Why war on ISLAM?? |
Post Reply | Page <1 34567> |
Author | |
nu001
Senior Member Male Joined: 02 March 2007 Status: Offline Points: 252 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Sorry brother, don't mind for my comments, It might sound harsh but I think that's the reality. What do you mean by pakistan wants? People? or Military? what people wants is immaterial in pakistan, what military wants that's final. They will remain in control of power for eternity by feeding different capsules (Democracy, secularism, islamic etc etc) what ever can keep the people quiet for sometime. But the rule reamins to be a military rule, with or without uniform. Past sixty years should be enough to understand that. And a military rule can only provide different form of autocracy, coz that's what they have learnt and made for all over the world. Just like a mango tree can't produce apple, a man can't give birth to a child even if u try a million years, Army can't produce democracy in million years. Even a corrupt democratic politician can provide a better denocracy in course of time. See the example next door in india. Pakistan needs a people's revolution, which the pakistanis are not capable of because of many reasons, they can only make some chaos, the situation suits the west perfectly to keep pakistan in their hand and dependant. don't like to make it lengthy, it's useless talking about any kind of democracy in pakistan. |
|
"Al-Quran-The only Straight path to success. Alhamdulillah"
|
|
Whisper
Senior Member Male Joined: 25 July 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 4752 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Unfortunately brother, one of the things that would concern me is what brand of Islam would they govern the folks with in the country. Hamsheer�em, my point is very simple. A people should be free to choose any brand, any breed of what they like. Who are we? The keepers of Islam or its copy rights holders? I believe that humans hold the simple straightforward right to follow any practices, any religion, folklore, culture, whatever in any way they like. And, we plus, least of all, the Pentagon or any other Grand Council of Greed have no right, at all, of telling them what to do or what not to do. It�s a natural learning process. If it doesn�t work for them then it�s up to them to choose what�s the next best thing for them. the true type of Islamic rule that was enlightening and tolerant as practiced by Islamic Spain in mid medeviel times, or the head chopping off force the women to be illiterate and wear burqa type that was practiced in Afghanistan under the Taliban ruled regime? Well, the burqa is perhaps the worst thing that can ever happen to any woman, but just in our parts of the world. I have known a good majority of women, in Muslims countries, who adorned their burqa despite their men�s demands to be free and open. It�s something blown out of proportion, I have not been able to work out by who. In time, if Afghans didn�t like or generally felt unsafe with the Talibaan, they would have definitely blown them out almost like stubbing a cigarette in an ashtray. It�s exactly their matter how they like to live or behave with their women. We do not have any right to implement any Manhattan model or caste them in moulds of our fancy. What breaks my heart is my Afghani refugee friends that I am working with to teach them to read and write, at least in English. Once they learn the English lettering they can read even the transliterated stuff in their own language. These are women aged 15 to 42, who were not allowed to attend school. The two set ups, the Industrialised US and the Afghani or, for that matter, any other on the sand dunes of Sind or the Mid East, are very different. I have been across both these. Had I found that the woman in Seattle had gained something after she was converted into a mortgage sharing slave I would have stood by you and shouted for all the women of the world to do that! I have tried to look kindly at a set up in which a footballer�s muse can spend in a day what a mother or a teacher can�t earn even in a whole life time. Just vulgar comes to mind. True the American and foreign occupation has been a bad thing, but I think the viciousness of the former rulers of Afghanistan were worse. I would not like to see the Wahabbi form of Islam there also. Maryah, what if they come to choose it?
Absolutely! But, did the Founding Fathers� prescribe that if some people fail to look like us, we must shower them from 52,000 feet up in the air, with some of the lethal stuff? Jefferson was not a "christian, he was a secularist, but he believed in the separation of church and state. I agree with you, but only to the extent that if the people in the US wish to keep the state separate from religion � WE HAVE NO OBJECTIONS AT ALL. But, if some people wish to run their state or states in keeping with their religion why should we bomb them or even object to what they want?
nu001
My friend, why would I mind anything, ever? We are here to sing our own songs, in our own tunes, What do you mean by pakistan wants? People? or Military? This survey is based on peoples� opinions and aspirations. what people wants is immaterial in pakistan, what military wants that's final. They will remain in control of power for eternity by feeding different capsules (Democracy, secularism, islamic etc etc) what ever can keep the people quiet for sometime. Eternity? All things come to their end, sooner or later. The army occupation of Pakistan is nearing its end. But the rule reamins to be a military rule, with or without uniform. Past sixty years should be enough to understand that. And a military rule can only provide different form of autocracy, coz that's what they have learnt and made for all over the world. Just like a mango tree can't produce apple, a man can't give birth to a child even if u try a million years, Army can't produce democracy in million years. I agree with you, these 60 years and five months have been a nightmare. But as they say sometimes enough becomes enough and change coughs in. The conditions are now set for a change. Army won�t produce democracy, the people will. Even a corrupt democratic politician can provide a better denocracy in course of time. See the example next door in india. Not just in India, but it has been that way in every single country of our world. People start from somewhere and then carve a system out for themselves. Pakistan needs a people's revolution, which the pakistanis are not capable of because of many reasons, they can only make some chaos, the situation suits the west perfectly to keep pakistan in their hand and dependant. My friend, solutions always rise out of a process of chaos. don't like to make it lengthy, it's useless talking about any kind of democracy in pakistan. Yes, it�s useless, perhaps, now. But the coming time is something else. |
|
Duende
Senior Member Joined: 27 July 2005 Status: Offline Points: 651 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I just love these kinds of polls. In all my life, I have never been asked a
decent question or chosen to participate in any one of these earth shattering polls which do the rounds, supposedly conducted over a broad spectrum of society, but never broad enough to include me!. The polls tell me, for example: 4 out of 10 people say they support democracy, so I assume, well let me see, of those 10 people over there, I wonder which 6 were against democracy or worse, answered: �don�t know�? So, on the basis of my experience, I can�t take polls seriously. Here we have the ultimate of polls: a survey presumably of Pakistanis, but released in Washington, and funded by the US Institute of Peace. Well, let�s see, what do we have here? The United States Institute of Peace, is funded by Congress and headed by: Bush appoints anti-Muslim to peace role Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington Saturday August 23, 2003 The Guardian A Middle East expert who has written dismissively of diplomacy and holds views to the right of the Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon, was yesterday named to the board of the US Institute of Peace. The largely honorary appointment of Daniel Pipes, a gift of President George Bush, has outraged Democratic senators, American Muslims and Arabs, liberal Jews and a large portion of the academic community, who say his opinions are not conducive to peace.� The International Relations Center, on their �Group Watch� page (http://rightweb.irc-online.org/groupwatch/usip.php) give some very interesting details about this institution, such as this:� �USIP has been under criticism since its inception as being a research arm of the government. The USIP board of directors is a who's who of rightwing academia and government which challenges the institute's credentials as a nonpartisan and nonideological organization.� Given these credentials, I suspect the World Public Opinion polls are aimed at presenting the opinions which most accurately serve the purposes of such groups as the USIP, and ultimately serve to mould public opinion. Just like it says in their name. This piece, is a perfect example of non-information aimed it seems at the US home consumption: look at these gems: "The surveyors note that the support for Sharia playing a greater role may indicate desire for the civil courts to perform their functions more effectively rather than for a fundamental change." - or then again, maybe it means the people of Pakistan want Sharia law to be given a greater role. It depends how the question was framed, doesn't it? And then we have: "At the same time a large majority of Pakistanis want Pakistan to be more democratic." Isn't this a bit like a woman being a little bit pregnant? And what is a large majority? Is it like a large minority, just a different colour and a bit shorter? "Asked �How important it is to you to live in a country that is governed by representatives elected by the people� on a 10-point scale, the mean response is 8.4. Asked to rate Pakistan in this regard the mean score was just 4.8, though the polling was conducted just before emergency rule was imposed." Oh I see, so had you asked them this BEFORE the emergency rule, and even though the country has been under a military dictatorship for the past 8 years or so, the Pakistanis understandably rate the unelected leadership they suffer, with a 4 on the scale of elected representatives. Huh? Does this make sense, even? |
|
Diagoras
Senior Member Joined: 06 November 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 115 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I have once before asked you when did that happen and where, but you seem to have evaporated into some non-existent thin air well matched with your statement. Do you hold the guts at least to clarify what your statement means? Hold, peace! Good lord, I've only been gone a few days. Not everyone has constant Internet access. The individual I was responding to seems to support a system in which religious law was binding, also known as a theocracy. In such a system I would be forced to follow the dictates of the Muslim faith, whatever they were decided to be. I'm arguing for secular democracy instead. Get it? |
|
nu001
Senior Member Male Joined: 02 March 2007 Status: Offline Points: 252 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Whisper I appeciate you positivity. Yes, hope is something on which may are living in this world. If there was no hope, many would have perished and we all would have found it difficult. Since none can predict the future, lets hope for the best and pray to Allah that it happens the way you expect. An unstable and non-democratic Pakistan is a problem for many in the region as well, alongside Pakistan. Hope, the best happens. |
|
"Al-Quran-The only Straight path to success. Alhamdulillah"
|
|
Whisper
Senior Member Male Joined: 25 July 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 4752 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hold, peace! Good lord, I've only been gone a few days. Not everyone has constant Internet access. Sorry, we start to miss someone, specially, when just from our neighbourhood! The individual I was responding to seems to support a system in which religious law was binding, also known as a theocracy. In such a system I would be forced to follow the dictates of the Muslim faith, whatever they were decided to be. I'm arguing for secular democracy instead.My only question is very simple; what do we do if and when the majority want that for their own lands? |
|
Whisper
Senior Member Male Joined: 25 July 2004 Location: United Kingdom Status: Offline Points: 4752 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Whisper I appeciate you positivity. Yes, hope is something on which may are living in this world. If there was no hope, many would have perished and we all would have found it difficult. My friend, I see some exceptionally dark clouds being blown away by some fierce winds. The global balance is shifting to show us that there is none but just the One Super Power! 2012 will be some interesting year. |
|
Diagoras
Senior Member Joined: 06 November 2007 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 115 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
My only question is very simple; what do we do if and when the majority want that for their own lands?
They can't. The inalienable rights of man trump even a democratic decision. Freedom of religion is inalienable. Example: If everyone in America, the President, and Congress voted to illegalize Islam, under the Lockean ideals of the American Constitution such an action would be illegitimate no matter how many people supported it. The alternative is mob-rule, in which the rights of minorities are trampled. |
|
Post Reply | Page <1 34567> |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |