The Clash Of Un-Civilizations And Osama-ism

Re: Tahmed321

``...But even the poor, contrary to common contention of the elitists, know quite well that the way out of poverty is education...``

You are correct in stating that a big middle class is an essential precursor to countering the three scourges mentioned in the Economist article. But, countries like Saudi Arabia, Gulfdoms, HAVE had affluent middle classes. I do not doubt the ability of the poor to determine what is best for them. It is the arrogance of the unaccountable elite which appears to result in a false sense of knowing what is best for the poor that I have grave doubts about. It was not the poor or the fundamentalists that created the three conditions in Pakistan (Hudood ordinance, gender inequality, usurpation of democracy) that I mentioned in an earlier post. All these were implemented by a misguided elite under little or no pressure from the masses. To be fair, the elites in India, too, have perpetuated mass poverty by misguided economic socialist experimentation.

Re: Tahmed321

Rejoinder to my previous post

Let us take the example of gender equality. Everybody knows that India is not the land to which anyone wishing to learn about best practices in gender equality need go to. There are many other countries that do a far better job in this regard. However, the law in India gives women equal rights as men, and there is no move underway to deny women those legally enshrined rights. Empowered with those laws, women have successfully won a few major legal battles -- dowry deaths are now treated very seriously (burden of proof has shifted to the in-laws in the case of any suspicious deaths), and now women are struggling to get to get 1/3 of Parliamentary seats set aside for women. Barring Bangladesh and Turkey (am I missing any other countries), most of the MidEast still LEGALLY treats women very poorly.

Yehuda Goldsteen #108 I can see from your latest remark addressed to me that (despite the things you wrote earlier) you are nevertheless an excellent judge of character (just joking).

More seriously, as you can see from the disbelief of people on this post, there is very little people from Pakistan really know about Israel. The internet is of course a great tool for people to build understanding. My experience on chowk with the India-Pakistan discussions tells me not to have very high expectations though, since good discussions (and there are many fine Indian and Pakistani posters on chowk) often get drowned out by the ``noise`` of thoughtless posts or by the vicious cycle of nasty posts.

I hope you will stick around on chowk for as long as you find it interesting, and add to the diversity of the positive discussions.

I have always wondered why Indians are so obsessed with the creation of Pakistan, and the Two-Nation Theory. I would say Indians are more obsessed with the TNT than even Pakistanis are about the creation of Pakistan. This is somewhat odd. If one were to count the number of times the phrase TNT has appeared on Chowk, I think one would find that an overwhelming number of times, it has been used by the Indians; not by Pakistanis. Why?

Another topic of interest are the efforts of many Indians to discredit Jinnah. Barring the odd Pakistani fanatic, one will hardly find any Pakistani who is too concerned about Nehru or Gandhi. Most are indifferent about both these personalities. Pakistanis rarely, if ever, attempt to discredit them.

It is hard to find any country in the world, other than India, whose citizens two generations after independence, are so obsessed with discrediting the independence of another country, i.e. Pakistan. British citizens could care less about the legitimacy of illegitemacy of an independent India. British authors do not spent their precious intellectual bandwidth attempting to discredit George Washington, etc. One will not find too many, if any, Pakistanis writing a book opposing the creation of India (which was created one day after Pakistan, by the way). Infact, one will hardly find any Pakistani discrediting the creation of Bangladesh (which was not created one day before Pakistan). Most Pakistanis are now well into the stage of introspection of attempting to find out why the Bangladeshis wanted a new country. Even though, the events of 1971 happened in many of our lifetimes.

Yet so many Indians, whose parents weren`t even born in 1947, seem obsessed with the creation of Pakistan; attempting for some strange reason, to intellectually discredit its reasons of existence. One would think the only people who can make that decision are the Pakistanis. What the Indians think of the independence of Pakistan is at best immaterial, and at worst nonsense. Just like what the British colonists think about the independence of India is immaterial.

One could think, this obsession is a genuine desire of the Indians to have Pakistanis included into their country, i.e. they miss the Pakistanis, and would love to share the same country with them. Much like a husband who is still in love with a wife who has divorced him, and wants her to come back to him. But this cannot be the case, since Indians have gone out of the their way to buy armament to attack Pakistan, and have traditionally left no stone unturned to isolate Pakistan in international politics, to the extent of unsuccessfully trying to get Pakistan declared a terrorist state. Husbands who want to re-marry a divorced wife, they still love, do not behave in such a manner.

So why such an obsessive attachment with Pakistan being a part of India, while simultaneously discrediting anything Pakistani, including the two things most dear to Pakistanis, i.e. its founder and its creation and simultaneously holding a threatening posture towards Pakistanis, both by the Indian policy makers, book writers, and Chowk visitors?

I can only come up with one reason, i.e. the large numbers of Indian Muslims. The biggest potential problem in India currently is its large Muslim community. Indian current politics, economy and foreign policy has sidelined this group. The politics is out of the control of a secular Congress and is under the control of Hindu nationalist party, which according to its own website, regards the RSS as its philosophical benchmark. Economically, the gap between Indian Hindus and Indian Muslims is growing by the day; one getting wealthier, the other getting poorer. In foriegn policy, despite having the second or third largest Muslim population of any country in the world, India is getting closer and closer to Isreal, completely disregarding its Muslim population`s views.

The isolation of the Indian Muslim population is a ticking time bomb (words of an Indian Hindu friend). Most Indians seem to feel, the creation of Pakistan, could give current Indian Muslims, ``wrong ideas.`` Hence this obsession of discrediting Pakistan`s founders and its creation, all together, i.e. to convince India`s own Muslims that the creation of Pakistan was actually based on false ideologies and desires. This theme has been picked up certain successful Indian Muslims as well. Perhaps to gain credibility in the Indian society, or perhaps because they legitimately feel the creation of Pakistan, has left Indian Muslims in a vulnerable position (the later is the only legitimate complain any Indian can have against the creation of Pakistan, in my opinion).

I am sure Indian intellectuals know that regardless of how much they attempt to discredit Pakistan`s creation, it will remain there on the map. It is not going to go away (unless BB and NS take over again, of course). Even if they can somehow or the other prove that Jinnah was a murdering psychopath who created Pakistan to augment a massive drug-dealing business, will that make Pakistan disappear now, after 50 years? Obviously not. Then why the obsession? Specially when the areas constituting Pakistan were never a part of Indian empire. They were a part of the British empire.

The Indian reaction is like that of a man who had two wives. The first one has divorced him, because she was, rightly or wrongly, uncomfortable living with him. The man is now obsessed with discrediting his divorced wife, or attempting to harm her, or to force her back into his own house. The reason for this destructive obsession is not love for the ex-wife, but a fear, that the wife who is still with him, will get wrong ideas from the first wife, and will attempt to leave him, also.

A better way to handle this situation would be to respect the individuality and freedom of the decisions of the ex-wife, which led to the divorce. And to create a situation where the current wife remains in love with him.

Pakistanis have many faults, but one will be hard pressed to find any Pakistani who spends his valuable time attempting to doubt the ideologies behind India`s birth. Pakistanis have matured far beyond that. Luckily, there are no Rafiq Zakarias in Pakistan attempting to discredit the existence of India (or of Bangladesh, for that matter), as a nation. If the Indians can cross this hump, and accept the desires of the various groups of people in South Asia, South Asia will become a much more friendlier place.

RE: Reply #: 94 Urstruly

What I meant by ``Islamic Civilization`` not being monolithic even under Huntington`s description has to do with the clash that he envisions.
Is there going to be such a clash between Americans who are Muslims and have never been outside of America and the West?
Are the current Northern Alliance fighters in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban to participate in such a clash with the West in future?
Lets face it Urstruly. The OIC is supposed to be THE representative of Muslim Governments in the world of today. Their effectiveness is very limited. They never seem to have the backbone to press ahead with any single agenda.
In my very limited capacity and humble opinion I am saying that Huntington is trying to create an enemy that does not exist.
The masses in large Muslim countries are too busy making ends meet to be thinking along these lines. Sympathy with fellow Muslims that we all feel is not going to create the clash that Huntington describes. The masses in Muslim countries desire more freedom and a better standard of living for themselves and their children. That is why the do not vote for Mullahs.

Anyway, just some thoughts..

Ras

Folks, please join me in condemning this outrageous newstory from The Dawn -- one of Pakistan`s most respected newspapers:

QUOTE: ``SRINAGAR, Dec 2: Seven Hindus en route to a wedding were massacred on Sunday by FREEDOM FIGHTERS (emphasis added) in the southern mountains of occupied Kashmir, adding to 19 deaths in overnight violence, police said. The UNARMED Hindu civilians were on their way to a wedding in Udhampur district, 150 kilometres north of Jammu, when they were ambushed in a dense forest and SHOT AT POINT BLANK RANGE, police said...``

http://www.dawn.com/2001/12/03/top12.htm

END OF QUOTE

Killing of innocents notwithstanding, Dawn saw it fit to call the perpetrators of this crime `freedom fighters`. What type of a freedom struggle is it that causes even a mainstream national newspaper patronized by the elite, to lose its moral judgment, and write that sentence in a dead-pan, straightfaced manner? Killing members of a marriage party advances the cause of freedom? It is repugnant. It is this sort of moral irresponsibility that makes me very sad when I hear high-ranking officials of Pakistan including President Musharraf justify all this is in the name of a freedom struggle.

Urstruly-115

[ one of the book by my favorite author Ishfaque Hussain. Yep the living legend Ishfaque is also my spiritual mentor along with her wife aapaa Bano Qudsia]

Chaudhary ji,

Your favourite author and spiritual mentor and

unfortunately you dont even know his proper name!

It is Ishfaque Ahmed.And what is this nonsense...

her wife?

Urstruly-116

Chaudhary ji,

Jao maaf kiya.Iftaar kam kiya karo:)

BEYOND K FOR KAFIR,

I always suspected that there has to be systematic indoctrination to make the younger genrations of pakistanis of the YLh type to make them ontologically india haters. k for kafir is one in the schools, and now a story by a famous pakistani writer asfaq ahmed as quoted by urstruly in 115.

Here a revered indian/hindu idea of yoga is rediculed in childrens stories by a spiritual writer of pakistan, a living legend according to the following quote from

urstruly 115

``I dont know but you always remind me of a character in one of the book by my favorite author Ishfaque Hussain. Yep the living legend Ishfaque is also my spiritual mentor along with her wife aapaa Bano Qudsia. Anyway this character is from his book ``Aik Mohabbat Sao Afsaanay``; the character is a Sadhoo Baba who desperately wants to please his creator and the way he does it is by Tantra Yoga. In Tantra Yoga he slids a cotton spository up his, you know what, and sets the other end, which hangs outside, on fire. As the fire reaches you know where, he runs on the roads crying and screaming ``Rothray Yaar man ja``, ``Ruthray yar man ja``.

UNDERSTANDING PAKISTANIS

Romair 121 post is a good example of the pakistani mind set. The india hating process is so well permeated the pak mind set right from the education to childrens stories that even an allegedly educated person is unaware of the extent of the brainwashing. Read 121 and read urstruly post 115, how in various subtle ways the redicule of every thing hindu is injected. Post 115 gives the mechanism that creates post 121.

Scout # 120: Well, I WAS going to see if the latest newcomer incarnation would be any fun, but to alleviate some of the suspense, compare Mr. Poonwala and Mr Yehuda Goldsteen`s writings with our very own Solitude aka Shiraz aka Bharatiya Musalman aka Imran Zulfiqar --- paying special attention to the ``halo`` in the style of writing (although the halo seems a little worn from the extended wearing by solitude aka B-M. Note also the rather abrupt disuse of the appendage after the name: it used to say , deprecatingly, ``Doctor for the poor`` .... I`m going to leave it up to you to see which is which ;)

Behram B. Atashband # 123, Poonwalla # 107

The truth lies somewhere in between (Beharam -Iranians have nothing to do with the Arabs; Poonwalla - Iranians have given up Persian culture). Many educated Iranians tend to be extremely proud/fond of their Persian culture, including all the things Behram has mentioned. Iranians, as a group also take pride in being ``aryans,`` and strongly resist/resent Arab cultural imperialism.

On the other hand, recent ``Islamic`` revolution has led to the some of the same issues of identity crisis in Iran as in many other Islamic nations. An Iranian colleague of mine would bristle at the fact that the Mullahs in his country were trying to turn Iran into just another cultural backwash of Saudi Arabia.

Ladies and Gentlemen

No doubt, the new`est hobby on chowk seems to be finding out ``Who`s Who`` i.e. uncovering ppl who use multiple usernames. In this context, let me introduce Mr. Sherlock Hitchcock... errr... I meant Mr. Brad Cruise. Just when I thought the issue --- or let`s say the ``non-issue`` --- between scout and myself had been ``resolved``, this aristotle claims that I have something against her from my previous ``janam``...

``But whats your problem with Scout .I am not telling you as her advocate ,but you are jeopardizing your cover b/c of your pre -``username`` nick enemity must i say .I have your past post to link you to your new `Username` nick ,so be carefull``

Haaaannn... pakra gia mai! Haaai Allah, Brad Cruise is soooo aqalmand! Wow :-)

So what past post are you talking about sir? I invite you to please end this suspense and unleash the ``evidence`` that you`re holding back. Ma`an just think abt it... how totally screwed I will be when this happens ;-)

RACIAL PROFILING OF A MIND and MENTAL PROFILING OF A RACE

``Mhamid, hasan, allah-ditta, abdul, Mohammad, and Thiruverabardan would you step out of the line please``. Some say it is what is gonna happen in near future and some say it is already happening. The question is: which one is a lesser crime-blowing up 250 people using a rented truck in a jiffy or blowing up 3900 people using four planes. Dilemma? Then try answering this question: when Timothy McVeigh blew up federal building why didn’t anyone expressed his ``concern`` that he is uncomfortable flying with a white male in his late twenties. No one stopped renting trucks or cars to white males. And no one asked white males to step out of the lines at the airports, and bus stations. No airline companies asked white males to step out of the plane because other passengers feel uncomfortable. And today it is none other but brown male who is willing to ``cooperate``, (as if he has a choice), to step out of the lines and disembark the friggin` planes. Sometimes I wonder if this cooperation is a result of a cost-benefit analysis that a brown male runs in his mind or is it the inherited slave of a mind from colonial era when he pretended to look the other way while walking in front of a building which used to have the sign reading ``Indians/blacks and dogs not allowed``. The cost-benefit analysis of a slave used to go something like this: ``hmm I can`t go in there anyway so why bother``.

Sometimes I wonder if the notion of civil liberties is a state of mind or do they really exist.

Your comments are welcome.

BEYOND J FOR JACKASS

You know all along I was thinking, since I read that story by Ashfaque Ahmad, that he was bullshitting but now I realize that you hindus are really really bad people:)

BTW ``bad`` in the above sentence is the white ``bad`` which means bad and not black ``bad`` which means good.

shammi #126
``write that sentence in a dead-pan, straightfaced manner?``

If their leader on a white horse Musharraf can say something like `Pakistan had nothing to do with the Taliban` at the UN in front of the world`s press with a ``dead-pan straightfaced manner``, anything is possible.


http://www.un.org/News/briefings/docs/2001/pakistanpc.doc.htm

``...But having political relations with a party did not mean accepting everything they did, he continued. The Taliban were not created by Pakistan, they were indigenous, and Pakistan was neither equipping them nor cooperating with them militarily. ?Whatever military resources we have?, he said, ?there is an Eastern direction we would like to concentrate them on?, not on Afghanistan....``


``please join me in condemning``

Its for Indians to act, not ask others to condemn. It bears repeating, take a long look at the rubble in Kabul and the Afghan orphans with legs blown off by landmines and see the consequences of leaving any wiggle room for Pakistani delusions.