Abandoning status as "Islamic Republic"

[Rashid Mahmood]

 

[Armstrong]

exactly, like you calling yourself Jinnah's successor does nothing to take away from the fact that you are essentially the next Mir Jaffar.

Damn you Oscar !

@Rashid Mahmood Bhai deeekh raheiiii hain isss Karachiite ko.....he just called me Mir Jaffar !

 

[SQ8]

I said a process, a process, not a name change. People need to abandon the ideology of a Islamic Republic instead be more realistic, the Moulvis will disappear gradually then

Then you live in a fools utopia. The Moulvis will tear whatever tatters are left of this country apart if that happens. The process CANNOT just come from the government. It wont work, not in this day and age.. you cannot engineer the nation the way Attaturk did some 90 years ago.

 

[Armstrong]

you cannot engineer the nation the way Attaturk did some 90 years ago.

I can do that !

Are you with me young man ?

 

[Ussaid]

View attachment 182015 View attachment 182016​

Just some biased material.

you cannot engineer the nation the way Attaturk did some 90 years ago.

People used to say men can never fly. It would be a gradual process. Why can't we repeat the feats of Attaturk? I have faith in the new generation.

 

[SQ8]

View attachment 182015 View attachment 182016​

The most relevant lines to be noted are these

"Now, if Islam suits our luxurious lifestyles or not.... we are compelled to keep Islam and Pakistan parallel to each other".

This is important to the narrative of partition. The land was made to provide Muslim a state to govern as they wished. whether they turned into a theocratic disaster or a secular system is entirely their choice.

I can do that !

Are you with me young man ?

You wont be able to do a thing and at the end will find yourself a Reham Khan(the best wishes I can give you) and settle down to pet some nice Belgian shepherds.

People used to say men can never fly. It would be a gradual process. Why can't we repeat the feats of Attaturk? I have faith in the new generation.

Sure, people also did not have the information highway with them...massive means of disseminating information and disinformation which also ends up leaving people in a cocoon. The young generation you have the faith in is going to be slaughtered before your very eyes in their idea of support because they cannot fight the fanaticism that breeds next door to them.

 

[punit]

Just some biased brainwashing material.

People used to say men can never fly. It would be a gradual process. Why can't we repeat the feats of Attaturk? I have faith in the new generation.

the mantra is Gradual process. repeating the feat of Ataturk is not possible in current scenario.

 

[Rashid Mahmood]

Damn you Oscar !

@Rashid Mahmood Bhai deeekh raheiiii hain isss Karachiite ko.....he just called me Mir Jaffar !

Don't worry bro, everyone knows who is the real mir jaffar and who is a patriot....
Just stay focused.....

 

[Ussaid]

the mantra is Gradual process. repeating the feat of Ataturk is not possible in current scenario.

PLease explain how?

I can do that !

Are you with me young man ?

You can do that? You didn't even understood the point of an online thread.

 

[Armstrong]

You can do that? You didn't even understood the point of an online thread.

Oh I understood it well enough; do you think you're the first brainiac who came up with this notion ? This topic has been debated to death right here on this forum more times that I can care to remember.

And like always the superficial approach to solving our issues remains the hallmark of my people; religious fanaticism has gripped the country....change the name...that'll do it !

Brilliant !

And its ever so humorous to see Indians coming here claiming the moral high ground in this just because their State is officially secular and that somehow means that tolerance has seeped through to the people ? They should give a look at the PEW's Religious Social Hostility Index over the past 10 years and skim through the Sachar Committee Report to really soak in the reality of their 'Secularism'. Sometimes I can't understand whether to puke at their blatant hypocrisy or whether to feel sorry for them that they've fallen so madly in love with their own legend that they don't even realize it.

 

[timetravel]

Sure, as long as it provides for me. You are mistaking the inability of the state to act out its functions due to a malignant population as problems relating to the state laws itself(not that many are not discriminatory.. but not all are either).

Even if the state provides for everyone, a constitution based on one particular religion is discriminatory. So as you said many laws are discriminatory (not all but many). This is not a nation in which I would want to live if possible for me. My point is if I can move to a country where I would get equal rights I would move out asap.

While you say yes, but I doubt you . I don't think that Pakistanis would really be willing to live in a Constitutionally Hindu India where all Muslims are provided for. If that was the case Pakistan would not have been created in 47. I think India did not even talk about Hindu constitution but only secular constitution. The Pakistanis feared they might not get equal rights as others in a Hindu majority. So the reason for separation was the desire for EQUAL RIGHTS. It had nothing to do whether Pak. Muslims will be provided for. Citizens of all religion always desire equal rights in a nation, whether they get it or not is their luck.

So I have historical proof to back myself, that just because you provide for other religion people, does not make people feel satisfied.

What do I want out of this discussion. Nothing but just to convince you and as many other people as possible that its best to have a secular constitution. The intention is not to rebut but to convince as many as possible.

I openly oppose Islamic Constitutions or for that matter Christian/Hindu/Jews constitution. Any constitution should treat its citizens as nationals not as Hindu/Muslims etc.

Rebranding, removing Islamic.. these are all wishful thoughts.. the recent attack on the civil society protest should be ample proof that the issue with bigotry has much less to do with the state than with the society itself. The state can be called the glorious Islamic galactic empire of Lalapalooza and it still will not have that effect on the people that is being supposed.

The character of the state, constitution and institutions all need change.. that is a given.. but to expect rather naively just like the Government of Pakistan says that the problem will solve within 2 years is folly. The sort of mess Pakistan is in requires invasive surgery.. or a self implosion.. a civil war to say at the least... something that is already in progress.. it just hasnt expanded to the level for people to start calling it that.

Yes fully agree on this. A true secular Pakistan would require a complete change - Name, Constitution, Education System. Tough to achieve. Maybe a massive surgery or a massive civil movement the kind India saw in 1990s against VP Singh.

But I am little surprised, that why I am not seeing wide spread protests in Pakistan against extremism? Can you throw some light. We have seen very severe attacks on Pakistan, but why is the civil society not erupting in portests?? I find the response of Pak civil society very disproportionate compared to the mayhem created by extremists.

 

[SQ8]

Don't worry bro, everyone knows who is the real mir jaffar and who is a patriot....
Just stay focused.....

Patriot: the person who can holler the loudest without knowing what he is hollering about.

Mark Twain

But I am little surprised, that why I am not seeing wide spread protests in Pakistan against extremism? Can you throw some light. We have seen very severe attacks on Pakistan, but why is the civil society not erupting in portests?? I find the response of Pak civil society very disproportionate compared to the mayhem created by extremists.

You are mistaken that the civil society is not protesting..

Its just that they dont have much support or aren't much of a society to talk of.

 

[Bouncer]

View attachment 182015 View attachment 182016​

You are quoting a known political opportunist? I guess you didn't come across this

Jab bhi koi inqilab ho ga;
Qutub ud Din Shahab ho ga

(Meaning: Whenever there will be revolution i.e. martial law or coup ; you'll find Qutub ud Din Shahab supporting it)

This gentleman, may God rest his soul, supported every dictator one way or the other. First he served with Ayub Khan and was a "progressive". Later on he worked with Zia and was an Islamist.

 

[Valkyrie]

Your argument has so many loopholes which can be pointed out right away.

Qatar has about 13% of known global reserve of petroleum. As we know, petroleum is the chief driving factor of global economy in our times. With that amount of resources, it would rather surprising not to see a country prosper. However, did you know that Qatar has been ranked as one of the worst places for workers by International Trade Union Confederation ?

Saudi Arabia is also the same story.

These are not good economic models, as their economy is based on a singular precious raw material which is in high demand. The economy is based on wastage. A good model will promote re-use, will open up other facets of development and reduce reliance on a single source. You want an example ? Look at China or US. If land area is a matter of concern, then take a look at Japan.

Israel has a high number of PhDs. Now does that have anything to do with religion ? They don't get their PhDs by reading the religious scriptures. Look at the other instances, Canada or Japan. None of them can be termed as overtly religious.

Your most ridiculous example was that of USSR. Did USSR collapse because it was a secular state ? Taking it other way around,according to you, having a single religion will give rise to unity as a state, right ? Then answer me this, why there are so many Arab countries ?Islam was founded there, they have the religion in common, and they even have language in common, which is a far greater binding factor than religion, in my opinion. So, why so many Arab countries ?
Getting back to USSR ? Do you understand what Perestroika and Glasnost is ?

You are drawing wrong inferences all along which are totally out of context.

If one needs to look what real development is, then take a look at how the Western European countries did it or how Japan did it. France, Germany, UK, Poland, all of them were totally devastated after the Second World War, their economies ruined. In economics lessons you will find examples of inflation in Germany after First World war and Second World war. But all of them emerged out of that crisis and created a process for holistic development. This development is not based on a single natural resource that one country has in abundance and the other has none.

Excellently put! Someone here who has his head in the right place.

 

[mike2000]

I don't generalize whole races of people, I don't glorify cold blooded murderers like Mumtaz Qadri, I am not against any kind education, I don't hero-worship anyone who wears a beard and keeps women veiled, I think women are equal to men, I don't watch bestiality **** on internet (because they think it is better than watching *HARAM* WOMEN *HARAM*), I don't create my own theories on Jihadist groups, I don't blame much better-off westerns thousands of miles away, I don't violently watchdog my beliefs, among many things. Me and my ideology can have its flaws, but I think my ideology may be better because it agrees with the doctrine of Universal Human Rights accepted by the entire world. I didn't called any specific people silly, stupid, regressive. I merely stated the evidenced facts (and the facts point them out to be stupid and hypocritical perverts), something that millions of know-it-all conspiracy theorists around Pakistan fail to even understand. I am speaking from experience. If you are settled in Australia, I don't think you can understand.

The best comment i have seen on here coming from a Pakistani for a longgggg time. Kudos to you bro. You said it all, couldn't have said it better.