The Barbarians Within The Gates!

Re: # 103

You see poor Liaqat Ali Khan thought the same way in 1949... but look where that got us.
What you are saying is not practical... Modern states are not based on scriptures... You theory has been tried, and failed... and infact the consequences have been disastrous. As for ``Istehad``... it is ``Ijtehad``... which is not possible in the current environment because in case you didn`t know 80% of the Ulema have ``Ijmah`` on the issue of ``Ijtehad`` that the doors to Ijtehad are closed.

Re: # 96

I am the kind of mullah who belives that preaching to the convert from the pulpit is easy and useless, therefore, I preach where there is potential for new converts. And koylay ki dalali maiN moonh kaala is an occupational hazard and I am gladly willing to take that risk.

By the way, the `friends`` and ``allies`` have already started to evaluate their options if and when the ship sinks. Please read March 7 issue of Macleans where half of the magazine is dedicated to analyzing how American ship is about to sink and what should Canadians do to avoid getting dragged into the vortex of sinking ship. I know Maclean is a Candian magazine and probably the analysts were all frozen brain kanuks, but I assure you that they were all white; hence you should listen to them. And I think since you belong to the rat pack you will jump the ship way before me.

Re: # 96

And you will remain perplexed.... as we all are... I think Urstruly is a secret double agent of the CIA Mossad and what have you...

Why else would he post an Urdu article that is arguing for a secular state and claim the opposite...

Something is amiss...

re: this article
A good article by any standards. Truly objective and incisive. Nothing less is expected from the author.
Given the fact that both India and Pak are borne out of the same womb (and in a way, siblings), the question to ask would be: how did India manage to have uninterrupted (well, almost, not considering the Emergency) democracy for 50 years, and establish a secular state while Pak has been unable to do so?
Before i go further, let me say that i do not consider democracy in India perfect. Neither is it a perfect eg of a secular state. There are lot of lacunae. But in spirit it does try to be a democracy and secular state. There are constitutional guarantees. Elections are by far fair.
Where did Pak fail?
1. Was it because a bad beginning was made when Jinnah declared himself the ruler of Pak? Unlike Gandhi, he did not give up power but considered all power vested in him. Doubtless, he did not live long to see his ideals of secularism take shape (arguing he still held those ideals dear) but he did not give proper direction and his speeches today are subject to varying interpretations. Did he want secularism? Did he say Pak should be Islamic? He has said both depending on what speech you are reading.
2. Did the creation of a state based on religion then create a situation where mullahs gained vested interests in perpetuating the rivalry between India and Pak? Army colluded with mullahs to share the glow, so to speak. A perfect symbiosis. You rub my back, i will rub yours. India was the great satan. It has to be because it was not muslim and was next door, trying to annihilate Pak. So much paranoia was created about India in the minds of the public that generations of Pakis came to hate hindus (not just Indians, but hindus). Army became the saviour of country`s integrity, nay honor.
So, the question again to ask: Did enmity with India prove harmful in the end for Pak and hinder in the creation of those institutions that are necessary for democracy and a secular state?
3. People`s mandate?
What do the people of Pak want? Do they want democracy? If so, why did they cheer Mushy when he took over a democratically elected (however corrupt it may be) govt in a coup?
Are the people really secular? If so, why do they hail OBL as a hero and why do opinion polls show he is overwhelmingly popular in Pak?
Is it possible that people of Pak just do not want democracy but actually yearn for a powerful kingly but benign power (like Akbar the Great) to rule over them and bring them glory?
These are the questions that confront me from time to time. My time spent in Chowk have shown that people like the author of this article are few in numbers. If a vote is taken even inChowk, you will find that those who believe that Pak should be Islamic are in good numbers. And, those who believe Mushy is actually good for Pak are in good numbers too!
Sridhar

Re: # 90

Brilliant...

The `Isthehad` is workable the minute the People of Pakistan decide to allow the truth to manifest into a proper political entity, not just a facade. The word never is absent from my dictionary. Almost every thing is possible. It will take place.

Since I have time and time again talked about Isthehad, we would have to decide on certain matters view that process of consensus and hence I said `more or less an Islamic state.

Pakistani society is becoming more progressive over the issue of Kara Kori killings. The whistleblowers in our society are indeed letting the public know about the dispicible crime of honor killings. The principle of `equality between all races, sexes, and religions` so far at applicaiton level has NEVER been successful any where in the world. Thats a fact. The Americans ended up displacing over 50 million African Americans and killing 5-10 million in the process. German society fell for Nazism, and we all know about the Jewish pogroms in Poland and Russia. The Inquisition, and the persecution of sertain sects in Great Britain.
The Jews experciened one of their true golden ages in the Kingdom of Granada, a Muslim Kingdom once situated in Spain.

Right now, there is a cesspool of problems brimming in Pakistan. Asking why each one is happening as a random incident is an absolutely incorrect way of looking at it. It has many several factors, one of the major ones being our confrontrations with neighboring India. Mr. Feroz, you are free to believe that India is a made-up boogey man in Pakistan. However, myself, like millions of others Pakistanis, know that it is India and not Pakistan which has been the insulted us time and time again. The illegal occupation of Kashmir, not respecting our borders and intervening in OUR domestic affairs. However, you like myself are free to believe whatever you want.

The insecurity does not come from India? I`m truly flabbergasted to hear this. Please enlighten me how these insecurities have come about? May be because a hegemon is sitting to our east, occupying a province of Pakistan, and it has interfered in our domestic affairs. Who invaded who in 1971? We did the airstrikes, but that was on Indian positions when they crossed the line of control.The problem with us as a nation is that we are plagued with a retrogressive self-proclaimed representatives of Islam on one end, and their neo-liberal secular counterparts. Both are leeches to this nation. The true Muslims must rise and establish the proper Islamic state as perscribed the the Quran. Isthehad ought to serve as an agency of reform and social development. And, our insecurity does revolve around alot of issues, with the greatest being India.

I do not disagree with you on the meaning of democracy. However, we can not import the Anglo-Saxon/European model of democracy in Pakistan and expect it to work. The Bogra formula suggested that, and it failed even before it launched. But that issue was tied once again to our insecurity, which was being flamed by India.

In the defense of the People of Pakistan and myself, Mr. Feroz, please do not insult the People of Pakistan by stating that they suffer from some sort of disease or disorder. Also, I never said that India is the prime issue for are insecurity. Let me reiterate, a lot of different factors have contributed to this insecurity, every bunny knows that. Also, I have read that book and I have taken the VIEWS of the author into account. The League and many of the land-owning families did strike a deal, in which the league promised that it would not take part in any land-reforms, are you not aware of this? Also, books may or may not suggest certain things, but to realize and `buy` what the book is saying something which is my right. I believe that whatever feudal mentality we have in the country, we can eradicate by a process of education and other national programs. Taking away the lands of certain families will not mean the end of feudalism. It`s the mentality which needs to be taken away.


East Pakistan is under the bridge now, however, we may not ignore it and hence I`m going to take into account whatever you are saying. The `feudals` of Pakistan firstly, is politically incorrect. There is some feudal mentality amongst certain people, and we can cleanse that via a process of education and supremacy of judiciary. `Feudalism` is a concept, which can be defeated if we properly fight it via a process of education. Cleanse it out of the minds of the people. Let me ask you a question, if these `feudal` families supposedly do what you say in Pakistan, then, if they were to `earse` the feudal mentality from their minds, would you accept them as proper citizens of our country? Hence, the concept it self needs to be defeated. The Concept of Feudalism needs to be defeated, owning 100 acres or 1000 acres is irrelevant to the equation.

Every bunny knows the the Leagues goal were to stop the reunification of East Bengal and West Bengal, since the East had a Muslim majority. The Lahore Resolution signed at Minto Park explicitly declared the intentions of the Muslim League of India. You may consider reading it. You could also consider reading the Objectives Resolution.
Haroon, please remember; idealism is a virtue, but idealism without knowledge is a self-defeating proposition.

I do not support any of the current Islamic parties in Pakistan. I however am of the opinion that their hearts and minds may be won by a process of enlightened reasoning. A progressive Islamic party is needed, one whose scholars have real degrees and one whose clergy are well-educated sensible people. That my friends is the need of the hour.

Many European clergymen in the Middle Ages came to the Middle East for their higher studies, in order to get a more catholic and well-rounded understanding of the world, religion ,and better academics.

Long live a true Islamic Republic in Pakistan!

OK: Lets try to find something everybody can agree on (for once!!) on chowk - I say that they are making way too much of the pope`s death. The guy came up through the bureaucracy, lived a luxurious life, wasnt much of a leader (was impervious to the pedophile priest crisis very badly, lifting his little finger only when forced by public pressure). So, why the hoopla??

Re: # 35

This article proves URSTRULY`s argument to be rubbish...

The million dollar question is whether Urstruly can read urdu.. because the guy is arguing for a secular democratic state.

Re: # 93

He can`t... he is a first rate idiot ... and he proves it over and over again.

Re: # 88

Malik99... thanks for proving that you are not only a pathetic fool... but a liar of the first degree as well...

Have you heard of the Islamic injunction against gheebah..

Please do tell me how the Passport decision helped Islam or the people of Pakistan... it certainly did not harm ``Qadianis``.

Now you must really be worried... Because according to you I am a Qadiani... BUT my Passport says I am a Muslim...

re: Dost-Mittar # 39

You have made a couple of good points!

If there was such a feeling, then you can say that it was the failure of the Muslim Leaque leadership itself. If this was the case, then it might also explain the sense of alienation which has continued to exist between the Pakistani public and its representatives.

However, the process of Islamization of Pakistan started after 1947.

Ciao

#92 kaalchakra writes ``The Muslim man answered that it was Allah`s wish that Australians had welcomed him. He did not owe anything to his hosts. Australians did not follow Allah`s way. They were not just people. So they did not deserve his loyalty, and had to be destroyed.``

Upon reading this I dusted off my Australian history book. It turns out that the englishmen were not exactly the ``grateful`` guests of native australians either. In fact, they proceeded to do what is now cutely termed as ``genocide`` :). And then once they had taken over the country of from the original inhabitants, they proceeded to put the left over natives in reservations. funny, eh?? ;)

so given this history of australia, i fail to see how the statement of that muslim man is ``out landish`` or ``extremist`` or even worth pointing out.

urstruly,

you say :``I was conned by them. Only after seeing them up, close, and personal I later realized that they are the very reason the life of 99% of human beings in my part of the world is beyond miserable. ``.............. fine , i believe you ..........

.... but now that you know, what is keeping you here ?......... i am sure since you have been here many years you have the financial means to move back to the land of the pure ........ it just doesn`t make sense - why are you torturing yourself by living in a society that you hate ?............ i am perplexed

#92 by kaalchakra on April 3, 2005 8:51am PT


The Muslim man answered that it was Allah`s wish that Australians had welcomed him.


So when urstruly pays taxes that buy the JDAMs that kill his muslim brothers and sisters, that`s allah`s with too?

There you have it maulana urstruly...no need to feel bad...your man upstairs wanted it to be this way....

#91 by Urstruly on April 3, 2005 8:46am PT

Umm...ok..as long as your pay your taxes, we don`t care..

OTOH, if your head really does explode from all this impotent rage, that`ll mean a drop in tax collections...

So rave and rant all you want..just don`t let it give you a heart attack...those JDAMs the USAF is dropping on your muslim brothers and sisters (even as I post) aren`t cheap..

I`ll bet your internet provider pays taxes that help pay for a few JDAMs....

re: malik99 # 88

Please define the term ``elites`` in the context of Pakistan.

Ciao