Some of the comments on this thread are extremely fanatical and should be reported to the police, particularly the comment Cheetah replied to. Ammad Maliks comments are purely fanatical. I don't understand why we Pakistanis simply can't live at peace with each other. The steady Islamicization of Pakistan is responsible for a lot of ills in Pakistan.
From the day Ayub Khan declared Pakistan an Islamic republic we have had issues and have failed to become a purely secular nation as Jinnah had envisioned. We are at each others throats for no reason. According to the world Muslims report 52% of Sunnis do not believe Shia are muslims in Pakistan. This is the level of intolerance in our country. We should never have joined the Afghan Soviet war. We should never have let Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto kick out Abdus Salaam from his own country and ban alcohol even for minorities.
What we see today is the fanaticizing of Pakistani society and the polarization has reached its peak. We need to stop the evil Taliban but we are a divided fragmented nation which can't decide who are enemies are.
Havi,must you bring religion into it? Are there not enough people doing that already?
You are too emotionally focused on the role of religion in society, especially politics that I think you have lost the ability to analyze dispassionately. This often happens to activists. Your emotional involvement in this topic on the extreme liberal fringe makes you bring a particular POV into every discussion, without any regard to its appropriateness.
You can not correct the world, and you can not change everybody's minds. Let things be. Especially the ones you are not able to understand and contextualize.
Nothing beats first hand knowledge. Take each and every sentence of your post and question it. Find counter-arguments and try to place them in context of history. If you go on following likes of Raza Rumi, Beena Sarwar, et al you would keep making the same mistakes. People who do not know better would appreciate your line of thinking and you might consider it endorsement of your views. Unfortunately, certain 'facts' are actually myths that get accepted without being questioned. In case of your post allow me to correct the myths.
1. Ayub Khan was not responsible for Islamization. The 1962 constitution drafted by him carried provisions that had been in 1956 constitution, that in turn had depended upon Objectives Resolution of 1949.
2. Your statement that Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah wanted a purely secular nation is contentious at best. Many of his statements are taken out of context by both secular and non-secular camps. But neither side can claim that Jinnah did not say what the other side brings as proof. Unfortunately he died before a process for drafting of a constitution could begin which would have definitively crystallized his views on paper that could not be disregarded.
Any ways this is a very long debate and my view is that he knew that religion had a place in institutional set up of Pakistan. But he did not have definite answers in this regard since addressing this issue would be ground-breaking in may ways. That is why he had encouraged various individuals including M. Asad (Leopold Weiss) to come up with answers to some very difficult questions. It is my view that our problem does not lie with role of religion, but role of sectarianism in name of religion. The hijacking of Government of Pakistan by civil and military bureaucrats right after assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan dashed hopes of resolving important issues including this.
3. Pakistan by virtue of the history and legacy of its formation can not ignore the role of religion. A number of members of my Grand Father's extended family were worker of Pakistan movement. They had no doubt that religion not only played part in creation of Pakistan, but had a role in its institutional set-up.
4. Participation in Afghan conflict was a matter of life and death for Pakistan. Some very learned people stress that this specific struggle was foreseen by English Colonial government and that this was their justification for allowing Pakistan to come into existence. My friend, you are too young to realize how cold war was experienced. Soviet advance had to be broken. Otherwise Pakistan and possibly India could have been taken over by USSR. This is no empty rhetoric. This is my considered opinion. The fact that being a Pakistani you can share your opinions online freely is the fruit of Afghan war itself.
5. Alcohol being banned for minorities is news to me. Do we live in the same country?
I have seen enough problems resulting from alcohol intoxication that I am glad that Pakistan is free (relatively) of this vice.
You are right about fanaticization of our society. But this process is not only driven by Madrassahs alone. It is also being driven on the opposite extreme by self-described secular liberals with a Western world-view.
Ohhh...i see... a supporter of terrorist brotherhood...how is general sahab handling you in egypt ?
Back on topic...i am a pakistani first and foremost and i see iran as an enemy...In my ENTIRE life i have never come across a shia who isnt pro iran knnowing fully that our interests collide in afghanistan etc. I say capture their oilfields and gas em like saddam did .
Regarding Rajesh Khanna,i am just a fan, nothing more
You are a false flagger as far as I am concerned. Spread your poison elsewhere.