Protest in New York!

rsaxena #51, ``How shameful and embarassing what

you guys are doing to Christians.``

Aww, how righteous of you to point that out. In case you missed it, go back and read my post #37.

Shame doesn`t just lie west of the border. Or do you turn a blind eye towards your own shortcomings to sneer in our direction.

ylh:

Thanks for correcting me on Jinnah`s stance on the electorates issue.

My suggestion that the significance of the white part of the flag be explained was figurative -- the point being the need to drub the equal status of Minorities into public consciousness.

Attaturkization of Pakistan? hmmm.. let`s wait and see... Just remember, Pakistan is not Turkey, so that needn`t be a panacea.

rgds,

PM

Re: Urstruly #53

If a tree falls in a forest when no one is around ... does it make a sound?

Re: #53

Sigh. The trouble with me is that i`m too damn honest. ``sensationalism`` my ass. Its to make sure people read whats inside the click, which is absolutely true, and nothing contained inside is factually untrue, and the slogan was most certainly used and it is a real issue for the Christian community and even for other minorities such as Ahmadis (YES, I WOULD ALSO SUPPORT ``STOP KILLING AHMADIS``, ``IN PAKISTAN IN PAKISTAN``, who are being killed in the name of religion also on a periodic basis, so this is completely factually true. Frankly I don`t think i misrepresented anything. So don`t be childish and throw a fit. And some people are motivated by other reasons, and would love to find a way to attack the issues contained in the article indirectly by attacking me, because they are closet jamaatis for whom i literally don`t make any effort to hide my utter contempt.

Jinnah liked his whiskey `n his Pork. Deal with it. He still led the Pakistan movement, while most Islami mullahs opposed the division of India and sided with the Congress party. Then these same mullahs and their progeny tell the people of Pakistan, that ``Pakistan was created in the name of Islam``, so shariat needs to be enforced., and minorities should remain in separate electorates and be denied equal rights of citizenship.

The mullah line today is a vast oversimplification of the issues involved. The bottom line was that Pakistan was created to insure that the Muslim community was not economically discriminated against by the Hindu majority in a United India, and that it was free to practice its religion without let or hinderance. Neither of those 2 goals has anything to do with Shariat.

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.

OMAR MIRZA

RSexana #51: ``Tsk tsk tsk. Umairr, first protect your own citizens before worrying about India`s in Kashmir. How shameful and embarassing what you guys are doing to Christians.``

Unfortunately, I am not in a position to protect anyone. I wish I were, but I am not. What I can do is to point out the places human rights are being violated; be it Pakistan or India or any other place. I myself oppose all human rights violations anywhere in the world, and have criticised all the human rights violations that have and are being committed by Pakistan. Unlike some people, I do not make any attempts to justify the human rights violations committed by my country of origin. In fact quite the opposite, I attempt to highlight them.

You seem quite concerned about the Christians in Pakistan. I am concerned as well. If you are interested in pursuing this furthur, then I can point you to some people in Amnesty International who would be more than happy to get in touch with you in your efforts to improve the situation of Christians in Pakistan. I would you like to encourage you to get involved in pointing out the human rights violations of minorities in Pakistan, provided you have a sincere interest.

If you are just pointing out the situation of minorities in Pakistan to justify the killings of innocent human beings in India, then I am afraid you have a quite a bit of hatred inside you against any human being who does not share your views of the world. There isn`t much I can do to change that. You are the best judge of your own conscience.

What a wonderful read this was.

http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10603-2000Sep15.html

Bill Gates chilling in Delhi and Vajpayee getting standing ovations from the US Congress while our friends in the Jewish-controlled American media contrast this to the reception accorded Musharraf and the souring ties due to Pakistan`s links with ``Islamic terror groups and the Taliban``

RE: OMAR 1974 Reply# 52

I am really disappointed and disgusted with you after reading your reply. So it was nothing but sensationalism. What do you expect to achieve when you create resentment instead of awareness in the other party. Please spare us from your pathetic attempts to explain your motives why you sensationalized issues. As compared to you a lot of people firmly believe that the issues can be resolved-but this is not the way.

Krashid:

The TITLE of the piece is ``PROTEST IN N.Y!``, the discription of one of the eye catching issues which the protest was about, is what you are refering to, its NOT part of the title for G-Ds sake!

The 1000 mullahs mentioned in the piece are not an example cited of people killing Christians, just the street power of a political pressure group opposed to equal rights for minorities and their disproportionate political impact in circumstances in which the military regime felt itself under siege from every side. You are confused i suppose by the marketing of the article (Yeah, i figured i needed to make it eyecatching to get people to at least read it). I don`t feel i need to prove the killing of Christians in Pakistan, there are enough incidents recorded, and that was not my specific issue (READ MY PLACARD). If you read the piece carefully, you`ll realize there are a combination of three different things going on in the writing:

#1 Its a first person narrative account from my perspective, including my own involvement,

#2 I am reporting on what happened exactly at the Protest, and ``STOP KILLING CHRISTIANS`` was a slogan raised by the protesters.

#3 My Political Analysis & Editorial style writing.

Sac:

You focused too much on my mention of my alma mater. You should also have read the salient facts in that same post that i presented to support my `ludicrous` statement as you put it; Jinnah was a BORI, i.e a member of a religious minority himself. Also, he was a liberal, and a lawyer. The conclusion should be self-evident. Only someone who deliberates chooses to be wilfully blind to MAJs ideas/life/legacy could state that what i said was `ludicrous`. YES, JINNAH WOULD PROTEST TODAY`S PAKISTAN AS A BETRAYAL IF HE WAS ALIVE. That statement betrays your ideological bias, if anything. The truth is very hard to digest for people who have spent their lives tuned in to PTV thinking that the Vison of Jinnah is anything reemotely connected to what Pakistan has become today. I can only hazzard a guess that perhaps that experience as a PTV viewer left a deep impression on you that you have yet to overcome.

PTV has a very sanitized, black & White view of Pakistan`s history and politics. I guess they feel that in the name of patriotism, they have a right to selectively distort history as well. And if they repeat a lie often enough, people do become brain washed in their perspectives if exposed to little else, day in and day out. But things have changed since the 80s and ZIA KA DAUR, the state no long has a monopoly on information, the press is much much more free, internet use is up, SAT Dishes have increased. Unfortunately, the massses remain illiterate & ignorant, and a free press can`t change that. An image is often worth a thousand words. PTV is nothing more than a government propaganda machine.

OMAR MIRZA

Tsk tsk tsk. Umairr, first protect your own citizens before worrying about India`s in Kashmir. How shameful and embarassing what you guys are doing to Christians.

manoj: #44: ``You say that a PAf chief was an Ahmedi. This itself is a sign of intolerance. You have choosen to potray a muslim as a non muslim?``

Please do not incorrectly extrapolate my statements. In fact, please do not attemtpt to extrapolate them at all. Just stick to what I have stated. This is what I stated in reply 29 (about which you have made an incorrect assumption)

``The correct assessment of tolerance is not the rank a minority officer achieves, but the position he occupies in combat. I believe one of the Chief-of-Staffs of the PAF was an Ahmedi.``

If you read the above correctly, you will notice that I reference Ahmedis as being a minority. Not a religious minority, but a minority, in general (hence the word minority officer, and not religious minority officer).

As far as I am concerned, anyone who says he/she is a Muslim, is a Muslim. After that, it is between them are their God. I don`t particularly care.

You stated, ``maybe after 5 years we will hear that Pakistan treats its minorities well because 3 army chiefs were Shias?? because the mullahs would have declared the Shias as non muslims?``

I am not quite sure what we will hear about the Pakistani minorities in 5 years. However, the purpose of my reply was not to state that Pakistan treats its minorities well. It is just to state that in my experience, minorities are treated relatively well in the Pakistani armed forces. That is why, I said,

``So while the general intolerance for minorities is growing in Pakistan, it is growing at much much slower rate in the armed forces.``

Kindly do not misquote or misrepresent my replies. It wastes everyone`s time.

Manoj

It is not India and Pakistan being discussed here but another issue ... as far as India is concerned... in my opinion the whole Indian political History is a black spot on the name of secularism... India is a Hindu state and it shall remain a hindu state no matter what the constitution states...

However this is not the time and place to change my opinion so please refrain from posting on this thread against me ...

All I wanted to say was this is a purely Pakistani discourse and Indians should not feel free to give us their two cents...

Physician Heal thyself...

Re: Slink #39

Do I assume from what you wrote about your Mamu that you meant to imply that he was a member of a minority community? I`m just curious: which one? (Not that its really any of my business, just nosy.)

Re: Umairr`s reference to an Ahmedi as the Chief of Air Staff

I think that the point was not to discriminate against Ahmedis by calling them non-Muslims but to show that even groups officially despised by the State have a home in the Armed Forces. Don`t forget that Sir Zafarullah Khan was an Ahmedi, as was Gen. Akhtar Hussain Malik of 1965 fame. But, of course, this was before we declared them to be non-Muslims!

The Armed Forces used to believe in Legio Patria Mori (the legion is my fatherland) and to an extent they still do. Under Pervez Musharraf, it may revert back to the active enforcement of this ideal.

Omar: I support what you are trying to do. I am also of the opinion that the military guys in power would support what you are doing as well. However, in trying to get rid of the blasphemy law, you need to have a carefully planned strategy keeping in mind the following factors: the military already has a heavy internal agenda (devolution, IT, privatization, bringing back the nations looted wealth), a hostile external environment (Indian government - foolishly, IMHO - leading the charge, with the Bangladesh PM chiming in, and cold shouldering by the West) as well as dangerous internal forces of fundamentalism trying to gain power through force and subterfuge that they have never been able to gain through the free will of the Pakistani people. It is only common sense that one does not open up too many fronts, else you lose everything and Pakistan may well slide into the hands of fundamentalists.

While I have no doubt that the military people would be sympathetic to getting rid of the blasphemy law (and I say this based on some personal observations only), you need to get your message across in a thoughtful and constructive way. I dont have any answers for you on what that constructive way would be, but am sure you can come up with something if you think about it.

One from the archives:

BLASPHEMY

Word came in once again to hang
One`s head in shame as a member of
The human family that still stands firmly
Divided by faith, which is okay but not
To accuse, each other of disrespect with
Sentences of death looming
Based on possibly twisted facts or self interest
Backed by laws that need review
On the basis of the religion itself which once
Liberated us from such injustice and ignorance



Christians and us drink from the same well
Of enlightenment as do the Jews
With Hindus we have had much interaction while
Sharing the land of the Indus since our history began
The Bible and the Gita have lived amongst us
Along with the Ahmadi and the Zikri people
Color added from our own cultural paintbrush
But the canvas was and is in the hands of the Creator
Who has taught us much about respect and
The meaning of justice



One helpless Bishop with a gun in his hand
Conduct usually unbecoming for a man of the cloth
Has pulled the trigger and extinguished god`s gift of life
A last act of a desperate crusader for justice or
The parting cry of a human being to be seriously heard
Drawing attention to blasphemy laws as a tool of persecution
Against all believers who don`t walk the same path and become
Verbal targets of accusers and sometimes much more
In the land which today absorbs his blood
And that of many other innocent spirits
Who have chosen to be different.




- Ras H. Siddiqui (5-8-98)

This writing is dedicated to two people. Bishop John Joseph of ``Khushpur`` who killed himself in protest against the current Blasphemy Law in Pakistan and Arif Iqbal Bhatti, a respected lawyer and judge, who was assassinated because he pardoned a Christian boy innocent of the ``Crime``. It is also hoped that the Government of Pakistan will launch a full investigation to rule out any foul play in the matter of Bishop Joseph.

re OMAR1974 #38:

Instead of giving reasons for making that ludicrous statement about Jinnah at the end of the article, you`ve instead chosen to highlight your undergraduate crendentials. Wisdom my dear does not come with going to school(albeit fancy ones) alone. Read Rafay Alam`s reply to see the difference.

Of late Chowk seems to have become a safe haven for empty sloganeers and shrill conspiracy mongers.It leaves little room for constructive debate or the sometimes gentle or vicious banter. Esperanto anyone?

later

-sac

Umaair #29

You say that a PAf chief was an Ahmedi. This itself is a sign of intolerance. You have choosen to potray a muslim as a non muslim? maybe after 5 years we will hear that Pakistan treats its minorities well because 3 army chiefs were Shias?? because the mullahs would have declared the Shias as non muslims?

ylh

Your reference to Sikhs ( Golden temple) and Muslims ( Babri masjid) as black spots on Indian secularism.

Can I assume that you agree that prior to these events India was a truly secular state?

Sikhs - the most prosperous community in India!! max representation in armed forces, civil services!!!

How about the terrorists ( not sikhs, armed by the napakis) who had stocked weapons, ammo and shat in the harmandir saheb?? How about the raid by Saudi army assisted by Pak army on a mosque in S. Arabia to flush out armed militia??

muslims - not the most prosperous certainly ,but enjoy full religious freedom, rights, have held all important positions in civil, military , private sectors. Richest man in India being a muslim!!!!

christian church bombings - cases investigated and evidence points to Deendar -e - anjuman , a shadowy sect with the chief hiding in Karachi , pakistan!!!!

India does not lessons from rabid, intolerant, undemocratic self procalimed Islamists!