Protest in New York!

RE: Fairdinkum # 65

As a matter of fact I found the results of my “survey” quite interesting. Not that I/we have accomplished anything as far as Blasphemy Law is concerned but it is quite interesting to observe the behavior of the contributors belonging to different threads of our Social fabric.

People are quite afraid to interact candidly on the issues that may potentially expose their religio-political affiliations. It is pathetic to see people behaving as such on internet forums where anonymity is supposed to be conducive to honesty-but the potential threat of being labeled as a fundamentalist has become so cogent that people would rather die than speak their true feelings. For all such people there is a saying that, “It is better to be honestly dishonest than being dishonestly honest”. The forums like Chowk have a potential to make a difference but only if…..

I agree with you that Chowk is boring these days. I can live with ‘boring’ but the kind of BSing that is prevalent these days and, specially this article, is unbearable.

Kabuli re:66

I think that peoples usage of `tolerance` here does imply that those communities that are `tolerated` would be held as equal.. it`s not tolerance as we would, say, tolerate a petulant child (or as we tolerate, say, Jay or Naqashbandi! :-) ). Your points are, of course, to be kept in mind.

Regarding not considering Hindus as minorities.. Justice Bhagwan Das is usually one of the first names that is mentioned when people start questioning whether contemporary Pakistan allows any advancement for non-Muslims. That said, Hindus indeed are far less prominent than Christians or Ahmedis. Some of it may be because of the fact that the cause of injustices done to Christians are often picked up by the western press. Perhaps also because most of Pakistans Hindus are in the rural areas of Sind, and as such are very much out-of-mind (heck, we don`t even know much about the state of the Muslims there).

Magazines such as Herald or Newsline will every so often publish articles looking at minority issues, including the Hindus of Sind. Any such article makes one ashamed to be a Pakistani, seeing as how it is full of stories of kidnapping, forced conversions and general exploitation (though one does suspect that the Muslim haris go through exactly the same thing, except for forced conversion.. which makes the Hindus the very bottom of the totem pole, with even their otherwise-powerless muslim neighbours able to pick on them).

I don`t know of the status of Hindu officers/soldiers in the armed forces (since the general consensus seems to be that it is the most egalitarian of insititutions in Pakistan), someone else may post on that. Mind you, Sindhis on the whole don`t go into the army much (again, I`d be happy to be corrected).

CHRISTIAN FRIENDS AND THE CARE NGO!

If by any chance, you have chosen this individual to be your spokesperson and to present your case at the Chowk forum, I urge you to please re-consider. This person is doing more damage to your cause than good. Remember the saying, “A wise enemy is ten times better than a daft friend”; and this goes for you too Mirza, in case you had acted on your own.

RE: OMAR1974 Reply # 56

Mr. 1974,

Can you tell what is wrong with the following picture?

“i`m too damn honest”

“whats inside the click, which is absolutely true”

“nothing contained inside is factually untrue”

“, so this is completely factually true”

“Frankly I don`t think i misrepresented anything”

All of the above just in one paragraph. It smells like self-righteousness to me. Isn’t this self-righteousness as rancid as you accuse Mullah and Jammatis of having?

``sensationalism`` my ass.”

Aren’t you as arrogant as you accuse Mullah and Jamaatis of being?

Anyone who disagrees with you is stereotyped by you as being a Jamaati or a Mullah; ain’t it similar to Mullah’s casting others as infidels and Kaafirs who happen to disagree with them?

You accused me of sidelining the issue. I urge you to read the posts submitted by me on this board. So far it is only me who has provided a link to a Christian site that explicates the plight of Christians in Pakistan. I am also the only one, in this thread, who has posted the actual legal text of the Blasphemy Law so that this conversation may get more focused on the issue. On the other hand, several people have asked you to provide some actual facts and figures and you have eluded their inquiries. Have you ever thought for a moment that may be these people are questioning your credibility? What do you think the burden of proof is on us, the readers? What are you; just an eight lettered word on the screen, isn’t it? It takes sweat and blood to earn credibility. Do you have it in you?

I also wanted to give you a good answer to your arrogance about “illiterate brainwashed” people of Pakistan but I think tahmad321 has said it quite well.

I usually don’t give a damn about any titles that people coin on me; I rather enjoy them cuz they are a good indicator of weaknesses of that man. But just to alleviate the stomach cramps that you might be having I tell you that last time I checked Jamaati’s were on the wrong side of my barrel.

You are absolutely correct Kabuliwallah ... and some of the Hindus of Pakistan are very Patriotic Pakistanis ...

Re: kabuli

``As an aside, is it just me or Pakistanis (aside from Shandana Minhas and Asma Jehangir ofcourse) never seem to take Pakistani Hindus into account as minorities?``

Wasn`t very smart of them to stay back in a country created for Muslims (``Islamic Republic of Pakistan``)...they can fix their plight easily.

Kabuliwalla: #66: Well said.

Personally, I have very little knowledge about Hindus in Pakistan. The second Hindu I ever met in my whole life was a friend at a University in the US. This means I only met one Hindu during all my years in Pakistan. That too, for a few hours at someone`s house. So, I am not quite sure what the situation of the Hindus is in Pakistan, as compared to the rest of the minorities. Someone from Sind could probably give you a better view.

I think minority communities in Pakistan are a mixed lot, in terms of progress. It seems like (at least to me) the Parsi community in Pakistan is far more successful than any other community in Pakistan (including the majority Sunni/Shia community). Parsis seem to be in prominent and successful positions, in ratios, that far outweigh the numbers of their whole community. Bapsi Sidwa, Rustam Sidwa, Behram Avari, Ardsher Cowasjee are household names. NED university in Karachi, the premier source of sending IT people to the US, was founded by a Parsi. The Ahmedi community I believe is perhaps the most literate community in Pakistan. I remember reading somewhere that the Ahmedi community has a literacy rate more than double of the actual Pakistani literacy rate. Perhaps that is why, an Ahmedi was the first Pakistani to win a Noble Prize.

The Christian community, on the whole, is generally quite poor. This is probably a combination of discrimination against them, as well as the fact that historically many of them started out at the lowest step of the economic ladder. Many of them are descendants of lower caste Hindus (I don`t mean this in a derogatory sense) who converted to Christianity. Since the lower caste Hindus were dirt poor to begin with, their Christian descendents in Pakistan are still victims of that poverty (as well as victims of the lack of opportunities in a third world country, like Pakistan).

Regarding the Hindu minority: I wish I knew more about them, but I don`t. I don`t even know their exact number. My guess is that it is probably less than .5% of the total population of Pakistan. On the whole, I don`t think they are that well off, as compared to the other minorities in Pakistan.

All the above is based on personal observation and information off websites, and not on any research. The following is information from the Asian Center of theological studies (generally covers Christianity in Pakistan), www.acts.edu, regarding the religious based population distribution in Pakistan:

Muslim 96.7%. Sunni 67.6%, Shi`a 26.1% (including the unorthodox Ismaili), Ahmaddiya officially 0.13% but unofficially 3%. The latter are not considered Muslims by the government and are persecuted. Many have been driven underground.

Hindu 1.5%. Tribal peoples of Sindh and some Sindhis and Panjabis. Attrition through emigration and conversions to other religions.

Other 0.1%. Baha`i 25,000; Animist 20,000; Parsee 6,000; Buddhist 2,000.

Hope this helps.

Does anyone have a list of Christians who have actually been killed in Pakistan, due to the blasphemy law, or due to religious reasons (and not due to disputes over land etc.)? While the highlighting of this issue is quite important, a more objective analysis would be possible, if an actual list of non-Muslims actually killed in Pakistan due to discriminatory laws were available.

Re. Tahmed321..Post #64

Now aint that the truth!!What the eduacated elite ,wealthy`` My son is going abroad for higher education`` crowd has done for Pakistan,I could measure in a thimble.They can be best described as a den of thieves.

The average pakistani is a morally driven ,decent,deeply hospitable chap.If there is ever any hope for change,it will come from these woeful masses.

The educated elite simlpy state thier racist/bigoted swill in more eloquent terms.

Nonetheless Mr.Omar Mirza I admire your passion and zeal, and I pray to the almighty that we could have more like you in our midst instead of the gutless swine that watches from a distance and at best are engaged in a conspiracy of silence.

BTW thanks for the info on the care.pk website.

We need more action by people eith a heart and less silly ``patriotic drivel``.

Allah Hafiz

I usually stay out of Pakistan`s business on chowk...there are many Indians who can do that for me (unwisely in my opinion and this goes for their Pakistani counterparts too)...however I want to say something that concerns everybody in general...

this thing we hear so often about...``tolerance`` and ``tolerating the minorities``...who the hell is anybody to tolerate anybody else? A person tolerates somebody out of magnanimity and generousity. When individual 1 tolerates individual 2, what happens is that individual 2 is not standing on the same plane as individual 1. Individual 1 is looking down on individual 2 and out of his mercy and pity safeguards the life and property of individual 2. This might seem to be better when compared with bigotry and intolerance. But should tolerance be the standard people should aspire to? Or rather should it be Respect and Honour for individual 2 irrespective? What I mean to say is, a person should not have to be tolerated by somebody else. That in itself sounds and is demeaning to his status as a free individual in modern society. That relegates him to 2nd class by being tolerated. When a person tolerates somebody, he doesn`t really respect him or his choices, but only grudgingly or non-grudgingly agrees to stay out of the ``tolerated`s`` business. In my opinion, people should not be tolerated, they should be respected. And this can be achieved when a community removes this protector image of itself over other communities and gives them full status as equals and brothers.
I hope, I put my point across.

As an aside, is it just me or Pakistanis (aside from Shandana Minhas and Asma Jehangir ofcourse) never seem to take Pakistani Hindus into account as minorities? It is always Christians, Parsis and Ahmedis and sometimes Shias. Just curious...especially since I heard that there are still non-Muslim majority areas in Sindh which I presume to be Hindu. Somebody please, correct me if I`m mistaken.

regards,

Kabuliwallah

Urstruly,

what`s the result of your survey?
you know the questions you asked about blasphemy laws...

should we make amendments to blasphemy laws or should we ditch them...as if i have any say :)

it is so boring on chowk these days..

Omar you write: ``But how do you get that message across to people who are illiterate, uneducated and brainwashed? Its quite beyond their level of understanding, and ideological frame of reference to comprehend the distinction. And i don`t mean this in a condesending manner, its just a plain fact. So Education is the priority.``

I am very tired of this arrogant view of the Pakistani elite of those less well off. What have you ``educated`` people done? stolen wealth shamelessly; destroyed democratic institutions; replaced use of your minds with rote thinking. I could go on.

The poor person in Pakistan is second to none in common sense and intelligence and strong moral character. Unlike poor people in some other countries, they dont drink (and thus dont do thinks like wife-beating due to drunkenssness as happens in some other places) and they have a deep faith in God. I have heard more than one foreign visitor comment on the inherent dignity of the poor in Pakistan.

I would have expected something more sensible from someone trying to abolish the blasphemy law than what you just wrote.

Re: Vijay Amrit

I would suggest that you familarize yourself with Jinnah`s life and his political thinking, before generalizing Jinnah with a contempory Indian politican.

Jinnah`s seculurism, if that is an applicable term, originated in his British influenced upbringing and education; Jinnah`s political philosophy was based on constitutionalism. Jinnah was a British trained lawyer and he argued for Pakistan, in toto for the Muslims of India, on the basis of a consititutional right to political representation. Where Jinnah erred was in underestimating the raw emotional appeal of religion as a political consideration of the Muslims of India. Jinnah was, in his political attitudes, aloof from the religious sub-text of pre-partition Indian politics and since he was, for all practical purposes, a British gentleman, he never really understood the religious political under currents of the Muslim politics in India and that was his mistake; a mistake, which we are still debating in Pakistan vis-a-vis issues of Pakistan`s identity.

I am, on the other hand, in no position to make a generalized statement on Advani`s political logic and answer, or refute, your suggestion arguing a similarity in Jinnah and Advani`s political views. If I have an indication, it mostly points to the argument that Advani, and for that matter your Prime Minister Vajpayee (sp?) have blurred the distinctions in Indian politics between apolitical secularism and allowable political sectarianism.

When your prime minister, in a gathering in America, makes a statement that he is a member of RSS first and an Indian prime minister second, what does it say about his interpretation of India`s consitutional separation of the affairs of the state with local specified party political interests?

As fate would have it, Jinnah death before his vision of Pakistan could be fully articulated, but if his past political experince, historically doucmented, would suggest that Jinnah was acutely aware that Pakistan would have problems in overcoming the abstraction of secularism in its politics. Political speeches have an intent; a message that they convey and if that hypothesis is valid, then the question is not what Jinnah intended Pakistan to be, given his September 11 speech to the Constituent Assemby, but why did he use that much quoted (and infamous phrase)reference to a non-religious nature of a Pakistani polity? Was he aware of something and wanted to warn his listeners to that fact?

Jinnah`s Pakistan would have been a consitutional state with clearly demarcated boundries between politics and religion and in this intent, he differs from Advani in that sense that BJP has blurred that division of politics and religion in Indian politics.

Also, I would also humbly suggest to you that please do not generalize personalites living in differen historical periods. The verdict on Jinnah has been pronounced and the verdict on Advani is still being debated and it would premature of you to infer something that is still not decided!

History may agree with and then, angain, it may not!

Ciao!

VijayAmrit

Go read my comment on the Jinnah thread.... maybe you will know the truth...

Well Manhoj if being well off was the criterion for being free of exploitation... may I add that the Ahmadi community is perhaps a very well off community ... but that doesnt mean that they are not discriminated against....

Omar Mirza!

I think Jinnah was Khoja Memon and Shia. I think Bohri are different.

I completely agree with Manoj that Indians don`t need lessons from intolerant, rabid Muslims.

I think they are themselves in a position to supervise PhD thesis on that.

If educated Indians are SO MUCH TOLERANT, one can understand the Indian SECULARISM.

As far as highly respected Sikhs. It does not deny their killing 20,000 in number. (BBC. quote in case somebody starts farting)