The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism

DRUMZ

Do the math people, Someone who`s just said...

1. ``exuberance``

2. ``Verbosity``

3. ``pedantic``

4. ``Sophistry``

...in five lines has NO right to demand anything in ``plain english.``

……just a wild guess, but methinks he was being derisive….as in sarcastic?…as in to drive the point home?…:)

It is indeed very gratifying to see that the people who formerly declared that `religion based nationhood is stupid and can never result in a secular state` are lauding the Israeli state as a secular state.

My argument is not that Pakistan is secular or democratic right now, for it is not, but that Pakistan was founded as a Secular state for a muslim people. Whether or not that has come true is besides the point, but previously rsaxena and others had questioned the very basis of this view calling it an Oxymoron. CLearly accepting that Israel is a secular state, Mr.Saxena has accepted that in principle it is possible for a religion based nation to create a secular state. However though Israel is a Modern Democratic state, it is not a completely secular one yet, so on an intellectual premise even this argument can be torn to shreds.

I am not sure how and why he defines Pakistan as a religious state for it is clearly less so than Israel or Iran ... he points to the blasphemy laws, one can easily point to equivalents of that in Israel, especially with the law of return and ban on non Jewish immigrants while allowing only jewish immigrants into the state of Israel. One can also point to the council of Rabbis who oversee the Israeli state and its secular polity. However the ban on non-Jewish immigrants to Israel is a necessity... that will mean a loss of character as a Jewish state. This is something that Ehud Barak the liberal left oriented leader said on Charlie Rose in response to the very same question.

Yehuda Goldsteen, sounds like you were one the Jeopardy team consulted when compiling their `questions`

`What do you expect that to prove? Mr. Kumaraswamy is expressing his opinion, just like Mr. Poonawalla did. It proves there is a range of opinions in India, nothing else.

It is far more informative to consider ground reality...there are some in India who don`t want us to get cozy with Israel..fine and dandy..but the fact is there IS a confluence of interests and hence the arms sales, border protection help, and intelligence exchanges...I`ve heard this straight from the mouths of Mr. Peres and Mr. Jaswant Singh...`

Mr. Kumaraswamy is expressing his opinion as an expert on International relations. It is clear that you didn`t even bother to read his thesis. He is clearly in favor of growing Israeli-Indian cooperation. I agree that Israel and India has a lot of basis for progress.

`As for your other post, I am afraid you are just restating your original point...Israel was founded by jews but it is far from a theocratic state...if nothing else, it is a democratic country...it respects individual liberties, something it would have great trouble with if it was a religious state...last i checked, there were no blasphemy laws in israel...`

Again these are not `definitive` issues. What is theocratic and what is not. Genuine political scientists who would contend that with all the backwardness and `blasphemy` laws Pakistan does not fulfil the requirements of theocracy. Israel with all its individual liberties and other laws does qualify as a theocratic state for it has a supreme body of religious elite overseeing the political process. With that said I agree Israel is a true Democratic state, if not a perfect one yet, and it deserves our respect.

`...we can`t get very far if you keep expounding the fact that israel was founded for jews and ignore everything else....`

That is because I am not arguing against Indian-Israel cooperation nor am I denying that Israel as a state has become much more advanced than Pakistan, primarily because Pakistan regressed in the 1980s. Nevertheless most of your assertions about Pakistan are based on your lack of knowledge about that country and your innate biases against us.

Let me restate the Question to you and please try not to respond with your amatuerish and childish sarcasm which does not in any way pass for sharp wit:

If hypothetically speaking, Pakistan had developed as a perfect democracy with equal rights to all, will you still object to its creation on the basis of Muslim nationhood and if yes, then do you feel you are being hypocritical?

Sincerely

YLH

Ali Akbar Poonawallah,

`So, will Pakistanis please stop hoping, pleading, arguing, symphathizing, applauding, crying, raging, fuming, speaking, shouting, and fighting on behalf of ``Indian Muslims``.`

Gladly and Good riddance. No one can accuse me of speaking on Indian Muslims behalf. Infact, I find the majority of `Indian Muslim community` as such a scum that I`d rather die than be associated with them in anyway. Ofcourse I have the utmost respect for those Indians who follow their Islamic faith and not make a big deal about their `Muslimness`. If it had permeated your thick skull, I had used `Indians of the Muslim Faith` and not `Indian Muslims`. The `Modern Indian Muslim` is inheritor of the glorious traditions of deobandi fundamentalism, and fanaticism that had helped ally them with the Congress instead of the league ie `Islam cannot be contained in one tiny little country, we shall convert entire India to Islam`.

For the record we speak for the `Kashmiri people` not `Indian Muslims`. When it is ascertained through a UN monitored `plebiscite` that the Majority of Kashmiri people wish to think of themselves as Indians, I will gladly `laanat bhej` on them and move on. Until then you can hardly be intellectually honest in claiming the Kashmiri people to be Indian Muslims. If indeed that is your claim, PROVE IT. I will be the first one to accept your claim if you prove it in a proper legal manner consistent with International Law and UN resolutions 38 47 51 80 91 96 98 122 123 and many more.

OF COURSE there can hardly be any `intellectual` discussion with you Mr Ali Akbar Poonawala for you have shown in the short time that you have spent on chowk that you are a first rate liar . What is more is you shamelessly have not been able to back up any of your assertions with any sources.

`Please dont make an Icon out of Jinnah. Accept him as a human, full of faults and imperfections, as we all are.`

But you want more than that, you want me to totally denounce and renounce him as is obvious in your posts.

`Please separate the official ideology of Pakistan regarding Jinnah from the Man who was Jinnah.`

Had you read my original post you`d realize that my admiration for the man does not arise from the official representation of Jinnah as an Islamic hero. Quite contrary it is derived from the works of Mostly Western and Indian authors like Wolpert, Jalal, Anil Seal, Raj Mohan Gandhi, DR. Ajeet Javed, etc.

`-I too stand for Hindu Muslim unity and Indian nationalism. My point was that Jinnah suddenly and unscrupulously turned his back on his long stated goal of promiting Hindu Muslim Unity. Whenever a leader tunrs his back on long held views, it raises serious questions about his integrity.`

Jinnah`s about turn on that question has been the major debate. However while intrigued none of the serious historians and intellectuals have questioned Jinnah`s integrity, a man who has gone down in history as `incorruptible and Brave`. Gandhi called him that. In his Book `Pakistan or Partition of India` Ambedkar wrote `Yet there is no politician to whom the title of `incorruptible` is more fittingly applied. Hodson writes `Jinnah was no weathercock or power hungry politician. He was a man of integrity and honesty.` The answer to the dilemma of Jinnah`s about turn on `Hindu Muslim Unity` is an easy one. He never made an about turn. His was a constant: A fair settlement between Muslims and Hindus will achieve Hindu Muslim Unity. This is a constant theme in Lucknow 1916, in 1928, in London`s round table conferences, 1937, in 1944, and in 1946. Infact, Ayesha Jalal`s thesis `Jinnah the sole spokesman` is perhaps the most accurate view of Jinnah`s political career.

You, Doc, speak of Intellectual Honesty and yet you have not yet shown ONE source which could be deemed intellectually credible. You have made up the `facts` in your head.

`To equate Sunnism with Arabian tribalism is to generalize and downgrade a great faith. What would the Muslim masses of India (90 percent Sunni) have thought if this attitude was made aware to them?`

It is not yet proved that Jinnah said that. You have quoted no verifiable source and haven`t said anything that remotely comes close to proving this assertion. However, my personal view and keep in mind that I am of Sunni Origin, is that Sunnism indeed little more than Arab tribalism. How about an about face of your own. Only a couple of hundred posts ago you were making mince meat out of the Pakistanis accusing them of Anti-Shiite bias, now you are accusing the very symbol of their national identity of anti-sunni bias?

`Jinnah`s confession to Matloob Saheb is disturbing for it indicates that he did not believe in the permanence of his creation.`

Again you still haven`t quoted any source to back this `confession`. With that said, Jinnah`s prime goal was to bring about a fair and egalitarian settlement to India`s cosntitutional problem, not the creation of Pakistan as such. Jinnah was till the very end of his life a patriot of India, and the founder of Pakistan. He might have said the said statement in some despondent mood where he saw Pakistan drifting away from a firmly democratic pluralistic path that he had imagined on 11th August 1947.

`There are other disturbing facts about Jinnah. His eating pork and drinking whiksey and vodka were his personal habits, and while I find these to be filthy habits, I hold nothing against him on those counts.`

Ladies and gentlemen this is intellectual dishonesty at its best. Let me tell you something... Pork really tastes good. You should try it out sometimes.. and another thing Jinnah drank `Whiskey` not `Vodka`. If indeed you dont hold this against Jinnah why do you keep mentioning this in every single post that you have put about Jinnah on this board. Jinnah ate what he like and drank what he like as Cowasjee writes so brilliantly in his article..

http://www.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/20000618.htm



Have a nice day.

Sincerely

YLH

First there was a Madrasi who thought he was a Sikh and now we have a Gujrati who thinks he is jewish and lives in Tel-Aviv.

Yahuda Ji, Shalom to you and welcome to Chowk. Your last post shows that you will feel at home here on Chowk with classless mutts like Saxena.

In case you are not Gujrati and really an Israeli, I would like to add that, I have a deep admiration for the Jewish people. They have contributed immensely to human civilization over the centuries - Even when you look at the last fity years of the middle east the only person who commands any respect is Rabin. As for the conflict - I think in the end common sense will prevail - People like Arafat and Sharon will be replaced by saner elements of each society.

....prof hobbyty and little aitchisonians for osama want to engage me in a debate that they start off by saying :

``Afghanistan is not the beginning of the end of Islam - but the beginning of the end of the US as the sole global hegemon``

........ so how am i supposed to respond to this type of talibanist logic which is driven by burning hatred, seething self-pity, angry animosity towards modernity, pathetic wishful thinking, insane frustration, rabid religious madness and jaundiced jealousy ....... ( alliterations don`t come easy anymore)

.... here is how i would respond

``Afghanistan is the beginning of the end of the puerile and putrid idea of political islam ..... and it is the beginning of the real islam of whirling dervishes, bhang-intoxicated malangs and twice a year visits to the mosques ``

....... so here is my suggestion : let`s get god and his lashkars out of our business and go back to managing our own affaris as decent and competent human beings .....

....... i wish it was that easy, but looking at the blathering aitchisonians on nbc last night it is evident that the evil poison of urstrulyism has penetrated deep .... aitchison, even in abudul ali`s time, was not known for the intellectual prowess of its little feudal lords who were always more intrested in the antics of their fathers` mistresses in hira mandi ...... but this was scary - i hope the boys at st anthony`s, grammar school karachi and st mary`s pindi have turned out better ...... once they produced rhodes scholars and fine men like jehangir karamat - now, it seems, they are preparing suicide bombers and gun-fodder for B-52`s ......

........ so i appear to be uncompromising and unwilling to debate the fine points and nuances of fundamentalism and extremism ..... why ? because i can see throught the shenanigans, aka pedantic sophistry, of the islamists ......besides that, as you get older, it is difficult to hold a thought for more than a few keystrokes ......

...... so i have been to ten iftar parties so far and am even more convenced that islam, as we know it today, is in serious need of drastic reform - it is a religion of excesses which slowly leads to urstrulyism and death by B-52 ........think about it - a whole joyless month of getting up in the dark, near-starvation, heart-burn, indigestion, self-inflicted taraweeh torture and tired mirthless discussions about the spirit of ramadhan ......it is enough to drive a moderate man into osama`s waiting arms ......i propose we follow the christian example of lent-light and simply give up something for ramadhan .......... i will make the huge personal sacrifice of giving up tonic and ice .........

re: ylh

``http://www.idsa-india.org/an-sep9-2.html

Israel and Pakistan:Strange Bedfellows or Natural Allies?

P.R. Kumaraswamy,Research Fellow, IDSA

You will find it VERY INTERESTING. :)``

What do you expect that to prove? Mr. Kumaraswamy is expressing his opinion, just like Mr. Poonawalla did. It proves there is a range of opinions in India, nothing else.

It is far more informative to consider ground reality...there are some in India who don`t want us to get cozy with Israel..fine and dandy..but the fact is there IS a confluence of interests and hence the arms sales, border protection help, and intelligence exchanges...I`ve heard this straight from the mouths of Mr. Peres and Mr. Jaswant Singh...

As for your other post, I am afraid you are just restating your original point...Israel was founded by jews but it is far from a theocratic state...if nothing else, it is a democratic country...it respects individual liberties, something it would have great trouble with if it was a religious state...last i checked, there were no blasphemy laws in israel...

...we can`t get very far if you keep expounding the fact that israel was founded for jews and ignore everything else....

rsidhar #5: Apart from being ridiculous and repulsive, your remarks are idiotic. You are actually supporting the death of innocent poeople through terrorism.

Unlike India, Pakistan does allow the international press access to any terrorist attack carried out in Pakistan. And unlike India, Pakistan does not pile up its forces on the Indian border as a threat, after terrorist attack. These are the major differences between how Pakistan handles these situations and how India handles them. And this is exactly why, Pakistani investigations into such attacks, carry far more weightage than the one-side hidden investigations carried out in India.

Al-Qaeda has never carried out attacks in Pakistan, until Pakistan supported the US in Afghanistan. It has nothing to do with Kashmir. The attack was against the US embassy certifying this. Unfortunately India is trying to use this to support its repressive policies in Kashmir. It is in India`s interest for Al-Qaeda to carry out as many attacks in Pakistan as possible, thereby destabilizing Pakistan. It is also in India`s interest to blame everything in India on Pakistan without proof.

I hope Pakistan does not follow the Indian policies of using the deaths of innocent civilians as a shield to gain political advantage against India. It should allow third-party investigations into this attack, and try to find out who did it.

My condolensces to the famiilies of the people who died.

Folks the Americans now know the family secret --Talibans were Pakistan`s -- born out of wedlock --children!

Now this is what happens when you invite Osama-Busters as house guest.

Here is what NYT has to say about the Taliban breeders:



Pakistan Ended Aid to Taliban Only Hesitantly

By DOUGLAS FRANTZ

SLAMABAD, Pakistan, Dec. 7 — One month after the Pakistan government agreed to end its support of the Taliban, its intelligence agency was still providing safe passage for weapons and ammunition to arm them, according to Western and Pakistani officials.

On Oct. 8 and again on Oct. 12, Pakistani border guards at a dusty checkpoint in the Khyber Pass waved on convoys headed into Afghanistan. Western intelligence officials said that under the trucks` tarpaulins were rifles, ammunition and rocket-propelled grenade launchers for Taliban fighters.

Pakistan`s premier spying agency, Inter-Services Intelligence, had long provided safe passage to armadas of truckers and smugglers who supplied a mountain of weapons to the Taliban war machine. But the policy was supposed to have changed in September after a Washington ultimatum to Pakistan.

A senior Pakistani intelligence official acknowledged that the Oct. 8 shipment did contain arms for the Taliban, but he said that it was the last officially sanctioned delivery and that the Pakistanis have since been living up to their commitment to the Americans.

Even around that time, there were signs of a change. Pakistani military advisers were withdrawn from Afghanistan over the following weeks, a move that Western intelligence officials say may have been a crucial factor in the surprisingly swift collapse of Taliban forces when confronted by the Northern Alliance.

``We did not fully understand the significance of Pakistan`s role in propping up the Taliban until their guys withdrew and things went to hell fast for the Talibs,`` said a Western diplomat who has monitored the region for many years.

Nonetheless, Inter-Services Intelligence, or I.S.I., remains what many describe as a state within a state, with independent, and worrying, political tendencies.

``Power remains in the hands of a powerful group of `jihadi` generals who are outside the government apparatus, but have tentacles in government,`` the former prime minister, Benazir Bhutto, said in an interview.

Ms. Bhutto is hardly an impartial observer. Now living in self-imposed exile in Dubai to avoid corruption charges at home, she blames I.S.I. for conspiring to topple her second government in 1996, in part because she refused to fully back the Taliban.

But her view is shared by many in Pakistan`s intelligence and diplomatic ranks, where the strong sense is that Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the president, must begin a broader purge if he hopes to loosen the grip of elements in I.S.I. who, even now, are loyal to the Taliban.

One of the agency`s staunchly Islamist intelligence directors was Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul, who headed the agency in the late 1980`s and remains an influential figure within it.

``It will not be so easy for officers to set aside their beliefs and change sides,`` General Gul, who is retired, said in a recent interview.

General Gul remains a supporter of the Taliban and he denounced the Americans for condemning them and Osama bin Laden without providing any proof of guilt.

``Osama bin Laden is a sensitive man and he had nothing to do with the attacks on America,`` he said. ``You Americans will have to support the Taliban one day. They are not going to go away. They are integral, organic, historic.``

The agency and General Musharraf had specifically agreed to end support for the Taliban in a series of meetings and phone conversations right after Sept. 11.

But Pakistani intelligence officers and military advisers continued helping the Taliban at least into October, providing tactical advice and helping to strengthen fortifications around Kandahar, the southern stronghold of the Taliban, diplomats and intelligence officials said.

To reverse this, on Oct. 7 — the day the Americans started bombing Afghanistan — General Musharraf took the strong — and risky — step of removing the director of I.S.I., Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed, who is regarded as pro-Taliban. He replaced him with a moderate, Lt. Gen. Ehsan ul-Haq.

Speaking of General Musharraf, a senior American official said: ``He knows he has got cells of Taliban people in intelligence and he`s got a rule that he is going to kick anyone out who has been there four or five years because you don`t know where the cells are.``

To help the purge, American officials are questioning former Pakistani officials to compile a list of intelligence officers and other government officials whose pro-Islamic sentiments make them suspect, according to people who said they were interviewed as part of the search.

For many within the intelligence service, helping the Taliban was as much a religious duty as a military one. Some of the officers had trained Afghan fighters against the Soviets when I.S.I. funneled $3 billion in American funds into Afghanistan.

For seven years, Pakistan`s Islamic government had been the Taliban`s main sponsor, alongside Mr. bin Laden. It provided military equipment, recruiting assistance, training and tactical advice that enabled the band of village mullahs and their adherents to take control of Afghanistan and turn it into a haven for terrorists.

The impact was considerable because, after fattening its coffers with American money, I.S.I. was able to tilt the battle in Afghanistan.

Nasirullah Khan Babar, a retired army general who was Pakistan`s interior minister in 1994, packed his country`s diplomatic posts in Afghanistan with intelligence agents to ensure that the Taliban got the help they needed.

``They were I.S.I. people who had been in the jihad and the Afghans had a lot of respect for them,`` General Babar said in a recent interview at his home in Peshawar.

One of those agents was Amir Sultan Tarar, who was designated consul general in Herat, in the west. He used the code name Colonel Imam, which adopts a religious title and was a common nom de guerre among I.S.I. officers.

He befriended the Taliban`s spiritual leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar, and provided tactical advice to his forces while also serving as a conduit for arms and money, according to former Pakistani intelligence officials. Like many of the Pakistanis, he donned a turban and grew a beard to blend in with his clients.

As the Taliban captured more territory and enforced their harsh brand of Islam on larger swaths of the population, concern began to grow in Pakistan and Washington.

DRUMZ (loads of posts):

[(I am somewhat drunk right now, please excuse the grammer).]

Ganja toking, sharaab drinking, sappho loving...

- You are one crazy Mussulmaan.

:)

Shammi (#391):

Obviously when you read the news you read the news and when you read an op-ed you read an opinion. But ‘where’ you read the news could reveal a bias as well. Anyway, I was discussing with Dr. Poonawalla the matter about ‘objective journalism’, and if some people end up getting “deceived” it is because they rely too much on being spoon-fed by others. And in these days of quickie news-bytes anyone with a Net connection can manage to have an opinion from borrowed wisdom or the last resort of the ‘peace-makers’ – only SOME people create trouble. And they decide who those some people are….

-----

Dr. Poonawala (#418):

Let us take your counter-arguments to my post a little further…

[Let me point out a flaw in your reasoning. You imply that I am not a Kashmir and tell me that those who have been in Kashmir for generations are better equipped and more knowledgeable about Kashmir.

The point is that this is the same arguments that the Shiv Sena would use to discredit your Indian-ness or the fact that you are a Bombayite. You have not been in India for thousands of years like the Hindus and thus you are less Indian. Do you accept this? No. So, I am a Kashmiri as I live in Kashmir, believe Kashmir is my home and speak Kashmiri.]

I did not say you were not a Kashmiri; but I did point out that those who you call the elite have lived there for generations and may know the reality better than you and certainly much more than I, and I also specified the reason as their having been through terror and turmoil.

I find it silly that you see this on par with the Shiv Sena’s attitude towards Mumbaikars/

Mumbaiites. I assume you have made this point because of my being a Muslim. You would not have said this to a Gujarati or a South Indian Hindu – the question about their Indian-ness would not have been raised. As you are enthralled with history, may I point out that many Muslims in India are converts from Hinduism, and Indian Muslims have lived there for as long as Hindus. I wish you knew what you were talking about before getting so touchy. I speak about six Indian languages from different regions and have lived in those places at varied times, but I know that I cannot qualify as a ‘local’ and claim to know more than them. However, since you have spent a good many years in Kashmir, your case is different. Isn’t it interesting that you have not once mentioned being discriminated against by anyone (including the dreaded militants) in Kashmir although you are not a native of that land, and yet you think that the SS could use this argument against me??

[You must be very careful about writing about Kashmir. Do you know Kashmiri History? Have you read the Rajatarangini of Lalitaditya? This is the essential starting point.]

I am very ‘caring’ about what I write, not careful though. I must confess I do not know as much about Kashmiri history as you might know, but from all the feelers I have got from that publication they are not looking for an historian. In fact, they are not looking for the Kashmiri point of view, which they already have. This book you mention seems to be on the pop charts of Kashmiri history; I wonder if the militants have got hold of a copy. Can you also somehow get through to your connections in South Block and see to it that the politicians have copies and also the universities?

[Also, I appreciate that you dont write for a single paper. Perhaps, and no insult is intended, this is also a consequence of your financial wealth? Obviously you are wealthy enough to not have to depend on a singl paper for a steady salary and hence find the liberty and freedom to freelance. Many would like to do so but due to practical constraints have to accept a regular job with a single newspaper.]

Of course, no insult is intended, but it is a non-sequiter – a quality mastered by anyone who needs to make a sharp point on an anonymous forum. However, as a doctor of (for) the poor) I assume you too must be wealthy enough to sustain your efforts. The Kashmir economy is in the pits and who better than you to be aware of this. The ‘freedom to freelance’ is not such a luxury anymore when more and more publications rely on outsiders rather than their staff. Not only that, there have been some fine people who have put everything at stake to strike out independently even though they are not well-off for a reason that might not be very fashionable but am glad still exists. It is called self-respect.

[Please do write further about your travel plans.]

Most certainly, I will, though journalists are known to just land up at the scene of action unannounced. But would only be visiting as a well-wisher.

Regards,

Farzana

Rejoinder to previous post. Sorry missed out in providing a juicy tidbit:

``...Gen. Jehangir Karamat, chief of the armed forces, argued that the agency should stop its activities inside Afghanistan and civilian members of the government argued that if Pakistan withdrew its support, the Taliban would melt away, according to a review of minutes from the meeting provided by a participant.``

``But Lt. Gen. Aziz Khan, deputy director general of I.S.I. at the time, offered an impassioned defense of the Taliban: ``These people will make Pakistan strong. There is nothing we need to fear from them. All they will do if they take over Afghanistan is spread pure Islam.````

``The intelligence service carried the day and Pakistan did not pull back.``

``American intelligence officers were certain that the Pakistanis were providing training and tactical advice to the Taliban along with money and weapons and this speculation was later supported by other evidence.``

``Western intelligence officials credit the victory to Pakistani military advisers who fought alongside the Taliban. An intercepted telephone conversation described by two Western diplomats seemed to back that assertion.``

``In the call, Colonel Imam, the I.S.I. officer from Herat, was heard to boast, ``My boys and I are riding into Mazar-i-Sharif.`` ``(NY Times)

Re: Romair #273

``...The ISI is not all it is made out to be. It`s influence and power is highly over-rated. Everything from Advani`s stomach ache to Benazir`s incompetence is blamed on the ISI. Secondly, it is under the control of the civilian govt...``

From the NY Times (Dec. 8, 2001):

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Dec. 7 — One month after the Pakistan government agreed to end its support of the Taliban, its intelligence agency was still providing safe passage for weapons and ammunition to arm them, according to Western and Pakistani officials.

``We did not fully understand the significance of Pakistan`s role in propping up the Taliban until their guys withdrew and things went to hell fast for the Talibs,`` said a Western diplomat who has monitored the region for many years.

Nonetheless, Inter-Services Intelligence, or I.S.I., remains what many describe as a state within a state, with independent, and worrying, political tendencies...the strong sense is that Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the president, must begin a broader purge if he hopes to loosen the grip of elements in I.S.I. who, even now, are loyal to the Taliban...For seven years, Pakistan`s Islamic government had been the Taliban`s main sponsor, alongside Mr. bin Laden. It provided military equipment, recruiting assistance, training and tactical advice that enabled the band of village mullahs and their adherents to take control of Afghanistan and turn it into a haven for terrorists. END OF QUOTE

I rest my case. So much for the `civilian control over the ISI`. QED. More juicy material in the article at http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/08/international/asia/08STAN.html

This reminds me of a famous quote by a great American President -- You can fool some of the people some of the time, some people all the time, but not all people all the time. (Abraham Lincoln)

DRUMZ

``So in to hip hop`` - not.

``Structure of Scientific Revolutions`` is perhaps one the single most influential books of last 50 years - every chapter is fun and it is not a difficult read. Ofcourse with the emergence of multidisciplinary science, it is being reevaluated. Also I recommend ``Consilience: Unity of knowledge`` - I am becoming interested in the understanding the structure and limits of what we call knowledge - so call as it does not include mathematical symbolism or representation.

On how it relates to ideas presented by Urstruly:

Agreement or disagreement is not really so important - what I was pointing to was the fact that a ``paradigm shift`` had already occured within Islamia more than a hundred years ago - of course, the details of the shift were not the same - it`s general thrust was - the reawakening, resurrence of Islamia - (Notice the way Romair and Urstruly, both described the partition)

This shift will now change, only with the death of very large numbers of Muslims - The paradigm of the US as a hyperpower and the West constituted in NATO as an ``overlord`` is similarly effected - Afghanistan is not the beginning of the end of Islam - but the beginning of the end of the US as the sole global hegemon.

Similarly look at what Kuhn has to say about competing paradigms - paradigm wars - even here on chowk, you can see the paradigm wars: Unrestrained self represented in the proponents of so called secular humanism calling for the differentiation of religion from culture and conscience and traditionalist who see religion as the bedrock of reason and freedom (morality) in culture. (notice in both cases, the circularity of their arguments - they just talk past each other) My money is on the traditionalist, with a difference, these traditionalist are now armed with new sciences (can it then be argued that they are still traditionalists? - I think Yes, because they ground themselves in traditional religion - it not the religion that is changed but the knowledge, the tools to understand it that have evolved), method itself is being reevaluated. I would urge you investigate the writings of Peter L Berger, Robert N Bellah and

Daniel Bell and Karl Popper and compare their thinking with the ideas presented in Soroush`s work.

``Invisibility of Revolutions`` is also an idea in ``Structure of Scientif Revolutions``. The writing of scientific history (textbooks) is such that all sciences appear linear and cummulative - whereas in reality, scientific revolution, the shifts in paradigm, actually result in changes in perceptual (conceptual) reality.

On Hamidm : Did someone say ``angry inch`` - Don`t let staleness get on your nerves. My objection towards him is that he refuses to engage: verbose, pedantic - sophistry - Yeah, sure! but where are his ideas, either for or in opposition to the ideas presented. I don`t doubt his heart is in the right place and I am please that he reads the posts but I feel he is too comfortable, too lazy, to challenge the ideas in a meaningful way - as if he has not been moved intellectually, emotionally, for a very long time, and he won`t present something in response which one can learn from.

There, I have taken several thousand words to ``it`s been fun``.

# 424

Jesus! That was long....alright...apologies to everyone.