No Retreat

Re: # 101

ntsyed,

we all know that democracy as defined by you means:``one man, one vote, one time``


......... and look at this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/28/international/europe/28tablighi.html?

Comments to #101, Ntsyed.

That’s an interesting outpour and obviously you have strong feelings on this issue! I have a couple of questions:

1) Are you satisfied with the present status of women in Pakistan? Do you see any problems at all? If so, what are the three most important problems you see?

2) In what ways would you like the country to change (if any)? What would be the three important steps YOU would take to make those changes?

Thanks for your time in providing an answer!

I like this ``navel to kneecap`` funda. Amazing book man, better than Encyclopedia and MBD guides. Those who wrote kuran assumed like you are animals to be telling you how to cover your bodies. Indeed if you take out the kuran your average mullah will look like a wild beast with his dishevelled hair, body odour and all.


The most remarkable thing however is Syed Chacha giving fundas on democracy.

[The first principle of democracy is to accept whichever group wins the elections and not be sore losers. If one looks at the Pakistani population, regardless of their misconceptions of Islam most of them favor the Islamists]

So according to Syed Uncle`s First Law of Democracy, Pakistan wants an islamic theocracy. And he says ``First Law`` as if there are 2nd and 3rd laws of Democracy! Reminds me of Catch22 and Yossarian ROTFL..

Re: # 25
re: prashant123:
///Vertex..too bad man. My heartfelt sympathies. But..that is why Pakistan was created. Why not go there ? Not just you , but the whole lot of you. No more hindu freakazoids to worry about then....///


Because India`s their country as much as it is anyone else`s.

Guys - there is no need to justify your actions by looking at how things were done in 7th century Arabia. These basterdd Molvis want you in a tight spot, and you are playing into their hands by looking towards an outdated Quran. You don’t have to justify anything to them or to anyone else. It is pathetic to look towards Quran for the kind of shorts one can wear. Quran is not a sports magazine, nor is Hadis or Sunat (Hadith and Sunnah for the Araboobs) a manual on running.

You do what you want, and let the bloody Mulla gang live their own life (if they have any) and bang their foreheads as if lifting one’s ass in the air 5 times a day makes someone a better person.

Urstruly: no offense but your definition of bare minimum is very unclear.....first how you find out the center line of the kneecaps..where is it exactly...all kneecaps are not the same shape.... Do we need a doctor or a x-ray machine to acertain that we are not refering to the wrong centerline?..................... secondly 2 fingers is very ambiguous.........who`s two fingers? Romair`s or yours? ...............Woman`s or man`s? ...........Afrikan man`s or a Bengali man`s? ...........It would been better if God made these specifications more clear and exact so that there is no room for mistakes.

more exact like:...... ``length of the shorts shall be minimum 2.5 times the length of male organ of the man wearing the shorts plus/minus 1 millimeter``...... That would have also solved the problem of borrowing eachother`s shorts...just imagine a short that is perfectly legal on Urstruly might be 15 millimeters too short for Romair. ........Just the fear of violating God`s command and ending up in hell would prevent Romair to steal Urstruly`s shorts.

Frankly I beleive this whole concept of centerline is a anglo-saxxon Jeudo-Christian concept and no basis in Islam. Islam does not believe in ``centerline`` world it beleives in a world with a circle around it which forms a boundary...anyone on outside is outside anyone inside is inside. ``centerline`` concept being in the center, on the left or right is a kafir theory.

The nag for an article
The first principle of democracy is to accept whichever group wins the elections and not be sore losers. If one looks at the Pakistani population, regardless of their misconceptions of Islam most of them favor the Islamists. A quick IMPARTIAL survey of the rural and urban Pakistani populace reveals this truth. If it wasn’t for the feudal mindset and connections of PPP and ML etc, they could never win any FAIRLY held elections.

It’s a part of the package called “democracy” – majority opinion counts, not just of the ones who can lament on their defeat through hollow and ill-informed essays in English like this one. Just suck it up and wait for your day in the sun, which you`ve already wasted many times before.

The marathons are just lame excuses for Islam-bashing by the ones who’ve probably never studied this system, let alone with an open mind. This fact has been made abundantly clear on chowk. These crybabies would rather pull “the rug out from under their feet if the “resounding public opinion” suits the ‘mullah’ and their constituency.

Similarly, the decrying of ‘religion’ column on the passport is just as phony. In case the author failed to check the previous and current Pakistani passports, the ‘religion’ column has always been there. However, the “profession” column has been omitted from the new ones. I know so because I just received my renewed passport just a few days ago.

The only people to have a real problem with this are, of course, Ahemdis and Westernized parasites called “Liberals”. It denies them a critical cover in their sinister efforts to corrupt Islam through misrepresentation.

Secondly, while it is wrong to release the violators of law under any pressure, the people with authority should have a backbone of principles instead of politicking and capitulating to pressure. But ‘western’ democracy teaches otherwise: sell your mother if it gets you a vote.

What do the “mixed marathons” hope to achieve anyway? Just that few well-to-do Pakistani men and women could run a track together. How does it help the unabated abuse against women in the lower economic segments of society?

The author and her proponents need to get their act together and priorities straight instead of trying to put the cart before the horse.

Firstly, ALL women – not just the self-proclaimed enlightened liberal ones – need protection in every aspect of life. Then they should be afforded their God-given respect and right to education, economic opportunities, etc. Running marathons shoulder-to-shoulder with men is the least of worries for the majority of Pakistani women trapped in a life and death predicament.

The hoopla is only about allowing women to run outside for the men to cheer and jeer them, when Allah strictly forbids believing women in the Quran from leaving home without the jalabeeb(outer garment). Again, this is not about Mullahs and MMA.

If it was so, the self-proclaimed “self-righteous-secular-westernized-equality-for-all-majority” would have been out there to rescue any woman runner when Armed vigilantes were allowed to hang about outside in `ambush positions`….threatening to teach [any woman runner] a lesson who dared to run outside the stadium. But then again, cowardice is yet another prominent trait of this group. ``Allaaaaaaaah…mein to naee ja sakti naaa….mera nail toooot jaye ga naaaa. And I can’t let my husband go either…. I don’t like to kiss a popla, you know.``

Who died and made Ghinwa Bhutto of the PPP (SB) an authority on Islam?

She’s right about one thing though, Allah does not belong to the MMA or the men alone…. He does not belong to anyone. Instead, we all belong to Him. As His belonging, it is our duty to obey Him as He has ordered us in the Quran and sent His messengers to show us how to do just that. Study the Quran for verification of the preceding claim.

Islam certainly is not anyone’s property to be used at will, particularly NOT of the bunch which has little or no knowledge of Islam, let alone punctually offering 5 prayers and studying Quran regularly. For this group, as one of them recently put, Quran should be kept on a high shelf and only brought down for weddings etc.

The ensuing discussion
If the author and some of the male participants of this discussion wish to put themselves or women of their family on display for non-deserving people, more power to them. They can do it anywhere outside Pakistan where they have all freedom to do so, and knock themselves out.... with .22, .38, .45 or any calibre of bullets when things get out of hand.

But if they expect each and every other man to act like their fathers and brothers when their women are making a spectacle of themselves, then that ain’t neva happenin’, Bubbas and Bubbettes.

Not in Pakistan, not in India (by admissions of Indians themselves on other boards) and not any-doggone-where else on this planet.

It’s simply against human nature. You`re asking for too much.

There’s a reason why Allah made us the way He did and gave us the Rules that He has. Otherwise, He could’ve simply made us progeny of pigs and other four legged beasts to have “mixed marathons” and walk about and do everything else butt-naked. If that`s the freedom one seeks, then zoological gardens, safaris, and plain old jungles are the best places for you...except for the poachers who`ll fry that ``free`` as* in a jiffy.

Like the horrible hindoo fellar here who said ‘prostitutes are most liberal women’ and a horrible moslame fellar who claims ‘so? prostitution is a human need’ while (in the face of such travesty) the “liberal” damsels sat intellectually and morally constipated and their men sat silently sucking on the Western male genitalia as if it was a communal peace pipe of the American Indian, some may respect the women who flaunt their goodies, clothed or otherwise, others may hoot, and yet some others may just ‘reach out and touch’ like A-freakin’-T&T in spite of how much one dislikes such uninvited ‘touching’ (otherwise known as groping and molesting)…and there ain’t nothin’ y’all cud do ‘bout it if you ain’t got the likes of Mr. Smith and Wesson to cover you pseudo liberal behinds in case you lost your temporal temperament... not even the over-weight men, let alone over-weight women, could do anything about it.

In Pakistan we have more pressing issues regarding oppression of women than running freakin’ mixed marathons. These are luxuries and privileges, restricted to haves of the society. Rights of the 99% must be restored FIRST before according such frivolous privileges to 1% of the population. We’ll see about it when the train gets to your station.

Hamidm #95: ``....... i commend you for your efforts to stand up to maulana urstruly........... but don`t you realize the futility of fighting the hadith with the koran ?........... ``

There is something I learnt a long time ago. If one wants to convince someone of something, one must argue within the domain of the other person. No one will listen to logic, if it is not within their own domain. However, most people will listen to logic if it is within their own domain................

If someone wants to use hadith to prove a point, throwing secularism or athiesm at them, is a useless excercise. As useless as throwing hadith at someone pushing secularism or athiesm..............

Specifically within the domain of hadith, itself, women wearing shalwar kameez and running, is a lesser crime than Urstruly wearing shorts and showing his thighs.........or wearing pants below his ankles..........

The former has precedences, which support it; two of which I quoted. The later two (shorts and pants) are forbidden, all together...........

Urstruly #80: ``Now please explain to me, is there an avenue open for women running among men here? You have posted the evidence yourself.``

Here is another example, in addition of the running and walking that men and women do, amongst each other, at Hajj``

``According to Ayesha, the Holy Prophet`s wife, may Allah be pleased with her: “Allah`s Messenger, peace be upon him, raced with me and I won. That was before I grew fat. Later he raced with me when I was a little fat and he won.`` He said: ``tit for tat.” (Imam Ahmad).``

The story is actually quite commonly quoted. A good example of a woman running. It would be kind of hard to find a better one, from a Shariah point of view.

Urstruly #92: ``They have arbitrarily chosen an imaginary horizontal line passing through the center of the kneecap as a line of reference. The liberal group of ulema say that the sattar must be up to about two fingers above that centerline. That puts us approximately where the knee cap start from top. According to these ulema if a person is covered from navel to the two fingers above the kneecap he can offer his prayers. The conservative ulema on one hand do agree with the centerline concept but they contend that in order to be on the safe side the length of attire should be at least two fingers below the centerline.``

I am debating this with you in your own domain. A domain that I don`t even believe in i.e Hadith. Yet I am the one giving you exact quotes and sources. While you are, once again, throwing out concepts, with no rhyme or reason. Please point me to these ulema. And how in the world they decided what is two fingers above and three fingers below. What if someone decides it is six fingers above?

And who in the world gave them the right to define it in the first place. Certainly not the Quran.

Initially you had stated, ``.... defined in no uncertain terms. For men the bare minimum (in jurists terminology it is called ``sattar`` meaning the `covered` or `hidden`.) is an area that starts right below the navel and goes up to right above the knee cap.``

What happened, to the, ``no uncertain terms.`` All of a sudden, it is liberal interpretations vs. conservative ones. Apparently, the terms are not so certain after all. Is it below the knee. In the middle of the knee. Right above the knee. Two fingers above the knee. Or three fingers above the knee?

So far, from what I have heard, your wearing shorts above your knees and wearing pants below your ankle is a far bigger crime than women wearing shalwar kameez and participating in a marathon. What you are doing is strictly prohibited in hadith. What the women are doing has some precedence; specifically during Hajj...........

Urstruly #94: ``Coming back to me, yes I have worn shorts that were about three to four fingers above my knee cap. I admit that I am guilty of this obscenity of showing my knee cleavage, so sue me.``

OK, now we are getting somewhere. I assume you have also worn pants that go below your ankles. Amongst various other things that are forbidden in the hadith.

You answer defines why I find your arguments, so odd. When you commit a crime, as defined by Shariah, you simply state, ``So sue me.`` I have no intention of suing you. Considering the fact, that at one stage of my life, after having arrived in the USA, I was so enamoured with wearing shorts and the freedom they allowed, that I wore them everywhere. Until my wife had to forcefully stop me.

What I am, however, trying to highlight is that people, who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Those who wear shorts above their knees and tight jeans, below their ankles, should not comment on the Shariah what others are doing, and wearing.

What would be your answer, if a future female squash champion of Pakistan, wore shorts and when you complained, she gave you the same answer, i.e., ``So sue me.`` Would you be willing to live with her answer?

``From your post you are trying to convey a message that knee-long knickers are not only non-existent but impractical as well.``

If the guy in the picture you posted stands up, his shorts will go above his knees.
I never conveyed that knee-long knickers are impractical. I just stated that they are relatively non-existent in sports; specifically in Pakistan. In all the sports in Pakistan other than boxing (including soccer, field hockey, swimming, squash, tennis, table-tennis, badminton etc.) no male wears shorts that are that long. That is only a recent NBA fad........

You need to make up your mind. If you want to push hadith, that is your choice. But then, you cannot simply shrug off your own violations, by saying, ``So sue me.`` Specifically when you spend a better amount of your time trying to sue others..........

I think the MMA should arrange a ``Burkha Only`` marathon for interested women. And preferably, it should be arrange in mid July or somewhere around that time. It could yet be a true moment of sporting genius from the bearded sages of wisdom. Just imagine people...a winner...nay even a participant who manages to run the complete 42 KM fully clad in a burkha in 40-45 degree heat...definitely would be a contender for the global crown....Paula Radcliffe be warned!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.....I think many interactors here have yet again failed to see the immense foresight that these men of god have over us mere mortals.

romair,

....... i commend you for your efforts to stand up to maulana urstruly........... but don`t you realize the futility of fighting the hadith with the koran ?........... one is worse than the other when it comes to providing any meaningful guidance on anything that really matters ..........it is like looking for answers in the communist manifsto instead of das capital .............

.......... but, anyway, it was a good try ..........

Re: # 93

Yes hamidm you are a genius and I am bored

Re: # 92

urstruly,

......... is it also true that you have to keep a sheet between you and your partner while having sex ?.......... i am serious - this is what i learned in our compulsory islamiyat class at uet which was taught by the same genius who taught fluid mechanics .( i forget his name now) ......... needless to say the attendance in his islamiyat class far exceeded that in fluid mechanics ........... it was a source of immense mirth for the boys who wanted to get into the technical details of this maneuver ..............

.......... by the way, i think your shorts are at least six inches above the knee in your club picture ............

Romair #90

The reason that sometimes I do not dignify your pointless and meaningless diatribe is because that is what it is. I have a day job and I intend to keep it. The problem with you is that while writing a post you invent a premise; you assume that it is true without verifying it and build a whole castle around it. The only reason that I am dignifying this particular post of yours with a response is to see whether you are on some sort of drugs or not. You probably spent an hour or so writing your post and I am really taking a big stab in the dark assuming that you spent an hour or so in addition to that on figuring out the logic and the language etc. of the post. So, conservatively speaking you wasted 2 hours of your life building a case on a wrong premise.

Your basic premise in this post is that I somehow had provided wrong or false information in my previous post (#63) regarding the covered area. So here is the crux of your argument where you try to ``correct`` my error or right my wrong. You write `` Let me provide you with the truth: Under any Shariah, with a basis in hadith, it is banned for a Muslim male to expose any portion of his leg, between the navel and knee. This is what is widely acceptable, by, “scholars.”.

Now please explain to me in God`s good name how it is any different from your ``truth`` when I wrote in my post # 63 that For men the bare minimum (in jurists terminology it is called ``sattar`` meaning the `covered` or `hidden`.) is an area that starts right below the navel and goes up to right above the knee cap.

For crying out loud you provided the evidence with not one but two ahadith yourself in your post, writing:

1. Reported Muhammad Jahsh, ``The Messenger of Allah, upon whom be peace, passed by Ma`mar while his thighs were uncovered. He said, to him, `O Ma`mar, cover your thighs, for they are (part of the) `aurah.`` This is related by Ahmad, al-Hakim and al-Bukhari in Tareekh and in mu`allaq form in his Sahih.

2. Reported Jurhad, ``The Messenger of Allah passed by me when the cloak I was wearing did not cover my thighs . He said, `Cover your thigh, for it (is part of the) `aurah.`` This is related by Ahmad, Abu Dawud and at-Tirmidhi, who called it hassan, and by al-Bukhari in mu`allaq form in the Sahih.

Now had you bothered to read either of these ahadith that you posted you would have noticed that the keyword in both ahadith is the ``thigh``. Now please explain to me how one should define a thigh? Is the knee a part of thigh or the thigh ends from where the kneecap starts? And what exactly is the line from where the kneecap starts. Believe me, these trivial details were discussed by the ulema when defining the `sattar`. They have arbitrarily chosen an imaginary horizontal line passing through the center of the kneecap as a line of reference. The liberal group of ulema say that the sattar must be up to about two fingers above that centerline. That puts us approximately where the knee cap start from top. According to these ulema if a person is covered from navel to the two fingers above the kneecap he can offer his prayers. The conservative ulema on one hand do agree with the centerline concept but they contend that in order to be on the safe side the length of attire should be at least two fingers below the centerline. They contend that while sitting in the Namaz the attire slides up a bit and may exposes the area two fingers above the centerline therefore it is prudent to have a longer attire.

Coming back to me, yes I have worn shorts that were about three to four fingers above my knee cap. I admit that I am guilty of this obscenity of showing my knee cleavage, so sue me.

Now please explain to me how all the boxers and NFL players wear shorts that go well below their knees and perform in these games that require the most agility. From your post you are trying to convey a message that knee-long knickers are not only non-existent but impractical as well. The evidence below makes you false premise fall on its face yet again: