What's new

The birth of a liberal movement in Pakistan

Which liberal extremists are to make people change their ways? You will be surprised that most of these liberal extremists are as 'pious' in their daily lives as the fanatics are.

I don't give two figs whether someone is pious or a habitual alcoholic. All I care is that they are open to dialog.

I already showed you an example of liberal extremism. Hoodbhoy thinks that anyone wearing a burqa or hijab is not 'enlightened' -- whatever that means to him. Along with his statement questioning the patriotism of Balochis and Sindhis, he is the classic example of a bigot. His being a physics professor doesn't mitigate his bigotry.

If a mullah had made such sweeping generalizations based on people's looks or ethnicity, you guys would be all over him. And rightfully so.

Coming back to the topic, here is what I wrote at the Comments section of Express Tribute related to this topic. I know, not feasible, but...we liberal moderates are getting desperate.

Commendable, but I have lived in the West long enough to know how self-righteous leftists often turn out to be just as intolerant and dogmatic as right wingers. Just because I want to talk to the Islamists doesn't mean I agree with them 100%. The same I don't agree with all lberals 100%. The very fact that you guys view anyone who wants to talk to the Islamists as a traitor and a 'fake' proves your own intolerance.

Will you allow a woman to wear a burqa in your commune? Will she be able to live a normal life or will she be viewed with suspicion and derision wherever she goes?
 
Last edited:
Developereo,
Please provide the quote where Hoodbhoy says that burqah is not enlightened. Also, that is just one man, btw, even if he said so.
Also, the 'commune' is not some hippy joint. Anyone is welcome who is not going to wrap himself with bombs and start threatening people around. And several of my own relatives have beards and some women folks wear burqah. Nothing against them. They are my blood and fellow citizens.
Your assertion about liberal extremism in Pakistan is utterly devoid of any evidence. Whatever the small group of liberals are in Pakistan they deal with beards and burqah EVERYDAY; often in their own households. There are no issues even if some 'burger family' may feel superior due to class war.
On the other hand of the spectrum, the religious fanatics are not so tolerant of others' personal choices.

This 'liberal extremism' argument is being repeated again and again. It would be better if we compare the two extremes in Pakistan's context threadbare. I know there is no significant liberal extremism in Pakistan. And, like you, I too have lived in the West long enough to claim that the right wingers have these BS theories about 'liberals' of America destroying America. Again, un founded.

So educated us, please.
 
Developereo,
Please provide the quote where Hoodbhoy says that burqah is not enlightened.

I already provided the link and the quote in my earlier post, but here it is again: Critical minds alone can take us forward: Dr Hoodbhoy | PAMIR TIMES

“Students were more enlightened and liberal 30 years ago. Today 60 per cent of the girl students in Quaid-i-Azam University (QAU) come in burqa and another 10 per cent in hijab,” said Dr Hoodbhoy who is Professor of Nuclear Physics and Chairman of the Physics Department, Quaid-i-Azam University. He has been a faculty member at the QAU since 1973.

Also, that is just one man, btw, even if he said so.

People asked for an example of a liberal extremist. I provided one.

Also, the 'commune' is not some hippy joint. Anyone is welcome who is not going to wrap himself with bombs and start threatening people around.

And where exactly did I imply that it was a hippie joint? I merely used your wording.

And several of my own relatives have beards and some women folks wear burqah. Nothing against them. They are my blood and fellow citizens.

Then, by definition, you are not a liberal extremist. We can be sure that Hoodbhoy, for example, would not want burqas in his utopia.

This 'liberal extremism' argument is being repeated again and again. It would be better if we compare the two extremes in Pakistan's context threadbare. I know there is no significant liberal extremism in Pakistan.

You are right. Liberal extremism is far outnumbered by religious extremism in Pakistan.

My worry, based on the reaction to the Governor's assassination, is that posistions are hardening on both sides and we are headed for civil unrest. I want us to talk to each other and try to work things out peacefully. I am not talking about dialog with those who adulate Qadri -- these people are clearly beyond the pale. I want us to find a compromise with people who want an Islamic state and are willing to work within the law.

By stereotyping each other and covering our ears, we are playing into the hands of our enemies who would like nothing better than for Pakistan to descend into anarchy and civil war.

And, like you, I too have lived in the West long enough to claim that the right wingers have these BS theories about 'liberals' of America destroying America. Again, un founded.

I am neither a right-winger, nor a left-winger. I am more of a Libertarian with liberal leanings, if anything, on social matters.

I am not talking about anyone destroying anything; simply stating my opinion that leftists tend to be just as intolerant of dissent as right wingers.
 
Last edited:
Ladies and Gentlemen.. I suggest you decide for your self because our man Developereo apparently fails miserably at describing what a liberal extremist is and just needs an opposing force to counter balance it with fundo religous extremisim...

You decide whats worse or should we hold both of these extremes at a similar battleground? I would like to ask, if your right wing is going more and more right, more and more extremist and you ask us liberals to meet in the middle? Just exactly what middle ground would that be?----quite frankly there is no middle ground any more.

RELIGIOUS EXTREMIST that Qadri listened to when in Pindi


LIBERAL EXTREMIST as Developereo put it

Pervez Hoodbhoy



Nadeem F Paracha


Fail Developereo fail..... you CANT compare the two and you CANT label them liberal extremists.. and if thats what you want to call it so be it BUT Don't ever try to equate a Liberal Extremist with a religious fundo extremist at the same scale..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
2 Kinda ppl need to exterminated(not in the real sense):
Religious Extremists
Liberal Extremists!

Aatish Taseer, son of assassinated Punjab Pakistan Governor Salman Taseer and Indian mother Tavleen Singh always had an uneasy relationship with his estranged father. His debut book, stranger to history was a journey that meshed the political with the personal


aatish.jpg


Salman Taseer's son Aatish Taseer, based in London and Delhi surfaced some years ago, with a book in search of his father. Aatish was born after his journalist mother Tavleen Singh had an affair with Salman Taseer though the relationship eventually ended.

Aatish's debut book, Stranger to History: A Son's Journey Through Islamic Lands holds several threads together, his relationship with his father and the complications of Indian-Pakistan parentage, the weight of history bearing down on those ties and the reaffirmation of the oft touted phrase: the personal is the political.



Affair

Aatish writes in a chapter called, 'Bhutto's Footprint.' "My parents met in March 1980, in Delhi. My father was in India promoting a biography he had written of his political mentor, the Pakistani leader Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. My mother, a young journalist with a Delhi newspaper, was sent to interview him.

'Which one of you is Salman Taseer?' she said, as she entered the room my father and his publisher were staying in at the Oberoi Hotel in Delhi.

Their affair began that evening. My father took my mother's number, they had dinner at a Chinese restaurant called the House of Ming, and for a little over a week, my father disappeared with my mother.

My parents met at a point in their lives when they became politically involved in countries that were experiencing political cataclysm...

My parents' affair lasted little more than a week, when my father left Delhi for Lahore, where he already had a wife and three small children. A month later, my mother discovered she was pregnant. The scandal of it was too great to assess.

My mother was from an old Sikh family, still carrying the pain of Partition. For her then, to become pregnant out of marriage by a visiting Pakistani was at the time, and still today, incalculable scandal. In a week when she was considering an abortion, my father called unexpectedly from the Club Marbella in Dubai. She told him what had happened...

My father asked what could be done to change her mind. She replied that they would have to at least pretend to be married, and over the course of their conversation, they came to a tenuous agreement to continue their relationship for as long as they could.

The months that followed were defined by secrecy. My parents met again in April, in Pakistan; they went to Dubai; they spent a summer in London, full of bright evenings and the bustle of people in pubs and open-air restaurants; and all the time, their relationship and my mother's pregnancy were kept from her parents and from my father's family in Pakistan.

It was this pact of secrecy that made their relationship possible, and it was from this period that one of the two objects I linked with my father as I grew up came into my mother's possession: a copy of his biography of Bhutto.

The inscription dated '17/5/80', read: 'With love and love, Salman Taseer.' The other was a browning silver frame with two pictures of him. In one he's holding me as a baby and in the other he's at a Mughal monument, dressed in white, wearing large seventies sunglasses."

Secrecy

Aatish even writes in a chapter called, 'Rupture' that, "A pact of secrecy had made my parents' relationship possible, but soon after they went to Dubai, leaving me with my grandparents in Delhi, this pact began to unravel. News of my birth was travelling. In Dubai, there was a false alarm.

My father was cooking dinner when his sister's husband walked up to him and said, 'How's Aatish?' My father dropped the pan he was holding and recovered himself only when he realised that his brother-in-law didn't in fact know of my existence, but was using my name not normally used to mean 'fire' in a banal sense to check the stove's fire.

Our past sometimes comes back to haunt us and so do the words we write. Aatish was with his father when Benazir Bhutto was killed in Pakistan. It is now eerie to read what he writes in the book about that murder. Aatish writes, "It's too awful,' my mother wept. I first saw her when I was with your father.

We were in Islamabad and he said, That's Benazir Butto. She was so young, so pretty. She had no business dying. Whatever her faults she didn't deserve to die like this. My mother had witnessed the death of the great Indian demagogues, Indira Gandhi and her son, Rajiv.

She understood demagoguery. She knew that in countries like ours, more so in Pakistan, where institutions are weak, where the state is threatened, these seemingly indestructible icons thrown up by the people bring a kind of solidity to the political landscape: they make it impossible to imagine the world without them..."

Aatish is Indian, his father Pakistani it is a cleave that only children from these relationships understand is so deep that to fill that chasm, even given all those clich ©s like love conquers all may be impossible.

In the book Aatish writes, "I didn't need to be Pakistani to understand what my father meant, only perhaps the degree to which he meant it. The death of the demagogue would demoralise the population. But in a country with few national leaders, removing Benazir made the very idea of the federation less viable..."

Aatish says in the book as he watched his father post Benazir's murder. "I felt a great sympathy as I watched the man I had judged so harshly, for not facing his past when it came to me, muse in the pain of history in this country. And maybe this was all that the gods had wished me to see, the grimace on my father's face, and for us, both in our own ways strangers to history, to be together on the night that Benazir Bhutto was killed."

Aatish's royal girlfriend

Aatish Taseer, 30-year-old son of the slain Pakistani politician Salman Taseer, went out for three years with a member of the British royal family but hopes they would marry were dashed four years ago.

Aatish, Salman's son from a brief relationship with the Indian journalist Tavleen Singh, upset his father by writing an autobiographical novel, Stranger to History: A Son's Journey through Islamic Lands. Reviewers said the book reflected the anguish of a son who felt betrayed by his father for abandoning his pregnant mother.

In 2006, Hello! magazine reported that the romance between Lady Gabriella Windsor, the daughter of Prince and Princess Michael of Kent, and Aatish Taseer, which many had expected to culminate in wedding bells, had ended after the royal beauty reluctantly decided not to follow her boyfriend back to his home in India.

Somewhat unusually a spokesman for Princess Michael went on the record to state, "I can confirm that Gabriella and Aatish are no longer together, but the love and respect they share for each other has not diminished."

He emphasised, "They are not getting married. That's official. They are very young, they are just enjoying each other's company."

Some sources suggested that Princess Michael, by birth a German, did not want her daughter to marry an Indian but there was no evidence to back up this claim.

The couple, who are both writers, first met when Gabriella (known as "Ella" in short) was on a magazine internship in the US while completing her final year at the prestigious Brown University, Rhode Island. When she returned to London, Aatish followed and the couple became a regular sight on the British social scene.

"Aatish very much wanted her to go back with him to India," a close friend told the Daily Mail, "but she wants to stay in Britain and pursue her writing career here. So they have very sadly decided to go their separate ways."

Rumours that the couple were about to get engaged were given currency in 2005 by a report in the "Mandrake" gossip column of the Sunday Telegraph, which stated, "Prince and Princess Michael of Kent will announce that their elegant 23-year-old daughter is to marry Aatish early this year."

The paper quoted Aatish, a trainee reporter then with Time magazine, as saying, "I will be heading back to India to pursue my career.

The opportunities in media out there are excellent and I'm determined to give it a go. I've lived here in London and in New York, but Delhi is where I am from and where I want to be."

However, in an interview to a reputable German Sunday newspaper, Welt am Sonntag, Princess Michael categorically denied her daughter was about to get married.

"It is not true," she said. "Gabriella is so young and is not thinking about getting married. She is going first to Africa to write an article about guenons (monkeys) in the Kalahari. Why should she be sitting around in India with babies? I am very fond of her boyfriend. I would not be against a marriage even though I receive letters from many people who do not appreciate multicultural marriages."


People pay homage to Pakistan's former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto who was assassinated in 2007

It would have been hard for Aatish to have adjusted to his wife's royal background. But the reality is that she is royal only in a technical sense, being 31st in line to the throne. Her elder brother, Lord Frederick Windsor, 31, who was educated at Eton and Magdalen College, Oxford, where he took a 2:1 in classics, is 30th in line.

Meanwhile, Salman Taseer's brutal death may free his author son, Aatish, from writing about the father with whom he had, by his own admission, a difficult relationship.

While in the West it is all too common for children to write about celebrity parents in an excessively critical way, Pakistani and Indian society appears not to be ready for such public scrutiny. When Aatish wrote about the father-son encounter in the form of a thinly disguised novel, his father was not pleased.

Salman Taseer, who was on his third marriage and had other children, had ambitions and reacted badly, it seems, to his son's novel.

Some open-minded fathers might have congratulated their sons on the literary merit and honesty of such books. From all account and particularly that of Aatish, Salman Taseer was apparently furious. The son felt rebuffed.

Aatish wrote in the London Evening Standard about his father's opposition to his novel. "My first intimation of trouble was when my father, in part the subject of my memoir Stranger to History, re-entered Pakistani politics after a 15-year hiatus.

As the book was being typeset, he was sworn in as a caretaker minister in General Musharraf's Cabinet and then, with an ideological flexibility particular to Pakistan, he was Asif Ali Zardari's governor in Punjab."

Aatish continued, "As the book was going to print, he threatened to sue my Canadian publisher for referring to his union with my mother as 'a marriage'.

They were never married. They had a liaison soon after my mother, a journalist at the time, interviewed my father about his book on his political mentor, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto; I was the result. 'How funny, darling,' a friend said. 'Your father considers it libellous to have been married to your mother!' "

Several women journalists become involved with men they interview. Some in London dine out for years afterwards on the strength of the men who loved them and left them. But perhaps Aatish was being na ve if he thought his father's political opponents would not throw the book at him.

"I must sadly confess, after my father's political opponents in Pakistan used the book to rubbish his Islamic credentials, to being an accidental accessory to attempted political parricide," Aatish recounted. "My father's reaction was silence, far more menacing than his threats to the Canadians for their delayed attempt at making an honest woman out of my mother."

Fatima Bhutto has written a gripping book about her father's assassination. Painful though it will be, Aatish will now in theory also be able to write a moving book, both as an observer and a participant, about the latest shocking drama in Pakistan.

A son in search of his father
 
Durran3 please don't compare them.It's a disgrace to Dr Pervez H and NFP personality.Both are very intelligent individuals.

I actually felt quite embarrassed putting up those videos but apparently some people on these boards believe them to be on equal footings with violent extremists on the right which is laughable to say the least
 
I am sure you can find videos where these two choose their words more carefully, but their bigotry has been exposed elsewhere. I already posted published statements by this vile excuse of a man Hoodbhoy. The man judges women by the way they dress and claims that Balochis and Sindhis are not patriotic.

I have also seen him interviewed on Australian TV where he needlessly cast aspersions on Pakistan military's ability to safeguard our nukes. He came across as a man who will say anything to get on TV and ingratiate himself to Pakistan's enemies.

Any day of the week, I will call him what he is: a closed-minded misogynist bigot.

As for NFP, I already explained why this one-trick pony has nothing of value to say. His every article boils down to Islam bashing. Interesting and valid up to a point, but ultimately repetitive and predictable.

In case you still have any doubts, let me reiterate: anybody who judges people by their appearance and believes that every man with a beard and every woman in a hijab are terrorists is no better than the extremist mullahs.
 
Last edited:
In case you still have any doubts, let me reiterate: anybody who judges people by their appearance and believes that every man with a beard and every woman in a hijab are terrorists is no better than the extremist mullahs.

No my friend , there is atleast one small difference

Anybody who judges people by their appearance and believes that every man with a beard and every woman in a hijab are terrorists doesnt murder them(instigate violence against them) while those extremist mullahs are cause of a lot of deaths , destruction and loss of humanity.

I can have many other reasons as well but I guess the one that I mentioned is suffice to diffrentiate between the two.
 
No my friend , there is atleast one small difference

Anybody who judges people by their appearance and believes that every man with a beard and every woman in a hijab are terrorists doesnt murder them(instigate violence against them) while those extremist mullahs are cause of a lot of deaths , destruction and loss of humanity.

I can have many other reasons as well but I guess the one that I mentioned is suffice to diffrentiate between the two.

Appreciate that and I have already indicated that anyone who advocates unlawful activity should be prosecuted.

I am taking the debate to the next level. Once we have weeded out the violent troublemakers, then what? At some point we have to sit down and engage in dialog to find compromise. To take the example of the blasphemy law, the mullahs will have to give up the death penalty clause and accept much tighter evidentiary requirements. The secularists will have to acknowledge that blasphemy is a sensitive matter for Muslims and such a law is not unreasonable. There are similar laws in Western countries against speech that is considered incendiary or hateful. A compromise law would criminalize religious vilification of any religion, impose strict evidentiary requirements, and have less extreme punishments.

But the Hoodbhoys and NFPs of this world will never accept such a compromise, and neither will the extremist mullahs. It is up to centrists to strike a balance and prevent the country from falling into civil war. People like Imran Khan, hopefully.
 
I am taking the debate to the next level. Once we have weeded out the violent troublemakers, then what?

But the Hoodbhoys and NFPs of this world will never accept such a compromise, and neither will the extremist mullahs. It is up to centrists to strike a balance and prevent the country from falling into civil war. People like Imran Khan, hopefully.

Dont you think we are getting too far ahead of ourselves if we start talking about something that doesnt even exist in the next 5 years or so.

Dont know what makes you think that when hatred mongers like hafiz saeed can change then why wont PH's(who are much more educated and moderate)change ( dont have seen much of him , but have been impressed by things he said , didnt really come across as a person who criticizes every hijab wearning muslim as you said).
 

Seriously, all the Ahadeeth that this guy has mentioned have explained cases where the offenders who was actually committing Toheen-e-Rasalat were killed. Where from these Ahadeeth is it proven that anyone who was "Blamed" for Toheen-e-Rasalat" was killed without any sort of investigation?

I am sorry i am not knowledgeable enough to actually quote from the Holy Quran and Sahi Ahdeeth but can anyone give us some Ahdees-e-Mubarika about "Tohmat'? What is the punishment and how a person is to be treated who accuses someone falsely?

Islam has always spread on basis of popularity and not by force. Muslims impressed non-Muslims into converting. This bloodshed is doing the complete opposite of that and this surge in liberal extremism is a direct reaction of religious extremism.
 
"liberal movement"...in...Pakistan...
Would protestants mass migrate to North America be also classified as "liberal movement"? Hardly.
It's a term coined in the west by, well, "editors", and you know who.

It should never be called "liberal movement" in any Muslim country in my opinion. People (mostly young ones) tries to get more room to express themselves and gain more personal freedom. It happens everywhere, in Egypt as well. And interestingly, regardless of religion orientation. Basically, it's a human thing.

American kids went out on street in 1969...
Chinese kids went out on street in 1989...
Iranian kids went out on street in 2009...

I am not going to comment more on this thread unless the year is 2029. See ya.
 
Developereo,
Thank you for the responses. Really, after what Durran says right after my 'commune' post, there is not much for me to add.
There is no liberal extremism in Pakistan but if you stretch what one or two people say and make that into something then what can I say. Fact is that liberals in Pakistan are outnumbered, out gunned, and are abandoned by their allies like PPP, MQM in Pakistan because of pervasive fear.
I am all for finding 'the middle ground'. Indeed, I don't want a Pakistan where burqah-clad people are not allowed entry into government buildings because, to me, THAT would be some kind of liberal extremism. However, it is hard to find a common ground with people who come out foaming at the mouth and threaten to kill you when you even bring up the subject of refining a MAN-MADE (dictator Zia's) law.
But I still thank you for being more refined than a lot of others here who are just out to justify a murder and are not bothered by the intellectual suffocation creeping in.
 
Back
Top Bottom