Western Media’s War on Pakistan

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

#51 by sri on April 23, 2004 2:34pm PT

+++
``Stupid Arabs are only one step above africans in the human evolution process``

``collective stupidity of obsessive compulsive pipedream ummah mindset``

``clueless nomads roaming around frikking desert eating camel meat``

``Now those stupid ``genes`` in pakistanis also explains their collective stupidity``
+++

I will only interact with you after you admit to your own bigotry and racist stereotyping of Pakistanis/Arabs... expressed in the dim-witted ``gems`` you posted above. Do you really expect Muslims to listen to sermons on openminded tolerance, delivered by closeminded bigots like yourself?

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

If US was maligning muslims even before 9/11 then why would the U.S of A save the collective behinds muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo while their fellow macho jehadi ummah-ites wore fine Hyderabadi bangles and behaved like hijras ? I`ll tell you why.... because that Slobodan Milosevic guy is one bad a$$ dude who would cut the b@@lls of every frikking jehadi and put them in their hands... that`s why.

re: #51 by sri
Read my post again and read that line in its proper context. You will not miss the cynicism this time.
Sridhar

#45 by Romair on April 23, 2004 12:51pm PT

Excellent comments!

I was born and raised in Pakistan, and among the huge number of my acquaintances (from outright atheists to highly religious people), there is not a single person who would be willing to live in Taliban’s Afghanistan, or to go out blowing up people in the name of Islam. Even if we take the surveys shown on CNN seriously, I would be worried if majority of Pakistanis thought that Osama was responsible for WTC tragedy AND considered him a hero. But that is not the case. This just proves that the US government has failed to make a strong case against him in front of Pakistani population. Pakistan’s major problems are the ones shared by every third world country – poverty, uncontrolled population growth, unemployment, low literacy, high crime rate, political instability etc. Religious extremism is not even among the top problems for an average Pakistani because religious extremists (however vocal they might be) could never fit into the fabric of Pakistani society, and they will remain outcasts in future too. If we can manage to address the key issues, religious extremism will die out itself, because it is not rooted into our society.

#38 by rsridhar on April 23, 2004 11:21am PT

`` Pak has to clean up its house to be viewed with respect. Meanwhile, it has a model to follow: the Indian model. After all, we have the same genes, don`t we?
Sridhar ``

hmmm.... i am not so sure about this Genes thing. They may also be related to Arabs. Whatelse can explain their collective stupidity of obsessive compulsive pipedream ummah mindset? Stupid Arabs are only one step above africans in the human evolution process.
For example, if we remove the western technology of Oil exploration, refinement and consumption, do you think Arabs would be living in mansions. They would be clueless nomads roaming around frikking desert eating camel meat. Now those stupid ``genes`` in pakistanis also explains their collective stupidity.

#42 by arjun_m

Armitage met and threatened Mahmoud (who was already in Washington DC, and was a known Taliban-sympathizer). But Mahmoud was only the ISI chief, not the Chief Executive of Pakistan. He did not make decisions in Pakistan. His commander-in-chief, Musharraf did. As Newsweek and PBS interviews of Powell establish beyond doubt, the Chief Executive (Musharraf) of Pakistan had already decided to support America within 4 hours of 9/11 attacks. This was even before Armitage met Mahmoud the next day (Sep 12) or Powell spoke with Musharraf the day after (Sep 13).

#44 by HisExcellency

geeeeezzzz.... you are even more deluded than the author...

* Pakis plotting to blow-up stuff in Canada
* Pakis plotting to blow-up stuff in Britian
* pakis plotting to blow-up stuff in Australia
* Pakis selling nukes in an Islamabad mall

try spinning those in Canadian, british and Australian media.

#41 by arjun_m on April 23, 2004 12:25pm PT

Pakistanis came out in support of Taliban in October 2001 because few people really believed the ill-equipped Taliban were capable of conducting a sophisticated, coordinated terrorist attack involving 4 planes hijacked on the same morning and flown by Al-Qaeda pilots. To protect its resources, the CIA didn`t share any evidence of Osama`s involvement with the world. The common man`s reaction was understandable: here was the world`s most powerful nation picking a fight with the world`s most primitive nation on the basis of suspicion!!

This suspicion was greater among the illiterate masses. Although the demonstrations petered out in November 2001, the general public was still skeptical about OBL`s involvement until the TV stations aired a video tape of Osama relishing the attack on WTC.
This tape was aired probably in December 2001 or Jan 2002.. and proved beyond doubt (at least for most Pakistanis) that Osama was involved in WTC. Before these tapes aired, the majority of Muslims were skeptical about American claims not only in Pakistan but all over the world. (Iran is perhaps only an exception).

That is exactly why a poll conducted in October 2001, before Osama`s video tapes and American aid package for Pakistan, is misleading.

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

HE #15 you write ``No other country has done more in the war against Terrorism than Pakistan.`` These is the pakistan government position, but I dont find it convincing. Pakistan governments starting with Zia had allowed terrorists in all forms (local lashkars, international fugitives, central asian bands seeking refuge from their governments) to come to Pakistan. They had not cared when hundreds of innocent pakistanis were being killed by their sectarianism. They had seen them as tools for a proxy war that could result only in needless bloodshed and which they could not win. This was very, very irresponsible policy. And like all irresponsible policies, it has proved over time to be a double edged sword. Musharaff made a wise choice after 9/11 when the US essentially told him to chose between the terrorists and the US. And today, musharaff has no choice because the terrorists are after him now. Anyway, better late then never, and may God help our jawans wipe every last one of these thugs from the face of the earth and dispatch them to hell.

You write `` Even before 9/11, the western media projected Muslims in bad light. Every Palestinian was a terrorist, every Arab was a half-breed, power-hungry creature. Every woman wearing a burqa is ``oppressed`` (but if a nun wears an ankle-length gown and veil, she is simply a religious woman). No educated and self-respecting Muslim can accept the western media as fair and balanced. ``

The contention that the muslims get an unfairly bad press is vastly exagerrated, and by any reasonable standard, is simply incorrect: I have been of course reading and watching the same western media (the mainstream media) for years. I have no basis for agreeing with this statement. By and large I have found western journalists to have done a very fair and reasonable job over the years. In addition, there is clear evidence that prior to 9/11, US and europe did not bear any particular animus towards muslims. This evidence is as follows: Muslims comprise 6-8 million in the US alone. In europe, they are a significant percentage (8 % in France I believe) of the local population. This is the result of massive immigration that took place over a short period of time since the late 1960s. Why would they let so many muslims in if they had such a negative view of muslims? (And rest assured, that for every muslim entering these countries, there was a long waiting line of nonmuslims whom they could have allowed in). After 9/11 visa restrictions have been tightened (but by no means closed), and for good security reasons.

The simple fact is that articles of this kind are based on falsehood. These muslims are like the boy who cried ``Wolf`` when there was none. All I can say is that, while it is fun to cry wolf, remember what happened to the boy when a real wolf came by one day. Just pray the same doesnt happen to the self-indulgent muslims who wish to enjoy the luxury of self-pity.

Everytime Pervez Hoodbhoy would write an article on how Pakistan was going to be Talibanistan soon, I always argued that this would never occur. Which it didn`t.

Every country/society has a pulse. A view about life, which can be considered the combined view of the population. Every society is at a certain level of sophistication, in terms of how evolved its thought process is.

The Western societies are the most sophisticated in this regard (specially in domestic matters). Other societies are somewhere behind them. There are certain elements of Pakistanis` views, which show up again and again in all surveys. People really need to look at some scientific measurement of these views (like surveys), rather than just shooting from the hip. Unfortunately, most Pakistanis and Indians, tend to comment on Pakistan with glasses on, that only show them the picture they want to see.

To paraphrase Ayaz Amir, Pakistanis have always known where they stand. It is the leadership(s) that have fluctuated back and forth. Pakistanis never wanted to support Afghanistan and Taliban to the extent the govt. did. Pakistanis also never wanted to support the USA to the extent their govt. did. They have always remained steadfast in their views, while the govts. went from one end to the other.

The Pakistani society, as a whole, is too sophisticated and beyond the point of being Talibanised. The reason Musharraf has been able to, ``get away`` with his U-turn is not because Powell was holding a gun to his head. Powell cannot hold a gun to every Pakistanis head. At best he can hold one only to Musharraf`s. The reason he has been able to get away with it is because he was bringing Pakistan back to the point where the society wanted to be to begin with. The reason the MMA got elected in NWFP is because the people felt that Musharraf has gone too far in the other direction, in supporting the USA. Not because the MMA`s views had all of a sudden become very popular in Pakistan.

Similarly Musharraf, and many Pakistani liberals and expats are dying for Pakistan to send troops to Iraq. Pakistan would get a nice payback from a defeated USA in Iraq, and it would make the lives of expats easier in the USA. However, that would go against the Pakistani social pulse, and Musharraf has been unable to do it, even though it is obvious he wants to do it, very much.

Pakistans` mean social point is a policy, which is neither pro-Taliban nor pro-USA. Currently, Pakistan is a bit too much in the pro-USA camp. It has to do that, since the USA can economically turn Pakistan into a basketcase. However, as the economy stabilizes, Pakistan will move towards its social mean point. Which is a good place to be, in the long run, in my opinion.

The Punjabi proverb describes relations with both the Taliban and USA (specificallly neo-con USA) nicely: ``Innanh dee dushmani wee pairhi, tay dosti wee pairhi.``

Pakistan should keep its distance from both USA and Taliban, in its foreign policy. It should only get close to either for trade, i.e. get melons and pomegranates from Afghanistan, and get FDI from the USA.

Pakistan`s solutions to its problems, its strategic depth so to speak, doesn`t lie in Kabul nor in Washington DC. It lies in the heart and mind and capabilities of the average Pakistan. These capabiliites have been proven in the construction sites of Dubai and in the software parks of San Jose. Somehow or the other those have to be unleashed within Pakistan, through a strong and stable economy, which will then lead to a strong and stable democracy.

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

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

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