Malala poll

[qamar1990]

Any source for your claim?

Open challenge to you. Do a poll on PDF and see how many Indians want to reunite with Pakistan.

At most people want the P-O-K region back not the whole of Pakistan

why dont you go ahead and start one, coming from me they might be biased.

 

[Armstrong]

Yara aiwayn hee subah subah terrorists kay munh lagna parta hai.....

Shareeef aaadmi haii na tung ho na tung karo !

 

[Nexus]

@Aeronaut @ANTIBODY @nuclearpak why guys allow such of threads in worlds biggest defence forum ?

 

[Arya Desa]

She is going to be converted into an arm of the Western Propaganda Machine. She will be sent to pakistan to be killed so they can justify further exploitation of the region.

 

[RazPaK]

@qamar1990, mate I feel as if you have this inherent dislike of all-that-is-west. Why are you in the US anyways? You better leave that place and re-migrate back to some place that caters to your taste, i.e. some Arab state, as the US is not going to become the Islamic Emirates, at least not in your life time. The reason why I say it is: If you end up doing something stupid, for no reason whatsoever, rest of Pakistan will get blamed. The headlines will read:

"A Pakistani immigrant was involved in..........."

Or

"An American of Pakistani origin was involved in..........."

And worst part, we had nothing to do with the way you were brought up. In all probability all your hatred will have roots in your brah's of Middle Eastern origin, with whom you grew up.....

Now this I can't stand. My country being blamed for future crimes of a citizen we had nothing to do with.

Very stupid comment by you. Hang your head in shame.

 

[qamar1990]

Very stupid comment by you. Hang your head in shame.

good to see a little support by a fellow pakistani lol.
damn i didnt expect all this **** from these clowns lol

 

[niaz]

This is the best article I have seen on the sorry state of Pakistan's society and the bigotry that runs deep in a primarily male chauvinist culture.


Permanent victimhood


Afiya Shehrbano
Wednesday, July 24, 2013
From Print Edition


24 12 11 0

Permanent victimhood
Politically speaking, Malala’s gravest error was to survive the attack by the Taliban gunmen who shot her in the head on her way back from school in 2012. Had she succumbed to her injuries or deteriorated to a vegetative state in some underequipped Swat hospital then she may have been forgiven (and forgotten) as a passive patriot. Survival has earned her suspicion and accusation of being an anti-Pakistan agent of the west.

Or, had she continued to live in Swat and waited for the Taliban to complete their botched first attempt or, even if she had caved in to their demands and shut down her campaign and ‘secular’ pursuit for girls’ education, then perhaps conservative Pakistanis and post-secular anti-liberal sympathisers may have grudgingly acknowledged her as worthy of some real, rather than conditional sympathy. Even then not for being a target of patriarchal violence motivated by religious politics of course, but, at best, for her being an indirect victim of US imperialism.

The compatibility and symbiosis between masculinist patriarchy, religion and imperialism is a convenient oversight in such analysis. In the eyes of such ‘analysts’ it is the Taliban who are viewed through the singular lens of imperialist violence and as victims, while women activists who oppose or resist their agendas are caricaturised as anti-Muslim agents and collaborators.

Conservatives are happiest when women conform to their roles as victims and do not behave as agents or activists. Yet, after a decade of a targeted gendered pogrom by the Taliban in Swat, these commentators remain silent on the case histories where women have been victims of the violence practiced by the Taliban. The defence of the Taliban as misguided guerrillas is based on a confused theory that alternates between seeing the Taliban as victims of imperialism but also as agents of anti-imperialism. The argument that they must not be judged as agents out of context empties them of purpose. Instead, they become flattened non-actors who are exacting passive revenge for drones and US imperialism. This avoids any discussion on their agency as exercised through the nature of atrocities committed specifically against women actors.

No explanation has been offered over why these so-called anti-imperialists exact revenge on women with such enthusiastic vengeance? Malala’s own explanation is “They are afraid of women. The power of the voice of women frightens them…That is why they are blasting schools every day. Because they were and they are afraid of change, afraid of the equality that we will bring into our society.”

This is not rocket science. Is religion – in this case Islam – void of political agency and has faith nothing to do at all with the Talib’s demand for an authentic Shariah-based Pakistani state? Why is it presumed that only the Taliban’s is a ‘misguided’ view of Islam especially when we consider that much of their worldview on women, minorities and their role in Pakistani society overlaps with and is shared by so many other Islamists and conservative men?

Activists for women’s equality remain the permanent symbols of progress, westernisation and freedoms and, therefore, they continue to be punished for promoting this cause. That is why I suggest Malala would have done everyone a favour had she just become a victim – and been ossified into a mute icon of permanent grief. Her death would have deprived the west of a ‘pawn’ which, according to conspiracy theorists, is obviously being deployed for the purpose of defaming Pakistan and Muslim men and for becoming the kind of collaborator of western Islamophobia that she is now seen as.

Malala symbolises Pakistan – whereby the preferred role for both would be one of permanent victimhood. If either seeks to become autonomous, secular, liberal or westernised then the whole national narrative as well as representation of Muslim womanhood comes under threat. In the conservative worldview as well as in the eyes of those so-called ‘radical new leftists’ who live in the heart of the Empire themselves, a Muslim woman should be passive, otherwise she can only be one kind of agent– a foreign agent, the other.

The argument of why Malala was singled out for cooption by the UN and west-based campaigns is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, when Pakistani women make professional contributions or achieve mainstream success, it is considered a conspiracy that their agency is not recognised and they are sidelined precisely because they are Muslim, veiled or brown. But when they are recognised for their courage and resilience, then they are accused of being sold-out, foreign or agents. The Cause is only important if it is directed towards those collective goals as defined by Muslim men.

This is why when Afia Siddiqi was indicted by the US courts, she was seen as a pure victim and there were no questions over her credibility nor any objections over her singular iconoclastic status amongst Islamists all over the world campaigning for her cause – including at Imran Khan’s jalsas. Never before had these sympathisers fought for the hundreds of Muslim women trafficked or women labourers around the world who are wretched victims of the neoliberal economic order. They are not the right kind of victims for The Cause.

This is not new. For decades, military dictators, Islamists and conservatives have accused women’s rights activists and human rights defenders of being Raw agents, Zionist sympathisers and anti-Muslim westernised collaborators. Now, a new breed of self-defined ‘radical’ commentators who are embedded and invested in the heart of the Empire have joined this criticism of ‘imperialism’ based only on delegitimising women activists of Pakistan too. What these critics all share is the view that Pakistani women can either be anti-imperialist victims or foreign agents – there is nothing in-between.

The writer is a sociologist based in Karachi. Email: afiyazia@yahoo.com
Permanent victimhood - Afiya Shehrbano

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Awesome reply. I was laughing in office. Literally!

@qamar1990, mate I feel as if you have this inherent dislike of all-that-is-west. Why are you in the US anyways? You better leave that place and re-migrate back to some place that caters to your taste, i.e. some Arab state, as the US is not going to become the Islamic Emirates, at least not in your life time. The reason why I say it is: If you end up doing something stupid, for no reason whatsoever, rest of Pakistan will get blamed. The headlines will read:

"A Pakistani immigrant was involved in..........."

Or

"An American of Pakistani origin was involved in..........."

And worst part, we had nothing to do with the way you were brought up. In all probability all your hatred will have roots in your brah's of Middle Eastern origin, with whom you grew up.....

Now this I can't stand. My country being blamed for future crimes of a citizen we had nothing to do with.

 

[DANGER-ZONE]

If anyone's doing the brainwashing its the Taliban that teach people to hate all over Pakistan hate America hate the west etc, So what if she comes back with Western ideals do you guys see western society as so poisonous that it would destabilize your conservative-theocratic based government?

Yet there are people who want to negotiate with them for a safe way out of the war zone, instead of getting things right.

 

[Masterchief]

Lol the irony is, because america is secular, people like qamar1990 can live and talk crap there, while they themselves, wanting to prove themselves as real patriots of pakistan detest secularism here on the forum, now what i would want to tell my friend qamar is that dude if you really want pakistan to be changed, then stop brooding over a little girl and come back to your country, and please dont be a two face.

 

[Manindra]

Conservative extremists shouts all time , hell to USA hell to Europe but if they got any chance to there then fu♥k you . z
I am gonna going to hell.

 

[Hyperion]

Sad part is, 99.99% of the people I interact with, including the "tribal belt" have nothing against the west (not saying India here), nor follow a fanatical version of Islam - trust me on this one. Yet, we have 10 arselholes in every 1,000,000. However, if you count the second gen+ immigrants of Pakistan (who've NEVER been to Pakistan), 9 out of 10 are wahabi zealots. NOW WHY IS THAT?

Behind EVERY "wannabe/amateur" bomber in Pakistan you'll find clues to him/her being in contact with one of these immigrants (in special professional cases, then it's different - and we can safely guess the culprits)

I have seen this ABCD(American born confused desis)/FOB(fresh of the boat) kind of kids come to Pakistan and either talk all crap, or are on some kind of mission to make a caliphate, and mostly belong to the second kind.

These American "foreigners" need to be checked for mental stability, along with any such Pakistani coming back from an extended trip of the holy lands.

Trust me this mental "caliphate" virus is much worse than any physical virus. If we can screen for normal viruses, then why not this?

Awesome reply. I was laughing in office. Literally!

 

[muse]

99.99% of the people I interact with, including the "tribal belt" have nothing against the west (not saying India here), nor follow a fanatical version of Islam - trust me on this one. Yet, we have 10 arselholes in every 1,000,000. However, if you count the second gen+ immigrants of Pakistan (who've NEVER been to Pakistan), 9 out of 10 are wahabi zealots. NOW WHY IS THAT?

Behind EVERY "wannabe/amateur" bomber in Pakistan you'll find clues to him/her being in contact with one of these immigrants (in special professional cases, then it's different - and we can safely guess the culprits)

I have seen this ABCD(American born confused desis)/FOB(fresh of the boat) kind of kids come to Pakistan and either talk all crap, or are on some kind of mission to make a caliphate, and mostly belong to the second kind.

These American "foreigners" need to be checked for mental stability, along with any such Pakistani coming back from an extended trip of the holy lands.

Trust me this mental "caliphate" virus is much worse than any physical virus. If we can screen for normal viruses, then why not this?

FOr an explanation see Fabricating history - DAWN.COM

Fed on lies, confused and dangerous

 

[Hyperion]

FOr an explanation see Fabricating history - DAWN.COM

Fed on lies, confused and dangerous

Why not paste it for others as well?

Here you go people, a refresher:

THE SIUT’s Centre for Biomedical Ethics and Culture (CBEC) holds interesting forums periodically where renowned scholars are invited to address the members. Since ethics is a wide-ranging subject the thought-provoking speeches on a variety of subjects delivered there provide the audience some issues to chew upon.

In July, Dr Arifa Syeda Zahra, who teaches history in a Lahore college, was a guest of the CBEC and the point she drove home very forcefully and convincingly was that those who destroy history do it with the purpose of erasing the collective memory of a people. The idea behind this act of vandalism is to pre-empt change, which Dr Arifa Zahra describes as the most difficult process in individuals and societies.

Her hypothesis very appropriately articulated in chaste Urdu laced with pun and humour was that history is the tool that allows us to distinguish between good and evil in the past lives of a nation. This process of analysing past successes and failures is essential to facilitating changes in the present.

This is not happening in our case because those controlling the destiny of Pakistan will not allow it to happen. They are so focused on religion that they distort past records and entangle people in frivolous debates on rituals to divert their attention from substantive issues.

Thus a big lie exposed by Dr Arifa Zahra concerns the so-called ideology of Pakistan that has been used by many an unscrupulous leadership to enable it to exercise control via religion. The conventional belief that has been relentlessly promoted is that the slogan ‘Pakistan ka matlab kiya, La illaha il-Allah’ (What does Pakistan mean? There is only one God) was the battle cry of the Pakistan movement. Dr Arifa Zahra’s contention is that research into history has conclusively proved that this slogan was an invention of the Ayub era in 1968 and has ever since been presented as a fact of Pakistan’s history.

When all laws are supposedly based on religion, such leaders come to enjoy unlimited powers by virtue of their becoming judge, jury and executioner all rolled into one by arrogating to themselves the power of interpretation and implementation.

They create a kind of comfort zone for themselves into which they trap the simple people. Nobody wants to step out of it to face an uncertain future. Who has not seen the blatant misuse of religion for committing the most heinous acts? They go unchallenged.

This falsification of history has provided the right-wing orthodox champions of Islam sufficient ground to build their ideological castles that are actually like castles on the sand.

Accordingly, the belief was fabricated that Pakistan was created to enable Muslims of South Asia to build a separate state for themselves in which they could create a theological structure with an Islamic system in vogue.

Dr Mubarak Ali, another historian who mourns the wrongs done to history, holds a similar point of view as Dr Arifa Zahra. He writes: “Our state uses the subject (history) for its own political and ideological interests. It is claimed that Pakistan came into being as a result of an ideological struggle. Therefore, the official purpose of history in Pakistan is to legitimise the state’s ideology and write history within a framework that suits the ruling classes.”

That would explain why we are not able to find solutions to our numerous problems. It makes us resist new technology — vide the moon-sighting debate that has become an annual feature of our lives and the Council of Islamic Ideology’s refusal to accept DNA testing as primary evidence in rape cases.

We refuse to show tolerance and compassion to ‘others’ because our view of religion has to be conformist. It is not inclusive and pluralistic. We do not inculcate the spirit of inquiry in our children who are discouraged from thinking lest that causes them to ask the wrong kind of questions that could ‘weaken’ their faith.

Another role of history, as identified by Dr Arifa Zahra, is in preserving our socio-cultural values and norms. People’s collective memories help them to distinguish between good and evil in society. The process of sifting wheat from chaff determines our preferences and forms the basis of our moral heritage. If collective memories are erased or distorted people are deprived of a tool to measure the good and bad experiences of their past.

In such circumstances, ethics faces a tough challenge. In numerous discussions at the CBEC, sensitive issues, especially those pertaining to medicine, have come under debate such as life and death, organ sale and transplantation and palliative medicine. With technology making rapid strides and communication injecting new ideas into society instantaneously, new ethical codes need to be devised.

One still remembers the struggle the Transplantation Society of Pakistan had to wage against some unscrupulous urologists promoting the organ trade in the country. They took their case to the Federal Shariat Court taking the plea that the Transplantation of Human Organs and Tissues Ordinance violated the tenets of Islam. It was the enlightened judge, Justice Haziqul Khairi, who ruled against the organ traders.

History can provide guidelines, but only if it is honestly researched and written with integrity. It is difficult to devise any ethical code without reference to the past especially the culture, moral values and beliefs prevalent in a society during different eras.

 

[PakPrinciples]

Sad part is, 99.99% of the people I interact with, including the "tribal belt" have nothing against the west (not saying India here), nor follow a fanatical version of Islam - trust me on this one. Yet, we have 10 arselholes in every 1,000,000. However, if you count the second gen+ immigrants of Pakistan (who've NEVER been to Pakistan), 9 out of 10 are wahabi zealots. NOW WHY IS THAT?

I have seen this ABCD(American born confused desis)/FOB(fresh of the boat) kind of kids come to Pakistan and either talk all crap, or are on some kind of mission to make a caliphate, and mostly belong to the second kind

Exactly, ask yourself why is that? You obviously haven't lived in "the west" so you're not fit to comment on this issue. Your views seem to be based on some kind of fictional belief you construed without any real life experience.

I understand where you're coming from but what a lot of you seem to think is this hate for Pakistan is something new (i.e. post 2001). I was born and raised in Canada and though it's a lot better here than the US I will assure you that without a doubt they hated Pakistan from the time I was in elementary school. Almost any Pakistani you talk to born and raised in countries like the UK, US or Canada will attest to this fact especially during times when there were very few of us. Growing up and even today most people don't know I am Pakistani or even a Muslim when they meet me, since they're under the impression we look like malnourished Indians they see on TV, until I tell them my ethnicity but from my earliest memories as a kid the moment they find out you're Pakistani they hit you with insults and you're literally in fights all the time and only when you fight back do they even begin to respect you. This is why I liked Imran Khan because he understood these peoples psyches better than guys like Zardari, Altaf, Haqqani or Nawaz and the other sellouts in Pakistan some of whom live abroad after stealing from the country or making money by throwing it and it's people under the bus for decades.

In the 1954 the US had a defence pact with Pakistan akin to what they signed with Britain, Japan, Israel and South Korea. However, did they help the country in '65 or even '71? No. Instead they put sanctions on the country even though they would never do such a thing if it was Britain, Japan, South Korea or Israel on the line while the USSR was actively supporting India. After helping American leaders meet with the Chinese ending a tense standoff with the PLA which ultimately led to the end of the cold war (and threat of nuclear war) and assisting them in eliminating their greatest threat in the second half of the 20th century (i.e. USSR), etc... what did Pakistan get for all it's troubles? Threats of war in 2001, sanctions throughout the 90s and absolute betrayal in the mid 60s when we needed them. You're living in a fantasy of your own creation if you think these people like/respect you or more importantly Pakistan.

Why do you think Pakistan pursued a nuclear program? Our leadership learned it's lesson that these people are not friends nor do they have Pakistan's interests or people at heart. My father was a young University student in Canada when Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto gave a speech following his address to the UN in NY back in '71 and he remembers Canadian politicians laughing at Pakistan on television in the mid 70s when they thought the country would be hurled into a sea of darkness and the "stone age" in a matter of weeks/months after they stopped supplying Pakistan with fuel assemblies even though our entire nuclear program was aimed at diversifying our energy mix and self defence not aggression. However, the nation prevailed because of our links with Muslims around the world (ex. Libya and Saudi Arabia) and most importantly our own ingenuity and strong belief in Islam so it's odd you would be against things like the Caliphate when the whole principal is centered around Muslims helping Muslims and working towards common goals like defense.

Furthermore, We aren't Desi's We're Pakistani's. I love Canada because it's where I was born and raised but that does not mean I abandon my Pakistani heritage/identity and simply walk away not caring what happens in my ancestral lands.

If we wanted we could easily sell out Pakistan and Islam and our people and make quite a good living doing so. However, unlike Pakistani politicians and the minority of liberal scum that pervade the country the majority of us work very hard to preserve our culture and remember our roots (though we do make our share of mistakes along the way). It's easy for you to say what you say being born and raised in Pakistan or another Muslim majority country but try living in a western country, particularly in a time when there are virtually no Pakistani's let alone other Muslims or even minority groups, where you have to watch what you eat, have to say "no" to people when they want to go out drinking, etc...