Ali pir Guls latest rap outing mocks both extremist liberals & extremist conservatives

[Reichsmarschall]

no RAW sponsored mullah terrorist supporter

how very not judgemental of yourself

Pakistan runs in our blood! no RAW sponsored mullah terrorist supporter has any right to criticize overseas Pakistanis who send billions to Pakistan!

we were born in Pakistan we live in Pakistan and we will die for Pakistan if the time comes while you enjoy the perks given to you because of the green card you have

 

[Silverblaze]

how very not judgemental of yourself


we were born in Pakistan we live in Pakistan and we will die for Pakistan if the time comes while you enjoy the perks given to you because of the green card you have

Quaid e Azam educated and lived in england, Iqbal also educated and lived in england and Germany and both became icons of Pakistan while congressi funded mullahs called them kafirs! The tradition continues!

Hindu sponsored terrorist mullahs who penetrated Tableeghi jamats and other organizations are now enemy operatives and deserve savagery!

According to Iqbal Deen-e-Kafir fikr-o-Tadbeer-e-Jihad Deen-e-Mulla Fi Sabeelillah Fasaad

Pakistan Zindabad, india and its mullah saffron fascist terror nexus murdabad

 

[Khanate]

So nawaz shareef's as a protege of zia is debatable? Well that explains certain soft corners for people who are great to wear a cloak of religion and conduct politics underneath.

You are playing attribution game, i.e., Zia is bad because he paved way for Nawaz Sharif ignoring the fact that Zia was assassinated. Going by your logic, Ayub Khan is bad because he paved way for Bhutto. The attribution game implies that Bhutto and Sharif could never have risen on their own. I find that implausible. Hence, my position: debatable.

Apologies but since iam entitled to my opinion - i do not trust folks who are mullah apologists especially of religious jamats. their actions lead at least me to believe they are arm of indian agencies. While ANP, MQM etc are targeted and rightly so, religious tola is tolerated and occassionally just verbally dismissed.

Pakistan needs neither a religious party nor a liberal one but a national party. A national party which recognizes ethnic diversity of Pakistan and on religious front exercises ijtihad which was the way of Iqbal and Jinnah, Pakistans founding fathers. Anyone playing divisive games deserves unparalleled savagery as retribution.

What part of "I don't have any sympathy/soft corner for the organisations you listed. They should all be taken to task." do you not understand?

 

[Reichsmarschall]

Quaid e Azam educated and lived in england, Iqbal also educated and lived in england and Germany and both became icons of Pakistan while congressi funded mullahs called them kafirs! The tradition continues!

Hindu sponsored terrorist mullahs who penetrated Tableeghi jamats and other organizations are now enemy operatives and deserve savagery!

According to Iqbal Deen-e-Kafir fikr-o-Tadbeer-e-Jihad Deen-e-Mulla Fi Sabeelillah Fasaad

Pakistan Zindabad, india and its mullah saffron fascist terror nexus murdabad

last time I checked Hussian Haqqani Tarek Fateh Altaf Hussuin Imtiaz Ahmad Ahmer Mustikhan Bhrahamdagh Bugti and others are also living abroad

 

[Silverblaze]

You are playing attribution game, i.e., Zia is bad because he paved way for Nawaz Sharif ignoring the fact that Zia was assassinated. Going by your logic, Ayub Khan is bad because he paved way for Bhutto. The attribution game implies that Bhutto and Sharif could never have risen on their own. I find that implausible. Hence, my position: debatable.

I have my opinion and my opinion is simple that you have sympathy for zia because of his so called islamic outlook. Neither his fraud referendum on the promise of Allah and Rasul SAW nor his creation of the most corrupt class of politicians not just sharifs can dissuade you hence this is my opinion - you can say whatever u want.

last time I checked Hussian Haqqani Tarek Fateh Altaf Hussuin Imtiaz Ahmad Ahmer Mustikhan Bhrahamdagh Bugti and others are also living abroad

Comparing terrorist Altaf, snake haqqani, and paleed maloon pig tarek fateh to Quaid e Azam and Iqbal is what should be considered blasphemy punishable by at least a 1000 lashes!

But nothing is more dangerous than people who live in Pakistan and preach religion while calling soldiers not shaheeds like jamat e islami and defending those who target Pakistan by religious rhetoric.

The golden words of Allama Iqbal - Deen-e-Kafir fikr-o-Tadbeer-e-Jihad Deen-e-Mulla Fi Sabeelillah Fasaad

RAW sponsored molvies are agents of Akhand bharat who will be defeated.

Pakistan always always Zinda bad Painda bad!

 

[Pakistani E]

who are the ideal liberals in Pakistan?

In the political from, classical liberalism is the ideology of liberty and rights for all individuals in the collective equally (generally considered left-wing). In this sense it is closely related to classical democracy. However, because it is also the ideology of reason, it tends to embrace a sort of mixed-democracy rooted in a republic with a separation of governmental powers and checks/balances.

Generally, classical liberalism rejects the authority of kings and rejects the collectivist nature and social stratification of monarchies and church states (the old estates; the classical monarchy/aristocracy). Thus, we can say it is an ideology where liberty and individualism comes before equality (despite liberty and equality being two of its main virtues).

Classical liberalism is exemplified by the enlightenment thinkers, liberal revolutions, the use of reason, voting rights, legal rights, a separation of powers, and the push for other Bill of Rights style individual liberties and rights like freedom of speech and religion. It favors tolerance, reason, and liberty over the authority of the state. Like with democracy, sovereignty rests in the citizens, and from there powers are delegated to governors (to create a liberal mixed republic).

In the economic form, classical liberal economics is the ideology of liberty and individualism in markets. It generally rejects the authority of kings and rejects the economics of the monarchs (seen in mercantilism).

Classical liberal economics is exemplified by Adam Smith, father of classical liberal economics (and went on to inspire the neoclassical economists like Milton Friedman).

Classical liberal economics isn’t a purely laissez faire economic ideology, but it does generally favor a mostly free-market with little government involvement. Thus, its economic system is capitalism (which, while it does result in social stratification by wealth, offers more opportunity to all on-paper).

Examples of Classical Liberal Values: Economic freedom, separation of governmental powers, tolerance, free trade, individual liberty, property rights, the use of reason, freedom of religion, separation of church/mosque and state, appreciation for science and education, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, the right to a fair trial, popular sovereignty, and more.

Simply put, classical liberalism champions essential Human rights (like those found in the Bill of Rights), but not necessarily at the cost of using too much governmental power. Its ideology was dominate from the mid-1600s to the late 1800s, from a rejection of Kings to the rise of inequality in the mid-1800s to the late 1800s (when some started to question of a laissez faire state could actually provide for the general welfare after the inequality of industrialization and the events of the civil war).

http://factmyth.com/what-is-classical-liberalism/

So in essence, there are none.