My Pakistan

Sadozai at # 119:

Mine was a tricky post.

I was referring to two things here:

1. For military action in tribal belt, we chose a Pathan General from tribal agency. This was the demand of the tribal elders at the outset. If we had sent a Pathan from the NWFP, there could have been feeling that an urban Pathan would not be able to understand tribal feelings and our original values.

2. General Naseerullah Babar used the terminology on the GEO the other day while referring to re-emerging Taliban support in Afghanistan. In an another interview he had quipped, ``we dont` want to merge Afghan Pushtoon areas with Pakistani Pakhtoon areas so that we (Pakistani Pakhtoons) might be termed as Punjabis of the merged area :-)

Bye bye for now.

tahmed32#115, you say ``bharatvaasi: why do you assume that being a muslim automatically implies being on the side of the muslim terrorists? has your brainwashing really been that bad on mars (or wherever else you grew up on)? ``

I am not assuming that being a muslin <=> terrorist. Far from it. I am assuming that it is but a small minority which is at it. This small minority has hijacked everything people, e.g yourself, hold dear. The very fact that these people are not condemened outright - but always given a fig leaf of ``root cause`` indicates a strange logic.

I am not brainwashed - if you read what I post, and understand it you will see what I am getting at.


Other than that good day to you.

pmishra: Islamophobes..like yourself do truly represent the best of secular thought :)

pmishra #132 that is fine. as i said, you are welcome to your views, and they dont interest me in the least.

as for it being nonsensical for me to say that islam calls for the equality of all men, and your implication of the same for western scholars whom you conveniently label as ``liberal`` (when in fact these are the most popular western writers, particularly after 9/11), that is fine too. you can keep ignoring the other parts of the Quran that i mentioned - that too is your prerogative as an anonymous chowk writer. you can also ignore the facts of history where muslim societies have often been defined not by the mullah but by enlightened people (and nonmuslims have often risen to great power under muslim rulers, jews have migrated from spain not to europe but to the ottoman empire, nonmuslim scholars have flocked to places like baghdad from greece and india, and so forth). after all, you are entitled to your opinions.

as i said, i am not concerned about what indians think of islam (pakistan is well protected from hate-filled men in india). as such your opinions are of no particular interest to me. what matters is that in pakistan people open their eyes to the peaceful message of islam, and not be taken off track by religious parties.

this is my final post. have a good day.

#129 tahmed

I have provided you quotations from the Quran which directly speak to violence against non-believers, jews, christians and polytheists. You are now making the ludicrous argument that these somehow still suggest that ``all men are equal``. How much more nonsensical will your arguments become? Will you next suggest that hitler was a actually a rabbi?

As for Karen Armstrong and company, yes, I am aware that there are many fine multi-cultural, liberal western professors with great enthusiasm for islam. As someone said not long ago, the issue with islam is not what some american professor says about it, but what is being said by the mullah, what is found in sharia and what is written in the Quran.

You, like many others, have tried to put a false universalist gloss on islam. Equality in islam is strictly limited to muslim men. You have tried to twist that and appropriate ideas about universal equality from elsewhere (european enlightenment -- post 18th century).

Your claims are similar to the ludicrous claim that ``islam`` means ``peace``. Some nice american professor has also made these types of statements. These falsehoods need to called out and the perpetrators identified in public. I am happy to have made a small contribution in this space.

Pakistan spies give motorbikes to Taliban killers
(Filed: 30/11/2003)


Taliban fighters carrying out ``drive-by`` attacks on American troops and peacekeepers have been equipped with 700 motorbikes, weapons and satellite phones supplied by Pakistani intelligence officials, according to leaders of fighters attacking Coalition forces.

The motorcycles have played a key role in Taliban hit-and-run operations in the south of the country where the campaign against international troops and aid workers has intensified. In the latest incident, a Frenchwoman working for the United Nations was shot dead this month by the pillion passenger on a motorcycle in the south-eastern town of Ghazni. The Taliban later claimed responsibility for the attack.

In another recent attack, a group of motorcyclists opened fire on an aid convoy near Kandahar, killing four Afghans. In August, two motorcyclists threw a grenade into the Kandahar compound of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, damaging the building but causing no injuries.

Taliban commanders disclosed details of the deal with individual Pakistani intelligence officials at a meeting in a safe house in Kila Abdulla, a small Pakistani town near the Afghan border. Despite Islamabad`s strong public support for the US-led war on terror, rebel leaders said that individual officials of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) backed the Afghan rebels in an attempt to counter the growing influence of rival Indian intelligence officials in the area.

ISI officials say that Indian officers have moved into Afghanistan intending to carry out operations across the border in Pakistan. ``These officials in Pakistani intelligence believe that the Indian penetration can only be countered if they succeed in creating chaos in the bordering towns in Afghanistan,`` a Taliban leader said.

Many members of the ISI are also opposed to Pakistan`s support for the war on terror. The agency backed the Taliban in the mid-1990s and senior officials are still closely aligned with them. The Taliban`s negotiations with ISI officials are said to be led by Hamid Aghaf and Mullah Qudratullah Jamal, members of the shura (council) set up by Mullah Mohamed Omar, the Taliban leader, to lead the new jihad against foreign forces and their local allies.

Mullah Jamal travelled to Pakistan for talks with ISI officials last month, the Taliban commander said, following up the deal to supply motorbikes, rocket-propelled grenades, Kalashnikov rifles, wireless sets, dozens of satellite phones, torches and radios. Most of the motorcycles are red 125cc Hondas, good at negotiating the rough terrain.

Since the Taliban`s first offensive was launched in mid-August, about 400 civilians, soldiers and aid workers have been killed, mainly in south-western Afghanistan near the Pakistan border. The Pakistani government has said repeatedly that it backs the Afghan government, led by President Hamid Karzai.

``We are with Karzai and we have nothing to do with the Taliban,`` said Shaikh Rasheed Ahmed, the Pakistani information minister. ``The world should stop suspecting us and understand that we simply cannot arrest every black-turbaned person.``

http://www.sundaytelegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=%2Fnews%2F2003%2F11%2F30%2Fwtali130.xml&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=31397

re:#53 by bharatvaasi
A very chilling article. If Paki terrorists cross over into India from Sindh and attack soft tagets, that would be the beginning of the end of the nation-state of Pakistan. It can then join ranks with the likes of Prussia, Yugoslavia etc. No nation state can exist for long if it is in perpetual enmity with a giant neighbour. Pakis are simply digging their own graves.

The big question is why? Surely in 50 years time, the ``powers that be`` in Pak would have learnt its lessons. So one would have thought but apparently not. The same mindset continues but in a different form. IF Pakistan is not able to dismantle its terrorist apparatus, its future is not secure. And it has only itself to blame.
Sridhar

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

pmishra #127 as i said, you can believe whatever you like to believe. what you think of islam does not interest me. the simple fact is that best you have been able to do is come up with statements that you stretch to support your contention that all men are not equal in islam. and the best you can do is to ignore what i wrote about even these statements being not representative of the overall message of the Quran which is definitely one of peace and respect for all faiths.

and it is not just ``someone like me`` who says this: go and read any book on islam or islamic history by any popular western writer (esposito, armstrong for example) and you will find the same thing.

or dont. as i said, what you think of islam is of no interest to me. nor would i have engaged in this discussion with you if you had not picked the one reference i made to islam in a lengthy post to someone else (ahmedzai).

#119 sadozai

Thanks for your courtesy. All of the older religions have their difficulties and complexities; islam is no exception. Regrettably, there are people, hindus, muslims and christians, who like to pretend otherwise. Our friend tahmed is one such person.

#124 tahmed32

Only a person such as yourself would pretend that verses in the Quran advocating violence against non-muslims are irrelevant to the question of ``All men are equal``. i will not waste time debating such a nonsensical proposition. Next you will claim that southern slaveowners also believed that ``all men are equal`` because after all parts of the US constutution suggest this to be the case.

Indeed, this is the foundation for non-muslims dhimmi status in sharia law. Actually the situation is much worse, because even the degraded dhimmi status is not available to animists and polytheists (hindus and buddhists). For them the message of the Quran is clear and much more ominous.

pmishra #120 why is it so hard for you to have a discussion without engaging in namecalling? are you a child of 6 years who cant speak without namecalling, rather than a grown up man?

as for the Quranic verses, not one of these verses you provided back your rejection of my statement that the Quran calls for the EQUALITY OF ALL MEN. These are the usual verses that both islam bashers and islamist extremists pull out to claim that the Quran calls for conflict between muslims and people of other religions. They ignore the many verses - and indeed entire chapters - sura rum, sura kafiroon - that are written which call for living in peace and affection with people. They ignore the many places where the Quran says that ALL religions are from God and people should not start fighting over religion. That the Quran says nothing that has not already been said. i could go on to put these handful of verses that people like you pull out in perspective.
all of the above is besides the point however: the point is that you have failed to provide me EVEN ONE VERSE that supports your rejection of my abovementioned statement. in other words, you dont know what you are tallking about. you can believe what you like, that is your business. but dont make claims that you cant back up.

let me simply direct your attention to the surah baqarah in the Quran where it says that ALL individuals of ALL religions will be judged by God. and to the number of verses in the Quran where even the Prophet himself is reminded that he is just a messenger and how an individual implements a religion is not his job.

so believe what you like. just dont make up facts to suit your prejudices.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

sadozai #119 while not wishing to get dragged into a religious discussion (i have already said everything i wanted to say long ago on chowk and would rather discuss something else), i would direct you to my response to Mr. Mishra.

if you think there is something wrong i am saying there, i will be glad to discuss it further with you. i will grant that many muslims have an arrogant attitude towards nonmuslims, but that reflects their primitive personalities. they dont have any backing from the Quran in it and indeed they violate they Quran every time they act as if islam is superior in any way to hinduism.

as for relations with women: as karen armstrong notes, the rights given to women in the Quran were so far ahead of their time that it took europe a full thousand years (!) before it gave similar property rights to women. any intelligent man can reasonably deduce that the important thing is the DIRECTION in which the Quran pointed. And the direction in gender relations is one of equality of women with men. just as the direction in communal relations is one of respect for all religions.

This is the opposite of the direction the religious parties in pakista, whom you have rightly criticized in your article, point to. I am less worried about incorrect perceptions on the part of the Mishras of the world, and more concerned about the brazen manner in which muslim chauvinists act as if they are some kind of a chosen people.

as for this nonsense about south asians getting searched more, that is certainly contradictory to my experience. and even if they were, so what? i am only glad they check since hijacking is a very real danger that muslim terrorists are more likely to do than anyone else.

and, common sense says that an arab or south asian looking male is more likely to hijack a plane then a white woman. and the mad shoe bomber wasnt just a joke - he almost blew up a planeload of people if it hadnt been for the brave air hostess who jumped on the madman.

so, my only complaint is that the americans are too politically correct. they should deal with islamic terrorism as common sense dictates, and not inconvenience other travellers just for the sake of political correctness. after all, how politically correct are those in the muslim world who demonize americans, jews, hindus, at every opportunity?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts