What's new

Terrorism, Shameless Religious Bigotry and Pakistani Mindset

hmmmm...... something that is proof for you may not be proof for me so asking for a proof and then denying that proof what can be said about such behavior?? can we name it??

Proof means scientific or mathematics proof or proof based on facts..
and these never lie no matter how much you deny them..
 
.
My single question to the post-Zia children who have never understood the narrative of our past (the real version):-

Before Ahmedis weren't legally non-Mulsims, when there were no blasphemy laws, when there was no criminal offence of fornication, there was no legal ban of consumption of liquor, betting, gambling and when there was no article 227 (all existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the Injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah, in this Part referred to as the Injunctions of Islam, and no law shall be enacted which is repugnant to such Injunctions), when there was no Federal Shariat Court or Council of Islam Ideology that interpreted state governance under religious ideology; were the people of Pakistan living an "un-Islamic" life? Were they non-Muslims or misguided? Were they confused about the separation of religion and state (there being no popular demand for such religious laws and these were promulgated forcefully rather than based on public opinion)? Were our elders misguided or was the re-born face of political Islam imported from Saudi Arabia and strengthened by our children of Maududi in direct confrontation with the previous strands of Islam in South Asia? Why did the people of Pakistan never demand a widely political role of Islam before that time? Were the lack of such "Islamic" provisions in our criminal and civil offences a symbol of "westernization", the dreaded "secularization" or directly "non-Islamic"?

I demand answers from the post-Zia children (not that I am not one of them but I do not agree with the post-Zia narrative handed down and accepted by our urban middle class youth)

This is an interesting thread and discussion best left to Pakistani forummers, but I saw this and couldn't help commenting since I have thought about the conundrum.

when there was no Federal Shariat Court or Council of Islam Ideology that interpreted state governance under religious ideology; were the people of Pakistan living an "un-Islamic" life? Were they non-Muslims or misguided? Were they confused about the separation of religion and state (there being no popular demand for such religious laws and these were promulgated forcefully rather than based on public opinion)?

If you apply the 'logic' of fundamentalism to your questions, then 'logically' the further back you go into Pakistna's history from this perspective, the more kafir those people, and if you go far back enough, why the people who created Pakistan were absolute kafirs!
:partay:
 
.
And for all those who are making so much noise about secular nature of founders of Paksitan.... this is what the person who gave the idea of Pakistan thinks about Qadiyanis...

Qadianis and Orthodox Muslims
by Dr. Allama Muhammad Iqbal

The issue created by the controversy between the Qadianis and the orthodox Muslims is extremely important. The Muslims have only recently begun to realise its importance. I intended to address an open letter to the British people explaining the social and political implications of the issue. But unfortunately my health prevented me from doing so. I am, however, glad to say a few words for the present on the matter, which, to my mind, affects the entire collective life of the Indian Muslims. It must, however, be pointed out at the outset that I have no intention to enter into any theological argument. Nor do I mean to undertake a psychological analysis of the mind of the founder of the Qadiani movement; the former will not interest those for whom this statement is meant and the time for the latter has not yet arrived in India. My point of view is that of a student of general history and comparative religion.

India is a land of many religious communities, and Islam is a religious community in a much deeper sense than those communities whose structure is determined partly by the religious and partly by the race idea. Islam repudiates the race idea altogether and founds itself on the religious idea alone, a basis which is wholly spiritual and consequently for more ethereal than blood relationship, Muslim society is naturally much more sensitive to forces which it considers harmful to its integrity. Any religious society historically arising from the bosom of Islam, which claims a new prophethood for its basis, and declares all Muslims who do not recognise the truth of its alleged revelation as Kafirs, must, therefore, be regarded by every Muslims as a serious danger to the solidarity of Islam. This must necessarily be so; since the integrity of Muslim society is secured by the Idea of the Finality of Prophethood alone.

This idea of Finality is perhaps the most original idea in the cultural history of mankind: its true significance can be understood only by those who carefully study the history of pre-Islamic Magian culture in Western and Middle Asia. The concept of Magian culture, according to modern research, includes cultures associated with Zoroastruanism, Judaism, Jewish Christianity, Chaldean and Sabean religion. To these creed-communities the idea of the continuity of prophethood was essential, and consequently they lived in a state of constant expectation. It is probable that the Magian man psychologically enjoyed this state of expectation. The modern man is spiritually far more emancipated than the Magian man. The result of the Magian attitude was the disintegration of old communities and the constant formation of new ones by all sorts of religious adventurers. In the modern world of Islam, ambitious and ignorant Mullaism, taking advantage of the modern Press, has shamelessly attempted to hurl the old pre-Islamic Magian outlook in the face of the twentieth century. It is obvious that Islam which claims to weld all the various communities of the world into one single community cannot reconcile itself to a movement which threatens its present solidarity and holds the promise of further rifts in human society.

Of the of the two forms which the modern revival of Pre-Islamic Magianism has assumed, Bahaism appears to me to be far more honest than Qadianism; for the former openly departs from Islam, whereas the latter apparently retains some of the more important externals of Islam with an inwardness wholly inimical of the spirit and aspirations of Islam. Its idea of a jealous God with an inexhaustible store of earthquakes and plagues for its opponents; its conception of the prophet as a soothsayer; its idea of the continuity of the spirit of messiah, are so absolutely Jewish that the movement can easily be regarded as a return to early Judaism. Professor Buber who has given an account of the movement initiated by the Polish Messiah Baalshem tells us that "it was thought that the spirit of the Messiah descended upon the earth through the prophets and even though a long line of holy men stretching into the present time - the Zaddiks" (Sadiq). Heretical movements in Muslim Iran under the pressure of Pre-Islamic Magian ideas invented the words buruz, hulul, zill, to cover this idea of a perpetual reincarnation. It was necessary to invent new expressions for a Magian idea in order to make it less shocking to Muslim conscience. Even the phrase "Promised Messiah" is not a product of Muslim religious consciousness. It is a bastard expression and has its origin in the Pre-Islamic Magian outlook.

We do not find it in early Islamic religious and historical literature. This remarkable fact is revealed by Professor Wensinck's Concordance of the Traditions of the Holy Prophet, which covers no less than eleven collections of the traditions and three of the earliest historical documents of Islam. One can very well understand the reasons why early Muslims never used this expression. The expression did not appeal to them probably because they thought that it implied a false conception of the historical process. The Magian mind regarded time as a circular movement, the glory of elucidation, the true nature of the historical process as a perpetually creative movement was reserved for the great Muslim thinker and historian, Ibn Khaldun.

The intensity of feeling which the Indian Muslims have manifested in opposition to the Quadiani movement is, therefore, perfectly intelligible to the student of modern sociology. The average Muslim who was the other day describes as "Mulla-ridden" by a writer in The Civil and Military Gazette is inspired in his opposition to the movement more by his instinct of self-preservation than by a fuller grasp called "enlightened"' Muslin has seldom made an attempt to understand the real cultural significance of the idea of Finality in Islam, and a process of slow and imperceptible westernisation has further deprived him even of the instinct of self-preservation. Some so-called enlightened Muslims have gone to the extent of preaching "tolerance' to their brethren-in-faith. I can easily excuse Sir Herbert Emerson for preaching toleration to Muslims; for a modern European who is born and brought up in an entirely different culture does not, and perhaps cannot, develop the insight which makes it possible for one to understand an issue vital to the very structure of a community with an entirely different cultural outlook.

In India circumstances are much more peculiar. This country of religious communities, where the future of each community rests entirely upon its solidarity, is ruled by a Western people who cannot but adopt a policy of non-interference in religion. This liberal and indispensable policy in a country like India has led to most unfortunate results. In so far as Islam is concerned, it is no exaggeration to say that the solidarity of the Muslim community in India under the British is far less safe than the solidarity of the Jewish community was in the days of Jesus under the Romans. Any religious adventurer in India can set up any claim and carve out a new community for his own exploration. This liberal State of ours does not care a fig for integrity of a parent community, provided the adventurer assures it of his loyalty and his followers are regular in the payment of taxes due to the State. The meaning of this policy for Islam was quite accurately seen by our great poet Akbar who in his usual humorous strain says:

O friend! pray for the glory of the Briton's name:
Say, "I am God" sans chain, sans cross, sans shame.

I very much appreciate the orthodox Hindus' demand for protection against religious reformers in the new constitution. Indeed, the demand ought to have been first made by the Muslims who. unlike Hindus, entirely eliminate the race idea from their social structure. The Government must seriously consider the present situation and try, if possible, to understand the mentality of the absolutely vital to the integrity of his community. After all, if the integrity of a community is threatened, the only course open to that community is to defend itself against the forces of disintegration.

And what are the ways of self-defense?

Controversial writings and refutation of the claims of the man who is regarded by the parent community as a religious adventurer. Is it then fair to preach toleration to the parent community whose integrity is threatened and to allow the rebellious group to carry on its propaganda with impunity, even when the propaganda is highly abusive?

If a group, rebellious from the point of view of the parent community, happens to be of some special service to Government, the latter are at liberty to reward their services as best as they can. Other communities will not grudge it. But the forces which tend seriously to affect its collective life. collective life is as sensitive to the danger of dissolution as individual life. It is hardly necessary to add in this connection that the mutual theological bickerings of Muslim sects do not affect vital principles on which all these sects agree with all their differences in spite of their mutual accusation of heresy.

There is one further point which demands Government's special consideration. The encouragement in India of religious adventurers, on the ground of modern liberalism, tends to make people more and more indifferent to religion and will eventually completely eliminate the important factor of religion from the life of Indian communities. The Indian mind is likely to be nothing less than the form of atheistic materialism which has appeared in Russia.

But the religious issue is not the only issue which is at present agitating the minds of the Punjab Muslims. There are other quarrels of a political nature which, according to my reading, Sir Herbert Emerson hinted in his speech at the Anjuman's anniversary. These are, no doubt, of a purely political nature, but they affect the unity of Punjab Muslims as seriously as the religious issue. While thanking the Government for their anxiety to see the Punjab Muslims united, I venture to suggest a little self-examination to the Government themselves. Who is responsible, I ask, for the distinction of rural and urban Muslims - a distinction which has cut up the Muslim community into two groups and the rural group into several sub-groups constantly at war with one another?

Sir Herbert Emerson deplores the lack of proper leadership among the Punjab Muslims. But I wish Sir Herbert Emerson realised that the rural-urban distinction created by the Government and maintained by them through ambitious political adventurers, whose eyes are fixed on their own personal interests and not on the unity of Islam in the Punjab, had already made the community incapable of producing a real leader. It appears to me that this device probably originated in a desire rather to make it impossible for real leadership to grow. Sir Herbert Emerson deplores the lack of leadership in Muslims; I deplore the continuation by the Government of a system which has crushed out all hope of a real leader appearing in the province.

Postscript. I understands that this statement has caused some misunderstanding in some quarters. It is thought that I have made a subtle suggestion to the Government to suppress the Qadiani movement by force. Nothing of the kind. I have made it clear that the policy of non-interference in religion is the only policy which can be adopted by the rulers of India. No other is possible policy is possible. I confess, however, that to my mind this policy is harmful to the interests of religious communities; but there is no escape from it and those who suffer will have to safeguard their interests by suitable means. The best course for the rulers of India is, in my opinion, to declare the Qadianis a separate community. This will be perfectly consistent with the policy of the Qadianis themselves, and the Indian Muslim will tolerate them just as he tolerates other religions.

The cultural value of the idea of finality in Islam I have fully explained elsewhere, its meaning is simple: No spiritual surrender to any human being after Muhammad (pbuh) who emancipated his followers by giving them a law which is realisable as arising from the very core of human conscience. Theologically, the doctrine is that: the socio-political organisation called "Islam" is perfect and eternal. No revelation the denial of which entails heresy is possible after Muhammad (pbuh). He who claims such a revelation is a traitor to Islam. Since the Qadianis believe the founder of the Ahmadiyyah movement to be the bearer of such a revelation, they declare that the entire world of Islam is Infidel. The founder's own argument, quite worthy of a medieval theologian, is that the spirituality of the Holy Prophet of Islam must be regarded as imperfect if it is not creative of another prophet. He claims his own prophethood to be an evidence of the prophet-rearing power of the spirituality of the Holy Prophet of Islam. But if you further ask him whether the spirituality of Muhammad (pbuh) is capable of rearing more prophets than one, his answer is "No". This virtually amounts to saying: "Muhammad (pbuh) is not the last Prophet: I am the last." Far from understanding the cultural value of the Islamic idea of finality in the history of mankind generally and of Asia especially, he thinks that finality in the sense that no follower of Muhammad (pbuh) can ever reach the status of prophethood is a mark of imperfection in Muhammad's (pbuh)prophethood. As I read the psychology of his mind he, in the interest of his own claim to prophethood avails himself of what he describes as the creative spirituality of the Holy Prophet of Islam and, at the same time, deprives the Holy Prophet of his "finality" by limiting the creative capacity of his spirituality of the rearing of only one prophet, i.e. the founder of the Ahmadiyyah movement. In this way does the new prophet quietly steal away the "finality" of one whom he claims to be his spiritual progenitor. He claims to be a buruz of the Holy Prophet of Islam insinuating thereby that, being a buruz of him, his "finality" is virtually the "finality" of Muhammad (pbuh); and that this view of the matter, therefore, does not violate the "finality" of the Holy Prophet. In identifying the two finalities, his own and that of the Holy Prophet, he conveniently loses sight of the temporal meaning of the idea of Finality. It is, however, obvious that the word buruz, in the sense even complete likeness, cannot help him at all; for the buruz must always remain the other side of its original. Only in the sense of reincarnation a buruz becomes identical with original. Thus if we take the word buruz to mean "like in spiritual qualities" the argument remains ineffective; if, on the other hand, we take it to mean reincarnation of the original in the Aryan sense of the word, the argument becomes plausible; but its author turns out to be only a magian in disguise. It is further claimed on the authority of the great Muslim mystic, Muhyuddin ibn Arabi of Spain, that it is possible for a Muslim saint to attain, in his spiritual evolution, to the kind of experience characteristic of the prophetic consciousness. I personally believe this view of Shaikh Muhyuddin ibn Arabi to be psychologically unsound: but assuming it to be correct the Qadiani argument is based on a complete misunderstanding of his exact position. The Shaikh regards it as a purely private achievement which does not, and in the nature of things cannot, entitle such a saint to declare that all those who do not believe in him are outside the pale of Islam. Indeed, from the Shaikh's point of view, there may be more than one saint, living in the same age or country, who may attain to prophet consciousness. The point to be seized is that, while it is psychologically possible for a saint to attain to prophetic experience, his experience will have no socio-political significance making him the centre of a new organisation and entitling him to declare this organisation to be the criterion of the faith or disbelief of the followers of Muhammad (pbuh). Leaving his mystical psychology aside I am convinced from a careful study of the relevant passages of the "Futuhat" that the great Spanish mystic is as a firm a believer in the Finality of Muhammad (pbuh) as any orthodox Muslim. And if he had seen in his mystical vision that one day in the East some Indian amateurs in Sufism would seek to destroy the Holy Prophet's Finality under cover of his mystical psychology, he would have certainly anticipated the Indian Ulama in warning the Muslims of the world against such traitors to Islam.
 
.
And BTW Paksitan was made in the name of religion so you cannot cut its roots...... it is deep in our heart that we were united just because of our religion..... Quaid-e-Azam wanted a piece of land for Muslims..... not for hindus, chritians and sikhs...... further go into history Quaid-e-Azam simply denied the co-existance of hindus and Muslims why??? he was a secualr then why he had to say all that......
why he joined muslim league when there was secular party "Congress"??
Was Quaid-e-Azam lying with all the muslims of sub-continent that we are having a country for Muslims..... do you know why Pakistan came into being ?? just because Muslims of india wanted a separate land because it was almost impossible for them to co-exist with hindus india was a secualr country wasn't it??? then why he preferred creation of a new country ??
 
.

Was that man slit at the throat alive? Or did they kill him and then slit his throat? :sick:

Damn man , these Talibans are so ***** up.

Can't argue with you there, that video made me sick! They are worse than animals! Are they even humans? Backward b******* I'd love to kill each and every f***** of their tribe!
May you burn in the depths of HELL you brainless f***tards!
 
.
Every side have its dark view. You cant blame to whole side. Seeing some bad TTP Talibans killing so you blame whole Talibans or whole Islam? Seeing few Armyman beating people so blame whole Military or whole Pakistan? Seeing Hitler then, blame whole Germany? Or whole Christianity? Seeing Plastine killing so blame whole Jew or whole Israel? Seeing Muslim killing in india so blame whole Hindus or whole India? Seeing war based on a lie of 9-11 killing millions of Muslim you blame whole non-muslims? So in this way every side is terrorist to other? Just dont judge your self, their is Allah who judge, who is better and who not.

yeah..leave everything to allah..he will take care of the bad TTPs...
 
.
^^

Those videos made me really angry. It is worse knowing that the soldiers families could have seen those videos being passed around like trading cards.

The Taliban need to be dealt with with a heavy hand, and soon.
 
.
And BTW Paksitan was made in the name of religion so you cannot cut its roots...... it is deep in our heart that we were united just because of our religion..... Quaid-e-Azam wanted a piece of land for Muslims..... not for hindus, chritians and sikhs...... further go into history Quaid-e-Azam simply denied the co-existance of hindus and Muslims why??? he was a secualr then why he had to say all that......
why he joined muslim league when there was secular party "Congress"??
Was Quaid-e-Azam lying with all the muslims of sub-continent that we are having a country for Muslims..... do you know why Pakistan came into being ?? just because Muslims of india wanted a separate land because it was almost impossible for them to co-exist with hindus india was a secualr country wasn't it??? then why he preferred creation of a new country ??

only if you understood ZINNAH...ha:sick:
 
.
What mean Solid prove? Made of steal?

It is proved that 9-11 was total base on lies by free fall speed equation. In which the mass fall dowm with the speed of 9.8 ms-1 which equals to gravitational force. It only happen when a mass freely fall like throwing stone from hill. But in 9-11 how WTC 1,2 & 7 fall down with the speed of 9.8 ms-1, they have steel fram, which suppose to convert it falling K.E. in to P.E. Thus it could not fall with that speed. It only possible when its fully steal fram was removed which can be done by pull out the buildings by dynamites. And its take months to calculate and place dynamites so building to pull down accuratly. Its mean the planing of building pull out was strat make in 2001.

WTC was framed to hold for days after hitting by missiles. But how could building fall down just hitting by plane with no warhead in half an hour? Steel metal on 10000 C. But could that plane with fuel make that temp. ? Even its fuel was full burn just hitting WTC. This temp. Can only made by dynamites

If building has hole on one side, it must fall banding on that side coz of gravitation force, How it could fall straght down? It must be some kind of artifical energy given so it will balance that gravitation force then the building could fall down straght. Who and what thing give this energy? Surely some kind of blast by dynamite

Now dont blame physics is terrorist thats why its wrong equation..
And i m sure you will know if you were educated..
 
.
Gen sb,
As much as I support your views,
why don't you leave the science to us ;)

lets break it this way
we make the rifles, u fire them ?

yeah ?
 
Last edited:
.
I must tell you emo!!!! You are only promoting Islam as a black religion... These people (Author) have only one agenda and that is bashing Islam.. Just give you an example.

Watch this video! and notice how they are bashing Islam.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nDpuAHkVM5Q

but you know what!!!!! this video proved out as a fake video. the girl in this video was paid for this drama.. Read this
1100596216-2.gif

Dear Boy,

The article quotes a certain very honest Malakand officer Sayyed Muhammad Javed...you know who this rascal is?
Read about a certain Javed in Malakand and his covert and later overt support of TTP in spreading their influence.
He was instrumental in acting as a primary informer to the TTP and facilitated all sorts of deals for them, all the while betraying Pakistan.
Same name shall appear in a most suspicious manner in the episode where the 4 SSG officers were martyred by TTP.

Regarding the video, when the TTP spokesman says on national TV that this was justified and the girl is lucky that this was the punishment she got away with...then i no longer need to authenticate the video in order to ascertain what the TTP stands for.
Their intent was obvious from their comments, however they never expected that nation would react more to this cosmetic (apologies to the women who were humiliated like this) brutality when it was really oblivious to the bloody massacre....

However embarrassing this episode was, it was nothing compared to killing people left right and center which TTP was actually doing.

The TTP got cocky and cited this as a feather in their cap, when the nation started crying bloody murder, they realized that this was a mistake and hence their agent Javed and all sympathizers quickly came to rescue.

Point is that Muslim Khan justified this act and called it very appropriate...if you need more than this to see TTP for what it is then you need to look at their justifications for each and every atrocity that they committed...
You will come to hate the TTP despite the fact that they deny many acts that they actually perpetrate.

If despite all of this we see condemning TTP as a conspiracy to bash Islam then we are really far away from Islam.
 
. .
I am not promoting Islam as a black religion there are enough people on the planet to do that & Muslims themselves are very good at doing it unintentionally even of the Video about that Girl been flogged is fake what difference does it makes? the people of Swat who were uprooted from their homes only because there was pressure on the Gov not to operate only because they are so called our own people, even when Naza-e-Adal was implemented we alls aw the intentions of theirs which they revealed by expanding down to Buner, if some sense would have prevailed in masses & if they were made ineffective at the right time we would not have seen millions
of IDPs

are all the Videos of soldiers & slaughter of Taliban released by Taliban fake

WARNING: Extremely Violent Content

Islamization Watch: Video: Taliban slaughter Pakistani soldiers and residents like animals

article ahs got no Ilsam bashing its only defining & talking about the bigotry & mindset which is allowing Terrorism & Extremism to prevail & eventually eat away all of us

What in the living fcuk did i just watch.

That was worse than 2 girls 1 cup.

Pakistan as Islamic moderate country? What you sayin? Out of your mind? Who are we to moderate Islam? Dont you think that the Protection of Islam is Taken by Allah and if we did try to moderate Islam what could happen? And don't dont dear to think it. It will remain as Islamic republic of Pakistan

The thing is if we don't do anything to 'moderate Islam' then the above videos will continue to exist.

"Islamic Republic" was not the original intention of Jinnah or Allama Iqbal.
 
.
Well, why blame , India,West or US,,,all they do, buy traitor among us and use against us. So, if we are weak then why blame others.
When we point finger toward enemy, rest of OURs fingers point toward us.
 
.
Was that man slit at the throat alive? Or did they kill him and then slit his throat? :sick:



Can't argue with you there, that video made me sick! They are worse than animals! Are they even humans? Backward b******* I'd love to kill each and every f***** of their tribe!
May you burn in the depths of HELL you brainless f***tards!

They are performing sunnat e yazidi.
people has still not identify them and blaming ones who expose them.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom