Congratulations; Religious extremism is knocking at your door.........AGAIN

[Proudpakistaniguy]

I know all that. This then merely cnfirms that Pakistan is at heart a secular state - simply because it puts restrictions on Muslims with the secular qualifier - British India. Whose boundaries and the definition was made by British officials which had secular borders and was a secular construct. There was nothing remotely religious or Islamic about British India. The boundaries/borders were secular creations made by British officials.

Muslims > Religious descriptor
British Raj > Secular descriptor

I dont know if border actually follow any religion or secularism lol Border just define boundary and location of a country. You are suggesting that if a country claim to be Islamic republic or Muslim country then it should have no restriction on borders or immigration and should give free entry or access to all Muslims around globe irrespective of whether it could accommodate them or not

Pakistan is neither Islamic nor secular. When we talk about secular then we should also define secularism because there are dozen concepts of secularism which are compatible to Islam whether its equal justice for rich and power/ powerful or weak, accountability of leaders, great social welfare system, free education, freedom of religion etc If Pakistani follow secularism then they will become half Muslim automatically because Islam is not just about Huqooq Allah( rights of allah) but haquq ul baad( rights of people)

 

[Indus Pakistan]

Islamic republic or Muslim country

Well if you follow the original Islamic concept as applied in Medina we only have the "Ummah". All Muslims, equal Muslims, all in one brotherhood".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

Well if you follow the original Islamic concept as applied in Medina we only have the "Ummah". All Muslims, equal Muslims, all in one brotherhood".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina

But non Muslims have all rights in there
https://themuslimtimes.info/2012/11/09/the-constitution-of-medina-a-symbol-of-pluralism-in-islam/
Rights of non-Muslims
The non-Muslims included in the ummah had the following rights:

1. The security of God is equal for all groups,
2. Non-Muslim members have equal political and cultural rights as Muslims. They will have autonomy and freedom of religion.
3. Non-Muslims will take up arms against the enemy of the Ummah and share the cost of war. There is to be no treachery between the two.
4. Non-Muslims will not be obliged to take part in religious wars of the Muslims

Dude do you think secular countries have equal rights for British and non british lol There are certain rules and laws which only apply to immigrants . You get holiday on xmas/easter but not on Eid or diwali so true secularism or equality dont exist anywhere

 

[Indus Pakistan]

think secular countries

For now can we keep the discussion on the track please. We can look at other points later. The point I made is if you follow Islamic principles then the loyalty to other Muslim or the Ummah supercedes everything else in particular man made concepts. So you mentioned sub-continent. You know and I know that is merely a man made abstraction.

However note this -

Significance of ummah

Another important feature of the Constitution of Medina is the redefinition of ties between Muslims. It sets faith relationships above blood-ties and emphasizes individual responsibility.[23] Tribal identities are still important to refer to different groups, but the "main binding tie" for the newly-created ummah is religion

What does this mean? It means a relationship formed through religion - that is as a a Muslim makes you part of the ummah which supercedes all other wordly divisions like ethnic groups, tribe, borders etc.

Given this reality how can you set up a Islamic state but then prevent other Muslims of the ummah for such reasons as sub-continent, British Raj etc. Do these mere human contructs supercede the Islamic concept of ummah that supercedes all other divisions and elevates everything to being a Muslim first and foremost.

Are you willing to allow fundamental Islamic concepts flounder on the rocks of man made abstractions like geographic regions? Whatever happened to faith relationships being above all else?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina

 

[Musafir117]

Mann Lo @Zibago
We are creating another monster to crush another one and in that we mean WE.
IK alliance with Sami.
Planning to religious poltical parties elections alliance.
Rising of Zombies in Punjab
JI March to ISD
Qadri container ready etc etc.
I am not gonna mention any name here but WE responsible for it.

 

[Proudpakistaniguy]

For now can we keep the discussion on the track please. We can look at other points later. The point I made is if you follow Islamic principles then the loyalty to other Muslim or the Ummah supercedes everything else in particular man made concepts. So you mentioned sub-continent. You know and I know that is merely a man made abstraction.

However note this -

Significance of ummah

Another important feature of the Constitution of Medina is the redefinition of ties between Muslims. It sets faith relationships above blood-ties and emphasizes individual responsibility.[23] Tribal identities are still important to refer to different groups, but the "main binding tie" for the newly-created ummah is religion

What does this mean? It means a relationship formed through religion - that is as a a Muslim makes you part of the ummah which supercedes all other wordly divisions like ethnic groups, tribe, borders etc.

Given this reality how can you set up a Islamic state but then prevent other Muslims of the ummah for such reasons as sub-continent, British Raj etc. Do these mere human contructs supercede the Islamic concept of ummah that supercedes all other divisions and elevates everything to being a Muslim first and foremost.

Are you willing to allow fundamental Islamic concepts flounder on the rocks of man made abstractions like geographic regions? Whatever happened to faith relationships being above all else?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina

You are confusing so many things together

Ummah in political sense existed during early days of Islam when Muslims were limited to one region or different neighbouring regions were linked together during caliphate and later on it became impossible for Muslims to have a single country/rule/ruler when they got spread all over and established their own kingdoms in different continents. When Prophet Muhammad(PBUH) propagated the message of Islam then his own blood relatives went against him then he had choice to either please his relatives who rejected his message or please God and he went for pleasing God.


secondly ummah is a ideological bond which all Muslims share toward each others irrespective of where they live and they dont need to live within one country to share this bond or feelings toward each others. Ummah also dont mean to take slap on ur face from fellow Muslim in the name of Islam or to love those who hate you or bring harm to your own existence lol

You might be a Muslim who is living in secular country but then you will be going to marry a Muslim even if he is from different tribe or race but you will not marry with those share same ethnic group as you but reject your God and associate partners with it so you are following religion in your life as much as those who live in Muslim countries

 

[Indus Pakistan]

impossible for Muslims to have a single country/rule/ruler when they got spread all over and established their own kingdoms in different continents.

I am not talking about having dispersed or distal Muslim entities which are a must as Muslims spread across differant regions of the earth. It simply became impractical for having one state. However the issue here is the "relationship based on faith" superceding everything. If that is the case and that was established as a precedent early on it follows that today if a Muslim comes to Pakistan he should be given citizenship based on his religious concordance with Pakistan - if the latter considers itself "Islamic state".

You can't have a state trumping itself as "Islamic" but which fails to give respect to "relationship based on faith".

 

[Zibago]

India just took advantage of situation in 1971 as Pakistan was weak internally and had political instability and fights against each others for grab of power

But if there was no India there wouldve been no BD they gave the heavy firepower and backing also they exploited our large distance to their advantage
BD cannot be repeated as no we have nabbed future agartala clowns before they could cause too much mayhem

Mann Lo @Zibago
We are creating another monster to crush another one and in that we mean WE.
IK alliance with Sami.
Planning to religious poltical parties elections alliance.
Rising of Zombies in Punjab
JI March to ISD
Qadri container ready etc etc.
I am not gonna mention any name here but WE responsible for it.

Baboon league itself is responsible for it cybercrime bill sey ley kar nick cartoons par ban tak maximum religious sentiments exploit kiya ab ro kiyon rahey hain jab inka dual face expose ho gaya
Btw mein religious types ki alliance ko serious nahi ley raha punjab hamesha sey extremist raha hy media ab show kar raha hy

 

[punit]

If I say your father was a hypocrite to use you mother to give you birth will I be correct no I will not be correct. Your father needed your mother to produce you. Pir and Molvis are Pakistanis they are part of Pakistan and people will have to live with it.

So pir maulvi is mother of pakistan ! Excellent job she is doing .

 

[Salik]

Amen.
When the Dharnas of 2014 happened, I was dead against toppling the govt through such means. And that too, with the help of a Mullah like Tahir ul Qadri. If the NS govt was toppled then, then it would set an extremely dangerous precedent. I thought Pakistan managed to avoid setting the precedent but then came the latest round of Mullahs--the so-called Labbek Mullahs--doing the same in the Faizabad area of Islamabad. Have you seen the Mullah Rizvi's interviews? I saw briefly interviewed for the 'Mahaz' tv series--the Mullah is a Mad Mullah!!

No matter how much you hate the PMLN govt--NEVER support Mullahs! Never! And a shame to those parties who are trying to topple this govt less than a year from the completion of its term. Shame to those who are turning the Panama Gate into a route to toppling this govt.

Pakistan has already lost some of its economic gains because of the P. Gate. Let this govt complete its term and let the voters decide. Flocking around lunatic Mullahs won't help Pakistan. And, in this vein, especially shame on Zardari and Mustafa Kamal to go to this deranged Tahir ul Qadri.

Have you listened to other interviews of Khadim Rizvi? Please do and don't build opinion on one interview given in specific context of one topic. Believe he is a moderate mullah, listen to him in detail.

Furthermore, we need to draw some points highly sensitive. If a govt tries to play with them, the supreme court immediately interferes and suspends before there are country wide protests and sit-ins, or army feels uncomfortable and goes for the coup. For example current govt changed the Khatm-e-Nabuwat law without debate in the Parliament. Or makes unilateral policy as there were news regarding Pakistan's nuclear assets without taking nation or the security institutions into confidence.

 

[Meengla]

Have you listened to other interviews of Khadim Rizvi? Please do and don't build opinion on one interview given in specific context of one topic. Believe he is a moderate mullah, listen to him in detail.

Furthermore, we need to draw some points highly sensitive. If a govt tries to play with them, the supreme court immediately interferes and suspends before there are country wide protests and sit-ins, or army feels uncomfortable and goes for the coup. For example current govt changed the Khatm-e-Nabuwat law without debate in the Parliament. Or makes unilateral policy as there were news regarding Pakistan's nuclear assets without taking nation or the security institutions into confidence.

I think one interview was enough to make me almost puke!

And you are implicitly condoning a mob rule: A govt. does something which a certain, miniscule faction doesn't like. The Supreme Court doesn't 'immediately interferes' and hence any Tom Dick and Harry can block the Federal Capital for weeks with public interviews glorifying his 'martyrdom' for this Labbek Cause.

Think Hard Sir!!

 

[Salik]

I think one interview was enough to make me almost puke!

And you are implicitly condoning a mob rule: A govt. does something which a certain, miniscule faction doesn't like. The Supreme Court doesn't 'immediately interferes' and hence any Tom Dick and Harry can block the Federal Capital for weeks with public interviews glorifying his 'martyrdom' for this Labbek Cause.

Think Hard Sir!!

What makes you puke?

i. His style
ii. His stance

He explained both of them in other interviews.

Anyway I am not condoning anything. I am just saying that if court passes stay orders in minor or any issue then why not here. There must be this option available for high level matters as well.

Imagine Gen Musharraf had taken stay orders from the court when Nawaz Sharif was appointing Gen Ziauddin Butt as chief of army staff, there was no chance of coup and the Marshall law. They would solve the matter later on, in detail.

 

[Meengla]

What makes you puke?

i. His style
ii. His stance

Everything! When asked by Wajaahat (the journalist), that girls missing schools because of his blockade for weeks, the Mullah said: "So what?! Let them miss a year! Students fail some times!". There is a lot in that interview which is revolting. We simply can't allow such thugs with a couple of thousands wanna-be martyrs to ruin it for millions of others. I don't care whether its Imran Khan or Nawaz Sharif or Zardari: This tactic of getting demands met while blocking millions to a normal life is unacceptable!! Listen to the one of the latest interviews by Ch. Nisar about the Dharnas.

And, yes, Mullahs are THE WORST! They don't even live in this century. To them it's a Win-Win: They are 'Ghazi' if demands met. They are 'Shaheeds' if they are killed. At least Imran Khan, as much as I despised his 2014 Dharnas, didn't want to be a martyr and he genuine cared for his followers.

Wake up bro! Read your post above and my response to that above. If you have a soft spot for Mullah Rizvi or Mullah Tahir ul Qadri or Mullah XYZ then you are very mistaken. No good can EVER come out of such an ideology. And I'd take a secular dictator like Musharraf ANY DAY over these Neanderthals whose life is either Ghazi or a Shaheed.

 

[Salik]

Everything! When asked by Wajaahat (the journalist), that girls missing schools because of his blockade for weeks, the Mullah said: "So what?! Let them miss a year! Students fail some times!". There is a lot in that interview which is revolting. We simply can't allow such thugs with a couple of thousands wanna-be martyrs to ruin it for millions of others. I don't care whether its Imran Khan or Nawaz Sharif or Zardari: This tactic of getting demands met while blocking millions to a normal life is unacceptable!! Listen to the one of the latest interviews by Ch. Nisar about the Dharnas.

And, yes, Mullahs are THE WORST! They don't even live in this century. To them it's a Win-Win: They are 'Ghazi' if demands met. They are 'Shaheeds' if they are killed. At least Imran Khan, as much as I despised his 2014 Dharnas, didn't want to be a martyr and he genuine cared for his followers.

Wake up bro! Read your post above and my response to that above. If you have a soft spot for Mullah Rizvi or Mullah Tahir ul Qadri or Mullah XYZ then you are very mistaken. No good can EVER come out of such an ideology. And I'd take a secular dictator like Musharraf ANY DAY over these Neanderthals whose life is either Ghazi or a Shaheed.

You sir are talking about their style. You have valid points. But the stance of Khatm-e-Nabuwat, there's no compromise even for moderate Muslim and liberal Muslim. After that there's only one category left i.e. non Muslim.

As I said you would find him a moderate person. He isn't against girls education either. What does he want from you? Nothing but safety of Khatm-e-Nabuwat law. Don't give it hype of 'religious extremism knocking at your door'.

 

[Meengla]

You sir are talking about their style. You have valid points. But the stance of Khatm-e-Nabuwat, there's no compromise even for moderate Muslim and liberal Muslim. After that there's only one category left i.e. non Muslim.

As I said you would find him a moderate person. He isn't against girls education either. What does he want from you? Nothing but safety of Khatm-e-Nabuwat law. Don't give it hype of 'religious extremism knocking at your door'.

Nope! After what happened to Salman Taseer, I dare anyone in Pakistan would 'insult' the Khatm e Nubuwat Law. Even if it were a glitch in that law which offended this Mullah, he had no right to go and block the free movement of hundreds of thousands of people for weeks, especially after the glitch was removed. He was a bully--I wish Pakistan had a strong leader to kick on his nuts from day one! And, yes, he very casually dismisses Wajaahat's question about girls' education being affected and, yes, he boasted in front of the cameras about he and his followers willing to embrace 'martyrdom' right there and then if needed.

Please don't make excuses for this guy!