Another One Bites The Dust

re. Urstruly:

``But anyway, the question is the principle of the matter. If a law imposed by a dictator has hurt so many people, then what makes you think that the result of a law repealed by a dictator will be any different.``

Here`s a test for you. Go look in he mirror and repeat that sentence, trying to keep a straight face and actually BELIEVING what you`re saying. If your IQ/EQ permits you to do the above (I`m guessing it does), try asking yourself why the DEMOCRATIC polity of Pakistan hasn`t outlawed honour killings. Also, for good measure, ask yourself if you`d like to raise your family in FIS controlled Algeria (remember the DEMOCRATIC elections result there back in `92?).

``I want violence to end for good; that means both, the violence of people on people and violence of government on people and vice versa. It can only happen through a democratic process. Are you afraid of a democratic process?``

If you still don`t get the point, here`s it for you in plain English: You`re trying to apply a set of principles (democracy, in this case) to entites that are inherently undemocratic (read: most religions, with their stress, for better or worse, on sovereignity NOT lying with the people.) Add to that the potential for abuse by an ulema upon a largely uneducated populace and their self-interested representatives, and you get some idea why your word games simply reflect the shallowness of your mind.

So long!

P.S. You really should get out a little. I know of a really good shrink in Michigan(?) for the phallic fixated. Want help?

Patrick,

``Often enough I find progressives reposts quite interesting. But when you start seeing 2-3 on every page, each prefaced by wanton name-calling, you`d have to wonder about the guy`s intentions. Debate seems farthest from them.)``

Indeed. Its because Farangi Kush/Afaqui/Progressive has nothing to say that isn`t cursing, sicko name calling and soiling himself in the process. I will not play the martyr in this, and I don`t think anyone should.

In fact, I suggest that interactors who are offended by Afaqui`s toilet mouth should treat him with his own medicine until he slinks away like the cancerous vulture troll that he is.(apologies to vultures, cancer cells and trolls)

re: ``hahahah! you ARE naive my friend. Every time anyone has tried debating with the guy, he`s either answered with a volley of insults (ask Saima Shah)-- completely coopting any discussion, or, as in the case of my most recent rebut, chosen to ignore. So please, spare us the looking-for-discourse argument. doesn`t wash for a sec.``

Ah yes, Patrick and Hobbyty, lets see how our intellectual pygmy Afaqui has (apologies to pygmies) enriched our boards today. Has he been able to even understand or pretend (as you do so well, Hobby bhai)to engage with some of the issues on this board in an intellectually honest way? I`m afraid the answer is nahin nahin nahin. Today`s verbal diahrea (apologies to diahrea) calls feminist women ``sows`` and ``literature spewing`` and god knows what that pathetic piece of trash he`s penned means (apologies to trash)...I just scroll past the sad mess that follows his nicks...

But yes, Chowk Editors, please put a limit on how many articles a single interactor can post in a day, or something like that...

Temporal,

Very interesting interact. Would like to hear the responses of those who are dance interested...

t:

``Officially this government has put a new life in Pakistan National Council of Arts (PNCA); giving them big funding.

The PNCA has already organised whole evenings of dance performances. Sheema is directing the dance programmes.``

my two paisas t

the building we were in all of that week for the art workshop with that wonderful niilofer was the PNCA kee karachi building...also if you remember, during one of the late evening sessions, there was the sound of ghungroos throughout- that was sheema, fasih, and nighat chaudhry practising for a performance the next day...they had all spoken in the morning session (you were as usual late:0)) AND most importantly sheema and naheed siddiqie spoke extensively about how it was for them all these years...the older lady was in tears...but they spoke about how it was all changing and that this was to be one of the first (and pls ask me how bloody expensive)of many to come performances at/with the pnca and how finally dance in pakistan was going to be done without fear or retribution (if thats the right word)

Banjara

Okay I believe you. Then how come ylh called it ``Kathak``. May be Sheema practices Kathak, but the dance that is actually popular in pakistan is Khatak? Anyways since I trust your knowledge of India and Pak, what you say has greater chances of being correct. But dont ever refer me to Ali1`s posts. I never bother to read the posts of that ba$tard.

Progressive

What did including the life of Durer have to do with the post?

In What should be done, part of the post - it is suggested that Modern or present day Muslims do not understand Shariah - If you will consider an alternate view:

It is not so that modern or present day Muslims do not understand Shariah - Shariah has failed to remain relevent. This is tragic for Muslims. Shariah is man made as opposed to Quran - Shariah provides a structure or scaffolding or foundation, for society - yet, this structure is today rejected by Muslims by and large - Why?

If Shariah contains or imparts a morality, a sense of justice - why does not find acceptance among a majority of Muslims?

Consider, perhaps it is because the morality, the sense of justice Shariah imparts to modern or present day Muslims, represents a dysfunction or disharmony - our morality is is disharmony with our ethics. If you will consider the analogy of the wheat and the chaff - we must dispense with the chaff, the morality, the sense of justice that has become fossilized in Shariah -

Yesterday, perhaps it was acceptable and good to give a girl of 15 years of age in marriage - today, it would be entirely unacceptable -would it not? Is this not evidence of a change in our understanding of the ``good``? It is a great misunderstanding of Islam and of the dynamic nature of the society it proposes - Of course as you are aware, obscuritanists, in reality Utopians, influenced by Aflatoon and Marx as they are, seek to arrest society, they must by virtue of their ideology arrest change - change that is the heart of society as represented in Quran: Did not Musa worship the same God, did not the same God hod him as His beloved? Did not the same follow for Eissa and was this not also different from the understanding, the morality, the sense of justice, from that which prevailed in the time of Musa and is this sameness and difference reflected in His choice of experience for Mohammed (may Allah Bless him and shower him peace)? Shariah at a point ceased to become a evolving, changing, human endeavor and instead became a blue print that not only captures a morality and a sense of justice, but also culture specific to a particular geography, in time - perhaps this is the greatest misfortune to befall Muslims.

Yet the obscuritanist utopians claim Shariah itself is the equivalent of the Quran, that it is Divine, eternal, non-human - can anything be more vile than such a conception, what can be more arrogant, more objectionable?

Obscuritanist utopians argue that society is going from bad to worse, they argue that they have a blue print for the perfect society - is this not arrogance? is this not blasphemy of sorts? Because society is going from bad to worse - change must be arrested - because a perfect society is established, change must be arrested. In both cases, tyranny and a deep rooted anti-Islamic sentiment is at work.

These conceptions of ``closed`` society are in direct contradiction to the ``open`` society that is both the impulse of Islamic understanding and the study of social transformation. How? Islam offer the individual moral choices at any, every step, and as a requirement of conscience, these choices must be free - that is to say, the conception of society in Islam, is one that is INDETERMINATE - free will/free choice ensure it will remain indeterminate, that is subject to continuous change, in morality, in the sense of justice, depending on the conception of morality and justice, prevailing at any given time.

Many persons mistake this for relativism or positivism - yet they overlook the anchor of this continuous change is both religious faith and a rational conception of the ``good`` - at any given point in a circle, the distance to the center is the same, yet one point different from the other point. The religious faith, the center of the circle, the rational conception of the ``good``, the understanding enabling, negotiating, the transition from one point on the circumfrence to the next.

So what does this have to do with the understanding of feminism? The first point is that feminism by itself does not represent a movement that Muslims can regard with suspicion. Feminism is merely a change in the understanding of how women see themselves, their relationship to men and to work. Are there other ideas that travel in disguise, incognito, in this movement? without a doubt. Do these ideas challenge the traditional conception of family? without a doubt - these ideas seek to redefine the notion of family.

How should Muslims respond to the feminist movement? In my opinion, examine, accept and incorporate those understandings that do not conflict with the understanding of Islam and reflect the changes in how women view themselves, their relatioship to men and work - and dessiminate arguments to counter abominations such as homosexuality as rational,legitimate and acceptable choice in society.

YLH.

You said: ``but still don`t you think declaring outright that `Dancing is Prohibited by Pakistan`s law` is a huge lie?``

AND

You said: ``She said it is in Writing, in Penal Code of Pakistan that Dancing is Banned.``

Where has she made this specific claim ...and in writing? (I couldn`t find it in the NY Times article... see my reply 523 on this board. If it is from some other source, please point it out.)

To Sattar2

Sattar2

I have ``watched`` you argue the Blasphemy Laws and related issues with a certain person more times than I can recall. I am impressed by your knowledge, your logic, your use of language and your unfailing civilised behaviour in the face of...well, what can I say?

Let me also say that I think I recognise what drives you to take your stand so publically, and so decently, again, and again, and again. It`s the same thing which motivates me to respond to people who question my rights as an Indian because I am not Hindu. (I hope that you do not find this comparison offensive, that is not my intention.) Certainly you take your stand with a dignity and fluency that I wish I had myself.

Equally, I recognise the attitude in the responses you get (and I do not care if a certain person does find that offensive). The same self-aggrandising and self serving prejudice, the same intellectual dishonesty, the same refusal to even admit the possibility that a certain understanding of the world does not translate into an immutable fact which makes them ``more`` than you. One could let it go, if these were just the views of an individual, but these attitudes actually support (perhaps even encourage, certainly justify) discrimination, and violence, and death, and that, I think, is what drives you in your passion to enlighten and convince.

I realise that the positions of Pakistani Ahmedias and Indian Muslims are different in many, many ways. I admit that I feel Indian Muslims are more fortunate, for despite what prejudice (and far more, I`m not avoiding mention of Gujarat) that we face, at least the law does not discriminate (in theory, and though fact is not faithful to theory, is usually somewhat constrained by it). I also feel, on chowk and elsewhere, that I get far more active and regular support from many many decent non-Muslim Indians than I see you getting from decent non-Ahmedia Pakistanis.

There are some honourable exceptions (Yasser Hamdani and TAhmed among them), but I suspect that the others do not properly understand how you need to hear their voices. Perhaps they are not so aware that making their voices heard clearly and consistently changes the centre of gravity for the paradigm, and that even in a small environment such as chowk this is valuable. I also think that you deserve their support, and that they have a duty to give it, and to give it more generously than they seem to be doing.

I realise that our issues are in many ways different. Again, please accept my apology if you find the similarities I see nonexistent, or the comparison offensive.

Best regards

Zafar

Hobbyty,

re`` ``...It seems the rules one observes elsewhere do not apply in Pakistan, in particular, I have in mind the role of women of elite class - elsewhere, women from such class have been instrumental in creating public awareness - in Pakistan, it is the economic benefit and social interaction of women factory workers and women from less privelaged backgrounds that are effecting a change in values. It is in the process of industrialization and labor creation that those interested in effecting the emancipation of women ought to invest in. The deeper the labor market, the greater the opportunity and the lower the cost of the emancipation of Pakistani women.``

Would you care to develop and further expand these thoughts?

However, I wouldn`t be as quick to stereotype women in what you term the ``elite`` classes. I know quite a few who have spent their lives working together with women of rural and working classes on eco development projects. They seem to be quite cognizant of their class inquities.

I also stand by my contention; that it is of great importance that women dialogue among themselves about political platforms before men get into the picture, esp. in Pakistan where, as Hamid pointed out seem use gender inequities as a mechanism of patriarchal control. This basic reality cannot be denied, even with a million cut and pastes of religious prevarication.

Progressive, (Pig Member Breath,)

What do you want from us khabees admi? Your opinions are not respected or wanted, your cut and pastes are slightly more intellectual than your puerile posts...you couldn`t string together a half comprehensible sentence if your life depended on it...why are you writing pathetic little posts to people who are actually debating a topic in a decent manner? Go curse yourself silly...

Reply Hobbyty # 548

“Last 40 or 50 post we have not heard from progressive - who is served by limiting the field?”

It was too good to last. I wish he’d at least read some Fatima Mernissi before deciding on whom to plagiarise…

Samina (various interacts):

…anyone with professional integrity who has spent time in a major daily’s news desk knows about questioning the sources and quotes and firing off queries to the originating new-service or source…and i know some who have chosen to kill major stories if they are not satisfied rather than be one up on their competition…

…that is professional integrity…

…what she said or did not say intrigued me…and I sent out feelers…and received this feedback from a mutual friend who knows sheema and khaled and was a former director of human rights in pakistan…that i would like to share with you…



[…The NY Times article published last friday is full of disinformation and misquotes. This reporter called from Islamabad and wanted to meet Sheema. It so happened there was a dance performance of her arranged by the horticultural society. So he saw the performance. Later he came over to Sheema`s place and had a kind of a social chat with her. During all this time he never took any notes! It appears that while in Pakistan he never switched on any Pak tv channels. There`s a 24-hour Indus Music channel which like V, MTV,MM,MMM does nothing but play songs and of course there`s a lot of dancing. The other 4 channels also have a big chunk of their time taken up by music and dances. During the referendum all day there were songs and dances. There are regular dance performances as well. Then culturally every wedding, be of the poor or rich has days of dancing prior to the Nikah. Hey why am I telling you this? This gora just poured out his hidden racist feelings and distorted vision about Pakistan.

Sheema had mentioned about:

1, dance being banned in !981 during Zia dictatorship;
2, The difficulties one faces to get an NOC an archaic law dating back to over 100 years;
3,and classical dancing a sort of dying art just as classical music because of today`s trends.

Sheema does not recollect saying certain things that he has quoted as if he was taking notes.This man made a story as if to dance in Pakistan is a grave criminal act! Officially this government has put a new life in Pakistan National Council of Arts (PNCA); giving them big funding.

The PNCA has already organised whole evenings of dance performances. Sheema is directing the dance programmes.

Every year national and international dance festivals are held in Karachi or Lahore or Islamabad. I have the copy of the article. It is very cleverly and well written except that it paints a largely false picture of the reality. Even the reporter demoted by two ranks Sheema`s father to Major! He was
Brigadier General…]

love,

t

_________________________________________________

ps:

Yasser: (various)

…views are one thing…language another…sheema is your mother’s age…and her dedicated track record in the service of tehreek-e-niswaan and many other causes spans a longer time frame than your age!

…dissent as vehemently as you want but do not let go of decency at any cost…that is what distinguishes an ‘insaan’ from an ‘aadmi’…(you mentioned somewhere you are above all a ‘human being’…but this term does not fully do justice to ‘insaan’ aur ‘aadmi’…

YLH

What makes you think that I disagree with you.

PM

This was exactly what I had in mind when I wrote that post; but I was expecting it to come from sattar. But anyway, the question is the principle of the matter. If a law imposed by a dictator has hurt so many people, then what makes you think that the result of a law repealed by a dictator will be any different. I want violence to end for good; that means both, the violence of people on people and violence of government on people and vice versa. It can only happen through a democratic process. Are you afraid of a democratic process?

And since I have your attention, what happened to the cardinal of your parish, is he in the slammer or still dating you in the rectory.

Sattar

I have had a detailed debate with you, on the topic of Blasphemy Law, on the following thread. Your accustaion that I keep quiet on ``certain`` issues is a dileberate lie.

http://www.chowk.com/bin/showa.cgi?aamirali_aug1601


During a debate, usually you lower yourself down to a level where it becomes difficult for you to keep a decent discourse. I will debate with you some other time on this issue; I hope when you will be able to concentrate on the subject rather than my personality.

Keep in mind that Holy Prophet did punish people who disrespected him, it is well documented; and he also forgave people who mangled the corpses of his loved ones. The message simply is that, in order to create order in the society sometimes it is necessary to use a stern hand and sometime compassion is enough.

One thing I never understand, why you yearn so passionately to blaspheme him (pbuh). Why you find it difficult to have a decent discourse. There are no secrets, no taboos in his life, and his life is like an open book. No other personality in the history of mankind has been scrutinized so closely not just by his friends but also by his foes. There are no myths, no mysteries, no missing pages from his life. Everything is very well documented. The accounts of his life are not based on ``recently`` found scrptures and scrolls from caves and from under the seas. Most people who find faults in Islam find it through the writings of his staunchest diciples (by selective quoting, out of context presentation etc.)-the ahadith that describe his life. Does this openness bother you? Is that why you want to resort to insulting him?

And in case your point is that the Blasphemy Law has a potential to persecute people on the basis of their reliigious views, then is it a problem with the law or with the ``due process``. Virtually, any law of the land can be used to persecute anyone. For example, the POTA law of secular India is targeted right at the Muslims (problem is the due process). Or the string of laws in secular USA, based on the recently approved Protection of Freedom Act, which institutionalize the anti-Muslim bigotry and anti-muslim witch-hunt through neo-McCarthyism (problem again is that the targets are not given due process). Are you afrais of the due process?

samina,

there`s plenty more (silent) support where that came from...nowadays i just don`t have it in me to try and reason with people, i`d much rather eat something instead :) i read about bush being warned on salon.com, didn`t catch the story on the nytimes website...incidentally a reporter from the nytimes showed up at my workplace as well, wanting to meet young pakistani urbanites...we told him we didn`t know any. but he did stick around for a couple of hours, and sent a norwegian photographer to take pictures a few days later. and the photographer wanted to see what young pakistani urbanites did for fun...and we told him we didn`t have any. or rather we took him crabbing, and had lots of fun, and he told us how after his time in karachi he now felt people across the world had a totally distorted image of what pakistan was like. they thought it was a war zone populated by fundamentalist lunatics whereas everyone was so normal, nice and friendly and he`d tell everybody pakistan was a great place to live. then we dropped him off at his hotel (the sheraton) because he had a flight to ny the next morning. and the next morning the explosion outside the sheraton happened. thank god he was in the bathroom, the windows in his room blew in. i wonder what he`s saying about pakistan now.

sorry...rambling etc

anika zaidi (anita zaidi?),

ya know i heard that too :) never been on the mailing list though, just brought it up because of samina`s earlier comment about women needing a womens only space to talk sometimes. i guess the only foolproof way to do that is face to face, but if you`ve ever seen a katoy even that might not guarantee estrogen as the lead player :) the waddling gait gets more pronounced day by day, and old friends keep bursting into laughter when they see me :(

shandana

Re#538

Thank you cutandpaste

This is one hair raising cut and paste -- one won’t mind reading from beginning to end.

Riedel expose raises some very grave questions about Mr. Musharraf ‘s sanity, decision making process and strategic thinking.

Who is Mr. Musharraf? -- a diabolically cunning Chameleon – or a certifiable village idiot – someone like that fabled wood cutter Kalidasa – cutting the SAME branch that he was sitting on?

Mr. Musharraf committed some very serious treasonous crimes – when he prepared for secret nuclear war with India -- without informing the Prime Minister of the country. That idiocy and insubordination in this nuclear age is mind boggling – where does he come from?.

In Jay Leno famous question to Huge Grant – what the hell were you thinking – General?.

Then he had the gall to throw that government by force.

Nawaz Sharif was 100% within bounds when he FIRED this insubordinate and a very dangerous general.

Nawaz Sharif should have done it as soon he came back from Cinton’s meeting – he should have fired General Musharraf – or -- made him Corporral Musharraf -- on the spot right after reaching Islamabad -- for such a monumental breach of military discipline and insubordination.

I hope by now -- under the tight leash of General Tommy Frank and Bush’s tutoring -- Mr. Musharraf has wizened up to graduate from the Village Idiot to Poet Kalidasa.

If Mr. Musharraf past performances are any guide – the shorter the tenure of Mr. Musharraf “Presidency” – the safer Pakistan -- and for that matter the subcontinent -- will feel.

Someone on this board suggested sometime back that Mr. Mushrraf is a SECURITY RISK –Riedel’s column says Mr. Musharraf may indeed be a SECURITY RISK – for the whole subcontinent.

Reply Shah # 514

Deepka, ist hat you? Why you are pretend?

“And you yourself crying big crocodile tears…”

It is MEEEEwho iscry big tears.!!! W hy you donot take repsonbilty for jahil behaviours and APOLGISE IMMEDATELY?

Whyy ouare ignfore me, haiN? Iamalso humanbeng like you, I desarving better, more respact!

“IT DOESNT PROVE THAT I DID ANYTHING TO YOU OTHER THAN NORMAL CRTIQUE ,YOU CRIED & CHOWK FELT SAFE TO SIDE WITH YOU BEING WOMAN CLAIMING `THE PROTECTION PROVIDED & PRIVILEGED UNDER ISLAM`”

Yesyes, you7talking alltime BIG About being decant. Butif youar re so DECANT WH?YYOU ARE SLUNDER ME???? HAIN?

WHY YOU ARE WRITE LIESFALSEHOODAND NASTINESS ABOUT MEEEEE?

Billee sattar choohay kha kay haj kau chalee, thut is why.

You should apolgise, Deepka. Iam ask nicely.

MONKEYS UP TO THEIR USUAL PEA BRAINED BUSINESS OF OBFUSCATION:

Urstruly wrote:

``1. If some ulema have done Ijtehad and declared it UnIslamic, then in order to repeal this law, there has to be an Ijma`a, i.e. consensus after debate. In consensus the majority rules according to the Islamic injunctions. Where is the debate? where is the concensus? where is the assembly to reach the concensus.``

O Gee, how wonderfully democratic we are! Wonder where all this stress on Ijtehad, Ijma`a and consensus was when the frikkin` law was IMPOSED upon the people of Pakistan by a DICTATOR (yes yesm throught the aegis of his majlis) back in `85 (?).

But I suppose it is too much to expect chimpanzees to understand the concept of manufactured consent