Wakeup Lahore - A MUST WATCH

[Pakz]

I dont have any mal-intentions, but just wanted to raise a counter-point.
Wouldn't it be wrong to say that the Christian world (the West) was ever united or they constituted one combined entity at the expense of the Muslims? I mean the Russians are Christians but never sided with the Europeans and the Americans. The Christian-Capitalist US is still having tiffs with the Christian -Socialist Cuba and Venezuela.

What I am trying to say is that religions never was a unifying phenomenon for people with different ethnicities. When Babur invaded India he fought with Ibrahim Lodhi of the Delhi sultanate. Tipu Sultan fought with both the Nizams and the British. Hitler, a devout Catholic waged war with the whole predominantly Christian western world.

I'd say ethnicity and culture are the main deciding factors.

Throughout history people of same faiths have fought with each other simply because religion fails to act as a unifying force. May be that's possible according to your and Zaid Hamid's views, but from what history and the present suggest, there will forever be factors beyond the scope of religion that will unite or divide us.

You have to go back, way back to see the whole game. The British at that time represented Christian empire. It wasn’t said straight to the face, but every sane person knows, how they brought their culture and influenced it into other people culture, language and religion. I can give you 10 pages history lesson on British grand plan to subjugate and divide the world population.

I wouldn’t say ethnicity or culture is the deciding factor because lets look at history. The Nazis believe in Nationalistic Socialist System. A party that may be composed of different ethnic people but still belonged to the party. Like Italians were supporters of Nazis.

The Communists of Russia, again different ethnicities were under the umbrella of Communism. Show me any where that a huge empire was based only on ethnicity. Heck, even British empire wasnet only one culture, language or ethnicity.

 

[MadDog]

my friend....the reason why russia and other countries didnt unite was that first of all they were either capitalists or communists and capitalism or communism have nothing to do with christianity...thus it would ve been difficult to unite on the basis of christianity...HOWEVER ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION ITS A DEEN...MEANING A WAY OF LIFE, ITS A PACKAGE ( ITS OWN FINANCIAL, JUDICIAL, ECONOMIC, POLITICAL SYSTEM)...this thing is absent in christianity....and for muslims this has been tested and was successful....during caliph Umar (R)'s time the govt couldnt find a single needy or poor person in the country, the minorities lived side by side peacefuly....read when european kings were fighting muslims in spain...The jews faught along side muslims...there was so much tolerance.
Today..u call 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 as arabic numerals
even the words algebra and algorithms have their roots
in the times when muslims used to be the most civilised society on earth.....cuz they followed Islam correctly.

 

[Pakz]

Pakistanis must change our thinking and Unite. This message should be conveyed to everyone.

 

[RobbieS]

You have to go back, way back to see the whole game. The British at that time represented Christian empire. It wasn’t said straight to the face, but every sane person knows, how they brought their culture and influenced it into other people culture, language and religion. I can give you 10 pages history lesson on British grand plan to subjugate and divide the world population.

I wouldn’t say ethnicity or culture is the deciding factor because lets look at history. The Nazis believe in Nationalistic Socialist System. A party that may be composed of different ethnic people but still belonged to the party. Like Italians were supporters of Nazis.

The Communists of Russia, again different ethnicities were under the umbrella of Communism. Show me any where that a huge empire was based only on ethnicity. Heck, even British empire wasnet only one culture, language or ethnicity.

Thanks for replying to the points I raised.

I don't really think that the British really started out with a grand plan to subjugate other cultures. I think the origins of British and European imperialism were mainly economic. The cultural subjugation which ultimately lead to the White Man's burden came much later. It was originally intended to facilitate their rule and governance. But I agree with you, they did spend considerable time and effort making sure their culture was super-imposed on ours.

Looking at it now, maybe culture is more of a factor than ethnicity. Nazis were mainly ethnically Germans including Austrian and Czechs. The Italians were Fascists and aligned themselves with the Nazis for material and imperial gains.

And you are right about the Soviet Union, they were mainly driven were communist ideals. But at the same time a majority of them belonged to the Rus culture.

An example of an empire based on ethnicity would be those of the Huns and the Mongols. Though both had their allies, it was their own culture and ethnicity that drove them towards what they achieved.

 

[RobbieS]

my friend....the reason why russia and other countries didnt unite was that first of all they were either capitalists or communists and capitalism or communism have nothing to do with christianity...thus it would ve been difficult to unite on the basis of christianity...HOWEVER ISLAM IS NOT A RELIGION ITS A DEEN...MEANING A WAY OF LIFE, ITS A PACKAGE ( ITS OWN FINANCIAL, JUDICIAL, ECONOMIC, POLITICAL SYSTEM)...this thing is absent in christianity....and for muslims this has been tested and was successful....during caliph Umar (R)'s time the govt couldnt find a single needy or poor person in the country, the minorities lived side by side peacefuly....read when european kings were fighting muslims in spain...The jews faught along side muslims...there was so much tolerance.
Today..u call 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 as arabic numerals
even the words algebra and algorithms have their roots
in the times when muslims used to be the most civilised society on earth.....cuz they followed Islam correctly.

I guess the crux of your argument is that Islam is much more than a religion. Its a way of living which takes care of every aspect of our lives.

In that case, I'd say all religions, if studied and understood in totality are filled with teachings that can be applied to our day to day lives. It actually boils down to how we interpret it.

I am also aware of how Islam provides teachings covering Banking, Judiciary and political system and my limited knowledge restricts me from saying anything regarding other religions. Cant say if any other religion covers those areas.

Although I have my doubts, I have nothing against Muslim countries forming a common political association and uniting to face common issues. I believe if properly implemented, it can even help solve a lot of world problems and who knows bring lasting peace.

 

[Pakz]

Thanks for replying to the points I raised.

I don't really think that the British really started out with a grand plan to subjugate other cultures. I think the origins of British and European imperialism were mainly economic. The cultural subjugation which ultimately lead to the White Man's burden came much later. It was originally intended to facilitate their rule and governance. But I agree with you, they did spend considerable time and effort making sure their culture was super-imposed on ours.

Looking at it now, maybe culture is more of a factor than ethnicity. Nazis were mainly ethnically Germans including Austrian and Czechs. The Italians were Fascists and aligned themselves with the Nazis for material and imperial gains.

And you are right about the Soviet Union, they were mainly driven were communist ideals. But at the same time a majority of them belonged to the Rus culture.

An example of an empire based on ethnicity would be those of the Huns and the Mongols. Though both had their allies, it was their own culture and ethnicity that drove them towards what they achieved.

British imperialism was not only economic but also Territorial. The American war of independence is the proof that the british were more interested in Imperlistic Territory integration of the empire. Likewise, the British would not have left the Indian subcontinant if it was not for the Nazis offensive against the British.

The main goal of the british was to bring the Countries ruled by them under the Commonwealth or in other terms under their influence. The main example is the usage of English around the globe. Why English is the universal spoken language today?

The West succeded in breaking up any knows Muslim empires at that time. Before the defeat of Umayyads, Muslims were very advance in terms of science, mathematics, architecture. All this knowledge was destroyed first by many invaders like mongols, crusaders.

Your example of Mongols and huns as ethnic or cultural empire was eventually changed to very different culture, ethnic and language. You would know that right.

However, when you have many different cultures and ethnicities then that can not be implemented, You need a system like Communism, Democracy, Nationalist Socialists to united the people. I am sure Americans are not united under ethnicity right.

Pakistan requires Nationalism with Islam that is the way of life prescribed by Allah.

 

[Pakz]

I guess the crux of your argument is that Islam is much more than a religion. Its a way of living which takes care of every aspect of our lives.

In that case, I'd say all religions, if studied and understood in totality are filled with teachings that can be applied to our day to day lives. It actually boils down to how we interpret it.

I am also aware of how Islam provides teachings covering Banking, Judiciary and political system and my limited knowledge restricts me from saying anything regarding other religions. Cant say if any other religion covers those areas.

Although I have my doubts, I have nothing against Muslim countries forming a common political association and uniting to face common issues. I believe if properly implemented, it can even help solve a lot of world problems and who knows bring lasting peace.

yes, religion can play an important role for the society. Take example of Israel. A country based on a religion. However, they used that ideology negatively on Palestinans.

yes, it can bring peace, IF, the muslims are educated and knowledgeable of what they follow.

 

[RobbieS]

British imperialism was not only economic but also Territorial. The American war of independence is the proof that the british were more interested in Imperlistic Territory integration of the empire. Likewise, the British would not have left the Indian subcontinant if it was not for the Nazis offensive against the British.

The main goal of the British was to bring the Countries ruled by them under the Commonwealth or in other terms under their influence. The main example is the usage of English around the globe. Why English is the universal spoken language today?

The West succeded in breaking up any knows Muslim empires at that time. Before the defeat of Umayyads, Muslims were very advance in terms of science, mathematics, architecture. All this knowledge was destroyed first by many invaders like mongols, crusaders.

Your example of Mongols and huns as ethnic or cultural empire was eventually changed to very different culture, ethnic and language. You would know that right.

However, when you have many different cultures and ethnicities then that can not be implemented, You need a system like Communism, Democracy, Nationalist Socialists to united the people. I am sure Americans are not united under ethnicity right.

Pakistan requires Nationalism with Islam that is the way of life prescribed by Allah.

I do agree that British did have territorial aims. But all I am saying is that initially they were secondary to economic aims.

Americans aren't united by ethnicity but by Culture. In most case its either both or one of them.

You are right about the advances by Muslims during the middle ages. But again I'd attribute them to Arabs as an ethnicity and culture and not necessarily their religion. I am not trying to berate Islam but I'm not sure about the role of Islam specifically in their advances.

And its also true that much of European advancement in the middle ages is owed to the Muslim Ummayad empires. The conquest of Al-Andalus and Spain provided a close interaction between the two cultures and transfer of knowledge to Europe.

And I don't agree that Crusades actually destroyed Arab knowledge and advancement. Unlike the ancient world the empires in middle ages weren't closeted from the rest of the world. Trade and economics ensured that knowledge was transferred. If all the Crusades may have actually it facilitated spread and sharing of knowledge. A fact borne out by the spread of the use of the Arabian horse by European cavalry. Crusades enabled them to view the animal at close quarters.

 

[Roby]

you know why Pakistan Nuclear bomb was called Islamic bomb by all muslim countries? because they consider it part of Muslim world the Ummah. Although it is Pakistan property, the muslim world still feel proud that a muslim country has a nuclear bomb, from Bangladesh to Malaysia to Turkey. All muslims felt proud when Pakistan detonated Nuclear bomb.

Today, No Politician think in terms of United interest of Muslims. They only care about themselves from Pakistan president to Egypt, Jordan, Saudi arabia. Thats why when, Iraq, Afghanistan was attacked, Muslim protested but the Politicians didnt care. That is the reason Muslim world is so behind because of this thinking.

Zaid Hamid is telling us that when Muslims are united togther then that is the only time when you can succeed in your objectives. This is what Prophet Muhammed said to Muslims.

I hope you get what i am trying to say.

If other Muslim countries are so much proud about Pakistans nuclear bombs, why the Arab league condmned the pakistani nuclear tests?

The Egyptian-based Arab organization denounced Pakistan's nuclear tests calling them a "dangerous" step toward an arms race.
(CNN, 28 May 98)

 

[RameeX Xaved]

If other Muslim countries are so much proud about Pakistans nuclear bombs, why the Arab league condmned the pakistani nuclear tests?

why are you not getting the point? most of the muslim rulers are unfortunately corrupt and they dont deserve to be leading muslim countries. arab league is nothing but puppet of west, specially zionist who have a strong hold on the world's affairs. the solution lies in the unity of muslim ummah, who has only one ruler which leads the muslims all over the world. there are no boundaries in islam. but today's leaders have forgotten the message of islam and the zionist have taken control of them..but pakistan being the only military super power of the muslim ummah, has the potential to lead this muslim ummah. but not under this current corrupt leadership

 

[Spring Onion]

I have heard similar things number of times, I have questions if anyone can help me understand. These stories that Zaid talks about, related to very old times, example victory over Persian etc. How many of these stories have origin in Pakistan or is he claiming every Muslim victories.

Those are not stories. And if you carefully check the seriese Mr Zaid Hamid has presented mostly related to battle field strategies. And indeed if we carefully check their war startegies these can help us understanding and fighting in the fields.

At that Time persian empire was a superpower but Muslims despite lack of resources and being weak fought against all such superpowers of that time.

It was the strategy that helped them overcome the superiority of the superpowers of the time.

 

[ssheppard]

Cant stop noticing young people ...looking lost...wondering why the hell they are listening to this ......

Fo 10 Minuts this guy tries to make people understand...."Khushnaseb Kaun the...."

 

[Spring Onion]

If other Muslim countries are so much proud about Pakistans nuclear bombs, why the Arab league condmned the pakistani nuclear tests?

The Egyptian-based Arab organization denounced Pakistan's nuclear tests calling them a "dangerous" step toward an arms race.
(CNN, 28 May 98)

OIC is the world body for all Islamic countries. They did not condemn Pakistani nuclear tests.

The role of Egypt can be taken with a pinch of salt due to pro-US dictator there besides its ties with Israel.

 

[Spring Onion]

Cant stop noticing young people ...looking lost...wondering why the hell they are listening to this ......

Fo 10 Minuts this guy tries to make people understand...."Khushnaseb Kaun the...."

Well Indians like you were not there on the spot so you failed to see the enthusiasm of the youth and i tell you it was no un-educated youth but highly educated and also from elite class whom people think might not be interested in ideology of Pakistan but hey

they are flocking to their roots

 

[ssheppard]

This guy must me minting money like anything........give people what they want to here.....and wallah.....there you have it ....Moolah ....and More moolah......

$$$$$


Everywhere......