Update

Pak Independent will be shifting to another domain when the opportunity comes. Due to Google's enforced change of blogspot's new and more difficult layout, I will be forced to switch domains.

Readers will be notified here when this blog has been shifted with the link to the new blog page. The current posts from this blog page will also be found in the new blog. Also due to real life issues I cannot guarantee when this will happen. Apologies to readers for this inconvenience.

Middle Eastern propaganda against Pakistan and Pakistanis and it's hypocricy

At many times I've come across Muslims from other countries, particularly the Middle East who criticize Pakistan and Pakistanis from being American pawns to being the cause of xenophobia towards Muslims worldwide because of some Pakistanis involvement in terrorism.

We should examine these accusations and see where the hypocrisy in all this comes. Firstly, for them to criticize Pakistanis in being American pawns is a rather far-fetched claim when Arab countries especially those in the Gulf alongside Turkey have American bases within their borders and provided support for the American and British invasion of Iraq.

Iran on the other hand, though not American ally, acts sometimes on behalf of the Russian Federation.
Such as Iran's silence towards Russian atrocities in Chechnya or Iran's support for Armenia against Azerbaijan during the Karabakh war.
Neither did Iran's Islamic regime cut it's ties with India, a country guilty of genocide against Kashmiri Muslims.

Iran also supports the Russian economy by purchasing their products and maintains full ties with Armenia and the Russian Federation.

This goes just as well for Arab countries who have normal diplomatic and trade relations with India and their silence to the situation in Kashmir.
Pakistan on the other hand has supported these countries in the Arab-Israeli wars and as to date has no trade or diplomatic relations with the Jewish state.

These hypocrites also maintain good ties with America, even though America is Israel's biggest supporter and allows Israel to strike at Arab countries by providing them weapons.
Why do these people not see themselves as Russian or American "pawns?" What about the fact that many of these oil rich countries provide the West with a huge percentage of their energy supply?

Even Arab countries such as Syria that developed close ties with the Soviet Union and then the Russian Federation have been silent to Russian support for Armenia against Azerbaijan or India against Pakistan or it's war crimes in Chechnya and other atrocities under communist rule.

Even during the Cold War many Arab countries developed close relations with the USSR when the USSR had been worsening many political problems in the subcontinent and other parts of the world.
Many Muslim nations under Soviet rule suffered from persecution especially the Chechens, yet the Arabs and Iranians silently opened diplomatic and political ties with the USSR.

The second accusation is somewhat more hypocritical than the first. I won't deny that a lot of Pakistanis are radicalized and have been involved in terrorist incidents and activity. But then one also has to look at the broader picture and see who contributes to this radicalization.

While Iran has been for decades supporting Shia radicals in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia has been funding religious madrassas for young Sunni children which radicalize them and encourage hatred of other religions as well as violence and intolerance towards them.

For many decades now, Iran and Saudi Arabia have been fighting proxy wars in Pakistan. Much of the sectarian violence between Shias and Sunnis is caused by Iran and Saudi Arabia's support for the two opposing sides.
So Middle Eastern people need to take a look at their governments actions and how the tax money of their relatives and friends back home or even their own tax money if they live in the Middle East is being spent to radicalize Pakistanis.

Readers wanting to learn more on this issue should research the regional proxy wars between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

There is also another side to this hypocrisy. A lot of the instability in Pakistan is due to many wanted terrorists world-wide such as Saudis and other Middle Eastern nationals hiding in Pakistan's North Western provinces and nearby countries. These people are creating a turmoil for Pakistan and have been behind many bomb attacks against Pakistani civilians within Pakistan and possibly against civilians worldwide.

Their presence and activities in Pakistan has brought a war to Pakistan and added to Pakistan's long list of problems. These include nationals from all over the Middle East.
This news report by press TV gives additional details of the German terrorist killed in Pakistan along with a Turkish terrorist who probably radicalized him.

These Middle Eastern nationals hiding in Pakistan have probably killed many troops and security forces during their stay.
They may have also killed many civilians in their bomb attacks.

So perhaps these Middle Eastern people who accuse Pakistanis for Islamophobia can answer for all the proxy wars their own or their families taxes have contributed to or all those terrorists from their home countries hiding in Pakistan, killing many innocent Pakistanis and foreigners as well as bringing a war to Southern and Central Asia.

Even in Western countries a lot of foiled and successful attacks are carried out by Middle Easterners.
Take for example Air France Flight 8969 which was a hijacking on an Air France plane carried out by North African Arab terrorists or an even better example the hijacking of Pan Am Flight 73 in Karachi, Pakistan by Arab terrorists.

Imagine how negatively this incident impacted foreigners impression of safety in Pakistan. Imagine Pakistanis carrying out such an act at a Middle Eastern airport especially on an important airline that flies to that destination.

And with the rise of Islamist militancy in Xiang province of China, certain Muslim countries in the Middle East have been pledging support for the Uighurs while Pakistan has been actively cracking down on Uighur militants hiding within it's borders.

But the biggest hypocrisy is when these Middle Eastern countries get help from Pakistan for their political wars as well as military training and technological aid.
Pakistan has trained many police and military personal from the Middle East including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and others.

Pakistan has also sold many weapons and other military equipment to these countries.
Who can forget Iran's nuclear program taking off, thanks to getting help from some people in Pakistan.

Since many Middle Eastern people despise Pakistanis, they should reject all they import from Pakistan and turn to other peoples they respect and look up to. But instead they hypocritically make full use of what they get from Pakistan while doing their best to pretend it all came from nowhere.

Even Emirates Airlines, one of the world's largest and fastest growing airlines was set up by Pakistan International Airlines (PIA).

It's always important to examine the facts when such hypocrites point fingers and make laughable accusations.
Those Middle Eastern hypocrites and racists who make such accusations against Pakistanis only need to be shown some basic facts such as those mentioned in this post to see the silliness of their own claims and ideas.

Foreign aid workers should be restricted from entering Pakistan

For more than a year now I've been reading of incidents of foreign aid workers being abducted, assaulted and even murdered in Pakistan. It is well known that the Taliban and other terrorist militants don't check their targets prior to abducting, assaulting or killing them.

But also what is well known is that they target foreigners more so than locals at any given opportunity. Foreigners are much more vulnerable targets than locals since they don't really know much of the whereabouts in large cities, have little or no knowledge of the local languages and how to ensure their own personal safety.

Even local criminal gangs not involved with any political terrorist groups also prefer to abduct foreigners instead of locals. This is true for most third world countries.

Another reason for them being more prone targets is due to the growing anti-Western sentiments in the Pakistani population, particularly anti-American. And thanks to the CIA claiming they've used their agents under the guise of aid workers, they are now more desirable targets for the militants.

There is also the reason that many uneducated people in the third world have the stereotype that all Westerners are rich and so provide good kidnapping ransom.

Even though not all or even most of the aid workers are Western, them being foreign still makes them more vulnerable. With all the reports coming in of them being attacked, it is time for aid agencies to withdraw all foreign aid workers from the country.

Also with so many people in Pakistan looking for jobs, it's better that locals are trained and employed in this profession. I understand that most people in Pakistan are not trained in job skills so agencies will be reluctant to hire them.

But the solution is still to train and hire locals with good references and recognitions. There is no point of giving the job to foreigners who will only be attacked and therefor not be able to get their jobs done.

These foreigners getting abducted and/or killed also adds more burden on our law enforcement agencies who already have enough problems to deal with.

Sending foreign aid workers into Pakistan at times like these is a bad idea to begin with. Hopefully reviewing the incidents, both aid agencies and the Pakistani government will not make these mistakes again.

The Turkish "secular" model is not suitable for Pakistan

I've come across many Pakistani leftists, both religious and secular who see the modern Turkish republic established by Mustafa Kemal Pasha, also known as the "Ataturk" or "father of Turks," as a role model for modernizing Pakistan.

Most of these people are misinformed and do not understand the history and politics of Turkey.
What has been done to Turkey is not really secularism but rather Westernization, which is separate from secularism. By abolishing the Perso-Arabic script and adopting Latin alphabet as the official alphabet and by abandoning traditional Turkish Anatolian clothes for Western dress, there is not much secularism involved.

Even though we frequently hear of the hijab being banned in public places in Turkey, is that really secularism?
I've read articles and seen news reports on the Internet over the treatment of religious minorities in Turkey and it seems to be even worse than Pakistan.

Religious minorities have a tough time working in civil services in Turkey such as police and other government jobs.
Converting from Islam has severe punishments under Turkish law. Many religious minorities in Turkey need government permission to build religious sites.

This is far from secularism, in fact quite the opposite. Does this not remind some Pakistani readers of the same "Indian secularism?" Where minorities are treated in the worst forms while keeping the country somewhat Westernized, imitating Western pop-culture.

This is not the role model for Pakistan. Those who claim that Ataturk was Jinnah's true model need to prove when Jinnah wanted a Latin alphabet writing system for Pakistan or when he wanted Pakistanis to abandon Shalwar Kameez in favor of Western clothes.

Those who also think Turkey or Ataturk are more secular than Pakistan should read this article.

I am not trying to be negative against Turkey or Turkish people. I might also be wrong about Turkey's reforms by Ataturk and the outcome of it, but all I am expressing is that it does not work for Pakistan. Pakistan must find a secular path without Westernization, retaining it's original culture and striving for maximum religious equality.

The videos below cover the tense situation of Christian minorities in Turkey:

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - [Not so] Good news! Pakistan has ‘oil’ for 200 years – its coal

Daily Times - Leading News Resource of Pakistan - Good news! Pakistan has ‘oil’ for 200 years – its coal

problem is we cannot rely on any type of resource to make our country rich or sustainable when we have an unsustainable population and only growing at an unsustainable rate.

Furthermore much of these resources are taken from Sindh and Balochistan. What are the chances the Baloch and Sindhis will allow these resources to be taken and used for nothing in return to them? The only good outcome from this will less dependency on foreign countries for energy, but with a growing population and rebellion within Sindh and Balochistan what good will this do other than feed internal conflict in Pakistan?

Something to think about.

Overpopulation problem discussed in Lashkari

I have not even started writing my second and more detailed and accurate post on the Pakistani overpopulation crisis. My first post can be found by clicking here. I have no plans to get to it anytime soon due to studies, but in the meantime here is a good video on the problem in Lashkari:

In favor of anti-alchohol laws in Pakistan

I don't oppose the consumption of alcohol because of religious reasons. I'm not a religious man and have no such religious commitments. I myself actually drink champagne on an average of two glasses a year when given the opportunity.

A few drinks with a clean meal is actually beneficial for the health. And whenever I consume some champagne, it's never more than one glass on each occasion. I don't recall ever consuming more than one glassful and even if one does it's safe.

But the problem is that most people don't consume two glasses a year when given the opportunity. In many countries there is a limit on what age you should be for drinking, how much should be consumed at most before you drive. But many drinkers don't care about that. They want to learn the hard way by getting jail sentences or their licenses revoked.

This does not end well for other people who have to die or get injured from such preventable accidents until the drunkard learns his/her lesson. In Western countries much of domestic violence and crime can also be owed to alcohol abuse.

An increase in domestic violence and other types of crime are amongst the last things Pakistan needs. Most people in Pakistan have little regard for the laws until they receive full capital punishment for their crimes.

Liquor is available to non-Muslims in Pakistan under license, but I oppose that. The whole reason Islam forbids alcohol, or better yet a large amount, is due to it's affects on the mind that can lead to all sorts of disasters.

But most people don't look at these reasons and simply ban it because Islam discourages it without looking into why it discourages it. It's just like the consumption of pork. Islam forbids it due to health reasons whereas people don't even want to have anything to do with pigs at all simply because Islam forbids consuming pigs as opposed to why it forbids it.

These are the reasons why non-Muslims are permitted to drink alcoholic beverages in Pakistan. But as stated people will not restrict their consumption until their desires are satisfied. In a country where hundreds of thousands of people die every year due to smoking addiction problems and drug abuse, what are the chances of them consuming alcohol with care?

You can never predict what people can do when granted the privilege of drinking alcohol until after they're drunk which can have severe consequences, even fatal.

Not to mention that regular alcohol consumption has bad affects on the health. These are the many factors that alcohol advocates need to take into consideration before pushing for it to be legalized, all in the name of "liberalism."

In Western countries there are even organizations devoted to the prevention of drunk driving and preventing alcohol from falling into the hands of liquor thirsty teens. We don't need people in Pakistan preoccupied with such devotions. We already have enough problems to worry about.

People, especially in third world countries do not take into consideration any sort of consequences for their actions only until after they have suffered through them.