What's new

Sikh and Hindu officers usher in a new era in Pakistani Army

Oh yes I have one prejudice. I love mangoes and think Pakistani mangoes are much better than Indian mangoes.:P

I am sure you have tasted the best Indian mangoes before you made that statement.

But then why do I feel you didn't feel the need to. ;)
 
Similarly, last century's bloodiest Muslim genocide was not carried out by Serbs, Israelis, Americans, Europeans or Hindus. It was Pakistan's military that refused to respect a democratic verdict and plunged East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, into an ocean of blood. Millions were killed, maimed, raped and rendered homeless. Luckily, Pakistan has a "Hindu" neighbour. "Hindus are born enemies of Islam'. Hence, Pakistani children are now taught that a Bengali traitor (revered by Bengalis as founder of Bangladesh), in connivance with our "Hindu" neighbour, dismembered Pakistan. Ironically, of all her South Asian neighbours, Pakistan enjoys most cordial relations with the world's only Hindu state, Nepal. The other big genocide was perpetrated by Indonesia. The target was: its own citizens who were members of the Communist Party.

This is a Pakistani writer here.

And we have some people here claiming all this to be a lie which has been "disproved"!
 
Hon Road Runner,

My problem is that I have very few prejudices; ethnic, linguistic or religious. I am for whosoever is good for Pakistan and against whosoever is IMO against Pakistan.

Me differentiating between Indian Punjabis and Pakistanis Punjabis? Perish the thought !!

Oh yes I have one prejudice. I love mangoes and think Pakistani mangoes are much better than Indian mangoes.:P

You hit the nail on the head. The excess of prejudices cloud the thinking totally and takes away the mental faculties to be able to think logically.

Indian Punjabis and Pakistani Punjabis! Are we talking about people in Pakistan? Isn't it obvious that the Radcliffe line did not exist before 1947?
 
Hon Friend, I respect your views but also sincerely believe that there is no such thing as 'pure Islam'.

The utopia of Khilafat is a myth. Hazrat Abu Bakar (RA) time was spent in eliminating false prophets. Hazrat Omar's (RA) 12 year khilafat was the only time which can be termed as great. Inter Muslim discord had already started during Hazrat Osman's ( RA) term and Hazrat Ali (RA) there was fighting among the Muslims all the time.

While you quote the great Caliph Hazrat Omer (RA), you forget that the pure Muslims of the 'Rashideen' era also martyred Hazrat Osman (RA) in Medina. This was only 26 years after the passing away of our holy Prophet (PBUH). Muawiya then started a hereditary kingdom, ostensibly also known as Khilafat. Yazid martyred grandson son of the prophet ( PBUH) and in Abdul Mailk's time Hajjaj ibne Yusuf martyred grand son of Hazrat Abubakr (RA), Abdullah ibne Zubair inside the Kaaba and his head was hung from the gates of Kaaba until it fell off by itself.

Young men of today have been brainwashed by false history and have a very fictional idea of the past. True golden age was during the Abbaside Khalifas Haroon and Mamoon Rashid. There was little piety and this was the time of Alif Laila. I quote below a good article published in the Daily News




Blaming others

Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Farooq Sulehria

The Amnesty International report on human rights for the year 2007 is out. The Muslim world constitutes, as usual, bleakest chapter. Every single country across the Muslim world has been pointed out by the Amnesty International either for executions and torture or discrimination against women and ethnic and religious minorities. Punishments never handed down even during the Stone Age, have been awarded in 21st century Muslim world. In one case, two Saudi nationals were awarded 7,000 lashes. Yes, 7,000. And executions? Well, 335 in Iran, 158 in Saudi Arabia and 135 in Pakistan. Violation of human rights, it seems, is the only thing that unites the otherwise divided Muslim world.

The report is no exception. The Muslim world cuts a sorry figure every time a global watchdog releases its findings. Freedom of expression here remains curtailed, Reporters Sans Frontieres annually reports. Regarding freedom of expression, there is a joke often told in Arab world. At a meeting, a US journalist says: "We have complete freedom of expression in the US. We can criticise the US president as much as we like." The Arab journalist replies. "We also have complete freedom of expression in Arab world. We can also criticise the US president as much as we like."

Similarly, it is either Bangladesh or Pakistan or Nigeria which is on top of Transparency International's corruption indexes. However, when Nobel laureates gather in Stockholm every December, Muslim scientists and writers are conspicuous by their absence. In case, as Naguib Mahfouz is crowned, he is stabbed and rendered paralysed. The irony, or tragedy, is that his attacker had not even read his excellent books. Or we disown Dr Abdul Salam just because he belonged to the Ahmadiya community. Salam's case deserves special mention since it underlines the absurdity that characterises this part of the world.

When all else fails, "Jews" and "Christian" West are there to lay the blame for all our ills. Conspiracy theories instead of scientific, rational thought holds sway across much of the Muslim world. And every time a rights abuse is highlighted in Iran, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan, a typical Muslim answer is: Look at Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine and Chechnya. True, imperialism and Zionism have a hand in our predicament. However, there are many wounds one can only describe as self-inflicted.

Take, for instance, the Iran-Iraq war, one of the last century's bloodiest conflicts. There is no denying the fact that the United States backed the Saddam regime. But it was the Arab sheikhdoms, panicked at the Iranian revolution, that stoked the flames of war. And, ironically, now in the post-Saddam era when the "Christian" West has written off Iraq's Saddam-era debt worth $66 billion, Iraq's Arab brothers refuse to write off that country's $67 billion loans.

Similarly, last century's bloodiest Muslim genocide was not carried out by Serbs, Israelis, Americans, Europeans or Hindus. It was Pakistan's military that refused to respect a democratic verdict and plunged East Pakistan, now Bangladesh, into an ocean of blood. Millions were killed, maimed, raped and rendered homeless. Luckily, Pakistan has a "Hindu" neighbour. "Hindus are born enemies of Islam'. Hence, Pakistani children are now taught that a Bengali traitor (revered by Bengalis as founder of Bangladesh), in connivance with our "Hindu" neighbour, dismembered Pakistan. Ironically, of all her South Asian neighbours, Pakistan enjoys most cordial relations with the world's only Hindu state, Nepal. The other big genocide was perpetrated by Indonesia. The target was: its own citizens who were members of the Communist Party.

Figures are not available but Israel perhaps cannot match Iran in executing Arabs. Iran's confessional regime is a champion of the Arab cause in Occupied Territories but Arabs of its Khuzestan province are regularly sent to the gallows. Seizing the opportunity, one may also point out how only recently Afghan refugees were driven out of Iran as if Afghan refugees were not as Muslim as Palestinians. And, by the way in the fallen "Emirate of Afghanistan" itself, Hazaras were slaughtered by the Taliban in their thousands almost a decade ago – mainly because Hazaras are Shia. In Iraq, more people have been killed in Shia-Sunni clashes than in resisting the US occupation. Shia-Sunni clashes in Pakistan have claimed more lives than those lost in its wars against India. Ironically, this only "nuclear power" of the Muslim world is not being occupied on its eastern front by its "Hindu" neighbour but is losing territory on its western front to its own citizens.

One can mention from the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait to the recent Hamas-Fatah infighting (a shameful tribute to Israel on its 60th anniversary). The list is long. Indeed, unending. However, the solution to all our problems is always simple: return to an imagined past which, mercifully for the people of the seventh century, never existed. Every time, a scientist in the West is ready with an invention, our readymade answer is: we knew about it 1,400 years ago what the West has found only now. We kill Theo van Gogh when confronted with a film. We burn down our own cities in response to a blasphemous and racist caricature. Still, we refuse to understand that our answer to every "provocation" is either a fatwa or mindless violence – perhaps because creativity is anathema to us. Not because we lack fertile minds, but because we lack liberation and freedom -- liberation from self-imposed mental, moral, and cultural censors. And freedom to think and express. Time to heed the great Syrian poet Nizar Qabbani, who said:



Five thousand years

Growing beards

In our caves.

Our currency is unknown,

Our eyes are a haven for flies.

Friends,

Smash the doors,

Wash your brains,

Wash your clothes.

Friends,

Read a book,

Write a book,

Grow words, pomegranates and grapes,

Sail to the country of fog and snow.

Nobody knows you exist in caves.

People take you for a breed of mongrels.



The writer is a freelance contributor. Email: mfsulehria@hotmail.com

Blaming others


However you are entitled to your views. I quote Voltaire
"While I don’t agree with what you are saying, I will defend till death your right to say it"

Regretfully, the kind of Pakistan that you aspire, few people would have a right to differ. They would simply be killed off.

Everything is right and I agree with, except:
Millions were killed, maimed, raped and rendered homeless.

Going by the gist of the article, there is no scientific way in which Millions of EPs could have been killed by the PA. I had posted something in this regard by a BD writer who debunked this claim of millions killed as a fallacy and propaganda ploy.

Maybe a response to Mr. Sulehria is needed.

Is there a link to the above article?
Thanks
 
This is a Pakistani writer here.

And we have some people here claiming all this to be a lie which has been "disproved"!

Yes he is a Pakistani writer, albeit mis-informed. For millions to be killed, the math that works out is beyond the ability of the garrisoned Pakistani Army. As of late, even BD sources themselves have cast doubt on this "millions" figure.

Here is a source by a BD author:

This is an excerpt from the book "The Myth of 3 Million" by Dr. M. Abdul Mumin Chowdhry. He writes:
Quote:
On 10th Jan 1972, the very day of his return to Bangladesh from prison in West Pakistan, he, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman publicly announced, 'Three million people have been killed. I believe that there is no parallel in the history of the world of such colossal loss of lives for the struggle for freedom.'

Yet only on 8 Jan 1972 in London, on his way back to Bangladesh, the same Mujib had claimed that, "one million people had been killed in Bangladesh."

It was reported that on arrival in Dhaka on 10 Jan 1972 the lobby behind fabrication of the absolutely impossible figure promptly briefed the returning Bangladeshi leader with added "fact" of three hundred thousand women raped, who in turn immediately went on parroting it. Thus the self serving fiction of "three million killed and three hundred thousand women raped" was created.

As has already been mentioned, according to Col. Akbar Hussain's disclosure in the National Assembly of Bangladesh, the number of claimants (war victims) did not exceed three hundred thousand. But according to Abdul Muhaimin, the Ministry of finance, Government of Bangladesh, had informed him that, only 72,000 claims were received. Of them, relations of 50,000 victims had been awarded the declared sum of money. There had been many bogus claims, even some from Razakars, within those 72,000 applications."

Whatever be the actual figure, the "victims" whose relations were compensated might not be all victims of Pakistan Army. A large number of refugees, 1.6 million according to one Awami League journalist, died in Indian refugee camps. Those who claimed compensation also included families of many such dead refugees. Besides there were also many false claims.

Rape Victims. The Bangladesh government opened a number of "Centers for Bangladesh heroines" at Dhaka and other places..

...about a hundred of them were given in marriage at various centers. How many heroines were housed at such centres? How and when such centres were closed and what happened to the inmates (has) remained a closely guarded secret up to now...

In order to kill three million the Pakistan Army would have had to kill 11,494 persons a day, non-stop from March 26 onwards. If, on the other hand, they were to kill one million people, their daily killing would come to 3,831. Seen in another way, for 60,000 Pakistan Army to kill three million and rape three hundred thousand women, each and every one of them had to kill 50 persons and rape 5 women.

Jauhri, a Bangladeshi journalist, wrote: "It is beyond me how three million people could get killed in a guerrilla war of eight month and 21 days. The raping of two hundred thousand women is also beyond my comprehension."

Now back to the topic.
 
Umairp,

Why is it your fault that muslims today are divided ?
Since every one was highlighting inner wars of Muslims and rejecting the idea of Islamic State.
Secondly, can I have comments from all on the portion highlighted in red. Is this how Pakistan sees Non Muslims ( 2lt Singh) & their utility ? Muslims in India do not feel so.

What I meant was that if there is a population consisted of Non-Muslims. All or some of them can be called upon for services like Defence etc.
2lt Singh lives in Pakistan so he can participate in defense. But it is sole responsibility of Muslims to protect their land and interests in an Islamic State.
 
^^^But then why would Singh fight for the Islamic cause? Is he some sort of mercenary?
 
This is a Pakistani writer here.

And we have some people here claiming all this to be a lie which has been "disproved"!

Yes we do.

There are Bangladeshis who are arguing that while atrocities were committed, genocide was not.

Using your logic, what does that imply? Some Bengalis denying genocide and some Pakistanis suggesting it occurred?

EDIT: Sorry Blain, posted this before I read your post.

Back to the topic.

Vinod, we have a thread on the issue in concern precisely for the reason of having discourse on the alleged genocide issue. Rather than attempting to score points here and there, contribute to the discourse on the thread in concern.
 
Yes we do.

There are Bangladeshis who are arguing that while atrocities were committed, genocide was not.

Using your logic, what does that imply? Some Bengalis denying genocide and some Pakistanis suggesting it occurred?

EDIT: Sorry Blain, posted this before I read your post.

Back to the topic.

Vinod, we have a thread on the issue in concern precisely for the reason of having discourse on the alleged genocide issue. Rather than attempting to score points here and there, contribute to the discourse on the thread in concern.

No intention of point scoring at all. And no posts on this topic either on this thread from me. I just quoted someone from an article posted by someone else.

I agree it was off-topic.
 
Since every one was highlighting inner wars of Muslims and rejecting the idea of Islamic State.


What I meant was that if there is a population consisted of Non-Muslims. All or some of them can be called upon for services like Defence etc.
2lt Singh lives in Pakistan so he can participate in defense. But it is sole responsibility of Muslims to protect their land and interests in an Islamic State.

Umair,

Perhaps we can agree that since interpretations of Islam vary, what is important is to have a nation with a representative form of government, where everyone can voice how they think Islam should be implemented in the nation.

If in such a society, if the majority of the people are convinced that Islam allows for equal rights to non-Muslims, and equal opportunities to serve the country, in the military or government, then I think that should be the route we take.

At this point it seems the people of Pakistan have accepted, through their elected representatives, that non-Muslims serving in the military to defend Pakistan is completely appropriate and "Islamic".

For people who disagree, the appropriate thing would be to try and convince other Pakistanis of their POV, and petition their elected representatives to support their position in Parliament, or support politicians in the elections that agree with their POV.

What is important is that open and free discourse takes place (continuously, throughout the life of a society) between people, between people and Islamic scholars, and between Islamic scholars with different interpretations and views, and people get to analyze and adopt positions based on that discourse, and hopefully see them reflected in their governments policies.
 
Everything is right and I agree with, except:


Going by the gist of the article, there is no scientific way in which Millions of EPs could have been killed by the PA. I had posted something in this regard by a BD writer who debunked this claim of millions killed as a fallacy and propaganda ploy.

Maybe a response to Mr. Sulehria is needed.

Is there a link to the above article?
Thanks

The link is at the bottom of the article " Blaming Others" in my post.
 
Since every one was highlighting inner wars of Muslims and rejecting the idea of Islamic State.


What I meant was that if there is a population consisted of Non-Muslims. All or some of them can be called upon for services like Defence etc.
2lt Singh lives in Pakistan so he can participate in defense. But it is sole responsibility of Muslims to protect their land and interests in an Islamic State.


Umairp,

This is the point I want to make, the responsibility to protect the land lies with ALL who live in it. If a non muslim is enjoying the facilities provided by the state, they have to contribute in full measure to the development , safety & progress of the land.Why the discrimination ? Would it be all right if the non muslims were to sit back somply because as you say its not their " sole responsibility" but that of the Muslims ?

Just coz you have planned a Rose Garden are other flowers banned from blooming in the garden? Ideally , a garden must have a mix of all plants but that is a another issue beyond the purview of this thread.

In the Indian Army, there are Regiments with Muslim Risaldar / Subedar Majors with Non muslim troops. They have fought equally well.
 
^^^But then why would Singh fight for the Islamic cause? Is he some sort of mercenary?

He is not mercenary infect he is not suppose to bother.

Because in Islam. Muslim Army can be given zakat to fund their campaing and their pays etc. But at the same time we cannot give zakat to non-Muslim if their are other needy Muslims. so you see there is this issue and many others that indirectly suggest that non-Muslims should not be bothered.
 
Umair,

Perhaps we can agree that since interpretations of Islam vary, what is important is to have a nation with a representative form of government, where everyone can voice how they think Islam should be implemented in the nation.

If in such a society, if the majority of the people are convinced that Islam allows for equal rights to non-Muslims, and equal opportunities to serve the country, in the military or government, then I think that should be the route we take.

At this point it seems the people of Pakistan have accepted, through their elected representatives, that non-Muslims serving in the military to defend Pakistan is completely appropriate and "Islamic".

For people who disagree, the appropriate thing would be to try and convince other Pakistanis of their POV, and petition their elected representatives to support their position in Parliament, or support politicians in the elections that agree with their POV.

What is important is that open and free discourse takes place (continuously, throughout the life of a society) between people, between people and Islamic scholars, and between Islamic scholars with different interpretations and views, and people get to analyze and adopt positions based on that discourse, and hopefully see them reflected in their governments policies.

Of course, this should be done by dialog.
I am just using my right in the democratic society to bring my point of view. you have right to bring yours. and then by the majority and concrete facts we shall decide.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom