:07:50 am
Siddiqua
`God` does not have to live as a human being. `God` also cannot be fully understood. So `religions of God` are bound to be divisive forces. On the other hand, human beings have no choice but to live with one another. So a sufficiently reasoned `religion of Man` can be a force for spreading understanding and tolerance. We human beings need to make our own choice.
`God` does not have to live as a human being. `God` also cannot be fully understood. So `religions of God` are bound to be divisive forces. On the other hand, human beings have no choice but to live with one another. So a sufficiently reasoned `religion of Man` can be a force for spreading understanding and tolerance. We human beings need to make our own choice.
Interact Index
Also by Beena Sarwar
Similar Articles
- Fundamentalism and Violence Khalid Sohail
- Militant Liberalism ahmad hayat
- Reclaiming the Middle Ground Ishrat Saleem
- ‘Our Liberals’ and Minority Psyche farrukh kamrani
- London’s Hour of Reckoning Ozer Khalid
US Elections 2008 Primaries
Get Chowk RSS FeedLatest Interacts
- pavocavalry: Re: # 4 I... The Future of Indo
- pavocavalry: Re: # 3 Thanks... The Future of Indo
- harish_hyd: #315 by HP HP Sahib, Why... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- pavocavalry: Re: # 1 -MOHTARAM... The Future of Indo
- HP: This is fascinating that... Pleas For Sanity as
- pavocavalry: the congress cannot settle... The Future of Indo
- HP: #310 Posted by dost_mittar... India-Pakistan: Empathy, grief in
- BJ2: Discussions here are useless. Jihadis... Pleas For Sanity as
