Jehad and The Curriculum

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

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

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

Jahad : As it seems the wastage of lives and blood of civilians, is not as it looks. Jahad is one of the main critarian to judge a Muslim. But the Muslim is one who knows exactly what Jahad means. The innocent youth of Pakistan becomes passionate after listening the Maulanas and Religious Personalities, when they talk about cutting the heads of enemies. They doesn`t mean to kill the enemies without any reason. If you see a non-Muslim and he is not speaking harsh about Islam, you have no right to punish him.

Jahad means ``Fight to establish peace`` or ``Fight for the rights``. If every Muslim will keep this definition of Jahad in mind, he will never be deviated from the ``Sirat-e-mustaqeem`` or the straight path. Pakistani government has taken an appreciable step to stop the groups of people who has wasted many lives only to get money for their benifit.

I have closely seen these groups and ``Jamats`` and Insha-Allah i shall write an Article in this topic, if accepted by Chowk.

re: harimau # 177

That is one point of interpretation.

Ciao

Ref ferozk #156

[Jinnah did set a bad precedent when he assumed the majority of sovereign authority if not sovereign power within his person after 1947. Pakistan`s legacy was the British parliamentary system and in such a system, the prime is the head of the government and the governor-general is the head of the state. At the time of partition, there was no politican in Pakistan who could stand up to Jinnah in terms of competence and persona need to lead Pakistan and even his prime minister, Liaquat Ali Khan, felt politically inferior to Jinnah.

Why Jinnah assumed and gave such an over arching role to the ceremonial position of governor-general is open to speculation. One reason might be that even though Pakistan in 1947 did have a constituent assembly, it did not have any sense of political institutionalism. Therefore, Jinnah might have felt a need to arrogate more powers to the office of governor-general to create the political institutions of Pakistan along the lines of the British parliamentary tradition of politics based on constitutionalism and rule of law.]

Excuse me for piping up but I think this is a fallacious argument. There were functioning legislative assemblies in East Bengal, Sindh, Punjab and NWFP; executive power was with the Premieres (Chief Ministers) of these provinces with the governor having over-ride powers, exactly like what we had in the presidencies of Madras, Bombay and (West) Bengal or in the provinces of Orissa, Assam, Bihar, Central Provinces, Northern Provinces or East Punjab in India. All of these provinces had inherited the British-Indian Constitution of 1935 and if they could function in India with Nehru as the Prime Minister, I really can`t see why it couldn`t have functioned in Pakistan with Jinnah as the Prime Minister. I think Jinnah was loathe to permit himself to bow ceremonially before a governor-general and chose to become an executive governor-general. He could very well have accepted the offer of Mountbatten to be the joint governor-general of both dominions (in which case, he couldn`t have pulled off the shenanigans in Hyderabad, Kashmir and Junagadh but then Pakistanis wouldn`t be able to accuse Mountbatten of partisanship either).

[The Government of India Act 1935, which was being used as Pakistan`s interim constitution, did give the governor-general the right to dismiss the parliament. Jinnah might not have opted for the position of the head of the government, that is of a prime minister, because he might not have wished his policies to be held hostage to a governor-general, with whom he might have developed political difference and chose the office of the governor-general to ensure that he held the ultimate power over the evolution of Pakistan`s political infrastructure.]

That fact didn`t prevent Nehru from being the Prime Minister under two governors-general, Mountbatten and Rajagopalachari, nor did it prevent him from functioning under the presidencies of Rajendra Prasad -- who actually attempted to test the limits of his powers and was firmly told by his constitutional advisors not to provoke a confrontation -- and Radhakrishnan. Even Fakhruddin Ali Ahmad as President meekly signed Indira Gandhi`s Internal Emergency proclamation rather than force a confrontation. It is all a question of people willing to put the law against their personal preferences. To this day, the powers of the President of India remain vague and untested. For instance, can the President dismiss the Prime Minister when the Prime Minister loses the majority in Parliament (due to changes in MPs` political affiliations but before a formal vote of no-confidence is taken) or can the President refuse to accept the Prime Minister`s advice that the Parliament be dissolved when the Prime Minister loses a vote of confidence on the basis that he no longer reflects the will of the majority of the Parliament and should the President then try to find an alternate Prime Minister from the current Parliament?

Ferzok,

Thanks for the response, chowk is a market place of ideas, and I have no intention to make friends or enemies here. Jay exists only on chowk, bashing a few pakis in the hsutle bustle and confusion of any chowk any where.

Regards

Jayaprakash.

re: Jay # 173

Contact me at ferozrafik@yahoo.com

Ciao

technology and shehdad,

There are several areas pakistan as a so called technologically advanced country according to tahmed can contribute to the ummah.
A jihadi seeks martyrdom, he wants to be killed in the process of killing others. Pakistanis with their computer prowess can develop a locator for the call of ``jihad``. When ever that word is uttered, the program should be able to identify the number of people shouting that from the voice pattern, assign an approp[riate weapon. It could be a daisy cutter for large crowds dropped from a UAV, or a precisely targetted gun mounted in the street corners.

This automated system can deliver shehdad to the millions of pakistanisscattered in the far corners of teh country.

Shehdad at the door step, nothing could be more appealing to the jihadis. Pakistan has to develop products to meet its own needs.

Ferzok, 171

It It is unhelpful, detrimental and for people like me utterly sickening to see the educated like you to talk about how poor pakistan was at the time of creation. Well the police service did not have a table to work on, so what did they do, they became corrupt, incompetant and became accomplices is crime. Is that what you are telling, is that the moral of the story.

This reminds me of my own child hood, at least the pak police had a wooden crate, we sat on the floor, walked for an hour to go to primary school,did not encounter electricity till I went to engineering college hostel, saved monety from the scholarship to help out my parents,....no the poverty and depravation did not create a pakistani being of today, 50 yeras later went on to become the head of propulsion system of the regulator of the third largest aviation country in the world.

Or you can take the case of my childhood friend and fellow sufferer who is one of the senior vicepresidents of the largest refinery in the world, Reliance.

Ferzok, it is people like you that extinguish the spark of hope in the poor and under previlaged of pakistan. It is people like you who look for excuses to pass on the buck and strifle self improvement. It is people like you who support the jihadis of pakistan by blaming it on poverty and the US actions in afghanistan. It is peole like you who prescribe what aothers shopuld do to improve pakistan rather making a small step in that direction.

Ferzok, be defiant, take a risk, make a small step, start a campaingn to rename the ``university avenuse`` on chowk as Salam avenue. No Ferzok no pakistani will ever dare to do that, that would be taking a smal action to state your beliefs in public, taht is exposing and affirming your true values, well your true values are no different from taht of Bhutto who introduced discrimination against the ahmadias, and hence you will not do that.

americans have well rounded educational curriculum.. as a result even the stripper at the health club can apreciated and use yoga to her advancement

re: rsridhar # 164

You are entirely welcome! :)

As your question, I cannot give you an answer simply, because I think that the real reasons are now buried with Jinnah and we can only speculate on his motives.

My own understanding is that Jinnah had a very low opinion of the capabilities of his fellow politicans and leaders of Pakistan and thought of them as mired in provincialism and not capable of rising out of their petty interest based politics. After partition, Jinnah lived for an additional eleven months and that is simply not enough time in politics to create a new political infrastructure for a new nation out of nothing. Pakistan of 1947 was a Pakistan, which most Pakistanis cannot even imagine.

Let me, as a way of illustrating my point, share what my late father used to tell me. My father joined the Police Service of Pakistan in 1949; two years after independence. He used to say that his office had no tables or chairs and for tables, he would use a wooden crate of mangoes and for chair, another crate. There was no paper to write reports or send instructions on, so he would use any scrap of paper he could find and there were no paper clips to use, so to bind papers and files he would use thorns.

The moral of the story is that Pakistan as an independent state existed only on paper. I think, and I fully realize that most people scoff at this suggestion, but Jinnah was too pre-occupied to ensure that Pakistan was able to survive the partition than worry about constitutionalism. In many ways, Pakistan was able to truly ``stand on its feet`` after it benefitted financially from the Korean War in the early 1950s by supplying jute (from East Pakistan) to the United Nations` forces in Korea. It is for this reason that the majority of the Pakistanis may detest the rule of Ayub Khan, but they always look back on the 1960s with nostalgia, because Ayub really provided them with the wherewithal of a national infrastructure.

I hope, this answer helps.

Ciao

re:#168 by jay
I agree with your view that criticism in the American press sometimes has a salutary effect on Indians. I had posted the case of an Indian who, stung by the criticism about Indian toilets by Jay Leno in his show, has helped build public toilets with modern facilities and has ushered in a kind of mini-revolution. I only wish that India`s image were not kilpinsque but that the American media showed some good aspects of India too. For eg: America borrows liberally from Indian spiritualism: its yoga, meditation etc and there are umpteen number of spiritual teachers coming here and teaching the ``spiritual wisdom of the East`` but few in the media acknowledge this aspect of India. There is a kind of arrogance here that comes out of being a rich and prosperous country. Perhaps thing will change as India grows in economic and political stature.
Sridhar

sridhar 165,

I am not worried about the so called negative images of india, they are truthful and publicuty in the west has a sobering effect on the indian elite. Many of the social changes in india have been hastned by the publicity in the west, and the Opra show on dowry is the best that has happened in recent years for the women to shun the dowry.

I have lived through the colonial mindset years in india where it was necessary to get the accolades abroad before any recognition is conferred in india. I have seen that a lot have changed in India in recent years. There was a time when any degree from any US university was considereed superior to anything indian, now it has to be ivy league, otherwise indian ones are considered better and suited to the local conditions.

All of the above is in stark contrast to what one sees in pakistan. A simple lass who refused marriage because of dowry, the indian elites made her into a heroine and was on Opers show. We value the principle of reinforcing the positive, while the ilks of tahmed and YLHs are bent on white washing of pakistan. For years the above two have maintained that honourkilling is not legal in pakistan, it is all due to corruption. When an article was on chowk regarding the legal sancity of honour killing, the two were notable absent as interacors.

I rather find it amazing that a few indians find some commonality with the pakistanis, as far I can see the educayed of pakistan are very very different from the indians in their values and approaches to social issues.

Sridhar,

As far as I know most of the indians are aware of the social situation in the US. If I remeber correctly, 1.5 percent of the population is in prisons. A total of 5 percent of the population is in the effective control of the criminal justice system, that is on parole, on good behaviour bonds, on the way to prison etc.

I remeber a few years ago listening to an economist from the US, citing the low un-employment rate in the US, may be it was 6 percent, I asked him about the 1 percent in prison, who are mostly of employabvle age. If you take this into account, the real unemployment in the US is more likely to be above 8 percent, assuming 40 percent of the population are potentially active job seekers..

re:#166 by Mantolives
Thanks for your post. I will surely try and get hold of the book you have suggested.
Sridhar