The enemy within!

[VCheng]

Excellent argument sir,
Indeed you and @TankMan made my day.The problem is not related with Islam.The problem is related with the manipulation of verses and their wrong meanings being done by so called peudo mullahs.

How manipulation is done?
It is done at three levels:
A)Either religious texts are manipulated
B)Translation is manipulated
C)Tafseer is manipulated

In other abrahamic religions,mainly first two tragedies have taken place.However, in our case ,the third case was observed as a consequence of which we are observing extremist versions of peudo-Islam ,introduced by these funded master minds.
I do not understand that why on earth few mindsets are blaming Islam as whole for recent tragedy?
The outcome appears more as a product of bad politics and horrible geopolitical game of tribal warfare while labeling it with religion ,lol
It is just like analogy that I place salt in a jar which is being labelled with sugar,and when someone adds it up to tea,he or she claims that sugar tastes horrible, albeit there was no sugar in a jar at all
Hence,to motivate ill-informed public you can manipulate any of the following component:

Quranic versus in arabic--->meaning of verses ---> interpretation of verses.

What is more interesting is that we have seen such set examples in other religions too.No body talks about Hindu extremism, Jewish extremism, the famous crusade wars etc.Hence,I believe that the only and ultimate solution is:
-Improvement of education system
-Introduction of school system at mardrassah
-Establishing proper test system and degree system to run mosques etc

Regards

Sir, please note that nobody is arguing for removal of Islam from all spheres of life, or somehow anybody daring to disagree with conventional thinking is against Islam. To say either is wrong and disingenuous. The argument is for a government and state that works equally for ALL its citizens, and for that to happen, religion must not form part of the State. It can remain dominant in the private lives of most of its citizens as they see fit, without any imposition from the State itself. This keeps Islam vibrant and strong for its followers without any concerns. Religion as State policy has been an utter disaster for Pakistan and it is time for this experiment to stop if the country is to survive, plain and simple.

 

[TankMan]

A mass-murderer can be cured as well. Breivik is treated by world renowned psychologists and psychiatrists for his delusions that Muslims are taking over Europe in year 2083. Nothing is impossible to cure, not even wild conspiracy theories

Most countries won't be able to afford spending the amount of resources they're spending on trying to cure Breivik.

Is this why we have one of the lowest crime rates in Europe? Because our criminals are provided with 5-star treatment in jails?

No. The reason you have one of the lowest crime rates in Europe is partly because of an effective Law Enforcement system, but more importantly because of the welfare state system. People are rarely driven to the level of desperation required to steal, rob or mug people. Therefore, the majority of potential criminals would be mentally ill, and thanks to your system that provides mental healthcare to people with serious problems, few of them actually go ahead and commit crimes.

Your idea of deterrence against crimes come from a backward mentality that a human refrains from committing crimes because of "fear" for severe punishments. I tell you, this is entirely not the case here. Oddly enough, murder is not considered the worst punishable crime here as various types of sexual assaults. You can be forcibly castrated, sentenced to 21 years in prison without parole if you are convicted of sexual abuse of minors. Yet, it does not stop people from abusing children as fear is not the best deterrence against crime.

That is reality. You may run from it and declare it 'backward', but that's reality. Few countries in the world can afford to proactively provide mental healtcare and have a welfare state. For the rest, the most effective and time-tested method of crime prevention is that of deterrence.

The ideal system would be to have a reasonable amount of both - a reasonable level of social and economic justice along with a reasonable level of deterrence through strict punishments. Less costly, more practical and more effective than simply focusing on the former.

Death penalties deter nothing. It's been tried and tested for centuries, not only in Muslim countries but also in crime heavens such as US. Furthermore it takes any opportunity from the offender to repent from his past crimes and start a new life after serving his due sentence.
Again, fear of flogging, caning, amputations etc etc is not an effective deterrent. People with criminal minds would do them no matter the consequences. It's quite evident from recent history that crime rate goes down not by enforcing more stricter laws, but by making a more fairer society.
Back in the 70's and until 80's armed robberies were quite common in Norway. Then, the state adopted policies for more equal income distribution, leading to a better egalitarian society and now we have virtually no robberies here in Norway.
So the only deterrent against crime is to make society as just and fair as possible. Then criminals would need no need to do petty crimes just in order to survive

Undoubtedly, removing the element of desperation is a very effective way of reducing crime. But it is not always practical. Norway is a fortunate country.

The ideal combination would be a fair and just society and strict punishments for deterrence. The two complement each other nicely. That's the way it was in the the Rashidun Caliphate.

Since the mayhem caused by that lone-wolf Breivik, we have seen no more similar cases. We could of course make an example out of him by execution in public. But this would only make his like-minded people more radical and determined to carry out more acts of terror for their "motherland" in revenge!
The Norwegian system of justice is not based on tit-for-tat. An eye for an eye ancient mentality of revenge. Its barbaric and reveals no difference between the offender and the prosecuting state. Sure the parents who lost their children in mass murder would wish nothing but execution in public for the perpetrator of such crimes against humanity. But as they already know, it would only cause more problems than solving them Breivik must stay alive and be "proven" wrong in 2083 for his Islamophobic paranoia, instead of being executed as "deterrence" in 2015 already!

The idea of proportionate punishments is in no way barbaric and neither is it backwards or ancient. There is a reason it is prescribed in the Quran. But you obviously don't give the Quran much value. Nothing I can do about that.

There is no need to make the execution public - simply execute him and be done with it. He will be proven wrong regardless. To be in fear of a 'tit-for-tat' reaction on part of other psychopaths speaks badly of how confident your people are in their Law Enforcement system. Or maybe it's just a case of pacifism. Anyway, Norway can afford to keep Breivik and other mass-murderers alive. But less fortunate countries with higher populations and more problems will not be able to afford this.

You're happy with your Justice system and it works for you. Very good, I won't argue in favour of changing it for you people. As the adage goes, don't try to fix something that's not broken.

However, such a system is neither practical nor will it be effective in other countries with bigger problems and worse conditions. Like I said before, Pakistan is not America or Norway and never will be, for better or for worse. We need a better justice system, yes, but trying to emulate Norway's will get us nowhere. We will need to have an element of deterrence and we will need to take serious measures like the death penalty.

@Slav Defence well said, you've summed the situation up well.

-Establishing proper test system and degree system to run mosques etc

I've been speaking a lot about a system fundamentally similar to the British OFSTED (but of course different in practice) that would test all madrassas and public schools to ensure they're at least meeting the minimum standards of both religious and 'worldly' education.

The idea of ''secularizing'' Pakistan and abandoning Islamic education and principles because of extremism is akin to demolishing an entire wall to get rid of some mold on it.

Pseudo Mullahs and Pseudo-Liberals everywhere, there's too much polarization and too much pseudocracy nowadays.

 

[VCheng]

The idea of ''secularizing'' Pakistan and abandoning Islamic education and principles because of extremism is akin to demolishing an entire wall to get rid of some mold on it.

Pseudo Mullahs and Pseudo-Liberals everywhere, there's too much polarization and too much pseudocracy nowadays.

Again the intellectual dishonesty persists. As I have stated before clearly, nobody is arguing for removal of Islam from all spheres of life, or for "abandoning Islamic education and principles". The only thing being advocated is to keep it dominant in the private lives of most of its citizens as they see fit, without any imposition from the State itself. This keeps Islam vibrant and strong for its followers without any concerns.

Sir, please note that nobody is arguing for removal of Islam from all spheres of life, or somehow anybody daring to disagree with conventional thinking is against Islam. To say either is wrong and disingenuous. The argument is for a government and state that works equally for ALL its citizens, and for that to happen, religion must not form part of the State. It can remain dominant in the private lives of most of its citizens as they see fit, without any imposition from the State itself. This keeps Islam vibrant and strong for its followers without any concerns. Religion as State policy has been an utter disaster for Pakistan and it is time for this experiment to stop if the country is to survive, plain and simple.

 

[Solomon2]

...Sometimes our moral calculus, perforce, yields the most stringent of prescriptions conceivable, demanding armed and organised action against a people who are so rigorously programmed with years of indoctrinated hate that such action alone remains the final separation between our survival and theirs -

The article is full of anti-Islamic hate....We are a Muslim country and PROUD Muslims - The land of the Pure! It is non of anyone's business what legal system we want to to be ruled by.

Yep, definitely a difference in moral calculus here - that is, a sharp difference in reasoning between what's moral and what is not.

 

[Indus Pakistan]

If you want influence, you could start with reducing the immaturity of your comments and constantly saying things like ''gullible Pakistanis''. Look up the definition of gullible. The fact that we disagree with you instead of buying everything you say is the exact opposite of being gullible.

And what about all the terrorists that grew up in the Western secular system and were kept completely illiterate about religion and are now going to fight with ISIS because some mullah on the streets told them things about Islam and they had no idea how wrong those things were because nobody ever taught them about Islam?

The 'Jihad' in Afghanistan was a purely political move and the Saudis purposely indoctrinated select people for that purpose to aid with their interests. It does not, in any way, discredit the idea of teaching people about religion to prevent radicalization.

See, this is some of that immaturity I was talking about. @Azad-Kashmiri makes a perfectly valid point about there not being any Islamic state in existence. And then you reply with some half-baked ''Economic Islamicity Index'' as proof that somehow Ireland is an Islamic state. Give us a break.

Read my post again. Indians tend to spend a lot of time in the comment sections of Dawn and ET to feel good.


''Toning down'' things and playing diplomacy on internet forums is pointless. Express your opinion fully. However, taking a self-righteous stand and labeling everyone that doesn't agree with you a ''Crazy Islamist Mullah'' is a surefire way of making sure that the people you are talking to will not agree with you, regardless of how right you may be.

By secularizing the state or education or condemning religion you would essentially be accepting that Islam is a violent religion - which means the terrorists and mullahs win. We're supposed to be doing the opposite of that. Going on wild-goose chases after ''secularism'' is an extremely myopic approach. Westerns systems can not directly apply to us. The same is true for Democracy - we will need to tailor it for our needs.

Pakistan is not America or Norway and will never be, for better or for worse.

When I said 'tone' down I did not mean change or reserve you opinions. Those who know me around here probably are aware I don't hold much back. However there is the 'message' and then there is the way the message is 'conveyed'. I was advising him that he needs to revisit his 'conveyance methodology'.

I do not expect my views to become dominant certainly not in my lifetime but change comes slowly. By making people think, provoke their thoughts slowly change can began. I am rather inspired by Rehmat Ali that young idealistic Cambridge University student in 1933 like a person highon drugs went around trying advocate his ideas via the pamphlet "Now or Never". Trust me most would have said with the same surity if not more than you show when you say "Pakistan is not America or Norway" and we all know what happened 14 years after his cry for "Pakistan".

Choudhry Rahmat Ali - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As regards IK he was my idol from young. I was never a fan of cricket but IK nurtured the deep patriotism and I was one of those Brit-Pak who failed Tebbits "cricket trest". Even now I am partial to PTI however along the way I think he has become confused in his moorings. He has lost himself and now lacks intellectuel coherance - That of course does not detract from his proven ability as adminstrator and leader.

May I ask are you in Norway or US?

I also wonder if we are allowed to open a thread on "secularism" and if we are I would like to engage with you and A-K on the subject. Any idea or belief ought to recieve critical exposure to see if it has any weakness. Maybe I am wrong but I would certainly like to get it "stress tested".

 

[TankMan]

Again the intellectual dishonesty persists. As I have stated before clearly, nobody is arguing for removal of Islam from all spheres of life, or for "abandoning Islamic education and principles". The only thing being advocated is to keep it dominant in the private lives of most of its citizens as they see fit, without any imposition from the State itself. This keeps Islam vibrant and strong for its followers without any concerns.

First of all, Pakistan is a Muslim majority state. The majority wants some level of religious involvement in laws, for example a ban on alcohol and pork. Democracy would dictate that they are allowed to do that. I disagree with any attempts to change that, since it not only goes against religious beliefs but will also fail badly due to protest from the majority.

Yes, what we do need to do is remove extreme, supposedly religious laws that have been fabricated by mullahs. For example, the Blasphemy Law.

As for education, we need a state-sponsored religious narrative to counter that of the mullahs. This narrative is to be absolutely non-sectarian and will focus on the ideals shared by all sects and schools of thoughts - for example, nobody denies the importance of justice and unity in Islam. That will be emphasized. Points of contention are to be downplayed so as to encourage acceptance of a difference of opinion.

A level of imposition in education is required to make it work in the first place. The ''imposition'' we advocate is no more than the imposition on children in the West to study, say, Geography.

There is no intellectual dishonesty here.

When I said 'tone' down I did not mean change or resereve you opions. I those who know me around probably are aware I don't hold much back. However thee is the 'message' and then there is the way the message is 'conveyed'. I was advising him that he needs to revisit his 'conveyance methodology'.

If you mean he needs to be less patronizing, and self-righteous, and that he needs to stop throwing labels around, yes, I agree with you.

Like I do not expect my views to become dominant certainly not in my lifetime but change comes slowly. By making people think, provoke their thoughs slowly change can began. I am rather inspired by Rehmat Ali that young idealistic Cambridhe University student in 1933 like a kid on drugs went around trying to get his views gain support via his pamphlet "Now or Never". Trust me most would have said with the same surity if not more than you show when you say "Pakistan is not America or Norway" and we all know what happened 14 years after his cry for "Pakistan".

I don't say ''Pakistan is not America or Norway'' as a negative point. I said ''for better or worse''. What I am stating is the simple fact that we have differences in situations, cultures, social structure and problems. Therefore, a system working in the West does not necessarily guarantee it will work in Pakistan.

May I ask are you in Norway or US?

I've been to the US and am close to people there. Not Norway. But we've got @Norwegian here who can tell us all about Norway if we needed the information.

I also wonder if we are allowed to open a thread on "seculrism" and if we are I would like to engage with you and A-K on the subject. Any idea or belief ought to recieve critical exposure to see if it has any weakness. Maybe I am wrong but I would certainly like to get it "stress tested".

There have been several discussions on the subject before, but by all means go ahead and make a thread. Do tag me in it.

 

[VCheng]

First of all, Pakistan is a Muslim majority state. The majority wants some level of religious involvement in laws, for example a ban on alcohol and pork. Democracy would dictate that they are allowed to do that. I disagree with any attempts to change that, since it not only goes against religious beliefs but will also fail badly due to protest from the majority.

Yes, what we do need to do is remove extreme, supposedly religious laws that have been fabricated by mullahs. For example, the Blasphemy Law.

As for education, we need a state-sponsored religious narrative to counter that of the mullahs. This narrative is to be absolutely non-sectarian and will focus on the ideals shared by all sects and schools of thoughts - for example, nobody denies the importance of justice and unity in Islam. That will be emphasized. Points of contention are to be downplayed so as to encourage acceptance of a difference of opinion.

A level of imposition in education is required to make it work in the first place. The ''imposition'' we advocate is no more than the imposition on children in the West to study, say, Geography.

There is no intellectual dishonesty here.

This is the dishonesty: ALL of what you say has been tried and failed spectacularly, and that any criticism means that no Islam is allowed. Both are wrong.

To pretend that all it needs to another, more refined attempt fulfills the very definition of insanity, since all the players that led Pakistan into this mess will do it all over again. Old wine in new bottles, as they say, (or may be old vinegar in new bottles ), will not change the situation. The record speaks for itself. Not changing this religiously fueled path will lead only one way to hell.

Besides, why does a religious narrative have to be State sponsored to counter the Mullahs? The same Mullahs that have fabricated the laws that hold Pakistani society hostage are the same Mullahs who have held the entire education system to ransom as well. Why not let schools do what they are supposed to, that is teach, and let the religious indoctrination remain under the purview of the parents, who are, after all, 99% Muslim in the country.

Education can never be imposed, that much is clear.

 

[TankMan]

ALL of what you say has been tried and failed spectacularly

To pretend that all it needs to another, more refined attempt fulfills the very definition of insanity, since all the players that led Pakistan into this mess will do it all over again. Old wine in new bottles, as they say, (or may be old vinegar in new bottles ), will not change the situation. The record speaks for itself.

Democracy has failed equally spectacularly in Pakistan. Would you now argue against it on that basis and label it insanity? Flawed implementation does not mean flawed ideas. As for pretending, did we not 'pretend' the exact same thing when the actions of Democratic leaders led to chaos, that all it needed was another chance?

The same Mullahs that have fabricated the laws that hold Pakistani society hostage are the same Mullahs who have held the entire education system to ransom as well. Why not let schools do what they are supposed to, that is teach, and let the religious indoctrination remain under the purview of the parents, who are, after all, 99% Muslim in the country.

These same Mullahs will remain and will be rampant even after Pakistan is secularized. Only this time a larger amount of people will buy their narratives of Pakistan being a ''kafir state'' since the state would have actually neglected the views of the religious majority.

Education can never be imposed, that much is clear.

Yet it is compulsory in the West. Maybe 'imposed' is too emotive of a word to use in this case. 'Made compulsory' might be a better alternative. But at the end of the day you know what I meant by it.

Besides, why does a religious narrative have to be State sponsored to counter the Mullahs?

Would you rather it be NGO-sponsored? That would be too vulnerable to being bought for nefarious political purposes.

 

[VCheng]

Democracy has failed equally spectacularly in Pakistan.

No, it has not. It has failed only because the Army keeps uprooting it in order to keep holding on to power.

These same Mullahs will remain and will be rampant even after Pakistan is secularized.

Again, the dishonesty: NOBODY is trying to make Pakistan secular. Its people will remain overwhelmingly Muslim. Just keep matters of State separate from religion.

Yet it is compulsory in the West. Maybe 'imposed' is too emotive of a word to use in this case. 'Made compulsory' might be a better alternative.

Education is also compulsory is Pakistan too. Just do not make religious education compulsory in school and leave it where it belongs: the home and the mosque.

Would you rather it be NGO-sponsored? That would be too vulnerable to being bought for nefarious political purposes.

No, not even NGOs. Let the parents determine what they want to do without imposition from the outside, whether be it government or anybody else.

 

[TankMan]

No, it has not. It has failed only because the Army keeps uprooting it in order to keep holding on to power.

Ah, the classic 'evil Army' argument.

The failures, incompetence and corruption of Democratic leaders is what gives the Army a reason to uproot it or to hold on to power. Had those leaders been even close to competent, the Army never would have any reason to ''keep holding on to power''. To paraphrase Zardari, Army Chiefs and generals leave after a few years of service. Corrupt politicians remain for decades upon decades.

Again, the dishonesty: NOBODY is trying to make Pakistan secular. Its people will remain overwhelmingly Muslim. Just keep matters of State separate from religion.

And is that not the very definition of secular? Would keeping matters of State separate from religion not involve legalizing alcohol and pork?

The only dishonesty here is your intentional ambiguity.

Education is also compulsory is Pakistan too. Just do not make religious education compulsory in school and leave it where it belongs: the home and the mosque.

Why? Because you say so? I have a valid argument in favour of keeping religious education a part of the curriculum. Respond to it with substance, otherwise don't bother because an argument as empty as this one does not make me want to change my opinion.

No, not even NGOs. Let the parents determine what they want to do without imposition from the outside, whether be it government or anybody else.

Again I must remind you that it is these same parents that send their children to radical madrassas, and it is these same parents that send their children to factories to work.

Why should our next generations suffer from the same flawed mentality and deficiency of knowledge which inhibited our older and current generations?

 

[VCheng]

Why should our next generations suffer from the same flawed mentality and deficiency of knowledge which inhibited our older and current generations?

They will suffer, if we do not change, rest assured.

 

[TankMan]

They will suffer, if we do not change, rest assured.

Dumping the responsibility of education our children about our religion, which is also a major social and political influence and undoubtedly is being abused, on 'parents' will do nothing other than ensure that they will suffer and be unable to cope with the challenges they will face, challenges we have been unable to handle.

 

[VCheng]

Dumping the responsibility of education our children about our religion, which is also a major social and political influence and undoubtedly is being abused, on 'parents' will do nothing other than ensure that they will suffer and be unable to cope with the challenges they will face, challenges we have been unable to handle.

It is clear that we have opposing views on this matter, but it is important to have a national debate on this issue given its importance. Do we persist with the same policies of the past that have yielded the results we see, or do we attempt to chart a new direction? The answer will matter a lot to the future of Pakistan, at least this much we can agree on, I am sure.

Edit: Whatever happened to this idea?

Proposing PDF debates.

 

[Slav Defence]

Most countries won't be able to afford spending the amount of resources they're spending on trying to cure Breivik.

No. The reason you have one of the lowest crime rates in Europe is partly because of an effective Law Enforcement system, but more importantly because of the welfare state system. People are rarely driven to the level of desperation required to steal, rob or mug people. Therefore, the majority of potential criminals would be mentally ill, and thanks to your system that provides mental healthcare to people with serious problems, few of them actually go ahead and commit crimes.


That is reality. You may run from it and declare it 'backward', but that's reality. Few countries in the world can afford to proactively provide mental healtcare and have a welfare state. For the rest, the most effective and time-tested method of crime prevention is that of deterrence.

The ideal system would be to have a reasonable amount of both - a reasonable level of social and economic justice along with a reasonable level of deterrence through strict punishments. Less costly, more practical and more effective than simply focusing on the former.

Undoubtedly, removing the element of desperation is a very effective way of reducing crime. But it is not always practical. Norway is a fortunate country.

The ideal combination would be a fair and just society and strict punishments for deterrence. The two complement each other nicely. That's the way it was in the the Rashidun Caliphate.

The idea of proportionate punishments is in no way barbaric and neither is it backwards or ancient. There is a reason it is prescribed in the Quran. But you obviously don't give the Quran much value. Nothing I can do about that.

There is no need to make the execution public - simply execute him and be done with it. He will be proven wrong regardless. To be in fear of a 'tit-for-tat' reaction on part of other psychopaths speaks badly of how confident your people are in their Law Enforcement system. Or maybe it's just a case of pacifism. Anyway, Norway can afford to keep Breivik and other mass-murderers alive. But less fortunate countries with higher populations and more problems will not be able to afford this.

You're happy with your Justice system and it works for you. Very good, I won't argue in favour of changing it for you people. As the adage goes, don't try to fix something that's not broken.

However, such a system is neither practical nor will it be effective in other countries with bigger problems and worse conditions. Like I said before, Pakistan is not America or Norway and never will be, for better or for worse. We need a better justice system, yes, but trying to emulate Norway's will get us nowhere. We will need to have an element of deterrence and we will need to take serious measures like the death penalty.

@Slav Defence well said, you've summed the situation up well.

I've been speaking a lot about a system fundamentally similar to the British OFSTED (but of course different in practice) that would test all madrassas and public schools to ensure they're at least meeting the minimum standards of both religious and 'worldly' education.

The idea of ''secularizing'' Pakistan and abandoning Islamic education and principles because of extremism is akin to demolishing an entire wall to get rid of some mold on it.

Pseudo Mullahs and Pseudo-Liberals everywhere, there's too much polarization and too much pseudocracy nowadays.

I myself hate to see that how Islam is directly or indirectly being trialed and declared guilty of every disturbance, thus masking all other evils and real players ,lol
Remember that thread:remove all mosques across Pakistan b/c of Abdul Aziz-sirry to say but it was't convincing nor manipulative, rather than stupid attempt.

Sir, please note that nobody is arguing for removal of Islam from all spheres of life, or somehow anybody daring to disagree with conventional thinking is against Islam. To say either is wrong and disingenuous. The argument is for a government and state that works equally for ALL its citizens, and for that to happen, religion must not form part of the State. It can remain dominant in the private lives of most of its citizens as they see fit, without any imposition from the State itself. This keeps Islam vibrant and strong for its followers without any concerns. Religion as State policy has been an utter disaster for Pakistan and it is time for this experiment to stop if the country is to survive, plain and simple.

Alright then, will do after Israel
Regards

 

[livewire]

Masoomana sa sawal: How does one separate religion from state? Like in Pakistan what practical steps could be taken to achieve this utopia? Im not talking about amending the constitution as that doesnt seem to play any role in the governance and the society! or maybe amend it but how to implement and what to implement? Secularism is just a word which soothes some people maybe!