Muslims Vs. Modernity

Nice write

yes dear mr solitude -- i want to know that as a reader and probably because my background in journalism has something to do with that -- as for you saying: ``

``This is what I mean by blaming or castigating the messenger as opposed to seeing the ideas behind and judging the article based on the merit and the ideas presented. I am not the only one who picked this up Mr. Quraishi. This is what I mean by ``dividers`` who chop this country up according to religion and sect and ethnicity and race. I am not going to let you get away with this remark and neither have some of the other respondents. It is nice to hear that your office is air conditioned, you must be a very important person. With all due respect, have a great day sir. `` -- yes sir, you are the only one who seems to have picked this up, because you are the only one ranting about it --

``I am not going to let you get away with this remark and neither have some of the other respondents.`` -- my comment on you being highly complexed about a very simple question is justified by this -- u seem to be attributing motives to me which you have made up in your own mind mr shiraz -- and pray tell me how will you `not let me get away with this` ???
Which other respondent on this board made an issue of this question by the way ?

I think you need to get some issues sorted out mr shiraz -- seriously.........

Regarding #107 by omar_r_quraishi on June 28, 2004 4:56am PT

You used words like ``complexed`` and then claim to have left Karachi? I am amazed.

Ok so you just wanted to know my name (full name) because you are a journalist right?

Is that it? Is that what you tell people after saying this:

`` i think readers should know whether this article was written by a disillusioned muslim who left it or by someone who wasnt a muslim ever .... ``

This is what I mean by blaming or castigating the messenger as opposed to seeing the ideas behind and judging the article based on the merit and the ideas presented. I am not the only one who picked this up Mr. Quraishi. This is what I mean by ``dividers`` who chop this country up according to religion and sect and ethnicity and race. I am not going to let you get away with this remark and neither have some of the other respondents.

It is nice to hear that your office is air conditioned, you must be a very important person. With all due respect, have a great day sir.

solitude sahib you`re funny hahaha -- dont know who is letting the heat get to them and who is being sanctimonious here -- and dont worry for my well being because my office is quite well airconditioned -- my question remains unanswered -- you seem to be so complexed about this issue that it would be futile to follow this any further -- as a journalist and an editor (and by extension as a reader) i would always want to know at least the full name of the person who writes a piece -- esp when i have seen a familiar name on some other stuff that might have gone by my eye --

#105 by omar_r_quraishi on June 26, 2004 0:42am PT

Please read your question. You qualified your question with ``so we may know if this is a disillusioned Muslim``?

What does this have anything to do with quality (or veracity) of the ideas presented. These are not my ideas anyway. I claim no originality nor credit for this but I do find them appealing and thought it would interest the rest of you.

I am not the only one who thought this was an inappropriate question. As most agree at best it was a stupid question.

Now Mr. Quraishi temper your sanctimonious rage, avoid the Karachi heat getting to your head and aggravating your disposition. We are in civilized society here and I have already apologized for calling you a pathetic person for invoking my religion through my name. I think you are wrong in invoking or referring to my religion through the use of my name and I have already explained what A stands for. Now is your life so boring that you must get worked up over this any further? If you must you may but you don`t have to you know.

solitude janab -- plz get THIS -- i asked u a PRETTY SIMPLE question -- as in what does the first letter in your name stand for ?? - i think that is pretty simple isnt it -- could you perhaps have given me a straight forward yes or `choose not to answer` response?


``To conclude the brand of DIVIDERS or men who attack us Pakistanis on basis of religion or sect are cruel and unjust. The people of Pakistan and the Islamic world are realizing that the men who invoke allegiances based on religious bias are men of violence and discord and barbarism. The people of the west are realizing that they are capable of similar evils and are seeing in us a reflection of their past. The question is are you on the side of a modern reformed secular Pakistan?`` -- ????? no janab, the question was what does the A in your first name stand for ????

Mr. Qureishi I go with my instincts.

If my instincts were right you were questioning my motivations for writing this piece by referring to my religion and my anglicized name.

A personal attack against one NOT based on the ideas one present are abhorrent to any sensible human. So if you imply my disloyalty or ulterior motives based on my name or my alleged ``disillusionment`` it is wrong of you to do so.


However I am fallible and we are beseiged DESPITE the numbers that gather to the side of reform! We are on the side of modernity and the course adopted by those who love liberty and we prevail.

If I misunderstood your motivations then I would apologize but since you have not yet clarified your position I am thinking MAYBE I was right in castigating you. Since instead you have implied that I would be nicer to you if I was submitting this piece to Dawn (you being an assistant editor of the paper) I am thinking for implying obeisance for profit or press should be enough reason why I should not apologize to you.

Nonetheless I view myself as someone who should not stoop to counter personal attacks (implied, perceived or otherwise) with the same. Therefore I will apologize because I ought not to have stooped to such harshness either way. If I misundertood your motivations and I will assume that I did misunderstand you then I apologize for my harshness and my personal attacks.

To conclude the brand of DIVIDERS or men who attack us Pakistanis on basis of religion or sect are cruel and unjust. The people of Pakistan and the Islamic world are realizing that the men who invoke allegiances based on religious bias are men of violence and discord and barbarism. The people of the west are realizing that they are capable of similar evils and are seeing in us a reflection of their past. The question is are you on the side of a modern reformed secular Pakistan?

#101 is not my post.

My post was this:
omar_r_quraishi #98
Thanks, but that is good news as far as I am concerned. Here is finally some tangible benefit of having a Cong. govt at the center - that clear information is demanded from the Gujarat govt.

dost-mittar,

As a member of a first-generation community, can you please tell me what`s wrong with an `in-your-face` attitude? And I am asking this in an in-your-face manner as possible :-)

A discussion that was between I think Vertex and another about exactly this issue on the previous Hijab board was quite informative. Needless to say, I think he was spot-on. The crux of his argument was that in-your-face expressions of `otherness` is part and parcel of this culture, so that alone is an insufficient reason to question the Hijab.

This leads, of course, to your `dar-ul-harb` statement, which is rather uncalled for. The implication being of course that the Hijab is in fact an expression of political hostility, rather than assertion of identity or the perceived fulfillment of religious obligation. There is a world of difference, the difference only being bridged by projected sentiment which is more an act of hostility towards the Muslim community rather than one emanating from it. Such sentiment should not be pandered to.

There is hypocrisy at work (which I am not accusing you of, btw) when those who suggest that the Hijab will somehow lead to ghettoization yet express a sentiment that those who wear it at work, etc. are being condemnable social miscreants. Here, by not being ghettoized, they are being offensive, and the only solution is to have them either ``conform`` (or rather, to placate) or to ghettoize. It`s no doubt a nice position to occupy for those who wish to be antagonistic...

#99 by bongdongs

there must be some mistake. i think the ``govt`` is too busy right now with Iraq/Abu Gharib etc.

#98

Goverment ribs army on WANA operations

By our correspondent

ISLAMABAD, June 22: The Pakistani goverment has painly told the Army to provide a comprehensive report with quality proof...
... army chief Gen Musharaff has been asked to appear before a joint parliamentary committee investigating the allegations of rape and torture during WANA operations. Gen Musharaff will cut short his visit to China to appear before the committee on Friday. Speculation is rife in Islamabad that Gen Musharaff may be asked by the government to retire prematurely due to his bungling of WANA operations.

#82 by solitude on June 21, 2004 6:41pm PT
#73 by omar_r_quraishi on June 21, 2004 6:44am PT

Regarding my name, Is it Arthur Shiraz or Athar Shiraz.

Mr. Quraishi since in most likelihood you have not stepped out of karachi I would like to inform you that the anglicized version of Athar is to ease communication with my American friends. I know of a lot of Xiao from China who use the name Steve because Xiao is harder to pronounce and a lot of Pervaiz`s who go with Peter or Pete and a lot of Jews who have Anglican names and Hebrew names (Yaqub call themselves Jacob).

Does that clear up your insinuations ? I am an open book. I lay no claim to being a Mullah. I do lay claim to kinship with the Muslims of the world because I was one before and I know how they feel and the Muslims know how I feel and they can relate to me quite well thank you (quite a lot of them).

What have you got next ? Will you next question my motivations as a Pakistani like your kind isolates and persecutes Ahmedi Pakistanis because of their religion? Will you next accuse me of being ethnically different (as in the case of Urdu Speaking people scorning the Punjabis as Paindoos and the rest of Pakistan looking down upon the Pathans as Niswar Choos?) What is next will you then question my credibility based on the color of my skin ?

You are a pathetic specimen sir and you are damaging our own people by such insinuations when you have no arguments to present. Its INDECENT and parochial and utterly evil that once again you try to squelch the voice of reform and once on basis of a name and once again you stigmatize the critic by branding them as the ``other``. That is just low and my fellow country men and women know that.

tch tch solitude jee, i asked u a simpe enough question -- what the A in your name stands for and u have given me a lecture in i dont know what -- and actually i have stepped out of karachi quite a few times -- and i think if u r artur shiraz then you have submitted your stuff to dawn before -- i wonder if you would be so abusive if you had been asked for your full name then ....

hey arjun, sadna et al, even your central govt in delhi doesnt buy this story now --

Delhi ribs Gujarat on `encounter`


By Jawed Naqvi

NEW DELHI, June 22: The Indian government has plainly told the Gujarat establishment to give quality proof that there were Pakistani men among the four people killed in an alleged encounter in the state recently , indicating a toughened stand against communally-inspired rhetoric.

The Indian Express reported on Tuesday that the government was clearly unimpressed by the Gujarat police`s ``evidence`` supporting the Pakistani identity of two alleged Lashkar-i-Toiba men shot last Tuesday.

New Delhi has asked the state police to furnish a more detailed report with sufficient evidence before the matter can be taken up with Pakistan. The report was sought after the Gujarat police approached the Ministry of External Affairs to ask the Pakistan High Commission to claim the bodies of Jishan Johar and Amjadali Akbarali Rana, the two alleged Pakistani members of Lashkar-i-Toiba.

The two men were among the four persons shot dead by the Gujarat police on a deserted stretch of the Himmatnagar highway. Ishrat Jahan, a 19-year-old college student from Mumbra in Thane, and Javed Ghulam Mohammed Sheikh of Pune were the other two killed.

Civil rights activists have accused the rightwing Hindutva government of staging a fake encounter for political mileage. The issue has caused ripples even within the state`s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party as its former Gujarat chief minister Keshubhai Patel declared that the state was experiencing a mini-emergency.

Mr Patel has stayed away from a high-level meeting of the party in Mumbai. ``I am unhappy about the prevailing situation in the state. There is a sort of mini-emergency where MLAs are afraid to express their feelings,`` Mr Patel, who has ``skipped`` the BJP national executive meeting that began in Mumbai on Tuesday morning citing ``knee pain``, said at his residence in Ahmedabad.

#82 -- solitude jee -- arent we being a bit touchy about a simple enough question???

re: mullah and modernity: the case of Imran Khan
Anybody read the latest news? The flashy playboy of yesteryears, the one who has fathered a nameless child living somewhere in USA is, hold your breath guys, divorcing his wife.

This was a high profile marriage: he in his 40s, she in her 20s; he, a famous cricketer with good looks, she a young chic with good money. Many pakis bemoaned the fact that he was marrying outside his religion. Some rejoiced that he was converting a jew into the islamic fold. ``One less jew in this world`` was the common refrain in Pak in those days.

Imran Khan always lived a western lifestyle when he was outside Pakistan. Often, he was known to frequent night clubs and with his good looks, he had no problem with high profile socialite chics. It surprised me that he actually married someone and settled down in life.
I thought this was a case of ``sow choohey khaakey billee haj ko chalee``.

Now, Imran Khan himself has given the most incredible reason for his divorce: that his wife could not adjust to the conditions in Pakistan!
Is this guy a moron or what? Which modern woman would adjust to conditions in Pak society, where so many restrictions are placed. I thought, being a person of western education and outlook, this guy would give same freedom to his wife that he himself enjoyed once. Looks like, that was not the case. So, 7 years and 2 kids later, this woman is now walking away to freedom. Good for her.
Imran seems to harbor a mullah mind. He is perhaps a ``closet mullah:, one who wears his western garbs when it suits him. Back in Pak, being a conservative can get him votes. So, he speaks and acts like a mullah in his own country. I also noticed, not without amusement, how much of a hardliner he was when it came to India. This guy, above anybody else, should be friendly towards India. But no. That will not serve his political fortunes.

Here then is a modern man caught up in the confusing debate: is Islam compatible with modernity? Imran Khan has just proved that it is not.
Sridhar

sparchus #93

seven VIRGINS

My friend, you certainly underestimate the generosity of the arabic Allah toward those who behead kafirs. You have to know the motivations of these people better. :)

he he he
all i can say as a `kafir` is i hope the `god of the muslims` puts some sense into them.So that we `non-believers` can live in a little peace minus the ambition of people who intend to get seven VIRGINS in heaven. god save aallaah!

#90 by solitude on June 22, 2004 5:53pm PT

[harish_hyd, why do you think its a stupid question?]

Well, it is stupid because there`s more than fair chance that a disillusioned Muslim would question Islamic beliefs, because that`s what led him to the disillusion in the first place. And if he isn`t a Muslim at all, there`s still a fair chance that he would question Islamic beliefs because we all know a true Muslim would never question the wisdom passed on by the Quran.

Correction:

``.....because that`s what led him to the disillusion in the first place.``

must read

......because that`s what led him to the disillusionment in the first place.

Sir Hamid,

We are still awaiting the fourth part :)

harish_hyd, why do you think its a stupid question?

#85 by arjun_m on June 22, 2004 10:58am PT
”why am I not surprised?”

What is there to surprise?

Prof Khursheed is a jamaat Islami old hand. Who else would say these things but a fundamentalist party that is the force behind some of the major problems in the educational system in Pakistan.
I think you should pay attention to Jehad is the basis of our ideology and it is the only way to defend our religious values, he added.

You did highlight it but this is the latest political line of the Islamist in Pakistan and elsewhere.
Now it is not a Jihad for Muslims rights in Kashmir, or Palestine but now jihad is to defend the religion.
It appears to me that Jihadi have conceded in Kashmir, Palestine, and Afghanistan etc.
The war against these fundos should now be more on ideological grounds than at physical level.

I think that is something that would hurt the jihadi more than anything else. They stand on very thin ideological grounds. The public support is waning.

The US, as the next step must emphasis to Pakistan to limit its religious programming on TV and other public media. I think Pakistan will soon have a new much more westernized PM, who would depend more on the US support than on the Army support for his power base.

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

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

#85
``Jehad is the basis of our ideology and it is the only way to defend our religious values, he added.``
It is hard to understand. What began as covert deniable foreign policy is now touted as mainstream religion. And in a whole nation worth of Muslims there appears to be no decisive reply.

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

#73 by omar_r_quraishi

[i think readers should know whether this article was written by a disillusioned muslim who left it or by someone who wasnt a muslim ever]

What a stupid question! Obviously, if he is a disillusioned Muslim, you can expect this from him. If he is not, you can still expect this from him. Man, the `Assistant Editor` seems to have taken leave of his senses.

dost-mittar,

``The Ontario govt. has agreed to allow muslims to settle their disputes according to sharia outside the Ontario judicial system. ``

.............. are you kidding !!!!.......... like the kind folks of medina, the canadians will regret the day they let in the meccan camel ! .............. trojan horse

#73 by omar_r_quraishi on June 21, 2004 6:44am PT

Regarding my name, Is it Arthur Shiraz or Athar Shiraz.

Mr. Quraishi since in most likelihood you have not stepped out of karachi I would like to inform you that the anglicized version of Athar is to ease communication with my American friends. I know of a lot of Xiao from China who use the name Steve because Xiao is harder to pronounce and a lot of Pervaiz`s who go with Peter or Pete and a lot of Jews who have Anglican names and Hebrew names (Yaqub call themselves Jacob).

Does that clear up your insinuations ? I am an open book. I lay no claim to being a Mullah. I do lay claim to kinship with the Muslims of the world because I was one before and I know how they feel and the Muslims know how I feel and they can relate to me quite well thank you (quite a lot of them).

What have you got next ? Will you next question my motivations as a Pakistani like your kind isolates and persecutes Ahmedi Pakistanis because of their religion? Will you next accuse me of being ethnically different (as in the case of Urdu Speaking people scorning the Punjabis as Paindoos and the rest of Pakistan looking down upon the Pathans as Niswar Choos?) What is next will you then question my credibility based on the color of my skin ?

You are a pathetic specimen sir and you are damaging our own people by such insinuations when you have no arguments to present. Its INDECENT and parochial and utterly evil that once again you try to squelch the voice of reform and once on basis of a name and once again you stigmatize the critic by branding them as the ``other``. That is just low and my fellow country men and women know that.

....A GOOD Muslim is a NON Muslim....:-)

digit#79:

I cancelled my subscription to the Post and Citizen two years ago because Izzy Asper (and his son) dismissed the publisher who refused to let them dictate editorials to him. I have recently started getting Citizen again and I do pay attention to the relevant sections of it.

There is nothing wrong with arbitration/meditation/conciliation in resolving personal disputes. They are both less costly for the parities, less stressful and do not accentuate hostility. But when they are to be decided according to sharia, you and I both know the kind of problems it can lead to. As regards the awards being in conformity with the Ontario law, this can only happen if they are not in conformity with the sharia laws, in which case they will simply be an arbitration panel and not a muslim panel. I am glad that people like you are involved in this issue - hopefully the govt. will realise the implications of this ill-considered idea and cancel the whole thing.

dos-mittar,

You read the Post/Citizen too much. :-)

Fear mongering aside, it is both well known, and a very common argument on the part of those who support these arbitration committees that the law of the land will reign supreme. This is not a `saving grace`, but understood to be a part of the design. Ismalis, Christians, aboriginals, and Jewish groups (not just `obscure` ones) have such comities.

The real issue isn`t Sharia, since any judgment of the arbitration panel must be in accordance with the law (there is only one law). The real issue is the competency of those who are running the arbitration panels, and those of us in the community are thinking along these lines despite the willful ignorance of those outside who would wish to obfuscate the nature of these arbitration comities. Either get rid of these across the board, or allow their use across the board. Personally, I would be very skeptical about the quality of the arbitration, so I wouldn`t go to one of these tribunals.

Your point about this potentially becoming an `image` problem...perhaps, but then there`s nothing that can make the Lowell Green types happy. In fact, given the hysteria these types have tried to stir up, it is better for the community to challenge it head on than to roll over and play dead.

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1086819009712&call_pageid=970599109774&col=Columnist969907621513

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1087078813623&call_pageid=970599109774&col=Columnist969907621513

hamidm:
``but now this system is in grave danger because soon the muslims (aided by their elected official) will be demanding all kinds of special priveleges - family laws, public beheadings, the right to treat their women like chattel, the right to walk around toronto in nightgowns, arabic classes in public schools, six breaks a day for namaz, etc. etc.............. the poor canadians are in for a rude awakening ............ ``

Well folks, this is already happening. The Ontario govt. has agreed to allow muslims to settle their disputes according to sharia outside the Ontario judicial system. The muslims successfully used a precedent under which some obscure jewish sect is allowed to use its own arbitration system according to ancient jewish law.

But if I were a muslim, I would stoutly oppose this move by Ontario. Once a couple of cases come to the public light of mothers denied adequate support or custody of their children based on sharia, there will be the same kind of backlash against muslims that happened in India after the Shah Bano case. The saving grace is that the Ontario govt. has made it clear that the Ontario law supercedes any sharia awards. [so was the Indian Supreme Court which found out that it was no longer supreme when people come out in force on the streets]

re: modernity versus Islam
People who are concentrating on Pak have missed talking about another country that is fast becoming a center of islamic terrorism.
I am talking about Bangladesh.
There is no reason why this country should ever have become a refuge for the terrorists. It itself went through a harrowing experience during its inception. The people who killed, raped or sodomised them were there own compatriots. Bangladesh seems to have forgotten all this and has now joined the Al-qaida with a new vigor that comes from being a new entrant to the ``evil club``. Its answer to its problems with India is: to be more belligerant, to join forces with ex-rapists in Pak and shun modernity.
So, here is a classic case of clash of Islam and modernity. Bangladesh has some kind of democrazy (better than Pak one would hope) but that has not resulted in any kind of moderation. It has only 2 national parties: one pro-India and the other, by default, is anti-India. Since being anti-India gets votes for this party, you can see this party indulge not just in anti-India rhetorics but indulge in ethnic killing of its hindu minorities. Islamists in that country seem to associate hindu minorities with India just as some in India make the mistake of associating its muslim minorities with Pak. It forgets easlity that those hindus are its own citizens and that fundamentalism will ultimately hurt Bangladesh more than anybody else. No country will invest there if that country has the image of being a terrorist haven.

Modernity should have come to Bangladesh but it did not. It shares a lot of common heritage with India. Even its national anthem was writtten by Tagore. Still, it does not try to find a common friendly ground with India. Here then is a classic case of Islam denying modernity to a nation.
Sridhar

re:#63 by Romair
``Speaking of Muslims vs. Modernity, Pakistan may be about to get its first candidate elected into the Federal Assemblies,...``
Idiot.
How is Pak involved in this guy`s election? As a Paki, u may feel proud but i am convinced that he is being elected because of his good credentials and his good work in office and not because he is a Paki (which is actually not such a great qualification now-a days).
Here is his biography from the www.electwajid.com site:

``Wajid Khan`s life documents an exceptional record of leadership and success in business and public service. As an entrepreneur, he has created hundreds of jobs for Ontarians. His door is always open for those seeking help or support, no matter their creed, faith, or point of origin.

Wajid works hard to resolve conflict - both here in Canada and abroad. Whether by working with human rights committees, numerous business organizations, dozens of cultural associations - or by sitting on policy executives dedicated to refining Canada`s role in international conflict resolution, Wajid Khan believes in the integration and involvement of all Canadians, both old and new, as we build a better Canada.

As a homeowner, husband and a father, Wajid understands the interests and needs of Canadian families today. A strong supporter of amateur sport, community youth activities and municipal projects, Wajid contributes to the welfare and prosperity of Canadians at every level.``
Any mention of his paki roots? NO.
I rest my case.
Sridhar

re: # 57

``the rest of the world, barring a small minority, does not debate it 24 hours a day, however. It just wants to learn it, or about it....``

Not the rest of the world. Just the western world. It is intrigued about Islam after 9/11. There is a surge of interest to find out why some of the adherents of this religion of more than 1 billion people are trying to spread terror around the world. And, what is it in that religion that encourages this?
This is the western way of life. Everything is debated, researched and brought under the microscope in order to understand it. Islam poses a threat to western way of life and this is a legitimate way of trying to understand Islam.
How can any muslim logically explain why an American was beheaded by some islamic thugs in Saudi Arabia? There is no logic behind this act. It is plain brutality. Yet, we do not see a great outpouring of grief or condemnation of the perpetrators of this crime from the muslim community. Why? This is what West is intrigued about and has made a study of Islam an obsession.
On a similar note, when USA started to lose a lot of blue collared jobs to India, there was a hue and cry in the media here (if u have been listening to Lou Dobbs on CNN, u would not have missed it). There was a lot of debate as to why this was happening. Then, recently, when Infosys opened its internship program to US students, a lot of universities jumped on the bandwagon and are sending its students to study in the Infosys Campus and learn what makes it take away jobs (almost 200 students from Harvard, and other Ivy League have joined this program- a 2 month stint in the Infosys campus).
This is another kind of jehad by India and China, a bloodless and technologically driven one, about which Thomas Friedman has written many columns. Which is preferable? I think u know the answer already.
Sridhar

re: Going down the drain: Paki style
Since we are on the topic of modernity in Islamic countries, it would interest people to know that there is something in Islam that makes it difficult to adjust to modernity. Call it: dogma, clash between belief system and western education that is a must for advancement now-a days but the dilemma exists among the muslims in Islamic countries: should we give up our religion to become better educated or should we just remain ``maulvis``?

I thought that Bangladesh had every reason to be proud of its existence and its culture. It broke away from Pak on the language issue but has found it very difficult to come to terms with modernity. A giant country in the neighbourhood (India) stares at its face every time it looks up. In the last several years, this Bhooka-Nanga desh has now become an active partner with Al-qaida elements.
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/bangladesh/

But that is not all. Apparently, Islmic credentials can be established only by killing the minorities. Does not the Qoran say: kill the non-believers?
So, after going thr` an ethnic cleaning itself where its people were killed and raped by the Paki Army, it seems to be indulging the same type of ethnic cleansing with the hindu minorities.
http://www.mukto-mona.com/human_rights/ethnic_clensing_Bangladesh.

Bhooka Nanga Desh (or call it Bangladesh if you will) has no future. It is at conflict with itself. This is a classic case of Islam clashing with modernity. Heck, Bhooka Nanga Desh even has some kind of democrazy. But that does not matter as even its PM actively supports hardcore elements who kill the minorities. It won`t sell gas to India because its hardcore elements are not friendly to India. This has seen an efflux of MNC Oil companies who can profit only if gas is sold to the huge Indian market (let us face it. Bhooka Nanga Desh has little to offer). And, with the new trade agreement (MFA) going into force, this nation of losers will also lose its textile quota, facing huge layoffs among the poor textile workers. But heck, that should not bother them. They think Islam is more important than feeding the poor, who are all dying anyway of hunger.
Sridhar

good question romair #42 -- i suppose they are all afraid of it -- veeresh jee what is a modern hindu ? pray tell ????

a. shiraz -- what does the `a` stand for? if im not mistaken does it stand for arthur or artur ??? could you please clarify?? i think we once got an email from you on dr younas`s case -- r u that very person -- i think readers should know whether this article was written by a disillusioned muslim who left it or by someone who wasnt a muslim ever ....

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

thats why I said presumptious generalization. Ur assumption of all that is bad is islamic and all that is good is western is just a bit to exagurated and very common in the generalization of ``progressive`` people whose favourite pastime is religion bashing. Blaming islam for every ill is just looking for a scape goat. some how the other I dont see Taliban resposnible for the rampant curruption in Pakistan.

My point: If this is Ur basis for stating that religion and progres cannot co-exist then I do not agree with Ur argument as it is based on presumptious generalization

Arjun,

The apologists of Islam change their stories and are nothing more than two faced liars. For these reasons they have lost my trust and the trust of the world to the point everyone laughs when they parrot ``Islam is peaceful!``

Thanks for bringing this up. Now the Pakistani governments and their western-eduicated apologists can go on tv and say ``Its not our fault ! The Taliban were created by the US`` !

The apologists of Islam are shameless, lack sincerity or any sense of truth or justice - they just care about overcoming by hooks or by crooks and sometimes they don`t even know the gaping holes in their beliefs and arguments but they try DESPERATELY to uphold something that oppresses all: Islam.

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

I have uploaded the latest version to the following address :

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Secularize_Pakistan

See the messages or the files section. The site contains the latest version of Muslims Vs. Modernity Version 2 (a little more elaborate). It also contains the article Muslims Vs. State. I wish I had more time but I don`t do this full time or even part time.

Mr. HamidM, I am honored to have you write in the interacts of my article even though your posts eclipse my own words :)

Fahadist, have you tried Math lately ? It is founded like all sciences and business and human knowledge on ``generalizations``, models and simplifications.

To all our Indian friends. I am impressed. This is what a secular country makes of its citizens? then I am amazed. I have always envied the ability of indians to make leaders that can astound the rest of the world but particularly the west. Your responses are clear and cut straight through the arguments of the Islamists and the Islamist apologists. I am so close to Islam that I cannot sometimes answer their sophistry. Yet one can rely on the objective third party that is rational. Thanks.

Romair, my father was a fighter pilot for the PAF. Did you know that?

atif1, my friend - a secular (``worldly``) view is for anyone who know how to love. I am impressed by your critical analysis of the FOB but I think you are afraid or upset with the west. This is the baggage of all minorities. You are intelligent though and you can wade through it if you embrace things rather than react to them.


Ralph - the similarities between communism and Islam are many :) I am glad you brought that one up.

As for the graph. It is not detailed enough. If people are interested I can put in the details that will answer many of your questions. You see ``Westernization`` is not the pinnacle just like ``Islamization`` is not the abyss. There are things more evil than Islam (some less evil than an Islamic fundamentalist along the submission continuum)

Similarly there are things better than westernization along the freedom continuum. I wish to put all the countries of the world on it because I think it will amuse and entertain the people and help them see the position of societies along various scales of modernity vs. westernization. I know I find studying these graphs very entertaining.


To all those who are upset. I wish I could apologize to you or hug you or show you the tears in my eyes. What I write sometimes hurts me as I write it and I ask myself often ``Wouldn`t it be easier to ignore it and pretend that everything is ok?`` but I do it with the hope that even if the words don`t come out right, even if it seems terrible you will know that I LOVE YOU nonetheless. I do it because I hope you can say ``Shiraz, you are not afraid of these things, maybe I could try them too ... `` Courage! Courage! I say these words because I know Pakistanis are secure and confident enough to embrace the good!

I am just like you and I am only telling you what I hear and read and understand to be true. I am open. I am not set in my ways. I don`t have anyone whispering in my ears. I am all alone and I am awaiting patiently. I do not have a faith or a belief or a religion like the Jews, Christians, Hindus etc. I am still the same Shiraz. I was what you are now today, I am you!

Tell all of us all you have to say please just be kind towards me and be gentle because I feel a lot. Give me a rational, convincing argument and I will change. Uptil now I have not heard anything new or anything that could change my mind.

All of us are listening and when you cry and shout and complain and abuse us we can only hear one thing ``We can`t really provide an argument in defence of the evil within Islam``. When we criticize Islam we are not criticizing Muslims who are peaceful and don`t follow the abhorrent tenets of Islam. We are criticizing the fundamentalist interpretations.

... why are people so obsessed by islam - part III

......... well i was going to write about the misogyny inherent in islam and the rather insipid and joyless sex that results from this horrible attitude, but romair`s last post reminded me of yet another pet peeve ......... it is the tendency of muslims to wet their pants over perceived reaffirmation from the white establishment that they all seek to destroy .......... so now some paki fellow is running for office in the socialist republic of canada - so what ? .......... how does this prove that muslims are well on the path to modernity?......... to me it simply demonstrates the fairness of the system that the white man has established in canada over the last two hundred odd years ........ unlike the khilafat that most muslims pine for, this system does not require the members of the shoora to take an oath of allegience to an arab diety ............ but now this system is in grave danger because soon the muslims (aided by their elected official) will be demanding all kinds of special priveleges - family laws, public beheadings, the right to treat their women like chattel, the right to walk around toronto in nightgowns, arabic classes in public schools, six breaks a day for namaz, etc. etc.............. the poor canadians are in for a rude awakening ............

............. anyway, it never ceases to amaze me how excited muslims get when they see a white man share their nightmare ......... karen armstrong, bernard shaw, murad hoffmann (who?).......... they claim that neil armstrong converted to islam because he heard the azan when he landed on the moon - never mind that the poor fellow has denied it many times .......... they get all excited because michael jackson converted to the true faith - never mind that he is not really white and a pedophile to boot !.............

............. we will talk about sex in part - IV ......... promise


p.s. it seems romair has dropped imran khan and is now supporting a fellow ``businessman`` in canada ......... the man is unstoppable !

Two words: presumptious generalization!!!

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

#63 by Romair

On my recent visit to Canada, I saw Wajid Khan’s board in Mississauga area. I stayed around the ninth street in Mississauga. Isn’t some India born a candidate for the Conservative from the same area? I think I saw her signs too.

www.electwajid.com

Speaking of Muslims vs. Modernity, Pakistan may be about to get its first candidate elected into the Federal Assemblies, ever, in North America. In fact, he may be the first Muslim candidate ever elected, to this level, in North America. I know there has never been one in the USA, and there may have never been one in Canada, either.

Wajid, who looks like a Pathan, but speaks fluent Punjabi, has gotten the nomination from the main party in Canada - Liberal Party. They are dominant on the East Coast, and were expected to sweep this election on June 28. However, they now have a corruption scandal around their necks, so they are neck and neck with the Conservative party.

But I think this guy will win. He is campaigning a lot on the Pakistani and Indian shows and channels.

P.S. He was a pilot in the PAF, a long time ago, and must have been around the same seniority as NazarHayatKhan. He is now a businessman. So he has the same background as me. Based on this, I have joined his campaign, and will be attending his functions. Even though I have no idea, what he stands for, other than what the Liberal party stands for.........But I do know that the current Canadian PM, gave a 45 minute speech on Pakistan and Jinnah, at a disorganized Abrar concert, that I attended, in hot weather. So I guess that is enough to support this guy.....and he is a Pakistani and very active in the community......

The whole percept of this write up is utterly wrong. Countries and nations make progress or go backwards. Countries modernize and nations adopt new cultures (modernization). Religious groups don’t do any such thing.

Where do Muslims fit in? They are neither a country nor a nation. Muslim is a religious group spread over many countries and many nations. Some of those countries and nations are making progress economically and moving towards modernization. Many are stuck as their economic progress is halted for different reasons.

Lumping different nations as Muslims is inaccurate. When you do that, you actually end up serving the cause of Islamists or the Muslim fundamentalist as that group is driving this debate beyond the confines of a nation and a country’s borders by emphasizing its roots as Islamic or Muslim and not as Pakistani or Sudanese etc.

Islam is part of Arab culture as it embodies Arab or rather Bedouin way of life. Islam is not Pakistani culture. It is a religion adopted by Pakistanis or some Indians in the Indian sub continent.

Muslims in Pakistan or in India or in Bangladesh derive their cultural values and way of life from the land and that is India. There is a fundamental difference between how Arabs look at Islam and how Indians/Pakistani/Bangladeshi work with Islam.
When Pakistani/Indians/Bangladeshi embrace modernization, they will do that based on their own culture, society and economic progress and not part of a pseudo Muslim nation and culture that is being advanced by the fundamentalist to counter the west influences as pointed out by the author.

When Atta goes to a bar before flying the plane, he is merely deviating from his culture. In his mind, he’s not doing anything anti or pro religion. Following the tenets of Islam is part of the culture that he grew up in because Islamic tenets are also his cultural tenets.

Atta was never on a religious mission. He was on a mission to revenge the Arab humiliation and more importantly to violently protest the US support of Israel and the house of Saud.
OBL’s emphasis of Islam is part of his call to retake the political power that has been usurped by the house of Saud. When OBL talks of Islam, he is talking about the revival of his culture. Islam is his culture and not just a religion.

When terrorists behead prisoners, they invoke Arab ancient punishments that were adopted by Islam. The Saudi Govt beheads people as part of its legal system, which is called Islamic.

Beheading was never a part of Indian legal system or even the culture, so it never shows up in Pakistani legal system and by and large Pakistanis abhor it.

Muslim way of life is alien to non Arab countries and nations. That is why Muslim fundamentalists emphasis Islam as culture or call it a way of life by superimposing it on local cultures, they introduce Islamic way of life, that is essentially Bedouin way of life and that includes forms of Hijab, encouraging Arabic style clothing, carrying beads, uttering Arabic words on several occasions, and referring to times of the day based on religious activity. They also introduce Arabic punishments including beheading etc. Daniel Pearls beheading in Pakistan was introduced as Islamic punishment.

Islamist strength is in creating a façade of a Muslim nation so they can pretend to represent a larger group of people. The west falls for it, because it finds it convenient. People of different nations with Muslim population should be able to distinguish between their own culture and the Islamic/Muslim culture which is essentially Arab and contradicts their own national cultures.
Followers of a religion just remain what they are; followers of a religion. Countries and Nations adopt new values and make progress. Pakistanis may or may not adopt western ideas and they will not do it as a part of a religious group.

Lumping nations together by their common religion is playing in the hands of the religious fanatics.

#49 by plats8

+++
How could anything in a constant state of war provide stability ?
+++

The Taliban were initially welcomed by the masses especially in southern Afghanistan. It was assumed that they would also win over the hearts of Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks and establish a unified central govt.

They failed to do so, and the war for unification of Afghanistan... became an ethnic and sectarian war. As a result, Afghanistan didn`t enjoy stability. But Pakistan did. As long as Taliban were in control, the Pak-Afghan border was quiet.

Oh man hamidm you are hilarious and your ``interacts`` are masterpieces displaying great comedic prowess. Write a book! publish something share yourself with the world because we need hope and we want to prevail and your ideas have to be heard.

........ why are people so obsessed about islam - part II

.......... since romair asked this question, it got me thinking ......... for most people the answer is simple - because it is an insidious ideology that seeks to destroy civilization and replace it with barbarism .......... but that is not my reason - my pet peeves are rather personal and even quite petty, some might say .......... i talked about the clocks, but never really got into the calender that has caused me quite a bit of anguish over the past few years .......... it is extremely embarassing when you can`t tell your boss when exactly you want a day off so that you an go kill a sheep, or when you can`t tell the dean at your daughter`s school, who is trying to bend over backwards to accomodate the five muslim students, when exactly you want him to declare test and homework free days ............ but that is not as bad as islamic interior decoration ..........

..........oh yes, interior decoration ........it seems that islamic aestheitcs demand that in addition to putting plastic flowers in vases on every table in the house, you are required to put up some mandatory islamic art as close to the ceiling as possible .............these include the gold on black ninetynine names of the diety, gold on black names of the messenger and his nephew and grandsons (for shias only), various surahs from the koran asking him to smite the heathens and grant al-qaeda final victory, an arabic incantation blessing food in the kitchen ............ the only place exempted is the toilet which is considered napak and therefore unfit for islamic art ............ now, i know this is not as grotesque as a statue of a naked man being crucified while his mother looks on with angles fluttering around her, but it is still pretty bad ............

......... i started thinking about it when an old friend was a recent house guest after many years .............on his previous visit he had brough me a marvellous piece of islamic art from saudi arabia and was quite upset when he couldn`t find it anywhere in the house ............ he offered to pray for my soul and was even more upset when i had to consult mrs hamidm to point him towards mecca ............. i was upset when i found out that he had given up drinking .... so i drank to his health, he prayed for my soul .......... i think i heard him in the middle of the night looking in the basement for his precious art .........or maybe he was secretly praying tahajjud like the early converts in mecca .............

......... in part III i will talk about my biggest peeve with islam - joyless sex ............

A suggestion to Chowk Staff:

I think discussing anything in the replies section is fine. But perhaps it would be a good idea to simply create separate permanent sections, where people can debate the issues, which they seem obsessed with, without printing articles on those issues, again and again, on the main page. I say this with all seriousness.

This section could include, titles related to Islam vs. West, India vs. Pakistan, Secularism vs. Shariah, BJP vs. Congress, etc. Individuals could present their views (and take out their frustrations in this section).

Perhaps you could preserve your main page for articles that point to something unique and interesting and informative. A personal journey. A trip through Pakistan or India. Science and Tech. in Pakistan or India. Economic analysis of the South Asian auto industry. Poetry. Write up on famous novelists. Sports etc......

I have been reading articles like this one, for years on Chowk. And have yet to have seen them be appreciated by anyone who doesn`t already agree with them, to begin with. Good articles, new thought, etc. should have the ability to convince those who don`t agree with it. Or at least make them think. Or introduce them to something they were unaware of, before. Not to start more mudslinging matches.........

dost-mittar #53: ``The chowkies are obsessed about islam because the world at large is obsessed with islam.``

The rest of the world became obsessed with Islam, after 9/11. Various people on Chowk, and many writers in Pakistan have been obsessed with it long before. And only some Chowkies are obsessed with it. Not all. There is, thus, something unique about those specific Chowkies (and writers in Pakistan).

And the rest of the world is obsessed with finding out what Islam is. I was seriously considering of studying it furthur at Univ. of Toronto. I went to apply for an academic program, after-work classes, and discovered that not a single seat was left. They had all been taken. The rest of the world, barring a small minority, does not debate it 24 hours a day, however. It just wants to learn it, or about it.

That is the difference.

Writers in Pakistan and many on Chowk, already know what Islam is. Yet they obsess with it. Many present it as the ultimate solution. And the other group present it as the ultimate problem. And then the take shots at how idiotic the other group is. You can take a look at the replies of many individuals, invariably, most of them will be on Islam. Hamidm comments on Islam as much as Naqshbandi. NHK comments on Islam, as much or more than Urstruly. etc. - albeit from opposite directions. Khaled Ahmad of Friday Times writes about Islam, almost exclusively as much as Qazi Hussain - albeit from opposite directions.

And they have been doing this, long before 9/11.

Personally, I don`t think Islam is the solution. Nor is it the problem. It is a religion that is out there. Those who like it, should follow it. Those who don`t should not. Simple. In term of international affairs, far more innocent Mulsims have and are being killed by individuals of other major faiths, than vice-versa. The statistics are their for anyone to see.

Unfortunately, too many people have tried to build their whole careers around it, as newer versions of Qazi Hussains and Fazl Rahmans, and Salman Rushdies and Irshad Manjis.

``You know very well that it is not easy for anyone to leave his religion of birth for a variety of reasons, let alone islam which imposes ultimate penalties for anyone contemplating such a move.``

I don`t agree with this. If today I did not have faith in my religion, and considered it, ``the handiwork of a clever man who used God to do his bidding by putting words in His mouth that suited him from time to time,`` I would leave the religion. I am dead serious. What is the point of following something, on a daily basis, that is just a creation of a human being? But after leaving it, I would stop obsessing it, and would obsess with something else.

What would anyone do to me, especially if I live in a non-Muslim society? Would they kill me? No. Nothing would be done. The reason people don`t leave is because they are dead scared of leaving, due to personal emotional reasons. The question of, ``What if it isn`t a man-made religion,`` keep haunting them. Yet they don`t like the religion either. So they remain in a frustrated stated, more due to their own cowardness, and lack of convictions, one way or the other.

What is even more interesting are the few Muslims who have left the religion, yet remained obsessed with the religion. What is their intention? If I decide I want to have absolutely nothing to do with Canada, and denounce it, and leave it. Why should I then discuss it debate it, built my whole Chowk career on it.

Perhaps, because, they know if they comment on anything else, no one will listen to them. It is quite difficult to write good poetry, write good analysis or economies, or present new scientific theories. But any Tom, Dick and Harry can write on (which is different from about) religion or politics. It is thus big business. And the Qazi Hussains and the Salman Rushdies are milking it for all that they can. Neither one of these groups would be as well known, if they had not linked themselves to Islam, in a controversial manner.

I admire the Jews, the way they handle their money, politics and media. I think we should learn from Mahatir`s statements. The thing that I admire most about the jews is the fact that they came up with a simple word ``anti-semitism``!
Can you imagine what this word can do?
- The power of a word, you can kill innocent prople, destroy homes, deny basic human rights and still if someone raises a finger, you can get away by calling the person ``anti-semitic``

So what do we muslims need in this day and age?
Other than modern education and better public image (to teach people like Mr. Shiraz that Islam does NOT oppress women and freedom of thought) is a WORD. A word like anti-semitism which we can use when people like Shiraz go on a muslim bashing spree.

The most amusing part of the article was the supplementary graph given for the readers to better understand the ``complex theory`` being presented. The author considers USA and Israel as the epitome of modernisation. Examining recent history:

Is the war against Iraq barbaric or Modern, militarily wise: Yes very modern but intellectually its a Barbaric act. Bush is no greater of a warrior than Nek Mohammed.

Is it the oppression against Palestanian that makes Israel to fall on the right side of the graph?

Just 40 years ago if you were a black citizen in US you were treated as a 2nd class citizen, whereas Islam ruled against it some 1400 years ago. 40 years is a very short time in a country`s history. Is that you basis for Modernisation?

The VIetnam war, hundreds of thousands killed on both sides, just because USA decides to kill the spread of communism, is that Modern or Barbaric, you tell me?

Why do you hate us (muslims) so much?

Urstruly,

Ummmmm, don`t look now but Afghanistan was already a stoneage wasteland before the Americans invaded. Between the Mujahideen and the Taliban, Afghanistan was being turned into a place that was pretty barbaric even by our unexacting standards.

BTW, Urstruly, I assume you were in favor of the Afghan Communist Party rule in Afghanistan? After all, the real reason why the Mujahideen opposed the Party was because of its social policies. You know, things like compulsory female education, land reform, no more bribes being paid to the tribal maliks, the abolition of wakfs and turning the land over to the tillers? Or were you horrified at the unIslamic nature of these activities?

..... why are people so obsessed with islam.........

.........i don`t know ........most people say it is because it is killing us?......... but personally i am against the ``new`` islam because it confuses the heck out of me ........ before we rediscovered islam during the reign of hazrat zia-ul-haq, it was easy to tell time ........ we had clocks and watches and when we were invited to someone`s house for dinner they told us to show up at seven or eight or nine .......... we usually got there an hour late but, generally speaking, there was a finite measure for time even though it was loosely followed ............. then along came islam - people started saying things like `` dinner will be served after maghrib`` ............. now when the heck is that?......... after five in the summer and after nine in the winter ?............but five is too early and nine is too late ......... it would be fine if we could drink between five an nine, but it seems that most muslims are averse to any form of entertainment other than watching videos of white people being beheaded on tv ............. in any case, i am confused by things like ``let`s meet between zuhr and asr`` or even worse, ``let`s have breakfast after fajr``............ there is also a secret sect that meets between ``tahajjud and fajr``.......... you didn`t know there was a sixth prayer, did you?..........

......... but modern clocks are still being used by the faithful - except they have been adapted to make them utterly usless........ during the early nineties the chinese in taiwan invented this clever islamic clock, in the shape of golden bait-ul-muqaddis, which wailed the azaan five times a day .......... all good muslims rushed out and bought one and the chinese made a lot of money ........ then came the age of computers and now the ummah can load a program that uses the pc`s internal clock to run their lives ......... it is a clever little program that starts with a tilawat ten minutes before the actual aazan - subhanallah! ........ who says the muslims are against modernity?......... we know when to pray, who cares about dinner

As a non-believer, when I read qur`an, it seemed to me to be the handiwork of a clever man who used God to do his bidding by putting words in His mouth that suited him from time to time. But then, it is no different from other religions where people have created all sort of myths to suit their ends. As a religious faith, I do not see anything in islam against modernity. The five pillars of islam are kalima, namaz, roza, zakat and haj. As long as muslims stick to them, they cause no problem to themselves or, what is more important to me as a non-mulsim, to others. I would indeed speculate that the reason why one does not see the kind of grinding misery in the middle east or even Pakistan that one sees in a country like India is probably due to the empahsis on zakat and philanthropy in islam.

The problem arises when one brings in the political islam into the picture. The five pillars make no mention of dar-ul-harb, blasphemy, umma, jihad, sharia or even the immutability of quran. So, the reform movement in islam, if it is to succeed, has to emphasise the separation of political islam from the faith as represented by the five pillars. Can it be done?

Romair:
The chowkies are obsessed about islam because the world at large is obsessed with islam. You know very well that it is not easy for anyone to leave his religion of birth for a variety of reasons, let alone islam which imposes ultimate penalties for anyone contemplating such a move.

On a lighter vein, I know that many good muslims coming to Canada claim to be an ahmedi to qualify for a refugee status, I wonder when they will start claiming to be murteeds for the same purpose:-).

14-hamidm 2

I entirely agree with you. We will have to give a new iterpretation to Quran to put an end to this modern `Munafiqat`; peoples parading as liberals but playing to the tune of the exteremist mullah. Take the example of Bhutto. He paraded as a liberal and even a sociaist, but he succumbed to the mullah and turned the very constitution of Pakistan into a `Fatwa` without any qualm of conscience. Then comes Musharraf with all his clamour to be taken as Kamal Atta-turk but sccumbing to the mulla by withdrawing his proposed amendment in the law of blasphemy and making a show of himself as a ritualistic muslim on media to be in their good books. What a pity!
In fact for a thousand years muslims have ceased to be honest, stopped thinking and started to follow the line of least resistense, i.e., the line of `Munafiqat`, a God- forsaken people.

re: #42 by Romair
``Why are people (including many on this site) so obsessed with Islam? ``
Heard the latest news? An American beheaded by Islamist terrorist. There is your answer.
Sridhar

HisExcellency #41,

``They were in a perpetual state of war, and never established a central court system, a parliament or a constitution. ....

PS: The only reason Pakistan supported Taliban was that they provided stability...``

How could anything in a constant state of war provide stability ? The reason Pakistan
supported the Taliban was unenlightened self-interest, or lack of strategic vision if you
will.

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

Hamidm is not just funny but lso great! I think he is one of the few people here who realise that there is more truth in traditions than in history.

The Indian sub-continent has traditionally shown that only the benign and the forgiving survive and move forward, be they kings or priests. This will happen again, too.

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

Romair #42
``Bhai sahib, if you don`t like Islam (or any other religion for that matter), just leave it. Join another religion. Or become an athiest. Move out of Islamic societies, into non-Islamic ones, and have a good time. Enjoy yourselves.``
Something like saying, if you dont like your family, leave it.
You are typifying the mullah view of Islam.Islam won`t change, you can quit if you like.
``Why not just stop obsessing with the Arab-looking Pakistanis, leaving them to their own ways, and enjoy the Lakers game or a Red Wings game or a Leafs game?``
We still do that, but we also worry when there is carnage in Karachi or Gujarat .

The graphical showpiece here reminds me of Tawaseen but that was different. Much more appropriate and coinciding with spirit of the message.

# 42 Romair

``Bhai sahib, if you don`t like Islam (or any other religion for that matter), just leave it. Join another religion. Or become an athiest. Move out of Islamic societies, into non-Islamic ones, and have a good time. Enjoy yourselves.``

Will his co-religionists then let him live? Are there any laws in Muslim countries which allow that? Or are you advocating leaving the country along with the religion?

- Avkrishna

Dear #41 by HisExcellency on June 18, 2004 3:13pm PT

Thanks for your questions and the questions of all others. The most pressing question that everyone is asking is how is Nazi Germany more Islamic than Pakistan?

I have submitted a clearer version to editors@chowk.com and it answers all of your questions and gives you much much more. Write to them and ask them to publish the edited version.

Please pardon me if I am not addressing your most pressing questions right away but if they don`t update the article then you can email me directly with questions.

Why are people (including many on this site) so obsessed with Islam?

There are certain inviduals, who just debate Islam, twenty-four hours a day. What is the cause of this obsession? One sees it in Pakistani newspapers, as well. Pick up the Friday Times, and there will be writers, who will just debate Islam. How the Taliban are going to take over, and they are the last bastion of defense against them. They will never review poetry or economics or science. They will always review books on religion, and tell everyone how idiotic the writers are.

Bad weather in Pakistan. Cause of problem, Islam. Low economic growth. Cause of problem, Islam. Mother-in-law has diarohhea. Cause of problem, Islam. I can never figure out such individuals.

Bhai sahib, if you don`t like Islam (or any other religion for that matter), just leave it. Join another religion. Or become an athiest. Move out of Islamic societies, into non-Islamic ones, and have a good time. Enjoy yourselves.

After doing the above, don`t bother the people who are not willing to follow you. Let them live with their Islam and their five prayers and their desire to wear Arabian thobs. Why does it bother you? If they want Islam and a 5% rate or growth, rather than no Islam and a 7% rate of growth, so what?

Unfortunately, there are too many people, who don`t have the courage to leave Islam, even if they hate it. Nor do they have any interest in not obsessing with it. I think the mullahs and such individuals need each other to survive. If they mullah were to disappear today, what would such individuals comment about? And if such individuals were to disappear, what would the mullah comment about?

The more I meet such individuals (who, instead of leaving Islam, are obsessed with it), the more I am starting to see a trend. Their anger is due more to personal events in their lives. They supported the Jamaat-i-Islami and now regret it. Or they supported Zia and are now out of favor. Or they had an ustaad or a relative who used religion to terrorize them.

Such problems should be diagnosed outside the domain of religion. One should either blame one`s self (for joining Zia or JI) or blame the individual who used any religion to terrorize. I really don`t think taking one`s frustration out on any religion is going to solve any problem...For example if people in Pakistan want to copy Arabs, what is yellling and screaming from the USA going to do.

Why not just stop obsessing with the Arab-looking Pakistanis, leaving them to their own ways, and enjoy the Lakers game or a Red Wings game or a Leafs game?

Why so obsessed?

re: A. Shiraz

There are also a few problems with your 2-dimensional chart.

1) The Y-axis is labeled ``Westernization`` (top, center) and ``Islamization`` (bottom, center). Essentially you are contrasting Westernization with Islamization. But Islam is spreading like wildfire in the West itself through immigration, conversions and high birth rates. There are millions of Musims in Europe and US. So Islam is not exactly an anti-thesis to Westernization.

Secondly, you just represent Islam on the Y-axis and forget about Judaism, Hinduism and Christianity. If your intention was to compare religions, then you should have compared Islam with Christianity, or Islam with Hinduism, or Islam with Judaism.... instead of comparing Islam with Westernization.

But if your intention was to compare Secularism with Theocracy, then you should have compared Westernization with Theocracy (or Religious Nationalism).... instead of comparing it with Islam.

2) Nazi Germany ranks higher than Pakistan on the Islamization scale! How can a country with 100% Christian population, be more Islamized than a country with 95% Muslim population (Pakistan) or even 12% Muslim population (India)?

3) China is an athiest country yet you have placed it below Sweden and USA in westernization. What exactly do you mean by Westernization? Do you mean democracy? Do you mean secularism?

4) Taliban and 7th Century Arabia rank the highest in Islamization (on your chart).
But these societies had very little in common. The Muslim State established by Prophet Muhammad at Medina promulgated an elaborate constitution called the Charter of Medina containing 43 fundamental rights, 23 of which were granted to Jews of Medina. Moreover, a Jewish elder was appointed as the Minister of Jewish Affairs and took all decisions regarding them. The same Charter was extended to all of Arabia when Mecca fell to the Muslims after the Treaty of Hudaibiya.

After the fall of Mecca, a general amnesty was announced for all who surrendered or took refuge in the Kaaba. Even during the wars fought between Muslims and infidels, the Prophet allowed the prisoners of war to win their freedom if they could teach 10 Muslims how to read and write.

In contrast, the Taliban didn`t respect the rights of Hindus or even fellow Muslims. Prisoners of war were invariably executed. Instead of promoting education, they were closing down schools. And moreover, they never created any constitution or Charter to define the rights of citizens and the powers of the state.

5) You placed 7th Century Arabia in the lower left corner. I can understand that 7h Century Arabia was not exactly modern. But it wasn`t barbaric either. Laws were introduced to ban the slaughter of newborn girls. Unlike pre-Islamic Arabia, 7th Century Arabia didn`t suffer from continuous internecine and tribal wars. Fear of death penalty had reduced the number of murders and rape incidents.

Most Western historians also believe that Islam brought peace to the Arabian peninsula and unified the warring Bedouin tribes.

6) Why are Japan, Malayasia and Indonesia missing from this chart? Since these states have successfully managed to combine modernity and Islam (or Shintoism), it seems you have decided not to include them. These states would easily fall into the lower right corner of the chart.

Either you have some preconceived notions about Islam... or your are really confused about the meaning of the terms ``modernization``, ``barbarism``, ``westernization``, and ``islamization``.

#26 by Ralph

There are of course many Muslims, especially the Wahhabi zealots who cry foul whenever anybody raises questions about their edicts. But if this article was about such Wahhabi zealots such as Taliban and Saudis, then this article should have been labelled Wahhabis vs. Modernity. I have no problem with that title.

But when the author uses the title Muslims vs. Modernity, it is only reasonable to expect him to study the various fiqhs (persuasions) in Islam before delivering a verdict. When you judge something before analyzing it completely, you are pre-judging it. Hence the term, pre-judice.

There are dozens of Muslim states in the world, each with a different implementation of Islamic law. The Malayasian and Indonesian models are much different from the wahhabi model implemented by Saudi Arabia. There is also the Sufi model followed in Tunisia and Morrocco. And then of course there is the Shia model followed in Iran and the composite model of Pakistan.

The Taliban model was not really a model. They were in a perpetual state of war, and never established a central court system, a parliament or a constitution. They claimed to be Wahhabi, yet they didn`t even implement the Wahhabi fiqh properly. Therefore Taliban system was neither Islamic nor even a system. Apart from Islamophobic propagandists, few Muslims refer to the Taliban system as a reference model.

PS: The only reason Pakistan supported Taliban was that they provided stability and enjoyed the support of Pakistani Pashtuns. They were never considered the role-models or mentors by the overwhelming majority of Pakistanis.

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

urstruly #31
``I think it is little late now to give us sermons on niceties like modernity and westernization.`` I agree with you here. Iraq was nothing but one big hate crime.
Lets talk about evolution reform renaissance then.Dont you feel the need to think about Islam, in light of the problems we have in our own backyard, in India and in Pakistan?
We cant blame it all on USA.
In light of that we need to think seriously about the points hamidm and others has raised.

arjun_m#34
Funny and sad site. I liked the camels too.

apprently to protest western ``fathers-day`` the saudi guys beheaded the New Jersey father in response to his son`s appeal.

http://us.rediff.com/news/2004/jun/18saudi.htm

#31 by Urstruly

`` It is time that we should start telling the