Imtiazi Pakistan

Well said, General

imtiazipakistan — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 09:15:36 +0000

Being Liberal….

imtiazipakistan — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 10:46:40 +0000

Here I attempt to list down the core lines of thinking of a “liberal” Pakistani. I have collected this thought process, from newspapers like Dawn that represent this “liberal” class, and from interactions both in person and on internet forums. I will try to keep updating this list as and when i come across new “liberal” mantras. So here goes, according to a Pakistani “liberal”, being liberal and modern means:

Allama Iqbal was nothing but a poet. A philosopher at most.
India is not the enemy, our Army is.
Whoever talks about Islam, automatically equals to Taliban.
Quaid e Azam was a secular , non Islamic leader.
Pakistan does not need nuclear weapons and the associated delivery mechanisms.
Pakistan Army is too big and too expensive to maintain.
Islam has no room in legislation and/or governance.
CNN, BBC and other MSM outlets are not liars, our journalists opposing or questioning the MSM view can be liars
You may question Islam or the existence of God but questioning the Americans is a big no no.
An American can call for bombing of any country, he is spreading democracy but when a Pakistani does that,we will call him a hatred spreading warmonger.
“We cannot survive without American hand outs” is a more important line of thinking as opposed to “We can survive on our own if we eliminated/minimised corruption”.
Regardless of the resolution of core disputes between Pakistan and India, i.e. Kashmir and Water, we should allow India free trade, and make the border between us a soft border.
Our minds are too feeble to think beyond the western model of democracy, secularism and capitalism, anything else is either beyond our understanding or it is a “ghissa pitta nizaam”. And last but not the least:
Anyone who disagrees with us is a conspiracy theorist.

Another day, another ZH basher

imtiazipakistan — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 07:59:25 +0000

I have to give credit to Dawn News and its community, they do encourage me to update my blog. Seems Dawn and its community are obsessed with bashing Zaid Hamid. First NFP, then Gul Bukhari, and now the bloggers at Dawn are also having a go. Zaid Hamid’s wave of popularity is worrying a lot of sections in our society. A lot of them will have their lifestyles threatened if Pakistan were to transform into the Pakistan of Iqbal, which ZH is promoting. Opposition to a “new” idea is natural, resistance to change also an expected behavior. We may expect more of this in the near future.
In the latest of the series of Bash Up Zaid Hamid campaign, sponsored by Dawn News, a blogger has latched on to a single point of ZH’s dream of announcing “Radio Pakistan New Delhi”, and used it as a point to discredit ZH and the ideology he is promoting. Unfortunately, the writer encourages the readers to write off totally and ignore completely whatever else ZH has been saying. ZH has been asked this question many times, on why he is promoting war and invasion of India. And he has time and again, said, that we will never start the war, India will start it and we will finish it only when we reach New Delhi. This line is a reminder to war mongers in India, that we will stop only when we reach New Delhi, if and only IF they dare to attack us. Its NOT a call to an unprovoked invasion of a neighboring country as the writer wants everyone to perceive. I mean how many times do you want the guy to say it?
The writer rightfully says that we should concentrate on making ourselves better first, at improving governance in Pakistan, at bringing justice to our own people first before we can even discuss exporting it to other countries. One view of AagTV’s Iqbal Ka Pakistan, and you will find that ZH is in agreement with this point. It is infact the prime focus of his entire effort, to transform ourselves into what we were supposed to be , the Shaheen’s of Iqbal. It is unfortunate that people ignore this and look for points (sometimes even create them) to discredit this positive effort that has finally given some hope to the masses, that has finally shown a ray of light at the end of the tunnel.
At the end, I must also say, that the blogger under discussion did a much better job than NFP and Gul Bukhari combined. Dawn News, time to replace some people in your newspaper.

We are proud of you, Zaman Khan

imtiazipakistan — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:11:43 +0000

MashaAllah:

Plagiarism

imtiazipakistan — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:25:10 +0000

For those who are OVER-impressed with Bollywood, great work tictac82, this is going to be a never ending series, I presume

Part 1:

Part2:

Part3:

Part4:

Part5:

Part6:

Part7:

Part8:

Max Keiser On the Edge 22/01/2010 Market Commentary

imtiazipakistan — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 13:11:45 +0000

Saying it as it is:

Naivety Liberalised

imtiazipakistan — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:08:30 +0000

On the question of war mongering, there is a special section in our media, intelligentsia and youth, that believes no one has the right to war monger when it comes to India. And that we should correct our mistakes and talk peace. The point is well taken and valid. But what this defeatist indianised section of our population forgets is the fact that peace is a two way affair. At this current stage I dont see the peace traffic coming from across the border. Asking and talking peace with India right now, is like standing in front of a crocodile and asking it not to eat you because you are a vegetarian. One issue that has not had its fair share of time, is the water dispute between Pakistan and India. Very little is being said and/or discussed about this problem, which in my view is the most important among all issues, which I also think will be the major cause of a wider Pakistan India war if it were to occur in the future. India has been continuously stealing Pakistani water for years, even when the peace talks and the CBMs were at their peak during the Musharraf years. And thats just one issue. So what peace are we talking about here? In their effort to be liberal on the India issue, this section of our society has I think liberalised not the thought process but the naivety of it. Naivety liberalised. Bottom line, you cannot have peace if the other side doesn’t want it. People telling you this are not war mongers, they are simply reminding you of the facts on the ground.

A response to “In defence of reason – Nadeem F Paracha”

imtiazipakistan — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:56:56 +0000

On a recent episode of “+92 IDENTITY” show on Dawn News TV, Zaid Hamid (ZH) and Nadeem Farooq Paracha (NFP) presented views relating to so called conspiracy theories and how they are perceived in Pakistan. ZH defending his analysis as non conspiracy theorist, and NFP representing the mainstream thought process. One would expect that after airing both the views , it would be left to the viewer’s discretion to decide and follow whichever camp they feel is telling the truth. But NFP, felt that the format of show did not allow a rebuttal and hence had to write an article in response. What was so special about ZH’s arguments that NFP felt the urge to write a rebuttal, a “punch by punch” answer as he says in his article? One read of his article and you realise that there is more of ranting and crying there, than actual refutation of Zaid Hamid’s arguments. In Punjabi slang, this is called “Rondee”. I will explain how as we move on. Please remember its conspiracy theories we are talking about

Have a read through this paragraph, to see what I mean by “rondee”:

“Taking the documentary to be a general discourse on the ins and outs of conspiracy theories in Pakistan, and not knowing what Hamid would say, my 10-minute spiel was simply a defence of democracy and common sense that I think should prevail more than demagogic paranoia in matters of social and political upheavals.“

NFP is complaining that he did not know what ZH was going to say hence that was in some way unfair to him? Let me ask you NFP, did ZH know what you were going to say?

Next example, when NFP says that ZH is anti Hindu and Hindus are a “paleet” nation, and are unfit to govern. First of all ZH is not anti Hindu, he is anti Hindu oligarchy, get your facts straight, he has said time and again that we sympathise with the Dalits and unscheduled castes of the Hindu population. And even if he says that these Brahman oligarchists are paleet, thats his point of view. So what? we have 1 billion people across the border who think cow is god, rat is god, even shivas genitals are god, so whats wrong with the belief that the Hindu oligarchy is “paleet”. In fact any type of oligarchy is paleet. Where is the conspiracy theory here?

Lets move on, NFP says ZH has no original research. First of all, i don’t understand what he means by original research, can you please define that NFP? He says ZH uses research done by Westerners and at the same time discredits Western media. He mentions a few names, like Naomi Klein and Noam Chomsky. Mr. Paracha, ZH was referring to mainstream media, how many times have you seen Noam Chomsky and Naomi Klein being hosted on MSM talk shows? How many times Mr Paracha? How many times are the views of these people propogated on CNN? Let me spell it out for you, ZH discredits Western Mainstream Media, and not Western intellectuals as a whole, so if he uses research from Noam Chomsky and Naomi Klein and others, there is nothing wrong with it, there is no hypocrisy there as you suggest. If he was quoting stuff from CNN and at the same time discrediting MSM then it would be called hypocrisy. Is that clear enough? Again where is the conspiracy theory here?

The next paragraph is just amazing just have a read:

“Hamid says the Pakistani people have been lied to, and claims to be an exception. Well, he is just continuing the tradition in a new paradigm. He says he is exposing the secrets, by bringing out the truth. Unless Hamid has never seen the programme we both appeared in, he would have clarified that he was not a ‘Dr.’ as he was labelled in it. The duplicity is amazing. By the same coin I am taken to task for being a semi-literate just because I conceded in the programme to having a bachelor’s degree.“

Now what do we have here. Hmmm. It looks like NFP is suggesting the ZH is a liar just like the rest. What does he base it on? The fact that an IT guy at Dawn News mislabeled him as being a Dr., and that so far he has not said that he is not a doctor(which he has said on many shows on many channels on many occassions, most recently on Ali Azmat’s show on Aag,but NFP wants nothing to do with that). Pretty heavy stuff to base your argument on. Nice job NFP.

In the next paragraph, NFP gets a little desperate and starts putting words in ZH’s mouth. This is what NFP says “Hamid then quickly added that after the airing of the programme he is sure the FBI will change it.” What did ZH actually say: “They may add that after our interview”, he did not say that he was SURE FBI will change it. My dear brother, NFP, who’s the liar now?

Next NFP uses a past experience of ZH in the Afghan war to label ZH as a CIA agent. And since ZH was fighting alongside Ahmed Shah Masood, and since Ahmed Shah Masood took money from CIA, hence ZH is CIA. NFP poses the question that does that not make ZH a CIA agent, the answer obviously is no, it does not. But it does make him a warrior of the Afghan war, who fought to eject the Soviets from Afghanistan.

NFP says that ZH wants everything that comes out of his mouth to be taken as an irrefutable ‘fact.’ Doesn’t every analyst and commentator want that? Whats wrong with that? Where is the conspiracy theory here? Please explain, NFP.

Continuing to the next two paragraphs, this is what NFP has to say:

“He says that since Pakistan is an Islamic nuclear state, countries like India, Russia, China, Israel, Iran and America have a huge interest in the politics of Pakistan, where these counties finance political parties and armed militant groups. He says those who suggest that we should look inwards and at ourselves to solve our socio-political and economic problems are being simplistic and naïve.

Right. These countries have as much interest in Pakistan as we have in Afghanistan, Iran, China, and, of course, India. Thus, as much as it will be ‘simplistic’ to only look inwards in this respect, it is simply delusional to only look outwards for whatever goes wrong in Pakistan.“

First of all, NFP, are you denying that there is no external interference and influence in Pakistan’s local politics and policy making? Please let us know. Second, again please don’t put words in ZH’s mouth. ZH said, looking inward ONLY would be simplistic and naive, just as you suggest looking outward ONLY would be delusional. ZH is of the view that you have to tackle all problems, looking inwards and outwards. he was quite clear about this in the show. There is a mountain of difference there in what ZH said and what you suggest he said, I hope you understand. A line in your next paragraph, negates your very own argument in the previous paragraph that ZH is delusional to only look outwards for whatever goes wrong in Pakistan. How? Just read:
“Even though Hamid agrees to be conscious of the turmoil Pakistan has been facing in its politics and economics…” So you know he agrees to look inwards, and yet you try to give us the impression that he only wants us to look outwards. Did you write the article in a hurry? You say something and contradict it in the very next line. This is amazing.

In the final paragraphs of his blog post, NFP’s argument revolve around the following concepts:

1. ZH is an isolationist, and wants us to cut off from the rest of the world.
2. His suggestion that Islam and Islamic history should be used to devise a system of governance for Pakistan is actually supporting the concept of a military dictatorship in the country.
3. ZH attacks democracy, only because he wants to prepare a stage for return to a military dictatorship.
4. ZH’s suggestion for Islam as answer, is the Islam conceived by people who want to rule us unchallenged.
5. No one is conspiring to derail Islam and Muslims.

Lets tackle them one by one, or “punch by punch”, as NFP says:

1. The first point is obviously not true, for example ZH has on many occassions suggested creating strategic alliances, with Iran and China, as a means to counter US influence in central Asia, this is hardly isolationist thinking. Another example: ZH wants Pakistan to be so powerful and progressive that he wants Pakistan consulted on every global decision making, again hardly an isolationist thought. You don’t have to be a genius to figure out that when ZH says , that we should be left alone, he means the foreign forces should stop interfering in our internal affairs, that doesn’t mean, we close our borders and our TV stations and become a closed society like Myanmar.
2. I simply fail to understand this argument, how is using good aspects of our history and using guidance from Islam constitute a military dictatorship. Our constitution prepared by a democrat, clearly says, that no law shal be made that is repugnant to the Quran and Sunnah. The legislators could be dictators or democrats, but they cannot legislate against the Quran and Sunnah, this is what the constitution demands. How does this support the concept of military dictatorship?
3. ZH attacks western style democracy, and not democratic values, which are inherent in Islam, you should listen to him more closely with an open mind, and may be then you will understand. Western style democracy is generally defined as mob rule, so it needs to be controlled by a constitution. That is when you become a republic. But that hasnt worked in Pakistan, the constitution has been unable to control the mob.
4. Again, not true, ZH wants an Islamic system, whether it is brought about via democracy or via dictatorship or via people revolution. He said this in episode 28 of iqbal ka pakistan on Aag channel, just search for it on youtube and watch it.
5. Well the answer to this question lies in your own article, NFP, when you label Islamic governance and anything derived from Islam, as a “myth”, “fiction”, and “utopia” and when you suggest that the Khilafat was nothing but a military dictatorship. If this isn’t an effort to derail Islam, what is?

I have saved the best “rondee” for the last, which made me laugh, NFP says:

“Despite his hatred for the Americans, on his website he is happy to accept US$ 300 for his reports. He says he wants the gold system, but, alas, is also worshipping the altar of the almighty dollar.“

Dollars, Rupees, Riyals , the paper currency , is the legal tender in this day and age. Will you open a shop today, and turn back customers who dont have gold to pay you with? By this statement you are suggesting that ZH is a hypocrite. While obviously there is no hypocrisy there. He will accept gold when it is made legal tender, simple as that. And how do you suggest people will be able to pay him in gold through his website? I would love to see that.

In my closing, I would like to ask you one last thing Mr Paracha, what makes you think the recent Iranian elections were stolen? Just because CNN said so, or do you have any “original research” to back up your claim? If you don’t then you are just another conspiracy theorist.

The choices are stark

imtiazipakistan — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 09:26:47 +0000

By Humayun Gauhar | Published: July 26, 2009 | The Nation

Patriotism, dignity, self-esteem are all vital and healthy ingredients necessary for making a well-rounded, and balanced individual.
Shiv Shanker Memon used to behave like a mouse when he was India’s high commissioner to Pakistan. But now as India’s foreign secretary did you hear him try and roar the other day? The gems that flowed from this would-be Royal Bengal Tiger would make Asprey’s drool.
The immediate problem is the Joint Statement issued by India and Pakistan after their two prime ministers met in Sharm El-Sheikh on the 16th of this month. In a rare moment of sanity, India agreed that, “action on terrorism should not be linked to the Composite Dialogue process and these should not be bracketed. Prime Minister Singh said that India was ready to discuss all issues with Pakistan, including all outstanding issues.” All hell broke loose in India and the government came under a barrage of fire. To help stop the fur flying Bill’s wife contributed to making a bad situation worse with the banal statement that, “we firmly believe that a significant number of” the perpetrators of 9/11 “are there in the border areas of Pakistan.” Tell me something new, Madam. Descending into India-speak she then asserted: “And we have conveyed to Pakistan that we are looking for additional information on them.” Oh! Are we Madam? Aren’t we just? For God’s sake lady, you have your CIA agents crawling all over our country (Americans and Pakistanis) with concentration “in the border areas of Pakistan.” The largest CIA base outside the USA is in our Frontier province and has been since the Afghan Jihad of the Eighties when you were busy creating these terrorists then called muhajideen and now called Taliban and Al-Qaeda. You taught our people the heroin trade to finance the Jihad. Your drones are flying all over my country without “let or hindrance”, filming everything. And you want us to give you “additional information on them” and tell you where the “terrorists” are? Truth is, you should tell us, for you know better. Come back Condi, all is forgiven. When oh when will we learn that America is another name for fickleness?
In a roar that became a pathetic squeak, Tiger Menon told Indian MPs in a lecture entitled Challenges and Opportunities for India’s foreign policy that, “the joint statement can be blamed for bad drafting but the meaning is clear that the composite dialogue is not delinked from Pakistan taking action on terrorism.” How? Does “action on terrorism should not be linked to the Composite Dialogue process and these should not be bracketed” mean “the composite dialogue is not delinked from Pakistan taking action on terrorism.” Wow! That’s quite a somersault, even for an Indian diplomat. India’s foreign office mandarins, no less than ours, take great pride in their fastidiousness and attention to all nuances and possible interpretations of every single word, phrase and sentence while preparing drafts. They make a painful song and dance of it, always turning it into a great production. “Good drafting” is their pride and joy. Indian diplomats are amongst the best in the world when it comes to nit picking. So what happened at Sharm El-Sheikh? Did the Indians of their foreign office fall asleep or did our mandarins mesmerise them? Were they drunk? The Indian prime minister is an educated man who won’t let any slip ups pass easily, unlike our guy who will read (or at least try to) and sign anything he is told to. Obviously Manmohan Singh went along because he knew that it was the right thing to say because it is the only realistic thing to say.
Not to be left out, Shashi Tharoor had to put in his two paisa’s worth – you remember that rather-handsome guy with the light grey eyes in the UN who tried to become its secretary general, he with an angreezi accent that would make the English blush. (“He can’t beat our current UN guy on accent, English and sparkling conversation Abu,” said my daughter Mashaal when she read this). Apparently, Tharoor is now rejoicing as India’s state minister for external affairs. In a stunning Indian dance of semantics he declared that the Sharm El-Sheikh joint statement was a “diplomatic paper” and not a “legal document”. He should have given us the code to decipher their meanings too. One presumes that a “legal document” is something the Indians would stand by and implement. Which begs the question: are the UN Security Council resolutions about holding a plebiscite in Kashmir “legal documents” or not? And if they are, why the hell don’t you implement them? By the way, for I may not get another chance, these foreign office wallahs nurture yet another creature called a “non paper”. Is that only a verbal statement? No, it’s on paper but it’s a “non-paper”, meaning we don’t stand by what is said on it, I suppose, or what is written on it doesn’t really exist. Anyway, one hopes to continue enjoying Mr Tharoor’s lightweight articles that appear in some Pakistani newspaper every now and then.
Why don’t India’s official geniuses as well as ours understand that they are both essentially saying the same thing? India says no dialogue without Pakistan first taking effective action against anti-India terrorists on its soil and then finishing them off entirely. Pakistan says India must seriously agree to discuss the core issue of Kashmir towards resolving it to the satisfaction of all three parties to the dispute – India, Pakistan and above all, the people of Kashmir. It’s the same thing. Look: if Kashmir is resolved anti-Indian terrorism will go away. It’s as simple as that. The two things are totally interconnected, to the exclusion of everything else. Solve Kashmir, no terrorism. Don’t solve Kashmir and Pakistan can do a tap dance, anti-India terrorism, which to the Kashmiris and many of us is a legitimate freedom struggle, will not go away. And by the way, the Americans should also understand, that until they get out of Afghanistan and the Palestinians get their own viable state with its capital in East Jerusalem, anti-American terrorism will not go away either. The only realistic choices are: do you want to resolve Kashmir honourably or do you wish to be consumed by terrorism eventually (regardless of what happens to Pakistan) and do you wish to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian dispute honourably by putting the Israelis back behind their pre-1967 borders and creating a viable Palestinian state, or do you wish Israel and America to be consumed by “terrorism” one day, which to the majority of the world is the legitimate freedom struggle of the Palestinians to reclaim their usurped homeland. The choice is yours. The choice is stark.

Media’s War on Iran

imtiazipakistan — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 12:27:27 +0000

We all are hearing Iran and Iran related news in the MSM on a daily basis, almost. I decided to do a little exercise to find all the headlines relating to Iran in this month (July) alone. I started with one network, and ended up with the following result, I didnt bother going to any other networks, as the headlines are numerous and were making me tired and sick at the same time, so i present to you the results from CNN alone for a period of 21 days of July, enjoy:

1. Iran’s supreme leader issues warning to opposition Fri, July 20, 2009

2. Commentary: Middle East is changed forever Fri, July 19, 2009

3. Iran reformers blast government in call for new vote Fri, July 19, 2009

4. Report: Iran opposition candidate blasts ‘clear lies’ Fri, July 19, 2009

5. Last British Embassy worker held in Iran freed updated Fri, July 19, 2009

6. Group: Human rights lawyer detained as Iran unrest spirals Fri, July 18, 2009

7. Clashes as key Iranian cleric warns leaders updated Fri, July 17, 2009

8. Report: Iran’s nuclear chief resigns updated Thu, July 16, 2009

9. Iran crackdown ‘shifted’ prospects for U.S. talks, Clinton says updated Wed, July 15, 2009

10. Rafsanjani set to deliver pivotal sermon updated Wed, July 15, 2009

11. Reports: Trial of Baha’is delayed in Iran updated Tue, July 14, 2009

12. Iran to execute 14 convicted in 2006 terror attack updated Mon, July 13, 2009

13. Man’s family learns of his death one month after Iran protests updated Sun, July 12, 2009

14. Iranians held in Iraq by U.S. return home updated Sun, July 12, 2009

15. Troops willing to die to stop Iran unrest, general says updated Sun, July 12, 2009

16. U.S. panel demands release of Baha’is facing trial in Iran updated Fri, July 10, 2009

17. Reporter held for 21 days in Iranian jails updated Thu, July 9, 2009

18. ‘United for Neda’ is artists’ song for Iranian people updated Thu, July 9, 2009

19. Iranians held in Iraq since 2007 released updated Thu, July 9, 2009

20. Iranian forces disperse protesters with batons, tear gas updated Thu, July 9, 2009

21. G-8 leaders have ambitious environmental goals updated Wed, July 8, 2009

22. France seeks release of student held by Iran updated Wed, July 8, 2009

23. Ahmadinejad calls election ‘the most free’ anywhere updated Tue, July 7, 2009

24. Iran reformists call for end to ‘security atmosphere’ updated Tue, July 7, 2009

25. Obama: No green light for Israel to attack Iran updated Tue, July 7, 2009

26. Nobel laureates urge U.N. to help free Iran protesters updated Tue, July 7, 2009

27. Ayatollah: Western ‘lies’ depict Iranians as ‘rioters’ updated Mon, July 6, 2009

28. Iran frees British embassy worker, leaving 1 jailed updated Mon, July 6, 2009

29. Iranian clerics dispute election results updated Sun, July 5, 2009

30. Moussavi said to be planning new party after Iran vote updated Sun, July 5, 2009

31. Report: Iran to prosecute satellite TV contributors updated Sun, July 5, 2009

32. British official warns Iran on embassy staffer arrest updated Sun, July 5, 2009

33. Rafsanjani doubts Iranians ‘satisfied’ with election aftermath updated Sat, July 4, 2009

34. Report: Ahmadinejad says he wants public talks with Obama updated Sat, July 4, 2009

35. Ex-Iranian president seeks to free detainees updated Fri, July 3, 2009

36. Report: UK embassy staff in Iran ‘face trial’ updated Fri, July 3, 2009

37. Attacks, arrests slowing online news from Iran updated Thu, July 2, 2009

38. Newsweek reporter in Iran reportedly ‘confesses’ updated Wed, July 1, 2009

39. Reformists question legitimacy of Iran’s government updated Wed, July 1, 2009

40. Iran blocks opposition party newspaper updated Wed, July 1, 2009

41. Iran releases more British embassy staff updated Wed, July 1, 2009

42. Opposition movement in Iran not over, experts say updated Wed, July 1, 2009

Now if this isn’t called generating consent to an attack on Iran, what is? Remember this ONLY CNN for a period of 21 days, ONLY. You be the judge.