Pak Tea House » Pakistan, Women » The fearless moderates of Pakistan
The fearless moderates of Pakistan
Watch this video where Asma Jahangir utters bitter truths and a woman from the audience puts the bigots to shame. Apologies to those who cannot understand Urdu/Hindustani. PTH Admin
More From PakTeaHouse
PakTeaHouse Recommends
- Causes of the Great Depression (LongCrisis)
- The Collapse of Complex Economic Life Support Systems (LongCrisis)
Filed under: Pakistan, Women · Tags: asma jahangir, Pakistan, Urdu Hindustani, woman
50 Responses to "The fearless moderates of Pakistan"
Leave a Reply
Recent Comments
- Rex Minor
said AKB proposes a stop to name calling, and Kaalchakr... - tajender
said the more educated states are less caste prone
k... - Fingolfin
said Tajender
ya they are not a trading community b... - tajender said reverse is ture,bjp and congress lost power in up...
- tajender said what i wrote about kayasth is right they have brhm...
- RajTOO
said tajender,
you're more of a cartoon than a serious... - no-communal
said BM,
.
I read parts of your debate on slavery. I... - tajender said Fingolfin
kayasth are illegetimate off spring...
- tajender said Fingolfin
kaysth are not bania.they are not tra...
- RajTOO said Fingolfin,
tajender knows nothing. He just copy p...
Wah! Fareed Paracha got torn a new one…. lovely
Being honedst and not a hypocRAT .. I am, en passant.. not very happy about liars and lawyers Both (L.L.Bs) who bank in Dubai, Toronto, Switzerland to evade incometaxes.
SYYED IQBAL JAFREE OFF BRIGHTON
Hats off to the lady from the audience.
I appreciate this old woman – unless we rise above emotions and give way to logic, the bigotry from the society cannot be uprooted.
It is not the question of being a moderate – it is the question of being logical or otherwise.
Pakistani women have more courage than Pakistani men.
Pakistani men are the “system” – why would they overthrow it?
If even 10% women of subcontinent are as courageous as those two ladies then they will usurp the power from our male dominated societies and most of our problems will be solved.
You go girls!
[...] The fearless moderates of Pakistan [...]
Aafia is the qaum ke beti who is the handy weapon of choice for the superior Muslim mindset to assassinate the disposable Aasia, who is the beti of the out cast.
When the intolerant, holier than thou mindset runs out of reason, the self-righteous society resorts to physical and emotional violence by stripping a woman naked and parading her in public, burying her alive along with her dignity. Their so called honor can only be validated by whole sale assassination of the respect of a woman.
And the cycle of physical and emotional violence against women and the marginalized carries on while the cowards appease the tools of the kleptocrats.
The hypocrisy of the self-righteous stalwarts of Islam is exposed here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB4Yqo8dC30
Paracha saab its time for you to retire – you look and sound like a fool
Shut your women up at your peril. They have a much better sense of history and a much better moral compass. Hoping that women like the lady in the audience get a good hearing. Not holding my breath though.
India has Nira Radia and Barkha Dutt, both paid for and in the payroll of government!
@censor
{India has Nira Radia and Barkha Dutt, both paid for and in the payroll of government!}
It is difficult to decide whether you deserve to be ignored or pitied.
@wonderer
Hi Nira or is it Barkha!
Go aunty go!
The hypocrisy of these men has to be exposed…. there is a complete lack of tolerance… Glad there are people like that in Pakistan still!!!
and may they always be safe… Ameen!
The fearless moderates of Pakistan are:
a) Old
b) Women
And thats it.
You may verify this fact in every single “liberal” gathering.
Its really between Extremist Young Men and “Fearless” Old Women. Its obvious who will win this.
Salman Arshad,
I guess you belong to the category which is not “fearless”. Enjoy your fears!
@ Amaar:
The only two categories of people worthy of respect is, the Taliban, and these old women.
These are the only two categories of people who do not twist their words to make them sound nice.
So I am not in any of these categories. I am enough fearful as someone under a gun point is fearful. I justify that with the reason that I am yet young and should better “escape” the gun point and look forward to a life, than die without helping anything. I’m not enjoying the fear, I’m struggling to justify it and shrug it off.
You have become the “moderate” to escape the same gun point. I personally find that path hypocrisy, although pragmatically it is more beneficial.
Wah this lady DESERVES a standing ovation and applause, I hope she is given a platform more often. If from the audience she can be so powerful imagine !!! Thanks for uploading. Makes us believe that there is still some hope for the future.
@Humanity (February 28, 2011 at 2:11 am)
“…..The hypocrisy of the self-righteous stalwarts of Islam is exposed here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PB4Yqo8dC30…..”
Thank you for bringing this to light. Mr. Paracha has quoted from Sura Ahzab (Chapter 33) of the Quran, in which Allah says “Verily, those who malign Allah and His Messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter and has prepared for them an abasing punishment” [Quran 33:57]. This verse essentially tells us that that those guilty of maligning God and His Messenger would be dealt with by Allah Himself. We should bear in mind that the curse of Allah is not a corporal punishment given by humans. The curse of Allah simply means the spiritual distancing of Allah from man. In the next verse, 33:58, the Quran deals with another topic, mentioning the people who malign believing men and women. Then further, in the next verse, 33:59, the Quran mentions and recommends protective measures for believing women to keep them from being harmed by the disbelievers, yet another discussion. Then, in the next verse, 33:60, the Quran makes mention of the scheming hypocrites, who inspite of swearing allegiance to the Holy Prophet and inspite of being citizens of the City-State of Madina, continued to conspire against the Prophet, the Muslims and the State of Madina. Hence, verse#60 basically deals with those Medinites who were guilty of sedition and treason during war. Then, in the next verse, 33:61, the Quran states that these traitors who were guilty of both sedition and treason, would be punished by Allah.
Mr. Paracha has made mention of “those who malign Allah and His Messenger” [33:57], has skipped all the subsequent topics mentioned in the following three verses (58 to 60) and has jumped straight to verse#61 and connected the two. Verse#57 speaks specifically of those who malign Allah and His Messenger, while Verse#61 talks explicitly about those guilty of sedition and treason during war. Verse#57 and verse#61 deal with two entirely distinct subjects.
Regards.
@Salman Arshad,
It suffices to say that you have respect for taliban and find the rest hypocritical!
@Bin Ismail
Fareed Paracha has a penchant for skipping and insulting intelligence. But his jump from mention of blasphemy in 33:57 to 33:61 shows his utter contempt for Quran as well. Verse 60 already has mentioned that the death penalty is for rabble-rousing and incitement to violence hardly for maligning the Prophet(sw). In 57 the Divine punishment has already been promised through God’s Hand – not human agency.
@Salman Arshad,
It suffices to say that you have respect for taliban and find the rest hypocritical!
@Bin Ismail
Fareed Paracha has a penchant for skipping and insulting intelligence. But his jump from mention of blasphemy in 33:57 to 33:61 shows his utter contempt for Quran as well. Verse 60 already has mentioned that the death penalty is for rabble-rousing and incitement to violence hardly for maligning the Prophet(sw). In verse 57 the Divine punishment has already been promised through God’s Hand – not human agency.
So Islam condones the death penalty for “inciting” violence (!!!)
I can now understand the complementary notion of “inciting” rape in Islam…
If “inciting” has legal equivalence with the crime itself in Islam, how can hypocrisy not flourish in a Muslim society.
A train with 10 tank wagons is chugging along. Two of the tanks contain rose water and honey and it is dripping out. The other 8 wagons contain sewage water, blood and poison and all that too is leaking out. Will you go near such a train or want to live near its tracks or jump onto or under this train? The religion exported from Arabia is like this train. Pakistan has made this train into its sole religion and ideology. Pakistanis are either voluntarily jumping onto or under this train or forcing each other to do so. Pakistanis do not wish to listen to any criticism of their religion because they are taught that even to listen to any such criticism will land them in eternal hell. A religion can make human beings into zombies of the worst sort by resorting to such tactics.
A religion must encourage its followers to listen to the views and criticisms of its opponents and rejecters peacefully, non-emotionally and introspectively. Otherwise the religion becomes a fascism. This religion from Arabia is a fascism for this simplest reason.
Did Jinnah not have the intelligence to realize this? Then why call him brilliant or a great statesman? An ideology or religion that does not encourage its followers to listen carefully, peacefully and self-critically to what its opponents and rejecters have to say is not suited as the ideology or religion of a nation, state, society, tribe, clan or family.
The day is fast approaching when arabs themselves will realize this and reject this religion created by (mis)using their language, cities, land, blood, emotions, women and honor and get rid of it. Are the arabs more intelligent than the Pakistanis?
Did your much-idolized Jinnah say anything clearly and incontrovertibly about those who wish to oppose and reject this arab religion openly and publicly? Did he tell you what treatment they be given?
No wonder Pakistan, a nation founded on hindu lands and blood by using an alien primitive totalitarian ideology from Arabia, has become a nuisance and danger to itself and the rest of the world.
@ Salman Arshad (March 4, 2011 at 1:12 am)
“…..So Islam condones the death penalty for “inciting” violence (!!!)…..”
No – it’s not like that. You may, I believe, like to take the trouble of keeping the context in mind. During full-scale war, when the enemy has besieged you and there are elements within the boundaries of your state engaged in espionage, sedition and outright high treason, disciplinary measures do seem to be required.
to bin ismail
And who determines who is a traitor?
Is a hindu in Pakistan who wants to get his hindu land back from the clutches of the pak-quislings of arabic imperialism (may be, even with the help of hindus from India) a traitor? The pak-quilsing will call him a traitor. But in reality it is the pak-quisling who is the traitor. So who decides?
@viva (March 4, 2011 at 12:20 pm)
Hi amar.
@Salman Arshad
Incitement to murder or violence is viewed as worse than murder in Islam. If Pakistan hangs the mullahs declaring wajib ul qatal fatwas against innocent people then that will the right thing to do.
correction:
‘be the right thing to do’
@ Bin Ismail:
There is almost no “context” of espionage or war when trying someone of “inciting violence” .. simply because it is almost impossible to convict someone of espionage or war BASED on his act of incitement to violence. The other way round may be possible, but that is not what we are discussing here.
Inciting violence is the type the Mullahs are doing.. Or the kind that has been followed in Islamic history to kill blasphemers. Sanctioning the killing of blasphemers without court trial, like a few accounts in the hadith, is incitement to violence.
And as is typical in Islam, Amaar’s context is different from your context, which is different from the context of Qari Hanif.
The problems of context aside, the real issue is of “incitement” itself. If you start killing people over “incitement” to violence, how would you argue against morally flimsy Muslims involved in discussing the “incitement-to-rape” characteristics of certain clothing ?
What I’m afraid of, and already judgmental of here is HYPOCRISY. let me repeat. The real issue here is HYPOCRISY. Would you now come up and say “one can incite violence but not rape” ? Well why not? If “incitement” is possible, anything could be “incited” ..
@ Amaar:
I think that comment of yours is out of anger against the Mullahs.
I find killing Mullahs very crazy. It would give all the wrong messages: 1) That those fatwas are such a big deal 2) That anyone who chooses to follow hadith is a criminal, except the govt. itself ! 3) That liberal Muslims are such sissies that they cannot disprove violent hadith on a scholarly level, and hence might actually be TOTALLY wrong in their peaceful interpretations.
to amaar
Your M. so-called prophet incited people to murder and violence (as per his convenience and his tactical abilities, needs, vanities and possibilities). Sahi hadiths tell us that.
@Salman Arshad (March 5, 2011 at 6:46 pm)
“…..If “incitement” is possible, anything could be “incited”…..”
Yes. Someone could incite another person to shout at somebody, but that would be substantially different from inciting people against the State during War.
@viva
You say: “Your M. so-called prophet incited people to murder and violence (as per his convenience and his tactical abilities, needs, vanities and possibilities). Sahi hadiths tell us that.”
Your Krishna incited Arjun and his army to murder and violence (as per his convenience and his tactical abilities, needs, vanities and possibilities) leading to the death of innumerable people. Mahabharata tell us that.
@viva, @Salman Arshad
Seriously?
If USA is justified in attacking those who perpetrated 9/11, if India is justified in taking on those who committed 26/11 then why isn’t a responsible statesman justified in confronting those who planned, aroused and resourced to murder his people simply on the basis of their religion?
Why was the whole of Arabia – tribes that had never submitted to one authority in their prior history – besieging Medina in 5th Hijri? This is well before a single Muslim expedition had ever set foot outside the periphery of Medina.
On what provocation? On what pretext? On what excuse?
Simply because the Muslims happened to profess a faith different from the orthodox and norm; this was the common denominator is the agitation, violence and collaboration of the wild and barbarian Arab tribes.
Correction:
this was the common denominator in the agitation
NOT
‘this was the common denominator is the agitation’
@Salman Arshad
1) That those fatwas are such a big deal
If the blasphemy death fatwa was against Salman Arshad it would be a big deal for Salman Arshad as he loves his life dearly.
2) That anyone who chooses to follow hadith is a criminal, except the govt. itself !
Salman Arshad, being a blasphemer, would be sensible in trusting the verdict of sincere Muslim scholars who have refuted such behavious on intellectual grounds. Otherwise, he would have to be put on the gallows for his insults against Islam. If Salman Arsahd is correct then all ‘liberal’ Muslims should do the honours of dispatching him to his eternal abode.
3) That liberal Muslims are such sissies that they cannot disprove violent hadith on a scholarly level
Many Islamic scholars – those who believe in Allah and Muhammad(sw) – have disproved the conclusions from such hadith many many times over. The mind of Salman Arshad simply refuses to accept such arguments as Muslim arguments as he likes to decide who is a Muslim and who is not.
to amaar
Krishna did not incite to any violence. They were all already on the battlefield facing each other. Krishna did not tell Arjun to attack, he only told him not to run away. Krishna never told Arjuna that he will kill Arjuna if Arjuna choses not to fight. Before the war started there was an announcement that if anyone wishes to leave or change sides then he may do so freely. After the 18-days’ war there were no civilian casualities – only soldiers on the well-marked battlefield had been killed. The engangements had to begin at sunrise and end at sunset after which they visited each others’, even the enemies, camps. The only woman killed was Shikhandini, who had angrily decided to take part in the war in order to take revenge on Bhishma (the commander-in-chief of the Kaurava army), who had earlier rejected her love and marriage offer (which she had taken as an insult to herself). She had been forbidden to take part in the war for this reason, but she did so disguised as a man. No women or money or loot were distributed among the victorious warriors after the war.
This is way different from what your M. “prophet” did.
Your M. prophet send armies against those who left or wished to leave islam. No one can leave islam or he will be killed. That is how fascism functions and succeeds is growing. Your M. prophet used to promise/distribute women and loot among his collaborating thugs and rapists. That’s what you “faithfully” have today in your islamic paradise of Pakistan.
Intelligent arabs had recognized that your M. prophet was cleverly bringing in a system of totalitarianism, loot and rape, that he was feeding poison mixed in honey. The subsequent developments (over 1400 years) of M.’s religion show that his religion indeed ends up as fascism, loot and rape. Pakistan is a case to illustrate this. Those who opposed your M. prophet have proved to be right.
@ hiob
Your apologista for Maha Bharat, Krishna and all this excess detail is pointless to our discussion. Fact: Violence was committed by the heroes you worship.
Young man, your grasp of the history of Islam is unfortunately as poor as your ability to reason. You’ve read from some tertiary sources and built your own castle of fantasies and delusions about Islam.
@Salman Arshad
“@ Amaar:I think that comment of yours is out of anger against the Mullahs. I find killing Mullahs very crazy. It would give all the wrong messages: 1) That those fatwas are such a big deal 2) That anyone who chooses to follow hadith is a criminal, except the govt. itself ! 3) That liberal Muslims are such sissies that they cannot disprove violent hadith on a scholarly level, and hence might actually be TOTALLY wrong in their peaceful interpretations.”
Amaar’s comment may have been out of anger, but without any emotion whatsoever, I would strongly recommend that that the mullas be apprehended and eliminated. How does the state deal with murderers? By hanging them.
@hiob
You’r not getting the point. Let me repeat what I said earlier for your sake. This is what I said:
“Your Krishna incited Arjun and his army to murder and violence (as per his convenience and his tactical abilities, needs, vanities and possibilities) leading to the death of innumerable people. Mahabharata tells us that.”
You see, this Arjun guy was intelligent and peaceful and wanted to avoid bloodshed, but your this K. was somehow so bent upon spilling blood that he eventually got the peace-loving guy to be violent. I’m only applying your own Supreme Logic to other phases of history which are more personal to you.
to amaar
Arjun wanted to avoid bloodshed, true, but he refused to accept/realize that his enemy Duryodhana was not agreed to that. There were long negotiations under Krishna’s mediation before the war and D. had rejected all the peace offers. So Arjuna was (contrary to your claim) not intelligent at that moment of time (just as the war was about to begin). Krishna himself gained nothing from the Mahabharata war. He said clearly that he will not be taking any weapon in the hand and will only serve as a charioteer.
Amaar you talk of “your” Krishna. I don’t possess any Krishna. I merely described what it/he was about (as depicted in the epos). How do you assume I worship him, or obey him, or recommend him the way you do with your M. prophet?
As regards “death of innumerable people” they were all soldiers on the battle field. Not civilians in a mosque or church or temple or at a bus-stop. Those who kill such civilians shout “allahuakbar” and not “Krishna is great”. That is a crucial difference.
As regards islamic history-writing and teaching – it is well-known, and even acknowledged by some muslims, that it is full of mendacities in order to glorify/justify islam and muslims. I am not deluded about islam because the maximum number of acts of fascism and terror are in deed coming from muslims and the victims are also largely muslims.
@hiob (March 7, 2011 at 6:44 am)
“Krishna did not tell Arjun to attack, he only told him not to run away”
Are you suggesting that since Krishna did not tell Arjun to attack, we should conclude that he told Arjun to entertain Duryodhana by dancing for him?
“The only woman killed was Shikhandini, who had angrily decided to take part in the war in order to take revenge on Bhishma”
Oh, of course. Now a good girl like Shikhandini should never have been angry. This is a unique privilege enjoyed only by Maharishi “hiob”. Shikhandini should have come skipping and singing to the battlefield. The poor girl lost her life, inspite of all efforts by Arjun to guard and protect the innocent and dainty female.
“No women …”
According to your own scriptures, Krishna had 16,000 wives, eight of whom were the main ladies. Additional ladies would obviously have appeared extravagant and a potential burden on the household budget. Hence, “no women”.
@hiob (March 7, 2011 at 12:28 pm)
“Arjun wanted to avoid bloodshed, true, but he refused to accept/realize that his enemy Duryodhana was not agreed to that”
Right. And the duo of Krishna and Arjun laid down their lives, without taking part in the battle in any way conceivable. Perfect embodiments of Ahimsa.
“I don’t possess any Krishna”
That’s good for Krishna. Your problem is not that you do not possess. Your problem is you are yourself possessed.
@ Viva & co
A failed attempt to misrepresent the teachings of Krishna. Probably with the motive to attack Islam. I humbly represent the actual text of what Krishna said. Actually when Arjuna saw his kinsmen in front on the battlefield, a really noble thought took over him and he said
‘ I….. do not foresee any good from killing my own kinsmen in battle .
I do not hanker for victory, O Krishna or for sovereignty, or pleasure. Of what use to us is having a kingdom.’ ( Chapter 1. 30-31)
That was a real noble thought but according to Gita, Krishna quickly incited him to violence. He reprimanded him by saying
‘ O Arjuna, from where has this disgraceful conduct come into your mind in this hour of peril? It is unknown to Aryas, does not lead to heaven and brings one disrepute
O Partha, do not give in to this unmanliness: it is unbecoming of you. Cast off this despicable faint heartedness and stand up and vanquish the foes.’( Chapter 2.2-3)
So the conclusion is that if someone like Arjun cares for his kinsmen i.e. fellow Indians. And does not want to kill them just to get Government of a small state. According to Krishna this is disgraceful and such a crime that one can be deprived of heaven by this merciful act, this fellow should get up and kill his kinsmen.
@ Viva @ Hiob
.. I hope you know that Veda teaches not only to kill enemies but also advises to trample their bodies under the hoofs of animals. You are rambling about Arab imperialism but I hope that you are aware that Vida advises its followers to subjugate all world by use of weapons
Read hymn LXXV of Rigveda
‘…armed with the Bow may we subdue all regions.’
And then this Hymn boasts of vanquishing all enemies as it says
‘Slung on the back, pouring his brood, the Quiver vanquishes all opposing bands and armies’
Then this hymn wishes the enemies bodies to be mutilated by hoofs of horses as this Hymn says
‘Horses whose hoofs rain dust are neighing loudly, yoked to the Chariots, showing forth their vigour,
With their forefeet descending on the foemen, they, never flinching, trample and destroy them.’
And then Rig Veda commands that no enemy should be left alive. As this Hymn further goes on
‘Go to the foemen, strike them home, and let not one be left alive’
So Veda advises its followers to subjugate all world by killing and mutilating the bodies of other people with the advise that none of other people should be left alive
[...] such actions have consequences). I wish my Urdu were better so I could properly understand what these outspoken women are talking about but language doesn’t interfere with seeing the way Pakistanis can laugh at [...]
i endorse all the views expressed above, except from the quacKKK from EimanaBAD with a charity give-away degree from New Jersey Jee.
Cheers. Or the Chair!
Wholesome Creativity is not phony-pomposity flying covered-up flags from the publicly-funded automobiles after procastinagting-retirement … it is implementing noble thinking against the prevailing tRends, to wit , not cater que sera sera but, rather, following the Que Sera Sera(tul Mustaqueem). Makes you think(?).
So behold my new, improved and more appropriate transliteration of our holy prophet’s worthy Name: MoHUMMED, rejecting the transliteration imposed by semi-illiterate mullahs begging moolah…
I guess I cannot resist detesting dollariZZZZZed dudes.
Good ,In the process some pakis have begun reading Veda and Gita.At least by doing so some of their sins would be purged and vice-versa lol. Chill.(commenting on the war of words going on via comments).
Appreciate this courageous lady in the video.Good to know that there still some folks who are humane enough to see things as they are and courageous enough to speak them loud.
Yes the Veda and Gita incite one to take up arms and fight,but when? thats important.Who are the enemy whom one has to finish,thats important to know.
It must be understood all these religious scriptures have an underlying philosophy and not necessarily work of art.
So the Pandavs (5 brothers) facing Kauravas the 100 brothers just merely a impersonation of the 5 senses in human being facing 100s of worldly evils,guided by logic or the chitta or mind thats what krishna represents.
Hindus try to understand these undertones of a text,we possess the brain to critically analyse a concept unlike blindly following any so called religious script be it hadith,quran or the like.
Musalmaans now accept that Krishna was a historical figure of Dwapar thus they also accept the Hindu system of Yuga as truth. Slowly slowly few Ajlaf coverted under duress might find their roots. Funny fact is there are millions of Hindus who dont accept Krishna as authority and no one is out there to remove their neck from their body in the name of Kirshna. Carry on the subconcious attempts to justify Muhamamd by seeking validation from kaffir traditions. HIOb should have asked if any of the participant of the Mahabharat war came up with the doctrine of Booty and Right hand possesion or did they have sex with the women of fallen soldiers while claiming to be the Oracle of Godhood. To set the record straight, not even an ordinary soldier participant of this battle in Dwapar Yug commited any inhuman act like of which was done to Safia Bint Huyay.