We, The Muslim Americans

Shammi,

I`ll look at the link you posted and get back to you; have you seen T. Friedman`s column in the Op-Ed section of the NYT today? Why are we not seeing an article that counterbalances it?

Sigalph

All lives are equally meaningful, except for Palestinian lives, apparently. Israel must stop dragging its feet on peace talks, it must stop settlers from living on Palestinian territories, it must withdraw from Ramallah, it must stop the police state currently in action, it must start accepting the moral imperative that is clearly being faced with-that it cannot live on the subjugation of a people.

My gut feeling is that there is a great deal of institutionalized hatred and contempt for Palestinians on the part of the Israelis who condone Sharon`s brutal siege - and George Jr.`s offensive demand that Arafat try to make peace while being a prisoner in his own home, shows the extent that these two leaders will wilfully attempt to distort the basic realities in the Occupied Territories. My support is completely for a peaceful and consensual ceasefire.

anNy,

Check out www.wbai.org-you should be able to get certain shows on the Internet:

Beyond the Pale; Progressive Jewish show

Democracy Now; daily one hour show; www.democracynow.org

Asian Pacific Forum: www.asianpacificforum.org

Urstruly

Thanks for the info; but Israel`s occupation is relevant to me as an American paying taxes.

ANny,

Ref Alternative stations:

http://www.kpft.org/ is part of the Pacifica network. One show that you may like is Democracy now (Amy Goodman)

(weekday mornings 9am US cental time)

sigalph235 #329:

[...Re: Edward Said


He lives in NYC and is getting a fat salary as a Columbia U professor. Then he expects Palestinians in Gaza, Jerusalem, and Judaea/Samaria to actively oppose Israeli administration at the cost of their lives. Typical Arab exile who cares little for his `people` but more for his rhetoric. I don`t see the professor braving IDF bullets that he wants Palestinian teenagers to face!...]


---allah aap ko aur khoosh rakhay!...in the face of this perceptive logic what can any temporal person utter?...yes i agree...we should always shoot the messenger!


---just for the record...though...am deadly AGAINST (pun intended)..the loss of ANY life...


_________________________________________________


anNY dear #330:

---there is hope yet...even though it seems we are passing through the darkest of night there will be light...there will be another day...ushering in light...and hope....there always is...only we should not count it in `our` time scales!

lve,

t

ylh #245: Hamzad Alvi is quite an interesting guy. I have recently added him to my list of must-read Pakistanis, which currently includes: Shahid Burki, Ayaz Amir, Cowasjee, Nasim Zehra, Tariq Ali, Najam Sethi, and Khushwant Singh (I considered Sardarjis honorary Pakistanis, ever since I realized they feel much more comfortable with us Punjabi speaking Pakistani software engrs. than with Tamil speaking South Indian engrs.).

Of the above, Najam Sethi is a distant family friend. Ayaz Amir is a fellow retired Captain. I met Burki. Nasim Zehra is (was) a fellow member of Tehrek-i-Insaaf (she quit when an NWFP feudal was given an important post in the party). Tariq Ali is the best debator I have ever seen on any channel; he regularly has all the CNN guys jumping out of their hyporcritic suits.

Of the non-Pakistani commentators, I read Eric Margolis (an international authority on Central Asia), Brian Cloughley (authority on Kashmir and the Indian/Pakistani military), Robert Oakley (the only American I have heard who actually understands Pakistan; he was the US ambassador), Farid Zakaria (extremely knowledgeable; though he carries with him a diluted form of his father`s anti-Pakistan biases), and Noam Chomsky (the only American willing to give the anti-American views).

The writers I avoid (i.e. they are either hypocrites, have their own agenda, or are plain stupid) include Benazir Bhutto, Shahbaz Sharif, Gen. Aslam Beg, Gen Hamid Gul, Sumit Ganguly, and the slick Pakistani feudal off-springs when they articulately present their views on feudalism (their views on all other issues are usually very enlightening, however).

As for Hamzad and secularism: It is quite possible I may be a bigger supporter of secularism, and a greater admirer of the illustrious Pasha Sahib than even you are.

My point is that each individual needs to realize their opinions should be limited to themselves, and they have no right to assume that their opinions and outlook on society is the 100% correct one. They cannot and should never try to force their views (secular or religious) down others throat, nor down the throat of Pakistan.

People who think they have seen the light, and assume all others to be ignorant are very dangerous, and need to be kept at an arm`s length from power.

So, if I feel secularism is the Pakistani holy grail, I will go and vote for my favorite secular candidate. However I have no right to state that Pakistan should be a secular (or religious) country, just because I want it to be one.

Here is how the world views Mr. Mushrraf`s clumsy attempt to legitimize his illegitimate regime through -- referendum.

Musharraf lacks a firm footing

Tuesday March 26, 2002

The Guardian

In the department of unfinished business, Pakistan continues to hold a prominent position. Next door, Afghanistan remains far from sorted, as even Britain`s gung-ho tabloid press must now admit. There, the arrival of British reinforcements coincides with another delay in the symbolic return of the exiled king. In the west, politicians` fickle attention turns towards Iraq, since knocking things down, in this case Saddam`s Babylon, is always easier than building them up.

Yet Pakistan is entering perhaps its most fractious period of instability since September 11 forced General Pervez Musharraf to sign up for the ``war against terrorism``.

Far from being fortified by US military aid and back-slapping, Gen Musharraf is struggling to hold the line against resurgent extremist violence.

This noxious fundamentalism, rooted in a perverted Deobandism, inflamed by Wahhabi zealotry and battle-hardened in Kashmir, has produced a string of sectarian counter-attacks since the Pakistani leader launched an anti-terror drive last January.

Among the victims so far are an Islamabad Protestant congregation and the journalist Daniel Pearl.



The failure of US and Afghan government forces to locate, let alone vanquish, al-Qaida and Taliban opponents is not unconnected to Gen Musharraf`s lack of control over the north-western tribal areas and their 450-mile-long Afghan border.

Tribal elders there have declared the US an enemy and say if the Americans enter their territory in ``hot pursuit``, they will get a hot reception.

The self-styled Pakistani president`s banning of hardline parties, his vow to wrest madrassas (religious schools) from the hands of politicised mullahs, his hasty trial this week of Pearl`s alleged killers, and his round-up of 2,000 militants amounts to a high-stakes gamble.

Students of double-dealing should note that in recent days, over half those arrested have been quietly freed. Gen Musharraf vowed in January to ``rid society of sectarian hatred and terrorism``, end ``the Kalashnikov culture`` and build ``a progressive Islamic state``.

But his is a dangerous game that, like Hamid Karzai in Kabul, he may yet lose.

________________________________________________

One sure way for Gen Musharraf to strengthen his position is to restore the constitution and hold free, fair national elections next October, as previously promised.

________________________________________________

This, rather than some bogus presidential referendum in May, could give him the mandate and the legitimacy that his 1999 coup failed to confer.(Guardian)

Soo -- ELECTION -- Mr. Musharraf -- ELECTION -- NOT that farce called REFERUNDUM.

If you`re MAN enough, Mr. Musharraf -- then fight a WOMAN, Benazir -- or another MAN, Nawaz -- in a straight -- FAIR & FREE -- ELECTION.

As a divined ``messiah`` especially sent by god to deliver the people of Pakistan -- you can surely beat the TWO -- hands down.

Soo why not?

Divine or not -- that`s the ONLY way to achieve the NIRVANA of LEGITIMACY -- especially for such a long haul -- of FIVE years.

Dear sigalph miaN:

You write:

“Ah, if wishes were horses...The delusions that PLO apologists suffer from would be a pathetic comedy if it were not related to the grim reality of terrorism.””(sigalph)

I find it rather amusing to read this comment from -- an ex Mukti Bahini APOLOGIST and -- an ex East Pakistani.

May be the same way -- YOUR “delusions” became a reality called Bangladesh – poor Palestinians “delusions” will someday materialize into a sovereign State of Palestine.

I hope you don’t regard -- the creation of Bangladesh – a “pathetic comedy” – my friend.

Regards.

Bina #320 ``The current landowning limit is 200 acres per person in Pakistan``. And it is of course enforced as diligently as the immigration laws of Pakistan, among other things.

Romair #294: Your remarks are very difficult to understand, and straighten out. I think I may have understood this one.

``romair and i have been interacting on this subject for a while…and am not in agreement with him by any stretch of imagination``

Could you point out where you disagree? As far as I know, everything I stated is based on pure solid facts and figures.

I have read every single article from Burki in Dawn. I have met him, as well. He makes a lot of sense to me. He is suggesting nearly everything I am stating. He hasn`t stated anywhere that every single institution in Pakistan, should be wiped clean. The only thing he has asked for is a new constitution under which all the current instituions should operate. Quite a few levels from wiping the slate clean, wouldn`t you say?

``in that context had mentioned that the time was ripe to wipe the clean slate…sadly …imho…none of the institutions of the state could be resusicated``

This is more a poetic metaphor than anything else. You have not offered any practical solutions. Of course, all the institutions should be wiped clean, if they aren`t functioning correctly. But who is going to do it and how is it going to be done? Could you explain this part.

The common folk of Pakistan is who I am concerned about. How exactly do you suggest they will wipe the slate clean? Will there be an Iran or French type revolution? Who is going to lead it, and how? And why hasn`t it happened already? There were plenty of chances for it to occur.

I cannot think of any other practical solution than what I have mentioned. The other solution is to continue to wait for someone to wipe the slate clean. For which you have no practical suggestion. And once the slate is wiped clean, who is going to resurrect the society. It will have the same rates of literacy, with a clean slate.

Revolutions, though attractive, are never the answer. Primarily because they are far and few. They are the idealistically romantic solutions of an impractical mind. The only way forward is evolution, by reforming the hand that has been dealt to Pakistan, through the steps I have mentioned, i.e. liberating Pakistan`s institutions from the clutches of the powerful families.

But I would be interested in how you think the slate could be wiped clean, under Pakistan`s current system, and whom, in your opinion, will carry out this task?

P.S. A simple test is what you should use on your ideas and solutions: if you cannot carry it out yourself, then rest assured no one else can either......

re fairdinkum 322

``Loss of human life is not something to cheer about...``

Hear, hear. Can I now expect an unconditional condemnation of this wave of suicide bombings that has intentionally targetted retaurants, cafes, shopping malls, and hotels?

Raw-Dust (#31)

This is something i found on the net: as for the opinion of the ulama of Ahle Sunnah of the Subcontinent (so called Barelvis) I still have to look that up. Please be patient and in the meanwhile read this article. Caveat Emptor: I am not saying that the view below is that of the Sunni ulama or that it is not. At the moment I do not know.

Was `Uzayr (Ezra) Called The Son Of God?

M S M Saifullah & Mustafa Ahmed

© 1997-1999 Islamic Awareness, All Rights Reserved.



Assalamu-alaikum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu:

`Uzayr, who was exalted by a community of Jews, is identified as Ezra by Muslim commentators. The Qur`an says:

The Jews call `Uzair a son of Allah, and the Christians call Christ the son of Allah. That is the saying from their mouth; (In this) they are intimate; what the Unbelievers of the old used to say. Allah`s curse be on them: how they are deluded away from the truth. [Qur`an 9:30]

Before we take care of the origin of the issue of exalting Ezra to son of God by some Jews, let us first discuss the life of the man himself.

Ezra (5th-4th century BC, Babylon and Jerusalem) was a religious leader of the Jews who returned from exile in Babylon, and a reformer who reconstituted the Jewish community on the basis of the Torah (Law, or the regulations of the first five books of the Old Testament). This monumental work of Ezra helped to make Judaism a religion in which law was central, that enabled the Jews to survive as a community when they were dispersed all over the world. Ezra has with some justice been called the father of Judaism since his efforts did much to give Jewish religion the form that was to characterize it for centuries after the specific form the Jewish religion took after the Babylonian Exile. So important was he in the eyes of his people that later tradition regarded him as no less than a second Moses(P). Regarding the tomb of Ezra Encylopedia Judaica says:

There are number of traditions concerning the site of Ezra`s tomb. According to Josephus it is in Jerusalem; other hold that he was buried in Urta or in Zunzumu on the Tigris; but the general accepted version is that his tomb is situated in Uzer, a village near Basra. This tradition is mentioned by Benjamin of Tuleda, Pethahiah of Regensburg, Judah Alharizi, and other travelers, Jewish and non-Jewish who visited Babylonia.[1]

It is to be kept in mind that the knowledge about Ezra is derived from the Biblical books of Ezra and Nehemiah, supplemented by the Apocryphal (not included in the Jewish and Protestant canons of the Old Testament) book of I Esdras (Latin Vulgate form of the name Ezra), which preserves the Greek text of Ezra and a part of Nehemiah.

It is interesting to note that the Jews in Arabia, during the advent of Islam, were involved in mystical speculation as well as anthromorphizing and worshipping an angel that functions as the substitute creator of the universe. That angel is usually identified as Metatron[2]. Newby notes that:

...we can deduce that the inhabitants of Hijaz during Muhammad`s time knew portions, at least, of 3 Enoch in association with the Jews. The angels over which Metatron becomes chief are identified in the Enoch traditions as the sons of God, the Bene Elohim, the Watchers, the fallen ones as the causer of the flood. In 1 Enoch, and 4 Ezra, the term Son of God can be applied to the Messiah, but most often it is applied to the righteous men, of whom Jewish tradition holds there to be no more righteous than the ones God elected to translate to heaven alive. It is easy, then, to imagine that among the Jews of the Hijaz who were apparently involved in mystical speculations associated with the merkabah, Ezra, because of the traditions of his translation, because of his piety, and particularly because he was equated with Enoch as the Scribe of God, could be termed one of the Bene Elohim. And, of course, he would fit the description of religious leader (one of the ahbar of the Qur`an 9:31) whom the Jews had exalted.[3]

The Islamic exegetes have mentioned that there existed a community of Jews in Yemen who considered Ezra as son of God. Hirschberg says in Encylopedia Judaica:

H Z Hirschberg proposed another assumption, based on the words of Ibn Hazm, namely, that the `righteous who live in Yemen believed that `Uzayr was indeed the son of Allah. According to other Muslim sources, there were some Yemenite Jews who had converted to Islam who believed that Ezra was the messiah. For Muhammad, Ezra, the apostle (!) of messiah, can be seen in the same light as the Christian saw Jesus, the messiah, the son of Allah.[4]

George Sale makes an interesting comment concerning the Muslim as well as Judeo-Christian opinion on this issue.

This grievous charge against the Jews, the commentators endeavour to support by telling us, that it is meant of some ancient heterdox Jews, or else of some Jews of Medina; who said so for no other reason, than for that the law being utterly lost and forgotten during the Babylonish captivity, Ezra having been raised to life after he had been dead one hundred years, dictated the whole anew unto the scribes, out of his own memory; at which they greatly marvelled, and declared that he could not have done it, unless he were the son of God. Al Beidawi adds, that the imputation must be true, because this verse was read to the Jews and they did not contradict it; which they were ready enough to do in other instances.

That Ezra did restore not only the Pentateuch, but also the other books of the Old Testament, by divine revelation, was the opinion of several of the Christian fathers, who are quoted by Dr.Prideaux, and of some other writers; which they seem to have first borrowed from a passage in that very ancient apocryphal book, called in our English Bible, the second book of Esdras. Dr. Prideaux tells us, that herein the Fathers attributed more to Ezra, than the Jews themselves, which he laboured much in, and went a great way in the perfecting of it. It is not improbable however, that the fiction came originally from the Jews, though they be now of another opinion, and I cannot fix it upon them by any direct proof. For, not to insist upon the testimony of the Mohammedans (which yet I cannot but think of some little weight in a point of this nature,) it is allowed by the most sagacious critics, that the second book of Ezra was written by a Chrisitian indeed, but yet one who had been bred a Jew, and was intimately acquainted with the fables of the Rabbins; and the story itself is perfectly in the taste and was of thinking of those men.[5]

Last but not the least, a Christian writer also proposed that Muhammad(P) got the information of Jews exalting Ezra to son of God from the Samaritans who said the Ezra had acted presumptuously and had changed the old divine alphabetical character of the holy Books of the Law - a character still used and revered to this day by rapidly dwindling Samaritan community.[6] This author concludes in a rather unchristian way that:

But it is not at all unlikely that the source of Mohammed`s indictment of the Jews is to be found among the Samaritans or amongst Arab tribesmen of Samaritan strain. If we found in Samaritan literature the opposite belief that Ezra (or Uzair) was the son of Satan, we would be well-nigh sure of having settled the matter.[7]

And Allah knows best!



References

[1] Encylopedia Judaica, Volume 6, Encylopedia Judaica Jerusalem, pp. 1108.

[2] G D Newby, A History Of The Jews Of Arabia, 1988, University Of South Carolina Press, pp. 59.

[3] Ibid, pp. 61.

[4] Encylopedia Judaica, pp. 1108.

[5] George Sale, The Koran: IX Edition of 1923, London, pp. 152.

[6] J Walker, Who Is `Uzair?, The Moslem World, Volume XIX, No. 3, 1939, pp. 305-306.

[7] Ibid, pp. 306.

* * * * * * * * *

The article about Muslims in America was quite good but I think that Muslims will increasingly have to make a choice between the culture of their host nations and that of Islam.

If we are to be able to live as US/UK citizens and be law abiding and * *YET maintain our Islamic identity * * it is IMPERATIVE for Muslims to set up traditional Islamic education centres [madrassahs] in the West. Examples are the Zaytuna Institute in California of Shaykh Hamza Yusuf and the Jamia al Karam in Nottingham. Our children`s iman depends on it.

Saminashah:

`The quality of education here is abysmal,`` said a Western diplomat. Pakistan has one of the world`s lowest literacy rates, and one of the lowest levels of education spending. Barely a third of Pakistan`s population is literate, ``even using a very low standard,`` the State Department said in its most recent human rights report. Pakistan`s literacy rate ranks below that of countries like Haiti, Rwanda and Sudan, according to the most recent United Nations Development Program report. Spending on education as a percentage of gross national product has been steadily declining, and now stands at barely 2 percent. In contrast, Bangladesh spends around 17 percent, and Iran and Turkey slightly more than 20 percent. Pakistan`s most recent budget sets aside $107 million for education, compared with $2 billion for the military — though experts say military spending is actually much higher.`

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/31/international/asia/31STAN.html

Saminashah, and you are telling us that Arafat`s problems are something that we should worry about when the above is true? Did you read the bit about `But a greater commitment to education has to begin with the politicians and economic elite, foreign diplomats and many Pakistanis say.`

Re: Fuzair/Romair

Here is some more evidence that just might support Fuzair`s assertion, i.e. the Soviets did not want to walk into Pakistan.

aliph) Had the Soviets any designs of that sort, they would almost certainly have taken into confidence their biggest S. Asian ally you-know-who on Pakistan`s eastern frontier. There are many reasons for having done this (military coordination with India would have made defeating Pakistan easier, diplomatic coordination would have made it more difficult for other powers to intervene, not consulting with India on moves regarding Pakistan would have been an unforgiveable faux pax, etc.) Fact is that at the time of the Soviet invasion, India was under a caretaker govt., and Mrs. Gandhi assumed the reins of power fully one week after the invasion begain. It is unlikely that the Soviets would have discussed such plans with a caretaker govt. with only a limited mandate.

bay) Should one argue that perhaps the Soviets had reached agreement over a Pak invasion with the relatively stable govt. of Morarji Desai in the summer of `79 or earlier, then that also sounds incredible because Morarji was the biggest peacenik that any ISI chief could have desired. Not only did Morarji oppose Indira`s plans for the establishment of Bangladesh, he was also the one Indian PM with whom Zia Ul Haq had a personal friendship. Indeed, Morarji had prevailed over opposition within his own Cabinet over granting recognition to Zia, and had resisted calls to publicly criticize Bhutto`s execution and embarras Zia. Thus, it is unlikely that Morarji would have gone along with any Soviet designs on Pakistan. At the time, India`s chief desire was to keep foreign powers out of the Subcontinent (even if it meant the Soviets). In any case, had such agreements been reached, they would have gone out the window with the collapse of the Morarji government (in which Vajpayee was the foreign minister, and George Fernandes the railway minister). There simply could not have been any understanding reached with the out-of-power Gandhi. Lastly, Seymour Hersch has alleged that Morarji was a CIA informant. Would the Soviets have discussed this with Morarji without the Americans getting wind of the fact?

tay) Mrs. Gandhi upon assuming power was privately furious with the Soviets for giving the Americans a reason to enter S. Asia.

Re: Saminashah

Check out `Suicidal Lies` at http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/31/opinion/31FRIE.html

Re: Saminashah

``...a war is premised on two parties that are equally armed...``

No, it is not. Heard of the `Powell Doctrine`?

Re: Bina

``The efficiency of Agriculture Industry`` reminds me of a an old story I read a long time ago. Mullah Naseeruddin (MN) sends a pound of prime usda approved meat home to his wife with instruction that he will be accompanied by a guest for dinner that night. I suspect his wife was a Kashmiri and hence could not resist the tempation and she ends up enjoying the meat all by herself, anyway when MN returns home that evening he inquires about the meat, the wife points towards the cat present in the room and tries to convince MN that probably the cat had it. MN picks the cat up and weighs it. The cat turns out exactly a pound. MN say,``Gosht to Mill gaya haye, per Billi kahan haye?``.

I am sure you must have done a great deal of research about the agriculture industry and its efficiency that I really learned from you, you may be right about its delivery chain being all that as well, may be my casual comment was too generalistic and my intentions were vague and what I meant to say, which by the way has been said much better by others like hamidm, sameerjb, romair etc, it was more about the feudal fauji nexsus. If I poo pooed the feudal I did not exonerate the fauji.

But c`mon, I don`t think NA seat is worth only 200 acres...unless the ``Kummeez`` (the more effectionate term in use by the feudals to address there serfs) are absolute in love with them.

Bina my uncle is probably the top textile guy if not ``the`` guy in garments industry at home, his operation is just grand. But you know what, you cannot find one piece, one freak`n piece that he produces in Pakistan in the local market. Its is absolute to his benefit alone. His best quality product comes out here and is not available locally and that bothers me. I don`t like it.

My comments about Abida or Baber or Ejaz-ul Haq were out of spite, I wasn`t being colourful, I was just stating fact, they are rolling in it and where did they get it....? I think it is public knowledge how saifullahs or Marwats or Ayubs get unsecured loans or gift wrapped industry, hell last time I checked NAB was looking for one of my uncles who is being poetic about a billion...:-) Any way your point well taken, leave you with dear ghalib,

GhaR kahaN Jis Ka Ghum Tujhaye GhaaRut Karta

Ik Hus-ra-tay Ta`meer Jo haye, So haye

On a different note, it just occured to me and this is for fuzair/romair/hamidm/temporal/sameer and party, hypothetically if Mushy says that he is going to keep it the ``R`` simple by only asking the people, ``do you want me to continue as P yes or no`` what chance does he have if the electorate is mortgaged in Garhi KhudaBuksh or Bhawalpur? Isn`t that the place where these people are loaded up in trucks and brought to the polling stations any way. Kaheen, ``BaRray Bay-Abroo Ho KaRr Taeray Koochay say Hum Niklay`` wala number General Saab kay sath na ho Ja-aye...:-)

Romair,

I`ve been following your debate with Fuzair with great interest. OK OK I`m not an ``expert`` like you guys. But Fuzair`s arguments make much more logical sense to me, than yours.

You may think Eric Margolis is the greatest thing since sliced bread. Thats cos you agree with everything he says:)) Personally, I think he`s an extremely biased ``expert``. I read War on the Rooftop of the World (at your urging, I might add).

Margolis is biased towards Pakistan--pure & simple. Yes, he knows Indian military personnel. But not as closely as he knows their Pakistani counterparts. He has spent umpteen days & nights with them, huddled in rough hovels at Godforsaken areas on the rooftops of the world. I think their mentality influenced him more than the other way around. Kinda like the Stockholm syndrome. I concede that your expertise exceeds mine in almost every area--but not in the way a human mind works:)

I heard a very interesting interview of one of Gorbachav`s chief spokesman (I dont recall his name--but he used to be a prominent speaker during each & every summit that took place between a US President & Gorbachev). He said that the invasion of Afghanistan was the decision of a very small group of octogenerian Politburo, heade d by Brezhenev. These guys were insulated from the truth in the Soviet Union, let alone the rest of the world.

The invasion was a hastily thought up hairbrained scheme by them, without any consideration to long term strategy. It took the ``younger`` Gorbachev`s generation of communists completely by surprise (& dismay). The Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko, Suslov, Gromyko generation of Soviet Politburo were getting senile & totally sclerosed in their thinking---one of the bad aspects when human beings forcibly insulate their minds from any kind of criticism. (Incidentally, thats why Gorbachev believed in `glasnost` first & perestroika later).

They absolutely believed that Communism (esp Soviet style communism) was the best form of society---esp for poor countries. Their international agenda was the spread of Soviet ideology. They were also deluded into thinking that America was on the retreat on every front (esp after the virulent anti-US revolution taking place in Iran).

They felt Afghanistan was ripe for the taking. Their plan was NOT a military strategy. They sent their second tier reserves--the C.Asian Soviet soldiers. At the risk of sounding racist, their fighting abilities was much more inferior to the Soviets trained to fight in the European theater. Their strategy was to install a pro-Soviet puppet govt in Kabul--PERIOD!. Thats why they assassinated Afghan leaders at will, because they ``strayed too far off the line`` or were too barbarically insane like Amin--to finally settle with Najibullah.. ..The bottom line is... that Pakistan NEVER was an intended target...DEFINITELY not in the short term. I`m afraid I dont agree with your conclusions.

As far as the F-16s go (correct me if I`m wrong), Pakistan got them AFTER the Soviet invasion. I recall Zia crying that Carter`s $400 million was ``peanuts``.

I dont know if Pakistanis understand the concept of ``hool``. I dont know if its an Indian(predominantly Bombay) term or used in Urdu. Its a psychological ploy that a stronger--often times a bully---uses. To ``scare`` a potentially weaker adversary into ``becoming paranoid & unsettled``. ``Keep `em guessing`` is the motto of that psychological game.

The one thing that you Pakistani military guys NEVER have a shortage of is PRIDE. Often times ``chest thumping pride``:)) That pride is very subconciously evident in your post. Like the kind ylh demonstrates when he talks about the unconquerable PAF--deep down you ``feel`` like he does, about the capability of the Pakistani military..esp the PAF. Heck, the Indian high command (both civilian & military) are actuley aware of that. {{{I`ve told you how the BJP has, time & again, manipulated that ``pride`` the Pakistani military (& to a large extent, its citizenary) has to make it a BAKRA.}}}

Believe me, I wont be surprised that the Indians have shared that titbit with the KGB. Those Soviet aircraft gave ``hool`` to Pakistan--nothing else. Its done all the time. Heck, the recent fiasco with the American spy plane & the Chinese fighters is the best example. The Chinese fighters were NOT supposed to shoot down that American plane. They were supposed to give it ``hool``. One chest thumping Chinese fighter was too eager to show off his skills & something terrible happened & he crashed into the sea. Then the US & China desparately try to ``save face``. Thats a risk you take when you give ``hool``:)

The way a country behaves depends largely on the ``collective psyche`` (or what Bilal Ahmed ref to as the Dominant Discourse) of its people. Increasingly (a military war is going to be an anarchronism--thank God). Wars are going to be fought on a psychological, economic & technological fronts. It was always a ``game``--a serious & sometimes brutal game. But not as brutal as a military war.

What do you think India`s military buildup against Pakistan is?!---its HOOL-plain & simple. The intented final effect was Mushy made a ``strategic U-turn. Now they are just waiting to see if he puts his money where his mouth is.

You really think Pakistan is THAT much a covetted piece of strategic real estate, that the Soviets would attack Afghanistan, primarily to attack Pakistan?? You really think India covets Pakistani real estate THAT much.?!! Please use your common sense, my friend. Pakistanis can barely rule their own country!! You think India or the Soviet Union want to rule it?! GET REAL!! Kashmir & Pakistan are NOT synonymous!!

Eric Margolis & you dont think OUTSIDE THE BOX. Yeah you make fancy arguments (whoah...& with several references, no less)! But you dont see the forest from the trees.

I was wrong when I said you Pakistani soldier boys strut around like your s *it dont stink! Fuzair is certainly wise enough to know its s *it stinks:))

t

in a moment of truth last night while watching pres bush on t.v, i realized that we will only see what we want to..it is only the above average intellect endowed men and women who think who can rise above while the rest of mankind will believe what they want to..believe totally, not just support because its what they adhere too (this made a lot more sense last night) sigalph will find it a task impossible to condemn what u and said obviously see as horrific and an unfair oppression of ppl..similarly, urstruly will find it hard to condemn, impossible actually, the killing of hindus in a temple in kashmir..we will refuse to condemn violence and unfairness because we are at a stage where death and unfairness are words to play with like collateral and strange and progressive and capri pants...we dont under stand the act of being killed..how it must be to know, ``okay..this is IT..im off for ever..burning to deah will be painful but maybe not as painful as having a tank drive over me..dearie me, that would crush all my ribs..and why is it that im having to die without having babies? without finishing my degree? why to die in my own land for godssake at the hands of someone who knows me not from adams? because some assh0le obviously doesnt have the brains to know that im just like him and the only diference between us is the one that successive idiots have shoved onto us ever since we came here``.....we color EVERYTHING man and think like we want to- with our sect, religion, nationality..thinking like humans is something thats passe...and anyone who has a problem with that statement would only have to go over the last few posts..any surprise that we`re in this bloody (khoon waala, not expletive) mess then? i dont think so

samina:

the progressive radio stations n all you mentioned someplace, is there someplace on the net they can be accessed? id like to know what theyre like. also, u say a lot of blacks, americans etc (wide range of ppl) have views differing from what the popular media is saying..are they vocal about it? what exactly do they say? who in their opinion is at fault and what should be done?