Hazaras flee to Australia

[Wright]

They could have went to China or Iran, why such a distant country that hates Muslims?

 

[Vinod2070]

They could have went to China or Iran, why such a distant country that hates Muslims?

That is the key.

There are more than 1.6 billion Muslims (some claim 2,1 billion now) and dozens of Islamic states.

Yet they could not find even one to find their security when they need to run from a country which was created in the name of Islam and for providing security to the Muslims!

That they were running in dangerous boats from the largest Islamic country in the world to a non Muslim country should tell you something.

See how it is sought to be explained away as the doing of some "political elites" or some such by the apologists. So that a deeper introspection of the real reasons and real issues can be avoided.

 

[Vinod2070]

You dont need to be spokesperson of Australia

Keep your hatred for Muslims to yourself

also protesting is your legal right in western countries

Along with rights come the responsibilities as well.

There is an underlying contract that may not be spoken or written but is an implicit assumption in any kind of society. When that is broken, there is conflict.

One just needs to see it happening all over Europe: Sweden, Netherlands, France, Germany, UK...

Muslims emigrate in large numbers and many live on their welfare. Many of them run from their own countries to escape persecution and genocide. They claim that they are targeted in their own countries to get asylum.

See what many of them return back to the society. How long it takes to turn on the host societies once their physical security is assured.

Ghettos where natives can't even enter, rapes, the most violent and immoral crimes (especially sexual crimes), claims of Islamophobia and so on.

And then they also demand Shahriah in these countries!

I think it should be the first duty of Islamic state or country to protect the wealth, life, honour and dignity of their citizens irrespective of their beliefs,caste and gender but it seem non Muslim countries in west are more Islamic than our corrupt government or systems

There is nothing Islamic about these duties of a state.

And any country providing these to their citizens in any place (not just West) is not being Islamic.

In fact, if one looks around the world, it is perhaps fair to draw a very different conclusion.

 

[acid rain]

That is the key.

There are more than 1.6 billion Muslims (some claim 2,1 billion now) and dozens of Islamic states.

Yet they could not find even one to find their security when they need to run from a country which was created in the name of Islam and for providing security to the Muslims!

That they were running in dangerous boats from the largest Islamic country in the world to a non Muslim country should tell you something.

See how it is sought to be explained away as the doing of some "political elites" or some such by the apologists. So that a deeper introspection of the real reasons and real issues can be avoided.

So according to you this is a planned migration and the real reason for seeking asylum is something else?

Wait, you may be on to something here. The asylum seekers manage to reach Malaysia and Indonesia which are muslim countries so why are they not accomodated by Malaysia and Indonesia but are pushed to Australia?

Spreading of Islam is the ultimate goal?

But what about the actual killings and bomb blasts thats happening against hazaras?

 

[Vinod2070]

So according to you this is a planned migration and the real reason for seeking asylum is something else?

No. The main reason is that they see no possibility of having security in Pakistan.

And neither in any other Islamic country.

 

[illusion8]

What do you want us to say ? That we are dead a nation? Than who were those people who donated there blood to the affected, who were those people who stoodby the vitims, who joined them at sit ins, who offered water to the protesters who offered food the the protestors....i dont know why you did not see this or talk about it in your post.
So no we are not dead as you thing. This problem as you claim is not so simple to be solved, number of external and internal factors are in place, and for this leadership needs to form a consensus, they need to be commited, why dont they do it now? Well you need to ask them this question ypurself.


Here is something for you to read on, read it all and if you still have anything left , just me here...i will be more than happy to assist or you can ask zarvan

Saudisation of Pakisan

You talk as if getting rid of LEJ is a very difficult job and all you can do is lend a shoulder for the Hazaras to cry on, why the hell entertain those internal and eternal factors at all? nothing is bigger and stronger than the people - not even the army or the politicians, it's when you start realizing that will be when you will make a difference.

 

[Developereo]

is it that only a few people control the law and order in Pakistan

You got it!

The local feudal/ethnic lords control the local police and law enforcement. They also deliver votes to the national party bosses, which means they are allowed to rule the roost.

why not do that once and for all and rid Pakistan from all such forces that cause Sectarian violence.

It's the old divide and rule technique borrowed from the colonial masters. The political elite only care about maintaining their power long enough to loot the country. They couldn't care less about any long term consequences.

Pakistan is a security state. The security has always been the responsibility of the PA.

That's the favorite strawman argument of certain people, within and outside Pakistan: the army (allegedly) controls everything so, if something fails, it's the army's fault.

The fact is that controlling domestic security is not the army's job. There are specific civilian institutions entrusted with law enforcement and their failure cannot be blamed on the army. The army has been at pains to distance itself from the domestic mess and give the civilian government all the room it needs to do its job.

While it may be true that certain influential army officials may be sympathetic to these militants, just as certain high-profile civilian politicians are, that does not implicate the institution as a whole. It remains the purview of the civilian institutions to enforce law and order and to hold anyone who obstructs justice to task.

 

[Vinod2070]

That's the favorite strawman argument of certain people, within and outside Pakistan: the army (allegedly) controls everything so, if something fails, it's the army's fault.

The fact is that controlling domestic security is not the army's job. There are specific civilian institutions entrusted with law enforcement and their failure cannot be blamed on the army. The army has been at pains to distance itself from the domestic mess and give the civilian government all the room it needs to do its job.

While it may be true that certain influential army officials may be sympathetic to these militants, just as certain high-profile civilian politicians are, that does not implicate the institution as a whole. It remains the purview of the civilian institutions to enforce law and order and to hold anyone who obstructs justice to task.

The "civilian institutions" have never been allowed to be built in Pakistan to a stature where they can take any kind of accountability.

Blaming them when the actual power has always been usurped when needed and accountability passed on when expedient doesn't fool anyone.

In fact, it is surprising that so many "Pakistani patriots" are just interested in trying to pin the blame on "civilians" and "democrazy" rather than actually doing anything about changing the situation on the ground.

And that will only happen after Pakistan ceases to remain a security state. What that entails is for Pakistan to figure out.

The one basic anomaly is leading to all these outcomes. Explaining them away as the fault of this or that person or set of persons won't change anything.

 

[illusion8]

You got it!

The local feudal/ethnic lords control the local police and law enforcement. They also deliver votes to the national party bosses, which means they are allowed to rule the roost.



It's the old divide and rule technique borrowed from the colonial masters. The political elite only care about maintaining their power long enough to loot the country. They couldn't care less about any long term consequences.

This is the 21st century, Why give in to "these few people" at all? why can't there be a mass movement? when will it be enough already? why wait for some Messiah, why not do it yourselves?

 

[Developereo]

The "civilian institutions" have never been allowed to be built in Pakistan to a stature where they can take any kind of accountability.

You are just repeating your strawman argument. The army is not going around telling people whom to vote for in civilian elections. The army doesn't tell police which evidence to collect and which ones to discard. The army doesn't hold a gun to judge's head telling them to acquit defendants.

This is the 21st century, Why give in to "these few people" at all? why can't there be a mass movement? when will it be enough already? why wait for some Messiah, why not do it yourselves?

Because, except for a tiny minority, Pakistani masses vote along one of three established lines:
- straight party loyalty.
- what the local feudal lord tells them to.
- what the local ethnic boss tells them to.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

So according to you this is a planned migration and the real reason for seeking asylum is something else?

It is an escape to survival. That is all the "plan" that there is to it.

Wait, you may be on to something here. The asylum seekers manage to reach Malaysia and Indonesia which are muslim countries so why are they not accomodated by Malaysia and Indonesia but are pushed to Australia?

Malaysia and Indonesia may be muslim countries, but the Hazaras are not welcome there because they are not Malaysians or Indonesians. For that matter, Indonesian muslims are not welcome in muslim Malaysia just as Malaysian muslims are not welcome in muslim Indonesia. The muslim Hazaras are therefore unwelcome. If you are thinking on the lines of 'muslim ummah', such a thing does not exist in geo-politics. It is simply a fiction created in religious minds.

Spreading of Islam is the ultimate goal?

Doubtful. The goal is simply of hoping to live in a safer and more tolerant environment. And will remain that way. Till religious 'nut-jobs' get primacy.

But what about the actual killings and bomb blasts thats happening against hazaras?

What about that? Is that showing any signs of being eradicated or abated? They will keep on happening, Hazaras will keep on getting targeted and the Hazaras will continue becoming casualties. Nothing indicates otherwise.

 

[illusion8]

Because, except for a tiny minority, Pakistani masses vote along one of three established lines:
- straight party loyalty.
- what the local feudal lord tells them to.
- what the local ethnic boss tells them to.

I seriously cannot fathom this, except a small minority the rest are sheep?

Take any revolution in history and you will notice that it started against a much more controlling and overpowering power than Pakistan's politicians, land lords or army so it's much more easier to break the nexus in Pakistan.

 

[Vinod2070]

You are just repeating your strawman argument. The army is not going around telling people whom to vote for in civilian elections. The army doesn't tell police which evidence to collect and which ones to discard. The army doesn't hold a gun to judge's head telling them to acquit defendants.

Because, except for a tiny minority, Pakistani masses vote along one of three established lines:
- straight party loyalty.
- what the local feudal lord tells them to.
- what the local ethnic boss tells them to.

It doesn't have to go around telling people that.

It just has to create the right conditions so that people are assured that "democrazy" and "civilian dogs" are no good and the army is the only savior.

And we see people falling hook, line and sinker for it.

The PA has direct run the country for decades. Probably for more than half its life.

Why did it not confront the issues you mention here?

Didn't it leave the situation worse every time? Didn't people celebrate each time PA was ousted from power?

Only to welcome them back the next time?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

They could have went to China or Iran, why such a distant country that hates Muslims?

For that matter, they could have gone to Saudi Arabia, Dubai and the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain or the other parts of the Middle East. Much nearer countries and fellow Muslim countries at that. That would be simpler and more logical as those countries are are part of the Ummah or 'muslim brotherhood.

Why did that not happen? Because none of them wants them. Never mind the 'brotherhood idea'.

 

[Developereo]

I seriously cannot fathom this, except a small minority the rest are sheep?

It's a stricter form of what happens in the developed world. Ordinary people don't have time to go around analyzing political candidates; they rely on endorsements by newspapers, organizations, etc.

In this case, people trust their feudal/ethnic lord's judgement. Loyalty to the feudal lord or ethnic boss is deeply ingrained in the culture, so their "recommendation" carries a lot more weight than a newspaper's would in the developed world.

It doesn't have to go around telling people that.

Again, if you will read your post objectively, you are simply repeating your strawman argument.
The army is all powerful so, if anything goes wrong, it must be the army's fault.

The truth is that the civilian government is entirely capable of screwing up by itself without the army's involvement. The corruption is endemic within the system and it is not the army's job to root out corruption in the country's culture.