India has long accused a certain number of Pakistanis of being involved in the terrorists attacks in Mumbai back in November 2008.
India has alleged without much evidence of the involvement of certain Pakistani militant groups being behind the attack, while Pakistan denies these allegations- which is only natural due to the lack of proof.
So clearly we have a stand off. India wants Pakistan to handover those accused while Pakistan does not want to extract them, possibly knowing they shall not get a fair trial and be punished for something they most likely had nothing to do with.
India has been trying to rally international support into pressuring Pakistan to handover these accused men.
Pakistan has also occasionally accused certain Indians of being behind bomb blasts and similar attacks within it's territory.
So clearly we have a stand off here.
My solution to this problem is that Pakistan agree to extract the accused individuals behind the attacks to a neutral country where they can be tried under an international terrorism where they could be tried under neutral conditions.
That is of course, if India agrees to do the same.
This way both countries can get what they want and under the control of global entities favorable to neither country.
If the men are proven innocent, India would only have to go against the international community to prove otherwise. The accused Indians behind attacks in Pakistan can also stand a fair trial and an international terrorism court can judge them fairly.
A solution like this could reduce a problem that is only giving a certain number of fanatics in India an excuse to waste their country's resources on constantly fighting battles with Pakistan.
Pakistan on the other hand will also be spending money and resources to defend itself from an Indian military build up.
Any solution to this stand off over a few terrorists is needed so the two countries can move on instead of both being plagued by war.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Population control of stray animals needed in Pakistan
In all my reading and hearing about volunteer animal care in Pakistan, I have never heard of any measures to actually improve the long term situation of stray animals in the country.
Most of their campaigns are to adopt and shelter animals. But does this solve the problem of uncared stray animals as a whole of improve the situation?
The control of population is seen as the solution to reduce poverty; especially in third world countries. I feel the same solution should apply here. To reduce the number of stray animals especially in the cities, a fraction of the animals brought to shelter should be sterilized.
This would prevent an uncontrolled birthrate of animals in need. Controlling the animal population should be part of the program to help them, otherwise we are left with countless stray animals in need.
Donations should partly be spent on this sterilization. With a stable and controlled birth rate of stray animals, they can be much more easily be helped.
Also endangered animals such as the snow leopard need to be moved out of the country to protect it from extinction.
There is no hope in the nearby future for endangered animals in Pakistan. If we are to conserve them we need to use donations and take further steps like the ones I suggested instead of simply giving them food and shelter.
Most of their campaigns are to adopt and shelter animals. But does this solve the problem of uncared stray animals as a whole of improve the situation?
The control of population is seen as the solution to reduce poverty; especially in third world countries. I feel the same solution should apply here. To reduce the number of stray animals especially in the cities, a fraction of the animals brought to shelter should be sterilized.
This would prevent an uncontrolled birthrate of animals in need. Controlling the animal population should be part of the program to help them, otherwise we are left with countless stray animals in need.
Donations should partly be spent on this sterilization. With a stable and controlled birth rate of stray animals, they can be much more easily be helped.
Also endangered animals such as the snow leopard need to be moved out of the country to protect it from extinction.
There is no hope in the nearby future for endangered animals in Pakistan. If we are to conserve them we need to use donations and take further steps like the ones I suggested instead of simply giving them food and shelter.
Saturday, May 22, 2010
My response to Pakistan's temporary ban on popular websites and the reactions
This was a widespread topic on the Internet and with a few people who raised the issue in person with me.
Nobody I spoke to agreed with the ban and what was most surprising is that more radical Islamist countries like Iran or Saudi Arabia did not take similar actions to my knowledge.
My answer to the question was the ban justifiable? Simply yes. There are many reasons to this and the most important is that it is to keep the Islamists satisfied.
Keeping the Islamists satisfied means protecting precious public property from being destroyed, innocent people getting hurt or killed etc.
The Islamists might be ethically immoral and their restrictions on freedoms may be too. Obeying them is not always a good idea and giving them a free pass to dictate your lifestyle to you is also not a good idea either. Though that has clearly not happened ie. women in Pakistan not having to wear burqas or hijab by law.
But at the same time as I wrote in another post of mine, defying them outright is a bad idea and can have a severe backlash.
For Pakistani elites and expatriates who are mostly unaffected by the influence of the mullahs, it's rather easy for them to complain about censorship, not knowing the damage these influential people can inflict, especially on more vulnerable targets.
The government and judges who imposed these bans probably know the threat they themselves specifically would face from the powerful religious radicals had they showed defiance.
So to point blame at our leaders as we normally do is the easy part. But looking at the reality of the situation is neither easy nor fun.
Speaking of situation, now is no time to seek further conflicts with religious radicals than the government already has. Their silence to the battle against the Taliban or their endorsements -either one- is extremely important.
The religious radicals can easily simplify the job of the Taliban carrying out more terrorism in the rest of Pakistan.
Then there are the other reasons of Western double standards. I have discussed this in my world history and politics blog. Why is a society that is jailing people for denying a historical event/incident (the holocaust) dictating the terms of free expression?
Westerners concerned with the issue of censorship in Muslim countries, especially on religious lines, need to take a second look much closer to home.
Also today, I saw a talk show in Pakistan that discussed banning the burqa in some Western European countries, while defending publishing material considered offensive towards Muslims.
Firstly, I agree with the ban on burqas because I do believe in restrictions on public expression. But I can guarantee those Islamophobic atheists on YouTube who continuously bellow the drum of "free expression," or better their definition of free expression, will endorse burqa banning and banning of religious symbols.
People need to review the social and political circumstances in Pakistan and the world before making judgments.
One should also study the different scenarios of censorship, especially the Islamophobic defenders of "free expression" and then conclude weather they actually defend the idea or just their own messages which fall into their own definition of "free expression."
For the time being Pakistan's government has made the right decision. The way to teach our people into accepting other people's opinions is not by shoving it in their faces, but gradually over time they themselves getting used to the idea that they do not have to view offensive images or other material if they don't want to.
It also means that people who oppose censorship in the West need to speak against censorship in all forms- including topics that Western society is sensitive to. And only after viewing the situations on all sides and all cases can we complain about censorship.
Nobody I spoke to agreed with the ban and what was most surprising is that more radical Islamist countries like Iran or Saudi Arabia did not take similar actions to my knowledge.
My answer to the question was the ban justifiable? Simply yes. There are many reasons to this and the most important is that it is to keep the Islamists satisfied.
Keeping the Islamists satisfied means protecting precious public property from being destroyed, innocent people getting hurt or killed etc.
The Islamists might be ethically immoral and their restrictions on freedoms may be too. Obeying them is not always a good idea and giving them a free pass to dictate your lifestyle to you is also not a good idea either. Though that has clearly not happened ie. women in Pakistan not having to wear burqas or hijab by law.
But at the same time as I wrote in another post of mine, defying them outright is a bad idea and can have a severe backlash.
For Pakistani elites and expatriates who are mostly unaffected by the influence of the mullahs, it's rather easy for them to complain about censorship, not knowing the damage these influential people can inflict, especially on more vulnerable targets.
The government and judges who imposed these bans probably know the threat they themselves specifically would face from the powerful religious radicals had they showed defiance.
So to point blame at our leaders as we normally do is the easy part. But looking at the reality of the situation is neither easy nor fun.
Speaking of situation, now is no time to seek further conflicts with religious radicals than the government already has. Their silence to the battle against the Taliban or their endorsements -either one- is extremely important.
The religious radicals can easily simplify the job of the Taliban carrying out more terrorism in the rest of Pakistan.
Then there are the other reasons of Western double standards. I have discussed this in my world history and politics blog. Why is a society that is jailing people for denying a historical event/incident (the holocaust) dictating the terms of free expression?
Westerners concerned with the issue of censorship in Muslim countries, especially on religious lines, need to take a second look much closer to home.
Also today, I saw a talk show in Pakistan that discussed banning the burqa in some Western European countries, while defending publishing material considered offensive towards Muslims.
Firstly, I agree with the ban on burqas because I do believe in restrictions on public expression. But I can guarantee those Islamophobic atheists on YouTube who continuously bellow the drum of "free expression," or better their definition of free expression, will endorse burqa banning and banning of religious symbols.
People need to review the social and political circumstances in Pakistan and the world before making judgments.
One should also study the different scenarios of censorship, especially the Islamophobic defenders of "free expression" and then conclude weather they actually defend the idea or just their own messages which fall into their own definition of "free expression."
For the time being Pakistan's government has made the right decision. The way to teach our people into accepting other people's opinions is not by shoving it in their faces, but gradually over time they themselves getting used to the idea that they do not have to view offensive images or other material if they don't want to.
It also means that people who oppose censorship in the West need to speak against censorship in all forms- including topics that Western society is sensitive to. And only after viewing the situations on all sides and all cases can we complain about censorship.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Pakistan needs to ban marraiges between first cousins
The Pakistani government needs to pass a bill banning marriages between first cousins. Such marriages should not be issued any government recognition or registration.
Those who oppose this idea need to read this article first.
Though this practice was invented in the Middle East an imported through Islam, it still doesn't help us.
As I wrote before, for some people in India to drink cow urine or marry dogs may be more primitive, it still doesn't justify such practices.
There is no excuse for this practice especially when we live in the 21st century.
Children born to first cousins can be harmed by disabilities and require extra medical care and facilities. Medical care that probably cannot help them by much and be used on people who actually can be helped.
Such children will be a burden on themselves and on society.
Those who oppose this idea need to read this article first.
Though this practice was invented in the Middle East an imported through Islam, it still doesn't help us.
As I wrote before, for some people in India to drink cow urine or marry dogs may be more primitive, it still doesn't justify such practices.
There is no excuse for this practice especially when we live in the 21st century.
Children born to first cousins can be harmed by disabilities and require extra medical care and facilities. Medical care that probably cannot help them by much and be used on people who actually can be helped.
Such children will be a burden on themselves and on society.
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Pro-Indian self-defeatists in Pakistan and their radical Islamist counterparts
This will probably be the first post in a series of posts that discuss in detail of the rise of Indianization and Islamic Middle Easternization in Pakistan on cultural and political lines. My second post on this issue can be found by clicking here. These ideologies seem to be dividing and confusing Pakistanis on both the cultural and political levels.
This post particularly discusses the political side to the rise of this phenomenon. For a long time I have noticed whenever influential people in Pakistan such as university professors and political annalists want to build criticism of Pakistan and our society, it is usually nonconstructive and almost always involves a praise(s) for India. The Pakistani media is polluted with the same ideas.
This "criticism" is better described as self-hatred for Pakistan and an unquestionable pride and praise for the Indian Republic.
These influential self-haters poison the minds of the Pakistani population with guilt for everything that goes wrong in Pakistan and the world. Many of these influential professors, annalists and political activists are seen as heroes by the Indians and are often paraded by the Indian propaganda media against Pakistan.
Whenever something terrible happens in India or the West such as the 2008 Mumbai attacks, the pro-Indian front is quick to blame it on Pakistan without hesitating even though they haven't the slightest evidence linking Pakistan to the incidents.
Whenever anti-Pakistani lobbies in the West and India need a Pakistani to promote their propaganda, no one does a better job for them other than people such as Asma Jahangir, Pervez Hoodbhoy, Ahmed Rashid, Ayesha Jalal and many others like them.
Take for example this public letter written to Pervez Hoodhboy by what appears to be a Pakistani expatriate in Oman.
The self-hatred and anti-Pakistan propaganda of these influential speakers is slowly being echoed by provincial separatists in Pakistan who see this as a perfect opportunity to defame the Pakistani government and the state.
They blame the ISI for every terrorist incident in India, Afghanistan and the world (sometimes even the 911 attacks themselves!) while they praise every small good thing about India and highlight every small bad thing about Pakistan without mercy.
Some go as far to denounce the so-called "partition."
And as I wrote above, these influential people and their propaganda have also polluted the Pakistani media with the same kind of self-hatred. Take this Daily Times article as an example. The media is not short of self-hating publication similar to that example.
So in the end, what we have is a group of Indian pawns who offer no solutions to our problems and fill our peoples minds with self-hatred and worship of the Indian government, and are quick to aid the Indian propaganda machine against Pakistan; called for whenever needed like obedient stooges.
The pro-Indian self-haters have expressed their hatred for their country to such a great extent that there has been a rise in opposition to their sentiments- and that's where the radical Islamists come in, including Wahhabis.
Because too few Pakistanis including the educated ones have been vocal against these Indian pawns, the Islamists have gained an audience in Pakistanis who are resistant to the rise of Indian cultural and political influence in Pakistan.
No one in Pakistan has been as vocal against Indian influence in the country as the Islamists and now the Islamists are gaining even more popularity than they already very much have.
But the Islamists themselves are a mirror of the pro-Indian (and sometimes pro-Western) elites in Pakistan. The Islamists indoctrinate Pakistanis with an inferiority complex towards Muslims of Central Asia and the Middle East.
These Pan-Islamists brainwash Pakistanis into thinking the problems in the Middle East are Pakistan's problems, they make these issues feel more important than the issues Pakistanis face in their own country.
Never will these Islamists criticize the Middle Eastern countries and their barbaric policies, including the slave-like treatment of labor class Pakistanis in Gulf Arab states.
The Islamist Wahabbis will never criticize Afghanistan for it's propaganda war against Pakistan and attempted violations of the Durand Line treaty simply because Afghanistan is a fellow Muslim country.
They also make Pakistanis feel ashamed of their pre-Islamic heritage and anything indigenous in their culture (or something in the culture which is not borrowed from the Middle East) and brand it as "Hindu" or "Kaffir" (infidel).
Many readers might not know, but there is a movement amongst Pakistanis against Indian cultural invasion to remove Urdu as the state language and replace it with Farsi and/or Arabic.
All this is being done in the name of resisting Indian cultural invasion and to make Pakistanis "more Islamic."
By this, the pro-Indian self-haters have done more than enough to give popularity to the Islamists.
The pro-Indian self-haters who spread their lies and propaganda need to be countered, but it does not have involve another type of self-hating Arab worshipers who fill our people's minds with equally prejudiced thoughts of religious hatred and hatred for their own culture.
The Islamists such as Zaid Hamid have also developed the clever tactic of branding any of their opponents and critics as "Hindu agents." Anyone who rejects Arabization or Islamitization is branded as a "Hindu agent" and more recently a "self-defeatist."
I myself have come under fire from the Indian and Islamist side. By the Islamists I've been called a "Hindu agent" for rejecting the glorification of Pakistani ancestors as "Turks" or for rejecting the idea of Islamic Ummah, knowing the bitter hatred and superiority complex many Middle Eastern Muslims have towards Pakistanis.
By Indians, I have been called some other fancy names such as madrassa educated for rejecting their false hegemonic claims on our pre-historic heritage.
Many pro-Indian self-defeatists also link Pakistani patriotism or nationalism with religious fundamentalism and hatred for India. Perhaps they too have a tactic of trying to defame their political opponents and perhaps to hide their own guilt.
The best example of this ongoing political climax is Ahmed Quraishi's outspoken opposition against pro-Indian self-haters in Pakistani universities and Indian propaganda in general, which I give him credit for.
The problem is it appears Mr Quraishi has close ties to Mr Zaid Hamid. Even during the scandal surrounding Mr Hamid on his links to Yousaf Kazzab, Quraishi has voiced much support for him and if I'm not mistaken, accused self-hating pro-Indian pawns of involvement in the scandal.
Never did Quraishi to my knowledge or any other Pakistani express any opposition towards towards the Arab/Middle Eastern worshiping Islamists- which include Zaid Hamid. Instead Zaid Hamid seems to be a close partner of Quraishi and other Pakistanis who stand up to pro-Indian self-defeatists.
Even on his YouTube channel, Ahmed Quraishi seems to be passionate on claiming Persians, Turks and Arabs as the ancestors of Pakistanis without providing any historic or scientific evidence for this popular claim in Pakistan.
This claim has been around for quite a while and is widespread amongst Islamitized Pakistanis. If I'm not mistaken, I also believe this idea of Pakistanis descending from Turks, Arabs and Persians is part of the public education system in Pakistan.
In the post 911 era, a new "blame Pakistan game" has been launched in the West, where every failure of the West in Iraq and Afghanistan is somehow always the fault Pakistan for "not doing enough" or "secretly supporting terrorism."
This blame Pakistan game has become a popular one especially in India and is aided by self-defeatists in Pakistan as well as the provincial separatists.
The Islamists have been the main outspoken ones offering a resistance to the blame Pakistan team of Americans, Indians, self-defeatists and others- in return for spreading their own sick ideologies of Islamic Ummah, intolerance towards other religions and glorification of ancient Islamic armies who were mostly Middle Eastern.
Zaid Hamid and his followers are the latest leaders of countering anti-Pakistan, pro-Indian, self-defeatist propaganda in return for being able to spread the idea of Middle Eastern superiority and turning every issue into a Western, Hindu or Zionist conspiracy theory.
Even amongst the patriotic or Westernized, leftist Pakistanis, Zaid Hamid had gained a huge following and almost turned into an unquestionable icon until his recent scandal.
Zaid Hamid is a strong propagator against a secular society that Jinnah had wished for as discussed in this article.
Zaid Hamid also recently spoke of planting the Pakistani flag on New Delhi, in other words conquering the Indian capital.
Many unintelligent, naive, narrow-minded Pakistanis buy into this ridiculous idea without knowing the nuclear outbreak that would devastate the entire region just trying to conquer a city which is not even ours nor has anything beneficial to conquer anyways.
And unsurprisingly, amongst the most outspoken people against this growing Middle Easternization of Pakistan (particularly Arabization) and rise in religious fundamentalism are the pro-Indian self-defeatists themselves such as Pervez Hoodbhoy.
Many readers at this point can see a clearly established pattern over here. Pro-Indian, self-hating defeatists who offer only regret after regret in being Pakistani and support for the enemy which seeks to destroy us.
On the other hand a rising Islamist movement with an inferiority complex towards the people of the Middle East and a hatred for other religions, indigenous interests as well as indigenous history and culture.
Both sides frequently outspoken against one another and their horrific ambitions/ideologies.
Both sides frequently distorting history to suit themselves and promoting hatred in being Pakistani.
Also interestingly, both sides occasionally like to use conspiracy theories involving the British to score points in their propaganda wars. The pro-Indian self-defeatists often claim the so-called "partition" was the work of the British to "weaken" the unity of the subcontinent, while certain Islamists including Zaid Hamid are said to claim the officialization of Urdu in the subcontinent was a British conspiracy to reduce the influence of Persian and Arabic.
Both sides only adding more confusion in the minds of already confused Pakistanis. Both sides tearing the country apart.
And because too few people are speaking out against either side, you have Pakistanis rejecting either one and embracing the other.
Just about every Pakistani who agrees with me on the problem of Bollywood, Indianization and Indian hijacking of Pakistani identity wishes for Persianization & Arabization. Zaid Hamid and those like him are heroes to these Pakistanis.
On the other hand most of the Pakistanis who agree with me on the problem of Arabization buy into Indianization and often welcome the ideas of the pro-Indian self-defeatists.
If we Pakistanis truly love our country and want to save our people from these poisonous trends, we need to have the courage to openly reject both.
This post particularly discusses the political side to the rise of this phenomenon. For a long time I have noticed whenever influential people in Pakistan such as university professors and political annalists want to build criticism of Pakistan and our society, it is usually nonconstructive and almost always involves a praise(s) for India. The Pakistani media is polluted with the same ideas.
This "criticism" is better described as self-hatred for Pakistan and an unquestionable pride and praise for the Indian Republic.
These influential self-haters poison the minds of the Pakistani population with guilt for everything that goes wrong in Pakistan and the world. Many of these influential professors, annalists and political activists are seen as heroes by the Indians and are often paraded by the Indian propaganda media against Pakistan.
Whenever something terrible happens in India or the West such as the 2008 Mumbai attacks, the pro-Indian front is quick to blame it on Pakistan without hesitating even though they haven't the slightest evidence linking Pakistan to the incidents.
Whenever anti-Pakistani lobbies in the West and India need a Pakistani to promote their propaganda, no one does a better job for them other than people such as Asma Jahangir, Pervez Hoodbhoy, Ahmed Rashid, Ayesha Jalal and many others like them.
Take for example this public letter written to Pervez Hoodhboy by what appears to be a Pakistani expatriate in Oman.
The self-hatred and anti-Pakistan propaganda of these influential speakers is slowly being echoed by provincial separatists in Pakistan who see this as a perfect opportunity to defame the Pakistani government and the state.
They blame the ISI for every terrorist incident in India, Afghanistan and the world (sometimes even the 911 attacks themselves!) while they praise every small good thing about India and highlight every small bad thing about Pakistan without mercy.
Some go as far to denounce the so-called "partition."
And as I wrote above, these influential people and their propaganda have also polluted the Pakistani media with the same kind of self-hatred. Take this Daily Times article as an example. The media is not short of self-hating publication similar to that example.
So in the end, what we have is a group of Indian pawns who offer no solutions to our problems and fill our peoples minds with self-hatred and worship of the Indian government, and are quick to aid the Indian propaganda machine against Pakistan; called for whenever needed like obedient stooges.
The pro-Indian self-haters have expressed their hatred for their country to such a great extent that there has been a rise in opposition to their sentiments- and that's where the radical Islamists come in, including Wahhabis.
Because too few Pakistanis including the educated ones have been vocal against these Indian pawns, the Islamists have gained an audience in Pakistanis who are resistant to the rise of Indian cultural and political influence in Pakistan.
No one in Pakistan has been as vocal against Indian influence in the country as the Islamists and now the Islamists are gaining even more popularity than they already very much have.
But the Islamists themselves are a mirror of the pro-Indian (and sometimes pro-Western) elites in Pakistan. The Islamists indoctrinate Pakistanis with an inferiority complex towards Muslims of Central Asia and the Middle East.
These Pan-Islamists brainwash Pakistanis into thinking the problems in the Middle East are Pakistan's problems, they make these issues feel more important than the issues Pakistanis face in their own country.
Never will these Islamists criticize the Middle Eastern countries and their barbaric policies, including the slave-like treatment of labor class Pakistanis in Gulf Arab states.
The Islamist Wahabbis will never criticize Afghanistan for it's propaganda war against Pakistan and attempted violations of the Durand Line treaty simply because Afghanistan is a fellow Muslim country.
They also make Pakistanis feel ashamed of their pre-Islamic heritage and anything indigenous in their culture (or something in the culture which is not borrowed from the Middle East) and brand it as "Hindu" or "Kaffir" (infidel).
Many readers might not know, but there is a movement amongst Pakistanis against Indian cultural invasion to remove Urdu as the state language and replace it with Farsi and/or Arabic.
All this is being done in the name of resisting Indian cultural invasion and to make Pakistanis "more Islamic."
By this, the pro-Indian self-haters have done more than enough to give popularity to the Islamists.
The pro-Indian self-haters who spread their lies and propaganda need to be countered, but it does not have involve another type of self-hating Arab worshipers who fill our people's minds with equally prejudiced thoughts of religious hatred and hatred for their own culture.
The Islamists such as Zaid Hamid have also developed the clever tactic of branding any of their opponents and critics as "Hindu agents." Anyone who rejects Arabization or Islamitization is branded as a "Hindu agent" and more recently a "self-defeatist."
I myself have come under fire from the Indian and Islamist side. By the Islamists I've been called a "Hindu agent" for rejecting the glorification of Pakistani ancestors as "Turks" or for rejecting the idea of Islamic Ummah, knowing the bitter hatred and superiority complex many Middle Eastern Muslims have towards Pakistanis.
By Indians, I have been called some other fancy names such as madrassa educated for rejecting their false hegemonic claims on our pre-historic heritage.
Many pro-Indian self-defeatists also link Pakistani patriotism or nationalism with religious fundamentalism and hatred for India. Perhaps they too have a tactic of trying to defame their political opponents and perhaps to hide their own guilt.
The best example of this ongoing political climax is Ahmed Quraishi's outspoken opposition against pro-Indian self-haters in Pakistani universities and Indian propaganda in general, which I give him credit for.
The problem is it appears Mr Quraishi has close ties to Mr Zaid Hamid. Even during the scandal surrounding Mr Hamid on his links to Yousaf Kazzab, Quraishi has voiced much support for him and if I'm not mistaken, accused self-hating pro-Indian pawns of involvement in the scandal.
Never did Quraishi to my knowledge or any other Pakistani express any opposition towards towards the Arab/Middle Eastern worshiping Islamists- which include Zaid Hamid. Instead Zaid Hamid seems to be a close partner of Quraishi and other Pakistanis who stand up to pro-Indian self-defeatists.
Even on his YouTube channel, Ahmed Quraishi seems to be passionate on claiming Persians, Turks and Arabs as the ancestors of Pakistanis without providing any historic or scientific evidence for this popular claim in Pakistan.
This claim has been around for quite a while and is widespread amongst Islamitized Pakistanis. If I'm not mistaken, I also believe this idea of Pakistanis descending from Turks, Arabs and Persians is part of the public education system in Pakistan.
In the post 911 era, a new "blame Pakistan game" has been launched in the West, where every failure of the West in Iraq and Afghanistan is somehow always the fault Pakistan for "not doing enough" or "secretly supporting terrorism."
This blame Pakistan game has become a popular one especially in India and is aided by self-defeatists in Pakistan as well as the provincial separatists.
The Islamists have been the main outspoken ones offering a resistance to the blame Pakistan team of Americans, Indians, self-defeatists and others- in return for spreading their own sick ideologies of Islamic Ummah, intolerance towards other religions and glorification of ancient Islamic armies who were mostly Middle Eastern.
Zaid Hamid and his followers are the latest leaders of countering anti-Pakistan, pro-Indian, self-defeatist propaganda in return for being able to spread the idea of Middle Eastern superiority and turning every issue into a Western, Hindu or Zionist conspiracy theory.
Even amongst the patriotic or Westernized, leftist Pakistanis, Zaid Hamid had gained a huge following and almost turned into an unquestionable icon until his recent scandal.
Zaid Hamid is a strong propagator against a secular society that Jinnah had wished for as discussed in this article.
Zaid Hamid also recently spoke of planting the Pakistani flag on New Delhi, in other words conquering the Indian capital.
Many unintelligent, naive, narrow-minded Pakistanis buy into this ridiculous idea without knowing the nuclear outbreak that would devastate the entire region just trying to conquer a city which is not even ours nor has anything beneficial to conquer anyways.
And unsurprisingly, amongst the most outspoken people against this growing Middle Easternization of Pakistan (particularly Arabization) and rise in religious fundamentalism are the pro-Indian self-defeatists themselves such as Pervez Hoodbhoy.
Many readers at this point can see a clearly established pattern over here. Pro-Indian, self-hating defeatists who offer only regret after regret in being Pakistani and support for the enemy which seeks to destroy us.
On the other hand a rising Islamist movement with an inferiority complex towards the people of the Middle East and a hatred for other religions, indigenous interests as well as indigenous history and culture.
Both sides frequently outspoken against one another and their horrific ambitions/ideologies.
Both sides frequently distorting history to suit themselves and promoting hatred in being Pakistani.
Also interestingly, both sides occasionally like to use conspiracy theories involving the British to score points in their propaganda wars. The pro-Indian self-defeatists often claim the so-called "partition" was the work of the British to "weaken" the unity of the subcontinent, while certain Islamists including Zaid Hamid are said to claim the officialization of Urdu in the subcontinent was a British conspiracy to reduce the influence of Persian and Arabic.
Both sides only adding more confusion in the minds of already confused Pakistanis. Both sides tearing the country apart.
And because too few people are speaking out against either side, you have Pakistanis rejecting either one and embracing the other.
Just about every Pakistani who agrees with me on the problem of Bollywood, Indianization and Indian hijacking of Pakistani identity wishes for Persianization & Arabization. Zaid Hamid and those like him are heroes to these Pakistanis.
On the other hand most of the Pakistanis who agree with me on the problem of Arabization buy into Indianization and often welcome the ideas of the pro-Indian self-defeatists.
If we Pakistanis truly love our country and want to save our people from these poisonous trends, we need to have the courage to openly reject both.
Thursday, May 6, 2010
My thoughts on the famous swat girl flogging video and the contreversy behind it.
Watch the video below. Most readers may have already seen this video:
Firstly when I heard of this video and how "disturbing" it was, I was under the impression that it was extremely violent. After watching it, I can say this is heavily exaggerated.
I have seen more violent footage that is far more disturbing such as beadings, shootings. This simply does not compare. However wrong and unjustified it was, it can hardly be called disturbing.
This is what made me suspicious of the video in the first place after many who saw it claimed it to be disturbing.
Another thing is the flogging does not look realistic at all. The sound of the whip should be much louder and stronger; heck even movies do a better job when carrying out whipping scenes such as the Indiana Jones movies.
The "whipping" to me appears at the most tapping the stick on the girl's back.
What increased my suspicion is the huge media attention this video received worldwide, knowing that incidents like these or even worse happen almost everyday in that part of Pakistan, why did people give this incident so much attention?
From what I can see, this was done in a deliberate attempt to discredit Pakistan. Many Pakistanis and international media lashed out at the government for making deals with the Taliban.
For Pakistanis it's a routine blaming of their government weather a dictatorship or elected by them. No matter what the government does. See this post.
For others it's part of the international blame Pakistan game, even though NATO has considered peace deals with the Taliban alongside the Afghan government.
Of course, if I am wrong and the flogging was real, I do hope those behind are captured or killed in a raid on Taliban hideouts, but this incident is still being given unjust special attention than other worse incidents.
Firstly when I heard of this video and how "disturbing" it was, I was under the impression that it was extremely violent. After watching it, I can say this is heavily exaggerated.
I have seen more violent footage that is far more disturbing such as beadings, shootings. This simply does not compare. However wrong and unjustified it was, it can hardly be called disturbing.
This is what made me suspicious of the video in the first place after many who saw it claimed it to be disturbing.
Another thing is the flogging does not look realistic at all. The sound of the whip should be much louder and stronger; heck even movies do a better job when carrying out whipping scenes such as the Indiana Jones movies.
The "whipping" to me appears at the most tapping the stick on the girl's back.
What increased my suspicion is the huge media attention this video received worldwide, knowing that incidents like these or even worse happen almost everyday in that part of Pakistan, why did people give this incident so much attention?
From what I can see, this was done in a deliberate attempt to discredit Pakistan. Many Pakistanis and international media lashed out at the government for making deals with the Taliban.
For Pakistanis it's a routine blaming of their government weather a dictatorship or elected by them. No matter what the government does. See this post.
For others it's part of the international blame Pakistan game, even though NATO has considered peace deals with the Taliban alongside the Afghan government.
Of course, if I am wrong and the flogging was real, I do hope those behind are captured or killed in a raid on Taliban hideouts, but this incident is still being given unjust special attention than other worse incidents.
Monday, May 3, 2010
Pakistanis and politcial Islam
Viewing various material on the Internet related to Pakistan and Islam, weather comments on news articles or videos, I notice many Pakistanis who try hard to band together with Middle Eastern and other Muslims.
But these particular Pakistanis are far from Islamic teachings. They seek to preserve Islam as an identity and a political ideology and not accept it's teachings for what they really are.
They take pride in their imaginary Mughal ancestries without knowing who the Mughals actually were.
As an example I saw comments like "your ancestors were black dirty Hindus who cleaned the steps; my ancestors were blond haired, blue eyed Mughals who sat in the palace thrones."
Or similar comments such as "death to the enemies of Islam, death to Armenians, death to Greeks."
All these comments contradict Islam's teachings. So why do these Pakistanis claim such attachment to Islam? The answer is that it's not really their attachment to Islam, but attachment to Middle Eastern people who these Pakistanis feel are the "true Muslims" since they were Muslims much before the Pakistanis.
Through Islam, these Pakistanis think they will get closer to the Middle Eastern and other Muslims.
In reality, to these certain Pakistanis, Islam is a sense of identity and belonging amongst the Middle Eastern gang instead of accepting Islam's true values of peace and tolerance.
The senseless comments without reason "death to Armenians, death to Greeks" is to essentially imitate the hatred some Turks have for the Greeks and Armenians. Even though it is not clear who is on the right side of the conflict. Sometimes there is even no "right side" since most conflicts arise amongst humans due to difference of opinion.
I doubt these ignorant Pakistanis have researched the history of conflicts between the Muslims and the "enemies of Islam" to reach a fair conclusion.
These Pakistanis make the most racist comments and then hate Jews for the sake of copying the Arabs. Islam to them means being more like Arabs, Turks and Iranians and not really Islam itself.
This is what I call political Islam which has infected the minds of Pakistanis.
A lot of these racist Pakistanis have a history of hatred and racism towards Bangladeshis.
I once heard of a traditional saying in Pakistanis families, when one of their family members overeats, they tell him in Urdu "tum bhukhay Bengali neyhi ho" meaning you are not a hungry Bengali. They are trying to imply that Bengali people are thin and hungry people, a typical racist attitude that many people from Pakistan as well as India seem to have against Bangladeshis.
But why? Aren't Bangladeshis our Muslim brothers? So why do Pakistanis put them down? My best answer is because they are not Middle Eastern. So the racist Pakistanis who try so hard to fit in amongst Middle Easterners have no real sense of Muslim brotherhood, because again, Muslim brotherhood to them means merging your identity with Middle Eastern identity.
Even amongst older generation Pakistanis who are grandparents, promote a more conservative, religious way of life at the same time try to spread racial prejudice into their grandchildren.
When they migrate to Western countries, they express fear of their granddaughters "running away with black people" but rejoice when their grandchildren marry people of European Christian descent. They would even prefer for their grandchildren to marry these "infidels" than marry black Muslims.
These same racist, Arab-wannabe Pakistanis oppose secularism and want Islam as the state religion. This is despite the fact that their racist attitude contradicts Islam in every way.
At some point these hypocrites need to review their behavior and ask themselves if they really advocate Islam in favor of secularism, then they need to stop doing what their religion does not allow.
But these particular Pakistanis are far from Islamic teachings. They seek to preserve Islam as an identity and a political ideology and not accept it's teachings for what they really are.
They take pride in their imaginary Mughal ancestries without knowing who the Mughals actually were.
As an example I saw comments like "your ancestors were black dirty Hindus who cleaned the steps; my ancestors were blond haired, blue eyed Mughals who sat in the palace thrones."
Or similar comments such as "death to the enemies of Islam, death to Armenians, death to Greeks."
All these comments contradict Islam's teachings. So why do these Pakistanis claim such attachment to Islam? The answer is that it's not really their attachment to Islam, but attachment to Middle Eastern people who these Pakistanis feel are the "true Muslims" since they were Muslims much before the Pakistanis.
Through Islam, these Pakistanis think they will get closer to the Middle Eastern and other Muslims.
In reality, to these certain Pakistanis, Islam is a sense of identity and belonging amongst the Middle Eastern gang instead of accepting Islam's true values of peace and tolerance.
The senseless comments without reason "death to Armenians, death to Greeks" is to essentially imitate the hatred some Turks have for the Greeks and Armenians. Even though it is not clear who is on the right side of the conflict. Sometimes there is even no "right side" since most conflicts arise amongst humans due to difference of opinion.
I doubt these ignorant Pakistanis have researched the history of conflicts between the Muslims and the "enemies of Islam" to reach a fair conclusion.
These Pakistanis make the most racist comments and then hate Jews for the sake of copying the Arabs. Islam to them means being more like Arabs, Turks and Iranians and not really Islam itself.
This is what I call political Islam which has infected the minds of Pakistanis.
A lot of these racist Pakistanis have a history of hatred and racism towards Bangladeshis.
I once heard of a traditional saying in Pakistanis families, when one of their family members overeats, they tell him in Urdu "tum bhukhay Bengali neyhi ho" meaning you are not a hungry Bengali. They are trying to imply that Bengali people are thin and hungry people, a typical racist attitude that many people from Pakistan as well as India seem to have against Bangladeshis.
But why? Aren't Bangladeshis our Muslim brothers? So why do Pakistanis put them down? My best answer is because they are not Middle Eastern. So the racist Pakistanis who try so hard to fit in amongst Middle Easterners have no real sense of Muslim brotherhood, because again, Muslim brotherhood to them means merging your identity with Middle Eastern identity.
Even amongst older generation Pakistanis who are grandparents, promote a more conservative, religious way of life at the same time try to spread racial prejudice into their grandchildren.
When they migrate to Western countries, they express fear of their granddaughters "running away with black people" but rejoice when their grandchildren marry people of European Christian descent. They would even prefer for their grandchildren to marry these "infidels" than marry black Muslims.
These same racist, Arab-wannabe Pakistanis oppose secularism and want Islam as the state religion. This is despite the fact that their racist attitude contradicts Islam in every way.
At some point these hypocrites need to review their behavior and ask themselves if they really advocate Islam in favor of secularism, then they need to stop doing what their religion does not allow.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Repost on Zaid Hamid.
I had written an earlier post on Zaid Hamid. In that post I had written that I saw Zaid Hamid to be a negative impact on Pakistanis in the long run, with his vision of political Islam and promotion of which was started by Zia Ul-Haq.
For decades, this ideology has left Pakistanis with an inferiority towards Middle Eastern Muslims and turned many into religious extremists who have little or no sense of tolerance.
What Zaid Hamid is doing spreading the same ideology, only in different circumstances. Unlike former General Zia, he is obviously not a dictator and cannot enforce his views on the population. Also unlike Zia, he has managed to gain a following amongst Pakistan's Westernized elites who traditionally did not follow religious lifestyles.
From what I notice, religious extremism is slowly declining amongst Pakistanis, but Zaid Hamid seems to be acting as the sort of person that will re-strengthen religious fundamentalism in Pakistan.
A person who will be the next Zia Ul-Haq ready to breed the new generation of religious fanatics amongst Pakistanis.
Knowing his tactics of fighting Indian propaganda, I admired him for that. Now I look at him and his ideas with disgust.
After all the Islamists and Hindutvas have been the traditional arch-rivals in the quest for political power in the subcontinent, so why should it be surprising?
At first I thought I was the only one seeing him for who he really was: An extremist cult-leader trying to gain popularity amongst the masses. Now that other Pakistanis see what I see, I can give him full condemnation without hesitation.
Instead of preaching tolerance, secularism, peace and promoting solutions to solve social or other problems in Pakistan such as overpopulation, he just preaches religious fundamentalism which will only strengthen the damage General Zia left on Pakistan.
I recall how people would quote him or use him as reference on Pakistani forums that I was a member of. Almost as if he's some unquestionable 'god.' His role in becoming a cult leader was not out of false prophet-hood as many claim, but rather by trying to turn every issue into a conspiracy theory and gaining an audience.
Adolph Hitler had a saying. Speak a lie, repeat it and everyone will believe it. That's exactly what the Indians have done in their global propaganda campaigns against Pakistan by preaching we are the "same people" and then by accusing Pakistan of spreading terrorism to the point many around the world, especially the West believe it without questioning it.
Zaid Hamid is using the same tactic and using religion, which has poisoned the minds of many confused Pakistanis youth ever since Zia Ul-Haq's reign of terror.
Even despite that most Pakistanis are not as religious as the extremists, this minority of fanatics which Zaid Hamid has joined have gained large followings by spreading unproven claims.
The long time mixture of Islam with Pakistani national identity also seems to have strengthened his power as religious fundamentalists have had that tradition of always hijacking Pakistani patriotism with religious fundamentalism.
I was rather saddened to see Imran Khan alongside Mr Hamid on a talk show to celebrate Pakistan's independence day in 2009.
Hamid's recent row with Pakistan's religious right wing can be seen as as a blessing or even a miracle. The growing tension amongst the religious fundamentalists in Pakistani society only makes the work of the civilized population (not counting the pro-Indian, Westernized elite Muhajirs) much easier.
Ever since the introduction of radical Islam that has infected Pakistan, the civilized population of the country have been powerless against the religious extremists.
With the growing tensions between Zaid Hamid and the mullahs, things may improve.
Few dared to openly challenge a religious fundamentalist in Pakistan like Zaid Hamid ever since their empowerment by General Zia. But unless one is a powerful religious leader himself, a strong opposition cannot be born.
The sooner Zaid Hamid's cult goes to war with the mullahs, the better and easier for the civilized population. All we must do is sit and watch two evil entities destroy one another, saving us the burden of having to destroy them ourselves.
Below are videos that explain Zaid Hamid's scandal and the murder accusation by the mullahs against one of their leaders:
Zaid Hamid's failed campaign in Lahore as a result of the scandal:
For decades, this ideology has left Pakistanis with an inferiority towards Middle Eastern Muslims and turned many into religious extremists who have little or no sense of tolerance.
What Zaid Hamid is doing spreading the same ideology, only in different circumstances. Unlike former General Zia, he is obviously not a dictator and cannot enforce his views on the population. Also unlike Zia, he has managed to gain a following amongst Pakistan's Westernized elites who traditionally did not follow religious lifestyles.
From what I notice, religious extremism is slowly declining amongst Pakistanis, but Zaid Hamid seems to be acting as the sort of person that will re-strengthen religious fundamentalism in Pakistan.
A person who will be the next Zia Ul-Haq ready to breed the new generation of religious fanatics amongst Pakistanis.
Knowing his tactics of fighting Indian propaganda, I admired him for that. Now I look at him and his ideas with disgust.
After all the Islamists and Hindutvas have been the traditional arch-rivals in the quest for political power in the subcontinent, so why should it be surprising?
At first I thought I was the only one seeing him for who he really was: An extremist cult-leader trying to gain popularity amongst the masses. Now that other Pakistanis see what I see, I can give him full condemnation without hesitation.
Instead of preaching tolerance, secularism, peace and promoting solutions to solve social or other problems in Pakistan such as overpopulation, he just preaches religious fundamentalism which will only strengthen the damage General Zia left on Pakistan.
I recall how people would quote him or use him as reference on Pakistani forums that I was a member of. Almost as if he's some unquestionable 'god.' His role in becoming a cult leader was not out of false prophet-hood as many claim, but rather by trying to turn every issue into a conspiracy theory and gaining an audience.
Adolph Hitler had a saying. Speak a lie, repeat it and everyone will believe it. That's exactly what the Indians have done in their global propaganda campaigns against Pakistan by preaching we are the "same people" and then by accusing Pakistan of spreading terrorism to the point many around the world, especially the West believe it without questioning it.
Zaid Hamid is using the same tactic and using religion, which has poisoned the minds of many confused Pakistanis youth ever since Zia Ul-Haq's reign of terror.
Even despite that most Pakistanis are not as religious as the extremists, this minority of fanatics which Zaid Hamid has joined have gained large followings by spreading unproven claims.
The long time mixture of Islam with Pakistani national identity also seems to have strengthened his power as religious fundamentalists have had that tradition of always hijacking Pakistani patriotism with religious fundamentalism.
I was rather saddened to see Imran Khan alongside Mr Hamid on a talk show to celebrate Pakistan's independence day in 2009.
Hamid's recent row with Pakistan's religious right wing can be seen as as a blessing or even a miracle. The growing tension amongst the religious fundamentalists in Pakistani society only makes the work of the civilized population (not counting the pro-Indian, Westernized elite Muhajirs) much easier.
Ever since the introduction of radical Islam that has infected Pakistan, the civilized population of the country have been powerless against the religious extremists.
With the growing tensions between Zaid Hamid and the mullahs, things may improve.
Few dared to openly challenge a religious fundamentalist in Pakistan like Zaid Hamid ever since their empowerment by General Zia. But unless one is a powerful religious leader himself, a strong opposition cannot be born.
The sooner Zaid Hamid's cult goes to war with the mullahs, the better and easier for the civilized population. All we must do is sit and watch two evil entities destroy one another, saving us the burden of having to destroy them ourselves.
Below are videos that explain Zaid Hamid's scandal and the murder accusation by the mullahs against one of their leaders:
Zaid Hamid's failed campaign in Lahore as a result of the scandal:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)