Uproar over a Cartoon?

Re: # 52

How sweet and sour!

how lovely! we don`t mind being called `pets` anymore. How sensitive :) and ..(able!). But you see even the-other-western-countrymen like Blair hate being called the same pet that angered pakistanis.
You surely have some insight into nothing!

Ref# 50

ZahraJ:

Yes! There is such a thing as National Security Council.

See: http://www.infopak.gov.pk/public/govt/Security_council.html``

The Pakistan Security Council is supposed to give advice to the president on issues relating to national security, sovereignty, Islamic ideology, and the integrity and solidarity of the country.

The very existence of this council is debatable and whether it would bring stability in any form to the current political system remains to be seen. Opponents see it as an attempt by the military to have a formal role in the political decision-making and a permanent stake in Pakistan’s governance.

Re: # 49

Now, that you have explained your stance, I think the summary statements were a little out of context. The one i have identified should not have been mentioned at the end. It left the reader with a vague conclusion.

Is there a Security Council in Pakistan? Is this is a new concept? Or are you kidding me? A country where people are killed right and left based on their faith and belief happens to have a Security Council ? To do what? To take care of the gardens and greenery of GORs, Race Course Parks, Army Headquarters...? I thought there are enough malis ``gardeners`` in all the big cities to take care of these establishments. Now, you have made me look into this Security Council concept.

Can you shed some light here?

Thanks.

Ref: # 46

ZahraJ: Thanks for your insight. You have raised a pertinent question.

[Pakistan needs to have a consensus as to how far the nation could go. ]
[In what respect?]

I tried to answer that rather broadly in the 3rd last paragaph of that article where I emphasized the concerns of those who seek to define their role in the war against terrorism and the degree of relationship they want to have with the only remaining Super Power.

Within the current framework; Parliment, National and Provincial assemblies and the Natinal security council are the ways to reach a national consensus. We cannot decide the above issues at the street level.

Re: # 40

vagabond78,

Rare but possible - I agree with you 100%.

You`re absolutely right that Pakistanis, especially the ones who relentlessly continue to lick the US/Western boots and genitals and profess to be the best kind of toilet paper available, have brought it upon themselves. Let`s not name any names as they know who they are, but a lot of this kind is found here at chowk too - male, females, drags, feminazis, et al.

But like they say about ants that when death/destruction nears these insects, they grow wings and pretend to be bald-eagles.


ZahraJ,

With all due respect to your American sensitivities, or perhaps lack of them, flag burning and calling someone by an animal are two very different things. For example: how do the open-minded-humurous-American women et al react when called a Bi-tch?

May Allah help you when your current masters drop your ilk like a stone in their traditional manner.

Ciao

Interesting information on the Year of the Dog.

http://www.c-c-c.org/chineseculture/zodiac/dog.html

Nauman,

An interesting write-up. I agree with quite a few things you have pointed out, but I think it`s unfair to expect any culture to change overnight. I liked the passage where you have explained different perceptions on dogs. I will just add another bit there. In Chinese mythology, each year has an animal symbol. The Year of 2006 is supposed to be the Year of Dog. Anyone interested in the details of that year can read them online.

Americans are and will be equally disturbed to see their flag being burnt in a muslim country or for that matter anywhere else in the world. It`s just that Americans do not demonstrate their outburst in a volatile manner. You will find a lot of write-ups right and left in the media, but Americans will not destroy their land or public property to make their point. Their reaction to racism was a different game.

Obviously, the Pakistani masses have their own characteristics. Their way of expression is quite different from the Americans. It`s not fair to draw any parallels. In Pakistan, the whole system will close down to express its disdain over a cartoon.

[Pakistan needs to have a consensus as to how far the nation could go. ]

In what respect?

#10 ferozk
Must you inject facts into this?
Don`t forget southern democrats refering to themselves as `yellow-dog democrats.`
One conjecture has been that all this furore is because dogs are haram in islam.
Methinks the cartoon merely brings up a larger issue - that the military regime has in effect surrendered the sovereignty of pakistan by letting american army and secret services operate in pakistan with a great degree of freedom.

Washington Times is not a mainstream newspaper. It is a right wing alternative to the more mainstream Washington Post. I doubt the Washington Times editors consult with the American government before publishing cartoons.

What is wrong being compared to a dog ? Dogs are docile, loyal and generally likeable animals.

....Why do I have this uneasy feeling... that in the coming 14-20 Months Pakistan will again be left High and Dry.. Like always...
.....Pakistan is being tolerated only as long its surving the purpose.....Forget Al-qaeeda...thats a bogey...
Americans are honestly cruel... they have Told Pakistan ...what they think of them
via this Symbolism ( Dog fetching prey for them )..... Pakistan must now wriggle itself out from these clutches.
It now has no Friends.... Maybe a symphetiser or two... But No Friends....This does not means another Breakup... although Baluchistan Is being used to create such a pressure...
or as a bargaining Chip.... with obvious insinuations....
Musharaf is not smart... He is just riding his Luck...and hoping for the Best...
And Honestly ....... Should Re-Stock the situation.

On a serious note, you brought these on your self. By becoming a ``client state`` of US in war on terror lost whatever self-respect as a nation. I was reading in a Pak editorial that one US senator had in the past said, ``Pakis are people who`ll sell their mothers for a 10$ bill``. So why would anyone give respect, be ``friends`` when a 10$ bill will do the trick. That`s what is happening.

Nawaz Sharif I feel did a much better job resisting the world pressure post Pokhran-98 while Mushy is forever prostrating and licking Uncle Sam`s soles-just like a dog. And how you treat dogs? My uncle told me how contractors would call on him with offerings to get Govt contracts and favours but he never accepted anything. He told me that once you accept you`re subservient to them and next time the same contractor would call in the middle of the night when you`re sleeping with your wife and ask you to get his job done. He was telling me not to be corrupt ever always be true. If only Mushy was advised like this post-911 when he betrayed taliban just like that.

So as cayenne would say, wake up and smell the coffee. Pak is really an old hound with its leash firmly in US hands. And nothing you say or do can change that.

Sorry for the prior mispost.

Uproar over a cartoon??????/...where is the uproar over this from all the mullahs and other self righteous lot in Pakistan....not to say the ``silent majority`` this is from your Daily Times

Daily Times Monitor

LAHORE: Commenting on the clerics’ decree against suicide attacks on holy places, Minister of State for Religious Affairs Aamir Liaqat Hussain on Tuesday said the decree was only for Pakistan and that suicide attacks in Iraq and Palestine were justified because Muslims were fighting foreign occupation there.

“Iraqi people can resort to suicide attacks against the US forces. Suicide attacks in Iraq and Palestine are legitimate because the Muslims in these countries are being killed by the invading forces,” he said, adding that the decree was issued in the context of Pakistan with a view to stopping terrorism at holy places. He said killing a Muslim without a just reason was forbidden in Islam and killing a Muslim for“God’s blessing was infidelity.

A govt minister expliticly supporting if not advocating more of these bloody suicide attacks that have been mainly killing innocent Iraqi civilians (instead of ``US Targets``) at a rate of 50 odd per day....and then following it up with: `` killing a Muslim without a just reason was forbidden in Islam``.....meaning what..well could be several things but me thinks most of his target audience would concur that means killing non-muslims ``without a just reason`` is viable.

Honestly...where are the riots from the thinking ``silent majority`` when the national religiou minister goes on air to make such assinine loaded statements.....(wassnt this the fool who faked all his degrees from some online uni...)