No country for brave men

[Bang Galore]

Salman Taseer murder: In Pakistan, liberalism and tolerance remain secret vices of the metropolitan rich

Dean Nelson

The murder of Salman Taseer, the feisty governor of Punjab province, marks yet another grim new year for Pakistan and a depressing reminder of its limited tolerance. He was shot dead by one of his own personal police bodyguards, apparently, because he had called for the country’s much-abused blasphemy laws to be scrapped after a Christian woman was sentenced to death. Members of the country’s minorities are vulnerable to blasphemy accusations in neighbourhood and business disputes with members of the Muslim majority.

Although he had defied death threats over his campaign, we do not yet know if it was his killer’s real motivation – the governor had many enemies and was notorious for publicly humiliating those he disagreed with.

To outsiders like me he was fresh air in Pakistani politics because he waged his campaigns openly and ferociously. He was both liberal and intolerant, a bully and a wit, and fiercely loyal to his Pakistan People’s Party leadership: he seemed to me a Pakistani John Prescott or John Reid, a proper political bruiser.

He had, in his time, been tortured in the notorious Lahore Fort under dictator General Zia, and was later thrashed by guards loyal to his bitter rival Nawaz Sharif when he was chief minister of Punjab in 1988. When he was appointed governor of Punjab by President Musharraf following the PPP’s 2008 election victory, he had his revenge on the Sharifs, mocking them on an almost daily basis.

His decision to champion repeal of the blasphemy laws was not universally popular among his PPP colleagues, and his prime minister, Yousuf Raza Gilani, rejected his call for reform. The Government’s survival was, and remains, under serious threat, and the last thing it wanted was a new front against the religious parties.

His murder is part of the looped story of Pakistan: all apparently progressive leaders claim to confront intolerant and discriminatory laws, but nearly all yield before the threats and anger of the Islamic parties and sectarian maulvis.

Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, who publicly admitted a love of whisky and faced down a crowd declaring “but I don’t drink the people’s blood,” later banned the sale of alcohol under pressure from Islamic conservatives. His daughter, Benazir, failed in two terms of government to repeal the Hudood Ordinance, under which rape victims are guilty of adultery if they cannot produce four male witnesses to their ordeal. Her government later championed the rise to power of the Afghan Taliban.

The world is not flat, as Thomas Friedman claims, and nor is it getting flatter. It is, in many places in Asia and Africa, becoming more contoured with deeper, darker valleys, like Pakistan, where liberalism and tolerance remain secret vices of the metropolitan rich.

I salute Taseer’s reckless bravery in trying to take it beyond Lahore and Karachi’s luxury farmhouses to the poor minorities who need it most. His murder draws a thick line for those who share his commitment and dares them to cross it.

I hope millions do, but I’m sure it won’t happen. Pakistan may never be more “liberal” than this.

Salman Taseer murder: In Pakistan, liberalism and tolerance remain secret vices of the metropolitan rich – Telegraph Blogs

 

[Bang Galore]

Salman Taseer is a victim of Pakistan's fatal flaw

The murder of Salman Taseer is the culmination of Pakistan's historic move towards religious intolerance and Islamisation


Kapil Komireddi

Pakistan's founders explained their hasty creation as the promised land where no Muslim would be killed for being Muslim. Today, it is a land where Muslims are killed for not being Muslim enough. Salman Taseer, the governor of Pakistan's largest province, Punjab, was assassinated because he had the temerity to assail the country's anti-blasphemy laws when he responded to the plight of Aasia Bibi – a 45-year-old Christian woman awaiting execution for the capital crime, under Pakistan's penal code, of blasphemy against Islam.

Who bears the responsibility for Taseer's death? To Pakistan's liberals, the principal cause of religious extremism in their country begins and ends with one person: General Zia-ul-Haq, an austere bigot who governed the country from 1976 until his death in 1988. Apportioning the blame so disproportionately exonerates his predecessors, erases the deeper history of theocratic idealism that underpins the very idea of Pakistan, and promotes, to the present generation, the erroneous idea that, prior to Zia, Pakistan accommodated pluralism.

Liaquat Ali Khan, Jinnah's erstwhile deputy and Pakistan's first prime minister, formally initiated the Islamisation of Pakistan in 1949. The objectives resolution he introduced set out the core constitutional principles by which the new country would be governed. Among other things, it proclaimed that Allah, who held sovereignty "over the entire universe", had "delegated it to Pakistan", and it called for the creation of conditions "wherein the Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah".

This immediately disenfranchised non-Muslims, and empowered mullahs and extremists. Senior government officials were soon calling for the adoption of Arabic as the national language and mooting the prospect of "Islamistan", a global confederation of Islamic states. This pan-Islamic fervour – part of Pakistan's attempts to anchor its invented identity – was not shared by other Muslim nations which, for all their inadequacies, had more definite pasts and less fragile presents than the self-appointed Land of the Pure. But there were consequences.

By the time Ayub Khan launched the first military coup in 1958, 11-year-old Pakistan had been ruled by seven prime ministers. His finely clipped moustache and fondness for scotch whiskey led outsiders to view him as a great moderniser. Indeed, Ayub's first major act as president was to commission the construction of a new capital city. A Greek firm of architects was tasked with the job. On 24 February 1960, Ayub gave the city its name: Islamabad, the City of Islam. Fittingly, while the parliament and the supreme court built by the Greeks are frequently forced into abeyance, the one building that is always open for business in today's Islamabad is a mosque named after a Saudi despot who funded it.

A new constitution was promulgated in 1962. Pakistan's official name was changed to Republic of Pakistan, dropping the "Islamic" that the 1956 constitution had introduced. But this was superficial at best. The constitution created a greater role for religion – and religious policing. It established an Advisory Council of Islamic Ideology to bring Pakistanis "into conformity with the teachings and requirements of Islam". It called for the creation of an Islamic Research Institute to "assist in the reconstruction of Muslim society on a truly Islamic basis". The first amendment to the constitution restored the country's old name: the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Pakistan's pluralistic heritage was subsequently erased in order to create a malleable monolith. Education was the principal target – the study of Islamiyat was promoted at universities; a new discipline called Pakistan studies, locating the country's origins in the history of Islam, was created; and the army, particularly Ayub, was portrayed as its saviour. India, meanwhile, was demonised as a "Hindu" state.

Ayub launched a war against India in 1965. At the battle of Badr in the 7th century, the prophet's tiny band of Muslim soldiers claimed to have vanquished the Quraysh with the help of white-turbaned angels sent by Gabriel. Ayub's propaganda machinery borrowed directly from that legend, reaffirming Pakistan's position as the defender of Islam. Stories about Pakistan's forces being assisted by green-robed angels who deflected Indian bombs with a wave of their hand were circulating, as were legends about Pakistani soldiers shooting down Indian aircraft with Enfield rifles. Pakistanis weren't just being invited to celebrate the valour of their soldiers – they were being told that their side had received celestial sanction.

Salman Taseer's security guard seemingly felt blessed by such a divinity when he pulled the trigger on the man he was commissioned to defend. To all those in Pakistan's armed forces who sympathise with Taseer's killer, this act may be a logical culmination of the journey that began in 1947. The suppression of dissenting or minority expression in a country that claims to symbolise the liberation of an allegedly oppressed people exposes Pakistan's fatal flaw: it remains, to use Salman Rushdie's words, an "insufficiently imagined" idea.

Salman Taseer is a victim of Pakistan's fatal flaw | Kapil Komireddi | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

 

[Hasnain2009]

Fatwa of Shaykh-ul-Islam Mufti Muhammad Idris Usmani about Malik Mumtaz Qadri and his supporters​

Note: This post highlights the fact that Islam is far from monolithic and while there are those who are issuing Fatwas that result in the murder of Governor Taseer, there are also those who have huge problems with such hideous and medieval savagery. This highlights the heterogeneity within Islam which is composed of numerous sects and viewpoints that differ widely among themselves. We at LUBP believe in a secular society which operates under the rule of law; where laws are made by elected parliaments and religion is not the business of the State!

Shaykh-ul-Islam Hazrat Mufti Muhammad Idris Usmani of Jamia Islamia has issued the following fatwa about the killer of Governor Punjab (Pakistan) Salman Taseer and about those who are praising and justifying his murder.

Question:

What do the Ulema say about the murder of Governor of Punjab (Pakistan) Salman Taseer who was killed by his own security guard. The guard claimed that he killed Salman Taseer because he was blasphemous to the Prophet (peace by upon him). However, there is no evidence of Salman Taseer’s blasphemy to the Prophet (pbuh). What do the Ulema say about many people who are praising Salman Taseer’s killer?

Answer:

“In the Name of the Merciful and Compassionate Allah, Dar al-Fatwa. Praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Universe; blessings and peace be upon our Master Muhammad, the Apostle of Allah, and upon his Family, his Companions, his Followers and those who have found the way through him.

I have carefully read the whole issue and also read various news reports and articles related to this (issue). I have also spoken to the jayyad ulema (eminent scholars) in Pakistan and India.

In the light of the available evidence, I state the following:

1. Malik Mumtaz Qadri has committed gunah-e-azeem (great sin) by killing an innocent soul. By taking law into his own hand, by killing an innocent man, and by bringing disgrace to the name of Islam, Malik Mumtaz Qadri has created fasad fil arz (mischief on earth) and committed tauheen-e-risalat (blasphemy to the Prophet). Same applies to those who are creating further mischief (fasad) by praising or justifying this heinous crime in the name of Islam. The killer of Salman Taseer is a real blasphemer to Islam and the holy Prophet (peace be upon him).

2. Those individuals and groups including the ignorant ulema, misguided journalists, politicians, lawyers wa deegar (etc), who are celebrating or justifying in any manner this heinous crime must be treated as accomplice in this crime. Those who endorsed a fatwa of Salman Taseer’s murder too must be treated as mufsid fil arz and must be punished according to the Shariah.

3. While the state of Pakistan will pursue a legal case against the killer and his abettors according to their national laws, the following verses from the Quran clearly specify the punishment for Malik Mumtaz Qadri and his supporters and cheerers.

This is a case of fasad fil arz. The perpetrators of such acts should be punished as provided in Sura Maida of the Quran (Ayah 32 and 33).

According to Islamic Shariah, Malik Mumtaz Qadri, any one supporting or praising his act must be executed by law or crucified or their hands and feet cut off from opposite side. Exile is not needed in the present case as the State can exercise Shariah authority on its citizens and subjects.

Those who are praising a killer and a mufsid want to go to Hell of their own accord.

For others, we can only pray for their path of righteousness.

In the light of religious commands, in the light of religious rules known to us, I think that these people should renew their faith and renew their marriages. But no one can remove anyone’s obstinacy. I pray to Allah to enable all Muslims, through His Prophet, pbuh, to be steadfast to His religion, Islam. Ameen!

Muhammad Idris , Mufti, Darul Ifta, Jamia Islamia
29 Muharram-ul-Haram 1432 AH

Fatwa of Shaykh-ul-Islam Mufti Muhammad Idris Usmani about Malik Mumtaz Qadri and his supporters|Let Us Build Pakistan

 

[I FLY HIGH]

Salman Taseer is a victim of Pakistan's fatal flaw

The murder of Salman Taseer is the culmination of Pakistan's historic move towards religious intolerance and Islamisation


Kapil Komireddi

Pakistan's founders explained their hasty creation as the promised land where no Muslim would be killed for being Muslim. Today, it is a land where Muslims are killed for not being Muslim enough. Salman Taseer, the governor of Pakistan's largest province, Punjab, was assassinated because he had the temerity to assail the country's anti-blasphemy laws when he responded to the plight of Aasia Bibi – a 45-year-old Christian woman awaiting execution for the capital crime, under Pakistan's penal code, of blasphemy against Islam.

Who bears the responsibility for Taseer's death? To Pakistan's liberals, the principal cause of religious extremism in their country begins and ends with one person: General Zia-ul-Haq, an austere bigot who governed the country from 1976 until his death in 1988. Apportioning the blame so disproportionately exonerates his predecessors, erases the deeper history of theocratic idealism that underpins the very idea of Pakistan, and promotes, to the present generation, the erroneous idea that, prior to Zia, Pakistan accommodated pluralism.

Liaquat Ali Khan, Jinnah's erstwhile deputy and Pakistan's first prime minister, formally initiated the Islamisation of Pakistan in 1949. The objectives resolution he introduced set out the core constitutional principles by which the new country would be governed. Among other things, it proclaimed that Allah, who held sovereignty "over the entire universe", had "delegated it to Pakistan", and it called for the creation of conditions "wherein the Muslims shall be enabled to order their lives in the individual and collective spheres in accordance with the teachings and requirements of Islam as set out in the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah".

This immediately disenfranchised non-Muslims, and empowered mullahs and extremists. Senior government officials were soon calling for the adoption of Arabic as the national language and mooting the prospect of "Islamistan", a global confederation of Islamic states. This pan-Islamic fervour – part of Pakistan's attempts to anchor its invented identity – was not shared by other Muslim nations which, for all their inadequacies, had more definite pasts and less fragile presents than the self-appointed Land of the Pure. But there were consequences.

By the time Ayub Khan launched the first military coup in 1958, 11-year-old Pakistan had been ruled by seven prime ministers. His finely clipped moustache and fondness for scotch whiskey led outsiders to view him as a great moderniser. Indeed, Ayub's first major act as president was to commission the construction of a new capital city. A Greek firm of architects was tasked with the job. On 24 February 1960, Ayub gave the city its name: Islamabad, the City of Islam. Fittingly, while the parliament and the supreme court built by the Greeks are frequently forced into abeyance, the one building that is always open for business in today's Islamabad is a mosque named after a Saudi despot who funded it.

A new constitution was promulgated in 1962. Pakistan's official name was changed to Republic of Pakistan, dropping the "Islamic" that the 1956 constitution had introduced. But this was superficial at best. The constitution created a greater role for religion – and religious policing. It established an Advisory Council of Islamic Ideology to bring Pakistanis "into conformity with the teachings and requirements of Islam". It called for the creation of an Islamic Research Institute to "assist in the reconstruction of Muslim society on a truly Islamic basis". The first amendment to the constitution restored the country's old name: the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Pakistan's pluralistic heritage was subsequently erased in order to create a malleable monolith. Education was the principal target – the study of Islamiyat was promoted at universities; a new discipline called Pakistan studies, locating the country's origins in the history of Islam, was created; and the army, particularly Ayub, was portrayed as its saviour. India, meanwhile, was demonised as a "Hindu" state.

Ayub launched a war against India in 1965. At the battle of Badr in the 7th century, the prophet's tiny band of Muslim soldiers claimed to have vanquished the Quraysh with the help of white-turbaned angels sent by Gabriel. Ayub's propaganda machinery borrowed directly from that legend, reaffirming Pakistan's position as the defender of Islam. Stories about Pakistan's forces being assisted by green-robed angels who deflected Indian bombs with a wave of their hand were circulating, as were legends about Pakistani soldiers shooting down Indian aircraft with Enfield rifles. Pakistanis weren't just being invited to celebrate the valour of their soldiers – they were being told that their side had received celestial sanction.

Salman Taseer's security guard seemingly felt blessed by such a divinity when he pulled the trigger on the man he was commissioned to defend. To all those in Pakistan's armed forces who sympathise with Taseer's killer, this act may be a logical culmination of the journey that began in 1947. The suppression of dissenting or minority expression in a country that claims to symbolise the liberation of an allegedly oppressed people exposes Pakistan's fatal flaw: it remains, to use Salman Rushdie's words, an "insufficiently imagined" idea.

Salman Taseer is a victim of Pakistan's fatal flaw | Kapil Komireddi | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Look my dear , if anybody is involved in blasphemy about prophet (p.b.u.h), he will be put to death , this is very simple it is the law of the land . Like in far eastern and arab states drug traficing law is there and the convict is put to death. I ASK why Mr Taseer has called this law as a BLACK LAW? Try to understand if you can, if anybody abuses to our loveones infront of us ,what would be the reaction ? LOve of our holy prophet is deep inside and no muslim can accept this whatsoever , he can sacrifice everything against that . So rather than calling it a black law , he should have talked to change the mode of arrest of the culprit. Dont assume that i am a hardliner , i am a liberal and cristian mission high school passed out guy.

 

[Hasnain2009]

Look my dear , if anybody is involved in blasphemy about prophet (p.b.u.h), he will be put to death , this is very simple it is the law of the land . Like in far eastern and arab states drug traficing law is there and the convict is put to death. I ASK why Mr Taseer has called this law as a BLACK LAW? Try to understand if you can, if anybody abuses to our loveones infront of us ,what would be the reaction ? LOve of our holy prophet is deep inside and no muslim can accept this whatsoever , he can sacrifice everything against that . So rather than calling it a black law , he should have talked to change the mode of arrest of the culprit. Dont assume that i am a hardliner , i am a liberal and cristian mission high school passed out guy.

If Salman Taseer was talking against the man made law of blasphemy, because of some weaknesses in it, then who give right to Qadri Mumtaz to take law in his hand and kill Salman Taseer?

Be-aware people, this incident is showing the real face of our mullahs and our countrymen !

 

[Bang Galore]

Look my dear , if anybody is involved in blasphemy about prophet (p.b.u.h), he will be put to death , this is very simple it is the law of the land . Like in far eastern and arab states drug traficing law is there and the convict is put to death. I ASK why Mr Taseer has called this law as a BLACK LAW? Try to understand if you can, if anybody abuses to our loveones infront of us ,what would be the reaction ? LOve of our holy prophet is deep inside and no muslim can accept this whatsoever , he can sacrifice everything against that . So rather than calling it a black law , he should have talked to change the mode of arrest of the culprit. Dont assume that i am a hardliner , i am a liberal and cristian mission high school passed out guy.

That's what scares me. That you consider yourself a liberal and that it might actually be true.

"I hope millions do, but I’m sure it won’t happen. Pakistan may never be more “liberal” than this".

 

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

Yes pakistan will never be liberal so a man will insult our Prophe (PBUH) and get away. This is the law of the land

TARIQ

 

[mjnaushad]

Yes pakistan will never be liberal so a man will insult our Prophe (PBUH) and get away. This is the law of the land

TARIQ

Tell me where he insulted Prophet...??? I am waiting

 

[Durrak]

Tell me where he insulted Prophet...??? I am waiting

I think that's enough that he disobey Islamic rules

 

[I FLY HIGH]

If Salman Taseer was talking against the man made law of blasphemy, because of some weaknesses in it, then who give right to Qadri Mumtaz to take law in his hand and kill Salman Taseer?

Be-aware people, this incident is showing the real face of our mullahs and our countrymen !

When somebody is killing your wife , or mother , will you wait for police to come . It is a human nature of love and affection for muslims about our PROPHET (P.B.U.H) . I think Salman Taseer should not have said this as a black law. Qadri is ready to die, law of the land will definately punish him . But why you do such things which make a person to surrender his life for a cause which he thinks is more precious than his life .

 

[Awesome]

I think that's enough that he disobey Islamic rules

Buddy you've just killed 99.999999% of the Islamic Ummah...

 

[mehru]

I think that's enough that he disobey Islamic rules

No justification for murder

On January 6, around 150 members of civil society gathered at the Karachi Press Club for a vigil in memory of the late Governor. It was a fairly decent turn out, especially considering the security risks involved. We took to the streets and went around the Press Club with candles in our hands, demanding an end to this state of lawlessness. Keeping in line with the idea of a peaceful protest, none of the protestors called out for death or blood but instead, demanded justice and respect for the deceased. Even so, there were only 150 of us when there should have been thousands more.

Whether you stand for the blasphemy law or against it, this blog is for you. It is a plea addressed to each of you regardless of your stance. In order to reach a mutual consensus on a debatable issue, it is important to have a holistic approach. Rather than obscuring and isolating the issue, we need to look at the larger picture, analyse every aspect before deciding on a stance. Unfortunately, when it comes to one of the most pertinent issues we currently face, we are wasting our energies in arguing, blaming and categorising the other rather than thinking rationally. Our own flaws prevent us from solving issues, which often get so out of hand that they are then dubbed controversial and thus, snubbed forever. The debate on the blasphemy laws in Pakistan is one of the many examples of how our myopic view has hindered any progress that might have been possible.

I cannot seem to shake off the image of Mumtaz Qadri, the 26-year-old assassin who killed Governor Salman Taseer, smiling with content, his words “Bus sarkar, qabool karlain” as he confessed to the murdered of Governor Taseer.

In his opinion and in the opinions of many others, Qadri is a hero because he had killed in the name of God. Again, the lack of foresight and fervor for martyrdom prevented hundreds of his supporters from condemning something that was nothing but cold-blooded murder. Islam does not allow us to take law into our hands. Whether you stand for or against the blasphemy law is insignificant, taking the law into our hands is a crime irrespective of the motive. Islam, by means of Quran and Hadith, strongly advocates against false accusations and the need for concrete evidence before any kind of punishment is ruled out:

“He who, in order to find fault, says something about a person that was not there, Allah will throw such a person in hell till he tastes fully what he had fabricated.” (Tibrani)

Those who claim that Qadri was a hero conveniently overlooked that there is a reason why there are courts in this country. There is a reason why there is a proper judicial system to tackle any forms of crime. The reason is fairly simple: to prevent lawlessness and injustice. Taseer wasn’t a blasphemer, he had never insulted the Quran, the Prophet (PBUH) or Islam but he was killed in the name of the blasphemy law that according to him, was “man-made.”

Governor Taseer was killed because he asked for mercy for a 45-year old mother of five. Twenty-seven bullets for taking a stance. His murder highlights the abuse of Islam and Quran for the sake of power and authority. By encouraging such behavior we are promoting lawlessness and a state where people will be at each other’s throat on a mere disagreement. Is this the message of the Quran? Is this what Islam teaches us? How humane is it to rejoice someone’s death?

In the aftermath of Governor Taseer’s murder and the confession, many considered the murder a victory for Islam, justifying the killing by Governer Taseer’s opposition to the abuse of the blasphemy law. It was mind-numbing to see people using all forms of media to publicly advocate murder and justify blood in the name of religion. Let’s be clear on this: these people rejoicing weren’t the Taliban and neither did a significant number of these individuals have links with terrorist organisations. Some television anchors resorted to using “jaa bahaq” rather than the more suiting (and often abused) “shaheed” (martyr) when talking about the murder. A Wikpedia entry and a few fan pages were created on Facebook in support of Qadri. Over 500 ‘moderate’ religious clerics, pronounced Qadri as “ghazi” while lawyers showered him with rose petals; one of them even embraced him as he arrived in Islamabad.

Governor Salman Taseer stood for tolerance and he was killed at the hands of extremism. There’s no justification for his murder, and every single one who instigated violence, has blood on their hands. Governor Taseer’s death highlights intolerance, hate and bigotry and speaks of a desensitised society where cold-blooded murders are justified.

We have been moving in the wrong direction for a very long time now. Our ideologies have become distorted and our vision, diminishing. The constant state of violence and the need to prove ourselves as pious Muslims and patriotic Pakistanis has engulfed our humanity. There are no rational dialogues anymore, only ego tussles, labels and death threats.

It appears that when religious sentiments are involved anything and everything is justified. This is not piety or devotion, it is pure insanity, inhumanity and barbarism.

The solution to our problems does not lie in striking each others head off, or battling for or against the blasphemy law, the solution lies in reasonable public discourse. Taseer’s death highlights the need for counter abuse laws to prevent wrongful accusations. Let us not talk of repeal and amendments but the need to fight abuse, to ensure that no one is allowed to use laws to settle personal vendettas, that violence is no longer justified in the name of religion.

As a practicing Muslim and a devotee to the teachings of the Quran and the Prophet (PBUH), I am outraged by those like Qadri who justify their heinous crime in the name of Islam. Nothing would disappoint the Prophet (PBUH) more than violence being justified in his name; nothing is more blasphemous than using Islam as a tool to justify violence.


The Dawn Blog Blog Archive No justification for murder

 

[mjnaushad]

I think that's enough that he disobey Islamic rules

Tell me you never disobeyed Islamic rules???

Again I am waiting

 

[mehru]

When somebody is killing your wife , or mother , will you wait for police to come . It is a human nature of love and affection for muslims about our PROPHET (P.B.U.H) . I think Salman Taseer should not have said this as a black law. Qadri is ready to die, law of the land will definately punish him . But why you do such things which make a person to surrender his life for a cause which he thinks is more precious than his life .

Yeah you are "right". I don't know why Salman Taseer sons have not taken action themselves after watching their bullet ridden father. Why do you think they have allowed the court to do justice?

PS. DON'T JUSTIFY A MURDER.

 

[Usama86]

No country for FOOLISH men should be the tittle for this thread.
Salman Taseer was a public figure, he was a politician and a public leader and it is a must for every public leader to undersrtand the sentiments of the people he leads no matter what he personaly feels about those issues. Salman Taseer acted very childishly when he openly went against the public sentiments on the sensitive issue, his approach was to throw a challeng to the people who did not share his ideas as he talked carelesly about scraping off the blasphemy law which 90% of Pakistanis believe is OK.
He didnot deserved to be killed over what he said because no where did he ever speak any thing against the Prophet S.A.W. He only wanted the law to be amended or scraped off, he should have been reasoned with instead of killing him. I hope that Mr.Qadri is held accountable for his actions.
Lesson to be learnt is that politicians should approach this issue with care and in a way which displays the shortcoming of the law instead of provocating peopls' beliefs. The technical aspects of the law should be debated in the parliment with the base that Blasphemy holds the death penalty.