Rest in Peace Pakistan (1947-1974)
Yasser Latif Hamdani June 28, 2007
#1047 Posted by masadi on July 6, 2007 3:37:15 am
Pardesi writes <<< I wish USA was that powerful. It’s not anymore. Also Japan is not an exception. Look at Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea. They all developed with USA’s help and are doing just great. >>>
South Korea is US occupied and its significance viz a viz North Korea and China cannot be ignored, Taiwan and Singapore are ``bird fart`` countries if they can be described as ``countries``. Japan is definitely an anomaly as far as development and race goes...
South Korea is US occupied and its significance viz a viz North Korea and China cannot be ignored, Taiwan and Singapore are ``bird fart`` countries if they can be described as ``countries``. Japan is definitely an anomaly as far as development and race goes...
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#1046 Posted by zeemax on July 6, 2007 3:28:43 am
#1044 by PM,
I don`t know much about Al Muhajiroun`s ideology, except that they want to resurrect some form of a politically unified Caliphate.
As for the text in bold, only the following part is true.
Many Muslims may or may not agree with secularism but at the moment, formal Islamic theology, unlike Christian theology, does not allow for the separation of state and religion. There is no `rendering unto Caesar` in Islamic theology because state and religion are considered to be one and the same.
I don`t know much about Al Muhajiroun`s ideology, except that they want to resurrect some form of a politically unified Caliphate.
As for the text in bold, only the following part is true.
Many Muslims may or may not agree with secularism but at the moment, formal Islamic theology, unlike Christian theology, does not allow for the separation of state and religion. There is no `rendering unto Caesar` in Islamic theology because state and religion are considered to be one and the same.
#1045 Posted by PM on July 6, 2007 2:29:16 am
The following should be read in conjunction with the article posted in my previous interact.
(letter to editor, The News, Tue., 3 July)
Muslim traditions and western capitalisation
The News in its edition of June 22 published an article by Wasay Yahya titled ``European Development and Muslim Society``, which is interesting because of some categorical remarks, but not really helpful, because, when the writer concludes, that a ``modern, yet pragmatic approach … rooted in Muslim traditions`` is needed ``to cause a ripple in the oceans of western capitalisation``, he doesn`t elaborate any further. After having strongly confronted ``the loss of spirituality in western life``, which according to him is the price for change, with Muslim morality and tradition, standing ``intact, regardless of time``, the reader feels a little lost with a mere reference to ``the spirit of a progressive Muslim backlash``.
The old, also very much European question, whether the agent of so called progress and development is not the devil himself, is enshrined in the ancient story of Doctor Faustus, which in the 19th century, much to the later admiration of Muhammed Iqbal, was given its most classical form in the drama ``Faust`` by the great German poet and writer Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. Faust enters a pact with the devil to satisfy his lust for novelty, but at the end he is saved by God, since He created the human being as essentially striving and searching for ever more knowledge and discovery. Striving and searching not only for inner perfection, but also outgoing, trying to responsibly explain the world and use its riches and means, have their own dignity and spirituality. Particularly religious men and women believe in one world, in the name of the truth conferred on us, and we have to interpret and recognise our different ways and approaches in the perspective of this oneness of the world, not letting antagonisms take the lead.
Recognising the oneness of the world, what matters is not so much our different interpretations of the world, but our contributions, resulting out of our faiths and beliefs, for the safeguard of the world and for the better respect of its foundations. This has to be discussed, and power without responsibility has to be questioned. Specific Muslim contributions are not only welcome, they are expected, also in Europe, where the debate about the right economical and social order these days is gaining importance with the active participation of the Christian churches and hopefully also of other religious communities. If there are ``oceans of western capitalisation`` dominating the world, they must indeed be ``rippled``; they could also be drained and transformed into fertile land, as Faust is doing in the last part of Goethe`s drama.
Hans-Joachim Kiderlen
Consul General of Germany
Karachi
(letter to editor, The News, Tue., 3 July)
Muslim traditions and western capitalisation
The News in its edition of June 22 published an article by Wasay Yahya titled ``European Development and Muslim Society``, which is interesting because of some categorical remarks, but not really helpful, because, when the writer concludes, that a ``modern, yet pragmatic approach … rooted in Muslim traditions`` is needed ``to cause a ripple in the oceans of western capitalisation``, he doesn`t elaborate any further. After having strongly confronted ``the loss of spirituality in western life``, which according to him is the price for change, with Muslim morality and tradition, standing ``intact, regardless of time``, the reader feels a little lost with a mere reference to ``the spirit of a progressive Muslim backlash``.
The old, also very much European question, whether the agent of so called progress and development is not the devil himself, is enshrined in the ancient story of Doctor Faustus, which in the 19th century, much to the later admiration of Muhammed Iqbal, was given its most classical form in the drama ``Faust`` by the great German poet and writer Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. Faust enters a pact with the devil to satisfy his lust for novelty, but at the end he is saved by God, since He created the human being as essentially striving and searching for ever more knowledge and discovery. Striving and searching not only for inner perfection, but also outgoing, trying to responsibly explain the world and use its riches and means, have their own dignity and spirituality. Particularly religious men and women believe in one world, in the name of the truth conferred on us, and we have to interpret and recognise our different ways and approaches in the perspective of this oneness of the world, not letting antagonisms take the lead.
Recognising the oneness of the world, what matters is not so much our different interpretations of the world, but our contributions, resulting out of our faiths and beliefs, for the safeguard of the world and for the better respect of its foundations. This has to be discussed, and power without responsibility has to be questioned. Specific Muslim contributions are not only welcome, they are expected, also in Europe, where the debate about the right economical and social order these days is gaining importance with the active participation of the Christian churches and hopefully also of other religious communities. If there are ``oceans of western capitalisation`` dominating the world, they must indeed be ``rippled``; they could also be drained and transformed into fertile land, as Faust is doing in the last part of Goethe`s drama.
Hans-Joachim Kiderlen
Consul General of Germany
Karachi
#1044 Posted by PM on July 6, 2007 2:26:11 am
Of some relevance, perhaps, to the topic at hand (with passages of particular relevance to Zeemax in bold.)
The fight against terrorism
By Hassan Butt
http://thenews.jang.com.pk/arc_news.asp?id=9
The writer is a former member of the radical group Al Muhajiroun which in the past has raised funds for extremists and called for attacks on British citizens.
When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network, a series of semi-autonomous British Muslim terrorist groups linked by a single ideology, I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was western foreign policy.
By blaming the government for our actions, those who pushed the `Blair`s bombs` line did our propaganda work for us. More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology. Friday`s attempt to cause mass destruction in London with strategically placed car bombs is so reminiscent of other recent British Islamic extremist plots that it is likely to have been carried out by my former peers.
And as with previous terror attacks, people are again articulating the line that violence carried out by Muslims is all to do with foreign policy. For example, on Sunday on Radio 4`s Today programme, the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said: ``What all our intelligence shows about the opinions of disaffected young Muslims is the main driving force is not Afghanistan, it is mainly Iraq.``
He then refused to acknowledge the role of Islamist ideology in terrorism and said that the Muslim Brotherhood and those who give a religious mandate to suicide bombings in Palestine were genuinely representative of Islam.
I left the BJN in February 2006, but if I were still fighting for their cause, I`d be laughing once again. Mohammad Sidique Khan, the leader of the July 7 bombings, and I were both part of the BJN -- I met him on two occasions -- and though many British extremists are angered by the deaths of fellow Muslim across the world, what drove me and many of my peers to plot acts of extreme terror within Britain, our own homeland and abroad, was a sense that we were fighting for the creation of a revolutionary state that would eventually bring Islamic justice to the world.
How did this continuing violence come to be the means of promoting this (flawed) utopian goal? How do Islamic radicals justify such terror in the name of their religion? There isn`t enough room to outline everything here, but the foundation of extremist reasoning rests upon a dualistic model of the world.
Many Muslims may or may not agree with secularism but at the moment, formal Islamic theology, unlike Christian theology, does not allow for the separation of state and religion. There is no `rendering unto Caesar` in Islamic theology because state and religion are considered to be one and the same. The centuries-old reasoning of Islamic jurists also extends to the world stage where the rules of interaction between Dar ul-Islam (the Land of Islam) and Dar ul-Kufr (the Land of Unbelief) have been set down to cover almost every matter of trade, peace and war.
What radicals and extremists do is to take these premises two steps further. Their first step has been to reason that since there is no Islamic state in existence, the whole world must be Dar ul-Kufr. Step two: since Islam must declare war on unbelief, they have declared war upon the whole world. Many of my former peers, myself included, were taught by Pakistani and British radical preachers that this reclassification of the globe as a Land of War (Dar ul-Harb) allows any Muslim to destroy the sanctity of the five rights that every human is granted under Islam: life, wealth, land, mind and belief. In Dar ul-Harb, anything goes, including the treachery and cowardice of attacking civilians.
This understanding of the global battlefield has been a source of friction for Muslims living in Britain. For decades, radicals have been exploiting these tensions between Islamic theology and the modern secular state for their benefit, typically by starting debate with the question: ``Are you British or you Muslim?`` But the main reason why radicals have managed to increase their following is because most Islamic institutions in Britain just don`t want to talk about theology. They refuse to broach the difficult and often complex topic of violence within Islam and instead repeat the mantra that Islam is peace, focus on Islam as personal, and hope that all of this debate will go away.
This has left the territory of ideas open for radicals to claim as their own. I should know because, as a former extremist recruiter, every time mosque authorities banned us from their grounds, it felt like a moral and religious victory.
Outside Britain, there are those who try to reverse this two-step revisionism. A handful of scholars from the Middle East has tried to put radicalism back in the box by saying that the rules of war devised by Islamic jurists were always conceived with the existence of an Islamic state in mind, a state which would supposedly regulate jihad in a responsible Islamic fashion. In other words, individual Muslims don`t have the authority to go around declaring global war in the name of Islam.
But there is a more fundamental reasoning that has struck me and a number of other people who have recently left radical Islamic networks as a far more potent argument because it involves stepping out of this dogmatic paradigm and recognising the reality of the world: Muslims don`t actually live in the bipolar world of the Middle Ages any more.
The fact is that Muslims in Britain are citizens of this country. We are no longer migrants in a Land of Unbelief. For my generation, we were born here, raised here, schooled here, we work here and we`ll stay here. But more than that, on a historically unprecedented scale, Muslims in Britain have been allowed to assert their religious identity through clothing, the construction of mosques, the building of cemeteries and equal rights in law.
However, it isn`t enough for Muslims to say that because they feel at home in Britain they can simply ignore those passages of the Koran which instruct on killing unbelievers. By refusing to challenge centuries-old theological arguments, the tensions between Islamic theology and the modern world grow larger every day. It may be difficult to swallow but the reason why Abu Qatada -- the Islamic scholar whom Palestinian militants recently called to be released in exchange for the kidnapped BBC journalist Alan Johnston -- has a following is because he is extremely learned and his religious rulings are well argued. His opinions, though I now thoroughly disagree with them, have validity within the broad canon of Islam.
Since leaving the BJN, many Muslims have accused me of being a traitor. If I knew of any impending attack, then I would have no hesitation in going to the police, but I have not gone to the authorities, as some reports have suggested, and become an informer.
I believe that the issue of terrorism can be easily demystified if Muslims and non-Muslims start openly to discuss the ideas that fuel terrorism. (The Muslim community in Britain must slap itself awake from this state of denial and realise there is no shame in admitting the extremism within our families, communities and worldwide co-religionists.) However, demystification will not be achieved if the only bridges of engagement that are formed are between the BJN and the security services.
If Britain and others are going to take on radicals and violent extremists, Muslim scholars must go back to the books and come forward with a refashioned set of rules and a revised understanding of the rights and responsibilities of Muslims whose homes and souls are firmly planted in what I`d like to term the Land of Co-existence.
And when this new theological territory is opened up, Muslims in the west will be able to liberate themselves from defunct models of the world, rewrite the rules of interaction and perhaps we will discover that the concept of killing in the name of Islam is no more than an anachronism.
Courtesy: The Observer
Email: hassanbutt1@gmail.com.
The fight against terrorism
By Hassan Butt
http://thenews.jang.com.pk/arc_news.asp?id=9
The writer is a former member of the radical group Al Muhajiroun which in the past has raised funds for extremists and called for attacks on British citizens.
When I was still a member of what is probably best termed the British Jihadi Network, a series of semi-autonomous British Muslim terrorist groups linked by a single ideology, I remember how we used to laugh in celebration whenever people on TV proclaimed that the sole cause for Islamic acts of terror like 9/11, the Madrid bombings and 7/7 was western foreign policy.
By blaming the government for our actions, those who pushed the `Blair`s bombs` line did our propaganda work for us. More important, they also helped to draw away any critical examination from the real engine of our violence: Islamic theology. Friday`s attempt to cause mass destruction in London with strategically placed car bombs is so reminiscent of other recent British Islamic extremist plots that it is likely to have been carried out by my former peers.
And as with previous terror attacks, people are again articulating the line that violence carried out by Muslims is all to do with foreign policy. For example, on Sunday on Radio 4`s Today programme, the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, said: ``What all our intelligence shows about the opinions of disaffected young Muslims is the main driving force is not Afghanistan, it is mainly Iraq.``
He then refused to acknowledge the role of Islamist ideology in terrorism and said that the Muslim Brotherhood and those who give a religious mandate to suicide bombings in Palestine were genuinely representative of Islam.
I left the BJN in February 2006, but if I were still fighting for their cause, I`d be laughing once again. Mohammad Sidique Khan, the leader of the July 7 bombings, and I were both part of the BJN -- I met him on two occasions -- and though many British extremists are angered by the deaths of fellow Muslim across the world, what drove me and many of my peers to plot acts of extreme terror within Britain, our own homeland and abroad, was a sense that we were fighting for the creation of a revolutionary state that would eventually bring Islamic justice to the world.
How did this continuing violence come to be the means of promoting this (flawed) utopian goal? How do Islamic radicals justify such terror in the name of their religion? There isn`t enough room to outline everything here, but the foundation of extremist reasoning rests upon a dualistic model of the world.
Many Muslims may or may not agree with secularism but at the moment, formal Islamic theology, unlike Christian theology, does not allow for the separation of state and religion. There is no `rendering unto Caesar` in Islamic theology because state and religion are considered to be one and the same. The centuries-old reasoning of Islamic jurists also extends to the world stage where the rules of interaction between Dar ul-Islam (the Land of Islam) and Dar ul-Kufr (the Land of Unbelief) have been set down to cover almost every matter of trade, peace and war.
What radicals and extremists do is to take these premises two steps further. Their first step has been to reason that since there is no Islamic state in existence, the whole world must be Dar ul-Kufr. Step two: since Islam must declare war on unbelief, they have declared war upon the whole world. Many of my former peers, myself included, were taught by Pakistani and British radical preachers that this reclassification of the globe as a Land of War (Dar ul-Harb) allows any Muslim to destroy the sanctity of the five rights that every human is granted under Islam: life, wealth, land, mind and belief. In Dar ul-Harb, anything goes, including the treachery and cowardice of attacking civilians.
This understanding of the global battlefield has been a source of friction for Muslims living in Britain. For decades, radicals have been exploiting these tensions between Islamic theology and the modern secular state for their benefit, typically by starting debate with the question: ``Are you British or you Muslim?`` But the main reason why radicals have managed to increase their following is because most Islamic institutions in Britain just don`t want to talk about theology. They refuse to broach the difficult and often complex topic of violence within Islam and instead repeat the mantra that Islam is peace, focus on Islam as personal, and hope that all of this debate will go away.
This has left the territory of ideas open for radicals to claim as their own. I should know because, as a former extremist recruiter, every time mosque authorities banned us from their grounds, it felt like a moral and religious victory.
Outside Britain, there are those who try to reverse this two-step revisionism. A handful of scholars from the Middle East has tried to put radicalism back in the box by saying that the rules of war devised by Islamic jurists were always conceived with the existence of an Islamic state in mind, a state which would supposedly regulate jihad in a responsible Islamic fashion. In other words, individual Muslims don`t have the authority to go around declaring global war in the name of Islam.
But there is a more fundamental reasoning that has struck me and a number of other people who have recently left radical Islamic networks as a far more potent argument because it involves stepping out of this dogmatic paradigm and recognising the reality of the world: Muslims don`t actually live in the bipolar world of the Middle Ages any more.
The fact is that Muslims in Britain are citizens of this country. We are no longer migrants in a Land of Unbelief. For my generation, we were born here, raised here, schooled here, we work here and we`ll stay here. But more than that, on a historically unprecedented scale, Muslims in Britain have been allowed to assert their religious identity through clothing, the construction of mosques, the building of cemeteries and equal rights in law.
However, it isn`t enough for Muslims to say that because they feel at home in Britain they can simply ignore those passages of the Koran which instruct on killing unbelievers. By refusing to challenge centuries-old theological arguments, the tensions between Islamic theology and the modern world grow larger every day. It may be difficult to swallow but the reason why Abu Qatada -- the Islamic scholar whom Palestinian militants recently called to be released in exchange for the kidnapped BBC journalist Alan Johnston -- has a following is because he is extremely learned and his religious rulings are well argued. His opinions, though I now thoroughly disagree with them, have validity within the broad canon of Islam.
Since leaving the BJN, many Muslims have accused me of being a traitor. If I knew of any impending attack, then I would have no hesitation in going to the police, but I have not gone to the authorities, as some reports have suggested, and become an informer.
I believe that the issue of terrorism can be easily demystified if Muslims and non-Muslims start openly to discuss the ideas that fuel terrorism. (The Muslim community in Britain must slap itself awake from this state of denial and realise there is no shame in admitting the extremism within our families, communities and worldwide co-religionists.) However, demystification will not be achieved if the only bridges of engagement that are formed are between the BJN and the security services.
If Britain and others are going to take on radicals and violent extremists, Muslim scholars must go back to the books and come forward with a refashioned set of rules and a revised understanding of the rights and responsibilities of Muslims whose homes and souls are firmly planted in what I`d like to term the Land of Co-existence.
And when this new theological territory is opened up, Muslims in the west will be able to liberate themselves from defunct models of the world, rewrite the rules of interaction and perhaps we will discover that the concept of killing in the name of Islam is no more than an anachronism.
Courtesy: The Observer
Email: hassanbutt1@gmail.com.
#1043 Posted by jayp on July 6, 2007 1:50:02 am
MULLA AND THE BURKHA
It is really pathetic to see the educated Pakistanis trying to pour scorn on the Mullah of La Majid for coming out in a Burkha. In fact the mullah represents the most progressive of the Pakistanis, he believes in unisex clothing. If the women in the west can wear mens cloths, the ubiquitous pants and shirt, why not a progressive Pakistani muslim leader wear womens clothes.
I congratulate the mullah, he is an example for the male- shounist orthodox - regressive Pakistanis, the so called educated ones on the chowk.
Liberated men across the world are cheering the mullah.
It is really pathetic to see the educated Pakistanis trying to pour scorn on the Mullah of La Majid for coming out in a Burkha. In fact the mullah represents the most progressive of the Pakistanis, he believes in unisex clothing. If the women in the west can wear mens cloths, the ubiquitous pants and shirt, why not a progressive Pakistani muslim leader wear womens clothes.
I congratulate the mullah, he is an example for the male- shounist orthodox - regressive Pakistanis, the so called educated ones on the chowk.
Liberated men across the world are cheering the mullah.
#1042 Posted by harish_hyd on July 6, 2007 12:37:36 am
#1041 by zeemax
Hindus believe in 3 crore gods (don`t ask me their names, I don`t know them)..monkey, snake, elephant, cow, dog, just about anything you can think of. You can freely insult them as you please, and no one will kill you for that :-)
Hindus believe in 3 crore gods (don`t ask me their names, I don`t know them)..monkey, snake, elephant, cow, dog, just about anything you can think of. You can freely insult them as you please, and no one will kill you for that :-)
#1041 Posted by zeemax on July 6, 2007 12:07:39 am
#1040 by mohar11,
....after all the insults I did your prophet..that`s best you can do - show up a monkey?
You aren`t offended? But I thought the monkey was your prophet, god, everything ... :)
Oh well ... I`ll try something else next time .. Hmmm :~)
....after all the insults I did your prophet..that`s best you can do - show up a monkey?
You aren`t offended? But I thought the monkey was your prophet, god, everything ... :)
Oh well ... I`ll try something else next time .. Hmmm :~)
#1040 Posted by mohar11 on July 5, 2007 4:34:20 pm
Re: # 1007 zee
That`s your best comeback? after all the insults I did your prophet - that`s best you can do - show up a monkey?... :) come on man - fight it... don`t hide behind a monkey suit or burkha like your mullah hero in islamabad...
That`s your best comeback? after all the insults I did your prophet - that`s best you can do - show up a monkey?... :) come on man - fight it... don`t hide behind a monkey suit or burkha like your mullah hero in islamabad...
#1039 Posted by Folio on July 5, 2007 4:33:06 pm
#1033 by aquaris on July 5, 2007 9:43am PT
Do u have an idea of how the Maulana is carrying lipstick. Cudnt this be the propaganda of the Mush govt?
Lal Masjid, JF and JH are puritanical insitutions. Girls` faces are not even seen by anybody. Why does they keep lipsticks in Jamia Hafsa?
I strongly feel that govt planted this in media.
Do u have an idea of how the Maulana is carrying lipstick. Cudnt this be the propaganda of the Mush govt?
Lal Masjid, JF and JH are puritanical insitutions. Girls` faces are not even seen by anybody. Why does they keep lipsticks in Jamia Hafsa?
I strongly feel that govt planted this in media.
#1038 Posted by zensufi on July 5, 2007 4:02:11 pm
Hallo - nicely written! I love history stories. Don`t know much about Ahmadis, but even the Christians, Parsis, and Hindus are treated unjustly in Pakistan. Whose ridiculous idea was it to state a person`s religion on the National ID Card and/or Passport? I think it is an impediment for a Pakistani non-muslim trying to get a job in Pakistan.
-zensufi-
-zensufi-
#1037 Posted by tahmed32 on July 5, 2007 11:21:40 am
#1036 Masadi the Intellectual Giant: the US elite engineered this second crisis, using their occupation force in Pakistan, to punish their out of favor peon, Musharraf...
hmmm....I think this is the same burqa Michael Jackson was wearing. Michael Jackson is USA elite, lends burqa to mullah ghazi. I can see it all now!!
Brilliant. Masadi exposes another International Conspiracy.
hmmm....I think this is the same burqa Michael Jackson was wearing. Michael Jackson is USA elite, lends burqa to mullah ghazi. I can see it all now!!
Brilliant. Masadi exposes another International Conspiracy.
#1036 Posted by masadi on July 5, 2007 10:39:44 am
Lal Masjid situation internal security matter of Pakistan: State Department
WASHINGTON, July 3 (APP): The United States on Tuesday described the situation with regard to Red Mosque (Lal Masjid) in Islamabad as “internal security matter” of Pakistan.
“This is an internal security matter of the government of Pakistan—we continue to monitor reports and seek to verify
My question: since when has the mullah`s rampage inside Pakistan, involving a group listed on the US terrorist list become for those that have ranted and raved about such and violate Pakistani borders on demand, an ``internal security matter`` of Pakistan, about which the US has no comments and about which their media has remained largely silent. Also quite noteworthy are the absence of calls from the US to Musharraf on this, even though the British PM called to congratulate his ``efforts``. All these fit very plausibly under my thesis that the US elite engineered this second crisis, using their occupation force in Pakistan, to punish their out of favor peon, Musharraf...
WASHINGTON, July 3 (APP): The United States on Tuesday described the situation with regard to Red Mosque (Lal Masjid) in Islamabad as “internal security matter” of Pakistan.
“This is an internal security matter of the government of Pakistan—we continue to monitor reports and seek to verify
My question: since when has the mullah`s rampage inside Pakistan, involving a group listed on the US terrorist list become for those that have ranted and raved about such and violate Pakistani borders on demand, an ``internal security matter`` of Pakistan, about which the US has no comments and about which their media has remained largely silent. Also quite noteworthy are the absence of calls from the US to Musharraf on this, even though the British PM called to congratulate his ``efforts``. All these fit very plausibly under my thesis that the US elite engineered this second crisis, using their occupation force in Pakistan, to punish their out of favor peon, Musharraf...
#1035 Posted by zeemax on July 5, 2007 10:05:35 am
... the issue is now no longer taboo. It is in the living rooms.
#1034 Posted by zeemax on July 5, 2007 10:03:04 am
#1033 by aquaris,
Look, for whatever reason he came out, it is certain he wasn`t escaping. He looked confident enough and actually smiling when he was being seated in the police car, neither was he ruffled by that rude interview on PTV. Besides, he left his wife inside (who would be free under the terms of amnesty anyway) but was surrounded by 60 girls in an overall group of over 250.
Anyway, whichever way it turns out, the issue is now longer taboo. It is in the living rooms.
Look, for whatever reason he came out, it is certain he wasn`t escaping. He looked confident enough and actually smiling when he was being seated in the police car, neither was he ruffled by that rude interview on PTV. Besides, he left his wife inside (who would be free under the terms of amnesty anyway) but was surrounded by 60 girls in an overall group of over 250.
Anyway, whichever way it turns out, the issue is now longer taboo. It is in the living rooms.
#1033 Posted by aquaris on July 5, 2007 9:43:22 am
There is another view, though unsubstantiated.
This Molvi was asked to come out for negotiation with some one very important ,
he was adviced to use discretion and he choose `` Burqa `` so that he could come out and have talk with that Important Person.
these Molvis are really Naive, or simpleton, fell in the TRAP.
...as Unfortunately , some one extra efficient at the gates , made it an embarrassment.....!!
Question remains ,....was it delibrate , or unintentional.....??
but by the look of things , it appears delibrate, as they FORCED him again to WEAR that BURQA ....for the PTV Interview....!!
......There are other Damaging and Embarracing Rumours, mostly through SMS , that the MOLVI ` peed `in the Burqa when Caught.....
these too are unsubstantiated.
#1032 Posted by philosopher on July 5, 2007 9:19:19 am
#1031 by echoboom on July 5, 2007 9:03am PT
(((((((The maulana masjid vs the Military Murtadoon
It wasn`t too long ago, or maybe it is far too long now, that the Cantonment Kutta while in active service hijacked a passenger plane of a country & people he was paid to serve & protect.
What a selective memory these Allah-&_Muhammed hating Murtadoons the tweedledee32 & tweedledum2 have (My Allah strike his LaanUts & Azaab on them)
That time the whole country was his white-masjid & he is stll holed up there keeping the whole nation hostage.
Terrorism is terrorism , no matter what the camouflage....the tragedy is that the maulana had to resort to use a burqua ( an eloquent commentary on the kanjar ``value`` system of the westoxicated scum) but the US-sponsored armed tkuttaas are still prowling the streets & at gun point refusing to let the nation take off the military-burqua because the US-thuGGs at their broke-backs are revving their greased cylinders.
The incident, by all analysyst, was primed to be used at the ``right`` moment. When Justice Khaleel Ramday rebuked & made the State Attorney public eat crow & made them pay a fine & when the movement against the nation-looter was on the front pages of newspapers around the world suddenly a tactic was employed to produce this ``naranGi`` ( thank you saadat Hasan Manto).
It really doesn`t matter if the Maulanaas method was right or wrong. The fact is that the Kuttaas from the Cantonments & Colony Kennels are still ruling over the people who hate the west from the inner-most recesses of their minds..and they are in majority not just in Pakistan but all over the world.
It just happens that their arsenal to ream the westoxicated arses has yet to gather critical mass.........and InshaAllah, that day is not far when Pakistan will be liberated from the talons of the Kalloo-goraaas.))))))
Inshallah
(((((((The maulana masjid vs the Military Murtadoon
It wasn`t too long ago, or maybe it is far too long now, that the Cantonment Kutta while in active service hijacked a passenger plane of a country & people he was paid to serve & protect.
What a selective memory these Allah-&_Muhammed hating Murtadoons the tweedledee32 & tweedledum2 have (My Allah strike his LaanUts & Azaab on them)
That time the whole country was his white-masjid & he is stll holed up there keeping the whole nation hostage.
Terrorism is terrorism , no matter what the camouflage....the tragedy is that the maulana had to resort to use a burqua ( an eloquent commentary on the kanjar ``value`` system of the westoxicated scum) but the US-sponsored armed tkuttaas are still prowling the streets & at gun point refusing to let the nation take off the military-burqua because the US-thuGGs at their broke-backs are revving their greased cylinders.
The incident, by all analysyst, was primed to be used at the ``right`` moment. When Justice Khaleel Ramday rebuked & made the State Attorney public eat crow & made them pay a fine & when the movement against the nation-looter was on the front pages of newspapers around the world suddenly a tactic was employed to produce this ``naranGi`` ( thank you saadat Hasan Manto).
It really doesn`t matter if the Maulanaas method was right or wrong. The fact is that the Kuttaas from the Cantonments & Colony Kennels are still ruling over the people who hate the west from the inner-most recesses of their minds..and they are in majority not just in Pakistan but all over the world.
It just happens that their arsenal to ream the westoxicated arses has yet to gather critical mass.........and InshaAllah, that day is not far when Pakistan will be liberated from the talons of the Kalloo-goraaas.))))))
Inshallah