Kargil and the Myth of Losing the Media War

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

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

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

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

In response to Ali (Reply #: 122):

Dear Ali:

Your statement: ``bahmad, me and my family have never had the misfortune of living in India.``

Comment: In this case, you perhaps need to go to India and observe yourself the richness and beauty (and even ugliness) of this great country of one billion people. Remember the forefathers of all Pakistanis were once loyal citizens of this country that you seem to hate so much. You indeed are entitled to form any opinion, but often the expression of such opinions lead to unnecessary and unfair consequences. This is what the spirit of Islam asks us to avoid.

Good luck, Bilal Ahmad

bahmad, me and my family have never had the misfortune of living in India

Ali

In response to Ali (Reply #: 120):

I am not really interested in other people`s religious beliefs, I am concerned with my own. I am sorry I cannot accept your invitation for a drink, but you are most welcome to come to my home and we can enjoy excellent Pakistani food. I am not joking!

My call for developing better relations between India and Pakistan, in general, and Hindus and Muslims, in particular, is the need of our times. It is a wise course for the people of both countries. I don`t know anything about your life experiences. But, it seems that you and/or your family members had some bad experiences in India. There are all kinds of people on either side of the border of India-Pakistan who have suffered heavily as a result of the uncalled for actions of some insane, perhaps temporarily insane, people. People have long been using the policy of tit for tat. This has brought a lot of suffering to people of various religious identities. We, therefore, need to take some action to turn the course of events for a better future for all. Are we prepared to learn from our past mistakes?

Best wishes, Bilal Ahmad

RE: bahmad & ravik

ravi, I am sorry I didn`t mean to offend you.

bahmad, you and me are never going out for a beer, that is for sure :-)

Do you know that Brahmins are made from Bhagwan`s head, Khashatriyas are made from Bhagwan`s Arms, Sudras are made from Bhagwan`s feet and the ``muslas`` probably from the droppings? How can you and me (droppings) have a constructive dialogue with the brahmins (head) as per your recommendation??

Hindu and Muslim civilizations have co-existed for a thousnad years with little peace, the ``war`` that you want to win by being nice is a civilizational war, and you can`t opt out of it by being nice; or even by renouncing your faith. You see, you were not born a brahmin, and you can do nothing to change that.

Ali

PS the beer bit was a joke, I would love to have a couple of pints with you, God willing.

Religous freedom in India:

Enough examination of the 8th amendment already. Let me give you an example of the secular laws of India. Some BJP lovers here have complained about lack of freedom for Pakistanis in choosing their religion. Here is a law Orissa passed in 1967 to regulate conversions. My comments are preceded by `--`.

It is known as the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act. Its constitutionality as well as that of the allied law in Madhya Pradesh has been upheld by a five judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in Rev. Stainislaus v. State of Madhya Pradesh [AIR 1977 SC 908].

The law provides, ``No person shall convert or attempt to convert, either directly or otherwise, any person from one religious faith to another by

use of force or by inducement or by any fraudulent means, nor shall any person abet such conversion.``

-- If the christian missionaries offer the sudras, created from the feet of Bhagwan, a life of dignity, that sure is an inducement!!!

``Anyone doing so shall be punished by imprisonment of up to one year and/or a fine of Rs 5,000. For scheduled castes or tribes, the punishment shall be double. ``

-- Of course BJP lovers can also burn the offender and his/her children to death if they so wish, as in the case of Staines.

``The offence shall be investigated by an officer of rank of an inspector of police or above.``

-- Muslims in Bhiwindi, Meerut etc. can vouch for the ``impartiality`` of the fine officers of Indian police. Also my friend Khan Bhai.

The Act was passed in 1967. Rules under it were not framed till November,1989. Here are the rules. They show the true face of the intolerant Hindu society.

``3(i) Each district magistrate shall maintain a list of religious institutions or organisations propagating religious faith in his district and that of persons directly or indirectly engaged for propagation of religious faith in the district.``

-- LISTS..hmm..Reminds one of Nazi Germany. Jay? Kant?

``(ii) The district magistrate, if he thinks fit, may call for a list of persons with the religious faith, receiving benefits either in cash or in kind from the religious organisations or institutions or from any person connected therewith.``

-- Remember the DM of Faizabad who watched the demolition of Babri Mosque and later became MLA on BJP ticket?

``4 Any person intending to convert his religion shall give a declaration before a magistrate, 1st Class, having jurisdiction prior to such onversion

that he intends to convert his religion on his own will.``

-- What has a magistrate got to do with my faith?? excuse me.



``5(i) The concerned religious priest shall intimate the date, time and place of the ceremony in which conversion shall be made along with the names and addresses of the persons to be converted to the concerned district magistrate before 15 days of the said ceremony.``

-- So that the good magistrate can pass this info to the Sangh Pariwar goons and they can take care of the priest and the converted by their favorite method...burning to death.



``7 The district magistrate shall maintain a register of conversion in Form C and shall cover therein particulars of the intimation received by him.``

-- You call this a secular democracy?? ZZ, Jay, Ravi, Kant, please accept that India is a hindu facist state. period.

Ali

In response to Ferozk (Reply # 117):

Thank you for your help. I hope your response will satisfy Jay and Kant Patel (and many others).

Are you aware of any good study on the religious minorities in Pakistan.

Thanks again, Bilal Ahmad

Re: Jay, bahmad et al

This an excerpt from the VIII Amendment of Pakistan`s Consititution. The entire passage is extermely turgid and obtuse, but the following passage is mostly applicable to the intent of the said amendment.

``The Prime Minister shall hold office during the pleasure of the President, but the President shall not exercise his powers under this clause unless he is satisfied that the Prime- Minister. does not command the confidence of the majority of the members of the National Assembly, in which case he shall summon the National Assembly and require the Prime Minister to obtain a vote of confidence from the Assembly,``.

In other words, Gen. Zia instituted the VIII amendment soley to reserve for the himself the power to dismiss a prime minister, with whom he disagreed. Since Zia`s time, this amendment was used by President Leghari to dismiss the governments of Benazir Bhutto (twice) and that of Nawaz Sharif (once). It was because of this that Nawaz Sharif used his popular mandate and legislative majority in the Parliament to revoke the VIII amendment as a means to secure his own power and to prevent the President Leghari from dismissing his government. This led to the celebrated tete a tete between Legahari and Sharif and ended up with Leghari resigning from his office.

I thought I`d post a brief summary of the aforementioned amendment, because I saw no connection between it and the issue being debated in the InterAct! section of article. The VIII Amendment is soley concerned with the ability of the president to dismiss a goverment via a process, which at best could be as described as extra-judical. It has nothing to do with the rights of minorities in Pakistan or what they can or can not be called, as the debate is presently trying to ascertain.

That catogory would fall, I believe, under the mantle of the amendment, which had sought to insitute a form of Shariat or Islamic governance in Pakistan, but was tabled due to a lack of votes needed for its passage in the Senate. The law labelling a person as a ``Kafir`` would derive from the intent of that Shariat amendment.

Though it could pass both houses, it could be brought up before the Supereme Court of Pakistan, because the court does hold the right of review on those aspects of the law, which disagree with the intentions of the Consitution of Pakistan. Given the current state of the consitution, the court will have to strike it down, because in order to pass its scrutiny, certain key passages pertaining to the rights of the minorities in Pakistan will have to revoked, altered or lessened to to allow the ``Kafir`` law to take affect.

Furthermore, it is exteremely difficult to discern the court`s actions in adjudicating such a law or what it might do, but given the fact that case law, or precedents, determines Pakistani law, it is highly likey that the court will dismiss such a case by invalidating its merits. One only has to remember that even though High Courts in Pakistan have routinely handed death sentences to non-Muslims for a host of reasons, mostly alleged as to the nature of the crime committed, the Supereme Court has repeatedly over turned them on all occassions.

Consequently, the so-called ``Kafir`` laws also fall within the penumbera of the blasphemy laws and so far, the charges made against non-Muslims under those laws have not been validated and they have been over turned for a lack a clear and complusive reason why the charges should stand.

Thus, regardless of what the Parliament or the courts determine, the Supereme Court of Paksitan has consistently upheld minority rights and has sought to curtail the government`s zeal, as was evidenced in its ruling on the special terrorist courts set up in Sindh by Nawaz Sharif to reduce the anarchy in the province. As long as the Court remains committed to the principle of judical review, there is nothing significant to worry about, but if it fails in its obligations and responsibilities, then there is a reason for concern in Pakistan vis a vis minority rights.

I hope this helps.....

Statesman:

I am in agreement with you. Indians have to sort out their own society without regard to what Pakistan is doing. I think my initial posts were in response to ali1 and in regard to an Indian-Pak comparisons. It seems we got side-tracked.

In response to Jay (particularly Reply # 109):

Dear Jay:

In my reply # 106, I asked Kant Patel a few questions. My questions were directed toward you too. Your reply # 109 suggests that: (1) you, like me, are not adequately informed about the Law in Pakistan, as you have failed to provide a summary of the Eighth Amendment that you have talked so often; (2) you have a misguided conception (perception) of the Pakistani society which is not significantly different from the Indian society; (3) you, in your attempt to hide the weakness of the Indian society, are engaged in highlighting the weakness of the Pakistani society.

These are my observations based upon your postings. Now, prove me wrong. If you do so, I will beg for your apology. Otherwise, please try to create a feeling of friendship between the Indians and Pakistanis based upon the universal values of love, peace, and fairness. Let us talk about more serious issues facing our Subcontinent.

Regards, Bilal

In response to Ali (Reply # 110):

Religious conversation generally ends in itterness and violence. Communal riots often start with relatively minor and unwise actions of a few. There is a lot of anger and hatred between some Hindus (and Sikhs) and Muslims. This needs to be minimized. But, it could only be done slowly and gradually by winning the hearts and mind of people of other religious and non-religious beliefs. In my Reply # 92, I introduced the proclamation of both Jinnah and Gandhi that advised us ``to avoid in speech and writing, any words which might be construed as an incitement to . . . acts`` of violence.`` I want you to think about this advise. Please refrain from inciteful statements and arguments. I know that you are a nice person and you will take my request in its good spirit. You can win the war by being nice to your (perceived) adversaries.

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

RE ZZ: Desecration of Ganesh`s idol in Pune:

Dear ZZ, You keep on referring to the incident of human excrement found on Ganesh`s idol as a proof that Indian muslims incite roits in India. Have you considered the following 2 possibilities:

1- A BJP fanatic like yourself did it to start the rioting so that muslims can then be killed?

2- Ganesh`s idols all over the world are known to drink milk. Maybe this particular one drank too much ..

Ali

Bilal,

I can neither add nor subtract any thing from Kant Patel has said. The law as reported in the pakistani papers say that calling a muslim, wahat ever be the `sub religion, sector or even caste`, a kafir is an offence. In most of the penal codes, the crime is defined. If the law has stated that `calling any one kafir is a crime` then there is no problem. Now you are asking, is there a law in pakistan which says that non-muslims can be called kafirs. Well Bilal, there is a law which says who should not be called. Obviously those who are not defined/specidied in the law can be called kafir with out invoking penal sanctions.

The very fact that such a law has been enacted is a proof that lot of people are being called kafirs. Very strange, you are asking the question, is there any law in pakistan which says that people can be called kafirs. Good question, you had been out of pakistan and out in the sun for too long.