Protest in New York!

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..

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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).

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.

In response to Asad_K (Reply # 74)
Dear Asad:

Your statement: ``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)....``

Comment: Asad, are you kidding about the egalitarian character of the Pakistan army? General consensus among whom?

My dictionary defines egalitarian as: ``Affirming, promoting, or characterized by belief in equal political, economic, social, and civil rights for all people.``

Sincerely, Bilal Ahmad

KabuliWallah!

You hit the nail on the head.

No tolerance, but taking the person what he/she is.

As far as my interactions with Hindus in my country. Hindus are mostly in Sind Interior and do as good and as poor as their other Muslim partners. They suffer not only together due to the Feudal system, but are also involved in crimes together. The politics of religious parties (and not Islam) most people hate and is certainly disadvantageous for Hindus. But most people as rightly said by someone co-exist and that bond is greater than any hatred propagated by religious parties.

During my college years two Hindus shared rooms with us for a while. (We would share bed even as space was short). Initially they started with some religious discussion with an intent of maligning and found retort. But later within a few days we learned what to discuss. After one year one of them got married and we travelled on ``Chakra`` (if anyone knows) in Thar desert to his wedding and were received well.

During my training in Pakistan one of my fellow was Hindu by the name of Murli Dhar. He was a very nice person (probably some higher caste fair color always smiling) and it never occured to me that he was a Hindu. His wife was also Hindu and used to visit him. (At that time I was unmarried and his wife was angry on him. And for the first time I came to know that hormonal changes affect the temperament)

In Sind, Apart from the sword of some religious parties, which hang on Hindus as well as underpriviledged Muslims, there is a good harmony

between people.

I agree with anyone, who says that quacks of politics should be shot who incite hatred.

tahmad321 #34: ``Why are militaries such good melting pots? Possibly it is the ``langar`` food that is served in military camps around the world, or perhaps a sense of companionship in misery, who knows...``

I have thought about this quite often. Specially when I got out of the military, and noticed the differences in acceptance of minorities, and (specially) people from poor families, in the general civil environment and the military. I think the Pakistan military (and militaries, in general) is more accepting of minorities due to the following reasons:

People join the military as young teenagers. At that age they haven`t quite been exposed the, ``real world`` situation in civilian societies. Their minds are still quite, ``moldable.`` They go through 2 to 6 years of training as cadets. During this time, they are thrown together with people from all corners, and all social levels of the Pakistani society. Rich, poor, Muslim, non-Muslim, Punjabi, Sindhi etc. etc. are all in the same batch, and live identically. From day one, they are taught to be loyal to be their course mates, their units, their military, and their country. Everything else like religion, ethnicity takes a back seat. By the time, the cadets become officers; they have all been molded into a standard military officer. The bad part is they lose parts of their individuality. The good part is they lose their religious and ethnic biases also. Everyone dresses the same, talks the same, and essentially becomes a similar entity. Their military identities overshadow their ethnic and religious identities.

The second reason is that militaries have a very strong concept of seniority based on rank. Rank is everything. A Major is senior to a Captain; even if the Major is a Christian from the poorest rural area of Sind, and the Captain is the Sunni son of the wealthiest jagirdar in the same area. All promotions are based on time spent in the military, so the Major will always remain senior to the Captain.

The third reason is that in the military, people`s lives depend on each other during peacetime training, and definitely during wartime. If a soldier is relying on his colleague to cover his back while he is charging to, ``take the hill,`` then the fact that the person covering him is from another province or another religion becomes immaterial. If a soldier is willing to put his life in the hands of a soldier from another religion, then he would be more than happy to socialize with him also.

Another reason is that the Pakistan military (all militaries) has a 100% literacy rate. It is the most educated and by far the most merit based organization in Pakistan. The poorest of the poor can join and become generals. In fact, many generals come from poor backgrounds.

A friend of mine who topped his class at PMA was the son of a sepoy. Some of his course mates were sons of millionaires. This guy is on the fast track, and will probably be a general someday. As a civilian, his millionaire course mates would have left him far behind (perhaps not even socialized with him). Two of my friends who topped their respective courses in the Air Force did not have running water in their homes. Yet both of them will probably become Air Marshals, someday. One of my flying instructors was a Christian from a poor background. For about six months, he held my future in his hands, and could have easily kicked me out of flying had he wished (hence my respect for Christian Pakistanis). Two other instructors were Parsis. I sat in the same cockpit with them, twice a week, for eight months, yet did not find out about their religious affiliations till later. No one asked, and no one cared. Look at Musharraf. He is a muhajir running the most powerful institution in Pakistan, as well as the whole country. All his generals follow his orders, be they Muslim, non-Muslim, Punjabi, Pathan etc. What chance does a muhajir have in the Pakistani civilian sector of reaching the top position in the country? There are hundreds of other examples.

There are some groupings and some discrimination in the military as well. It is definitely not perfect, in this regard. But on the whole, my experience has been that the Pakistan military is, by a wide margin, more merit based and accepting of people from all walks of Pakistani life, than civilian Pakistan. Mostly due to the reason described above.

Assad_K: #``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 institutions in Pakistan)``

I never met a single Hindu in the Pakistan military. I heard of one Hindu cadet, who was under training. The fact that everyone knew about him is an indication that there probably aren`t many, if any, Hindus in the Pakistan military. The military is open to them, just like it is open to all minorities. However, very few join, or are able to join.

bahmad #76: ``Comment: Asad, are you kidding about the egalitarian character of the Pakistan army? General consensus among whom?

My dictionary defines egalitarian as: ``Affirming, promoting, or characterized by belief in equal political, economic, social, and civil rights for all people.``

I have read your passionate criticisms of the Pakistan military with great interest. I was a big critic of the military myself, while I was serving in the military. That is why I didn`t last long, and was basically, ``shown the door.`` However now that I no longer wear a uniform (and have spent some time in the Pakistani civilian sector), I am able to form a more objective view. On the whole, I have developed a lot of respect for the Pakistani military (and all militaries)now; specially for soldiers of the rank of Colonel and below. The most difficult thing in the world, in my opinion, is to kill or be killed, to satisfy the desires and to protect people other than one`s own self. Believe me, going into combat makes running a .com look like a walk in the park.

Did you ever get a chance to serve in the Pakistan military? Have you had a chance to see it from the inside? I would be interested in finding out the reasons behind your views.

``Pakistani Hindus``

Now there`s an oxymoron if I ever heard one. The country was created for the purpose of separating Hindus and Muslims -- the Hindus who chose to stay back had it coming....according to a recent article I read somehwere (Chowk?) the geniuses are finally deciding to leave.

Urstruly #75

Dear urstruy,

Some times, people say a lot by remaining quiet.

Whereas Omar has chosen to express his disapproval of blasphemy laws by going out in the street and shouting, you have chosen to avoid ‘them and us’ approach & fight the injustices from within the system. But I am sure you both want things to change for the better. In my personal opinion, your approach to try to change things from within may be more effective and stands a better chance of success than Omar’s approach of clearly marking the line, and publicly denouncing such practices/laws as honor killing, and blasphemy laws etc. There is a strong argument (presented here on this board by some) that such behavior of ‘liberal’ Pakistanis (as Omar’s decision to protest publicly) in the West only strengthens the extremist elements in countries like Pakistan. Western media is biased against Islamic countries, and such actions, only provides fuel to western media to carryon their malicious campaign against Muslims. This adversely affects the efforts of those who have chosen to remain in Pakistan and fight (for reforming the system) from within.

And then there are people like me who, when it comes to religion & spirituality, are inconsistent, sometimes confused, and eternally searching - unable to reconcile their faith/religion beliefs with their conscience, and yet unable to side completely with either religionists or ‘liberals’ (as you some times refer to them). Issues such as blasphemy laws or treatment of women by Islamic fundamentalists are instances where I have no doubts about where I stand; I am wholeheartedly with ‘liberals’. However, there are instances where I find myself on cross roads. And there are instances where I find myself leaning towards religion. People like me are of not much use to either religionists or liberals. I suspect that majority of people fall in this category. They are not willing to commit themselves completely to any ideology or dogma. They prefer to make up their minds (on any issue) on a case-by-case basis. Some call them pragmatists; others call them “inconsistent/confused/dishonest” :)

You say: “It is better to be honestly dishonest than being dishonestly honest”.

May be we are all honest in our desires. Some firmly believe in their righteousness and are sure of their destiny – they are blessed people indeed. Others, and I include myself in this category are not so blessed, and prefer to reevaluate themselves and their worldview from time to time.

Take care.