Preventing More Lal Masjids

Very interesting ... the MMA member NA is referring to Abdul Rashid Ghazi as Abdul Ghazi Shaheed Rahmat`ullah Alaih on the Hamid Mir show on GEO, and Ejaz-Ul-Haq actually wept in his remembrance on live TV with tears flowing down his cheeks.

Echo was right on the other board. Abdul Rashid has already become an icon.

``are now killing you``

Well quite clearly this is too optimistic from an Indian angle.

#7 by echoboom,

Echoboom reply to this. Are you in or out?

#13 by hamidm2,

It appears not all agree with your opinion. See GT`s post below.

Re: # 6

chowk staff,

..... please leave echoboom out to play - #6 was a nice post ......... in his place please lock up maddening mad masadi .....

#16 by Mantolives on July 10, 2007 11:30am PT


the jihadis killed 800+ of your soldiers and forced you to retreat from the tribal areas..hence the need for the CIA hellfires to do the needful...

this is a fact...reality isn`t optimistic or pessimistic...

his karma index is still 0 which means he is banned...chowk stafff is lurking, modding up his posts...

Re: # 1

this is what was missed? name calling?

Dr. Hoodbhoy:

If you are speaking from the idealistic POV, then Pakistan will need to change its Constitution. If it is practical considerations (poverty, illiteracy), then even if you wipe out all the madrassas, will the mindset change? You yourself mention the failure of BB and NS to bring about change.

[Imperial America’s policies in the Muslim world are usually held to blame. But its brutalities elsewhere have been far greater. In tiny Vietnam, the Americans had killed more than one million people. Nevertheless, the Vietnamese did not invest in explosive vests and belts. Today if one could wipe America off the map of the world with a wet cloth, mullah-led fanaticism will not disappear.]

This is a disingenuous comparison. Vietnam was not being used the way Pakistan is by the US, which is not a new phenomenon. It isn`t ``imperial America`s policies`` but crusading American policies that have exacerbated the problems. However, the Pakistan problem has essentially to do with prudence, unlike Afghanistan or Iraq or Iran. The mullahs of the Lal Masjid were fighting the Establishment within. Activists do it for different reasons. So, we are talking about ideology, more specifically the ideologies of disparate groups.

Pakistani fanaticism can most certainly not be seen as perfectly representative of Islamic fundamentalism, which has at its very basis an anti-colonial stance.

[The government’s madrassa reform program has fallen flat on its face, and future efforts will do no better. It was absurd to have assumed that introducing computers or teaching English could have transformed the character of madrassa education away from brain-washing and rote memorization towards logical behaviour and critical thinking. Did the adeptness with which Lal Masjid managed its website really bring it into the 21st century? Madrassas are religious institutions; they cannot be changed into normal schools. It is time to give up wasting money and effort in attempting to reform them and, instead, to radically improve the public education system and make it a viable alternative.]

Change is usually slow. Knowledge of English (despite skewed and bad spelling) has not altered the face of American `fundamentalism`, which is essentially xenophobic. What you call normal schools may equip people with a scientific knowledge but not a scientific temperament. The best bombs are not crude bombs. And then we do have doctors at work, too.

There is a resurgence of fanatical forces in all religious streams of thought. Blair is getting to be in love with catholicism, Hinduism has found its ancient heritage delectable enough to eat, and the Dalai Lama too is giving speeches that don`t sound sweet.

The Lal Masjid situation is only one of Pakistan`s hiccups.

Re: # 19

I agree with you... arjun2 ko rooti dalney wala koyee to hoona chaheyae :)

There are conflicting reports abt the death of Maulana Ghazi. The last talk of Maulana Ghazi with Geo TV indicates that he`s killed by the secutity forces but not by the militants.

>>>A bullet had hit in a leg of Ghazi during gunfire and he was also asked to surrender after he was injured but he refused and was ultimately killed, some sources said.

Mr. Ghazi was killed in firing by some militants who were hiding along with him when he came out of a bunker and was heading to surrender, the other reports said.

Meanwhile, Interior Secretary Syed Kamal Shah has confirmed that the deputy chief of Lal mosque Abdul Rasheed Ghazi was killed in operation silence lunched against the militants holed up in the Lal mosque.

Ghazi was killed in a bunker as a result of cross firing during the operation silence, he said while talking to Gen News.

(http://thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=25725)
<<<

Going by the YouTube videos and several TV interviews of Ghazi it`s clear that he`s a cool customer with little emotions BUT stuck to his inflexibility when it mattered.

It`s also apparant that he`s staying in the company of children and women inorder to prevent the forces that are on prowl to attack him.

The purported `last ditch attempt` by the Govt to have muzakaraat with Ghazi is a ploy to locate him in the huge complex of Lal Masjid. As for what Tariq Azim said abt having talks with him and the reported despatch of mobiles to him for that purpose is a technical method to locate him pinpointedly. It`s immediatley after this location of Ghazi, the security forces made their attack and got him killed.

Re: # 12

Rahul,

Thanks. It seems that echo is out. So here I go again.

You see the problem with us liberals is that we are so comfortably arrogant that we do not even care to understand what the other side is saying. Take the earlier JH article for example. The author arrogantly brushes aside the JH womens` claim about Adam Smith. Why did the author not contend the claims? If not to the JH women then atleast in her article in chowk! I have a feeling, and I may be wrong, that the author felt that most of us here in chowk would laugh at those claims. But even here, how can we laugh? We are not even aware of the details of the arguement against Smith. I just feel sad.

We also trivialize history. Urstruly put forth a picture from 1857. I have a feeling he is not very well read about 1857. The `mutineers` almost won! Jihad was declared from the jama-masjid and 60% (if not more) of the army was Hindu. The British were listening very carefully, they had spies all over Delhi. Almost every day they thought of retreating so they took the message comming out of Delhi very seriously. Finally. the lack of organization and the bombastic `jihadi` rituals of charging head-long into the cannons on the ridge lead to defeat. This `jihadi` ritual was repeated again by the Lal-masjid group, BUT with a difference. This time the `jihadis` in our sub-continent were watching, listening and learning very very carefully. I am sad to say that I believe that the liberals are not even listening.

[This is a disingenuous comparison. Vietnam was not being used the way Pakistan is by the US, which is not a new phenomenon. It isn`t ``imperial America`s policies`` but crusading American policies that have exacerbated the problems. However, the Pakistan problem has essentially to do with prudence, unlike Afghanistan or Iraq or Iran. The mullahs of the Lal Masjid were fighting the Establishment within. Activists do it for different reasons. So, we are talking about ideology, more specifically the ideologies of disparate groups.

Pakistani fanaticism can most certainly not be seen as perfectly representative of Islamic fundamentalism, which has at its very basis an anti-colonial stance.]

I don`t know about others but I did not at all get this.

In place of Vietnam, one could include almost all of South America, which the US has been running as its fiefdom for decades. And Philippines had been a real American colony for a long time. Their response too has been different from that of Islamic world.

It seems internal ideology is an important factor. Is that what you meant by ``ideologies of disparate groups``?

Today, Pakistani nation has achieved its first milestone towards its freedom from the oppression of British colonial proxy ruling class and agents of neo-colonialism. This is a milestone because it has effectively drawn the separating line between two Pakistans - the opppressors and the oppressed. There remains no blurr now; no grey zone. This is the first absolute step towards revolution when people start seeing clearly - their objectives, their enemies, and their goals.

Na Pak fouj has a sepcial knack for initiating revolutions. The independence movement in East pakistan only reached at a point of no return when Na Pak fouj massacred students and teachers of Dhakka University on the fateful day of March 25, 1971. In recent past several months Na Pak faouj attacked many schools in the remaining terrotries of Pakistan and killed hundereds. Jamiah Hafsa and Lal Masjid are the point of no return for remaining Pakistan.

The similarity in rhetoric and attitude of ruling elite class is just uncanny between now and that in 1971. ``Kaalay``, ``Chotay``, and ``Miskeen`` Bengali has now been replaced by ``Dharee Waalay``, ``shlawaron walay``, and ``halva khor``. This is the begining of the end of the occupation of Pakistan by Na Pak fouj.

#22 by neembu on July 10, 2007 11:47am PT


this is what was missed? name calling?


boom`s name calling is more witty, more intelligent and makes more sense than any argument you have presented...ever....

#28 by Urstruly on July 10, 2007 12:11pm PT


Today, Pakistani nation has achieved its first milestone towards its freedom


dude...there`s no milestone..only the gazi guy`s headstone...guess what`ll happen next: mushy will crown himself king for 5 more years..which is cool because that`s what amrika wants..a president and COAS who STFUs when the hellfires rain on the parents of the ninja chix back in the tribal areas...

told you so....