Also Pakistan - what our country used to be like - Page 2 - PakMusic - The Pure Pakistani Forums | Pakistani Music Movies Dramas Desi Forums

AHMAD\ · #16 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by halofreak41

So anyone who wants to practice islam/ want to implement it in a country automatically get's labeled mullah? this is ridiculous , normal people also want this not only mullahs. I am no mullah and i want this.

what's worrying is the fact that you consider yourself a 'normal' but don't consider the so called "other 2" normal. You want to leave them crying....those were your words, which is quite pathetic.

On what grounds should I consider you a normal, when according to you, those who disagree with you should be left crying? That makes you farthest away from normal.

halofreak41 · #17 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHMAD\

what's worrying is the fact that you consider yourself a 'normal' but don't consider the so called "other 2" normal. You want to leave them crying....those were your words, which is quite pathetic.

On what grounds should I consider you a normal, when according to you, those who disagree with you should be left crying? That makes you farthest away from normal.

Hmmmm, who is to say they are normal? maybe the 2 are the dirty ones and 8 are normal. It is how you see it.

adil_909 · #18 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by halofreak41

Hmmmm, who is to say they are normal? maybe the 2 are the dirty ones and 8 are normal. It is how you see it.

that's the whole bloody point it's not for you to decide what is "normal"!!! just let people live however they like is it that hard to understand?

Afridi · #19 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 10:47 AM

all the people living in pakistan should focus towards the future, this is the time which will decide whether Pakistan will stand up as a nation and make it count or they will do nothing about it and destroy themselves, whether it's the politicians or civilians, everyone of them need to have a clear heart and work towards one agenda which is to bring Pakistan right back up, will it happen? that's another story

AHMAD\ · #20 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by halofreak41

Hmmmm, who is to say they are normal? maybe the 2 are the dirty ones and 8 are normal. It is how you see it.

haan isi liye ... you are in the 2 not the 8.

Lahoriii · #21 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Pakistanis have no dearth of curse words to fling at each other at the best of times, but one of the most vitriolic terms in vogue today is the word ‘liberal’. The word is used by itself and in various combinations — liberal fascist, pseudo-liberal — in order to shame and silence an opposing point of view in heated debates about anything from Pakistani society and religion, to the formation of Pakistan and its ideology, to the war on terror. Yet, most people who do so, have no basic understanding of what liberalism really is, and in fact, are confusing it with other concepts in a way that is both ignorant and embarrassing to observe.
First of all, Pakistanis think of a ‘liberal’ as one who drinks, uses drugs, enjoins promiscuity and wears inappropriate clothing. But this is actually a ‘libertine’ — ‘a dissolute person, usually a person who is morally unrestrained’. The most famous libertine in history was probably the Marquis de Sade and while I doubt that anyone in Pakistan could match his debauched lifestyle, anyone who “spurns or ignores accepted morals and forms of behaviour sanctified by larger society” (from Wikipedia) is called a ‘liberal’ incorrectly.
A ‘liberal’ is not the same as a ‘libertarian’, someone who adheres to the political philosophy that individual conscience and individual choice is the highest of all principles. They are individualist, distrust state power, and idealise free market capitalism. This movement believes that all services should be privatised and that taxation is a form of theft. Pakistanis, out of whom only two per cent pay tax, seem to have perfected this tenet of libertarianism to a fine art, but our sense of individual conscience and choice is woefully underdeveloped by contrast.
So what is a liberal and what is liberalism, really? The dictionary states that liberalism is “a political orientation that favours social progress by reform and by changing laws rather than revolution”. The worldview of liberals is guided by the principles of liberty and equality in society and liberals generally espouse the concepts of constitutionalism, democracy, free and fair elections, equality between men and women, races and religions, human rights, state protection of minorities and the free exercise of religion.
Liberalism, born in the Age of Enlightenment, has been a powerful force for change in the world; both the American and French Revolutions were inspired by liberal philosophy, monarchies and dictatorships have been overthrown and replaced by democracies, and liberalism has challenged the ideologies of both fascism and communism. More recently, liberalism as a political movement has fired the revolutions of the Arab Spring, but Pakistanis deny and fight the historical impact of liberalism on our own political and historical heritage, when in fact the liberal concept of protecting liberty and individual rights was a major factor in the creation of Pakistan.
Now, the phrase ‘liberal fascist’, as empty as it is oxymoronic, a term that makes absolutely no sense whatsoever, as the principles of liberalism — equality, justice, liberty — are completely at odds with the concept of fascism, which is a form of extremely authoritarian, intolerant right wing governance that takes away the civil rights of its citizens and uses force and violence to compel them into obedience. Perhaps a ‘liberal fascist’ is someone who wants to force their liberal viewpoint on those who disagree with them, but the very essence of liberalism is that it cannot be forced on anyone.
The other phrase, ‘pseudo-liberal’, is slightly less nonsensical than ‘liberal fascist’. In its current usage, Pakistanis use this term to mean a ‘fake’ liberal — someone who claims to be a liberal but in fact believes in and supports a less tolerant political ideology. What they probably really mean is someone who practices what has been termed ‘illiberal liberalism’ or ‘selective liberalism’. This means that a person holds double standards in their liberal worldview; for example, someone will espouse the right of Palestinians to have their own separate state, yet does not support the Kashmiris in the same aspiration.
The lesson to learn from this examination of the word ‘liberal’ and its Pakistani permutations is that Pakistanis are discussing political concepts without knowing what they really mean and conflating them illogically with social, religious, and moral ones. Instead of being proud of Pakistan’s struggle to espouse liberal values, we’ve turned the word ‘liberal’ into something to be ashamed of, and for a country whose intelligentsia claims to be so politically engaged, this is a disappointing and damaging path to tread.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 28th, 2012.

---

the one thing i never got about conservatives is why they are so cautious of progress... I do agree with them on the point that society cannot reach a utopian state, that's obviously impossible. That does not mean we can't continuously improve and evolve. The societies, the cultures and the traditions that existed 1000 years ago, even 200 years ago are in many parts of the world, nowhere to be seen, despite our best attempts to conserve them as humans naturally do not espouse change.

Why is it that many of these conservatives will live happily abroad, enjoy the secularism and live amongst the relatively more liberal culture but when it comes to Pakistan, they will vehemently oppose it for some odd reason? Where is the principle in that?

cyborg909 · #22 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHMAD\

sorry sir, it's the other way around in Pakistan. Oppressor cannot be portrayed as oppressed. No matter how much you play the victim card, it's not going to change the reality.

but janab who is talking abt oppressor or oppressed I have never mentioned anyone being oppressed, Im just pointing out the picture wasn't that rosy in lot of things we have actually progressed a lot e.g today 22% of boardroams position are held by women thats huge achievement (doesn't mean its ideal but its better then what we had in the past).

Neither am saying to play victim card infact its so called liberals who are playing the victim card. Consider for example till 1971 Mullah had no say in running of state we lost 1/2 of Pakistan, prohibition on alochol came in 1976 under bhutto (not a mullah) 1973 constitution under Bhutto and I could go on. 11 yrs of zia (how much twisted it was lets for sake of argument call it conservative reign) compare to rest of time when mullah had no say and u decide urself who is responsible.

U say Mullah or religious has no say in Pakistan, then U should say same thing abt ANP which was totally against pakistan, except for Sindh actually where Muslim league won and passed the pakistan resolution under GM Syed and the referendum in NWFP which Muslim league won, who else wanted Pakistan? Punjab Unionist won who didn't want pakistan, same with baluchistan, by that yardstick no one in Pak is now eligible to be pakistani and have any say and that includes minorities which didn;t want pakistan.

I can offer u time line of all events if u doubt me. Point is plz have a perspective.

AHMAD\ · #23 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyborg909

but janab who is talking abt oppressor or oppressed I have never mentioned anyone being oppressed, Im just pointing out the picture wasn't that rosy in lot of things we have actually progressed a lot e.g today 22% of boardroams position are held by women thats huge achievement (doesn't mean its ideal but its better then what we had in the past).

Neither am saying to play victim card infact its so called liberals who are playing the victim card. Consider for example till 1971 Mullah had no say in running of state we lost 1/2 of Pakistan, prohibition on alochol came in 1976 under bhutto (not a mullah) 1973 constitution under Bhutto and I could go on. 11 yrs of zia (how much twisted it was lets for sake of argument call it conservative reign) compare to rest of time when mullah had no say and u decide urself who is responsible.

Mistakes cannot be rectified by blunders. If extra-constitutional steps were taken before 1971, it shouldn't have been repeated. But Zia sahab, oh well where should I start about self proclaimed Mard-e-Momin sahab.

If that's not finding excuse than what it is? If that's not playing victim card then what it is?

Quote:

U say Mullah or religious has no say in Pakistan, then U should say same thing abt ANP which was totally against pakistan, except for Sindh actually where Muslim league won and passed the pakistan resolution under GM Syed and the referendum in NWFP which Muslim league won, who else wanted Pakistan? Punjab Unionist won who didn't want pakistan, same with baluchistan, by that yardstick no one in Pak is now eligible to be pakistani and have any say and that includes minorities which didn;t want pakistan.

I can offer u time line of all events if u doubt me. Point is plz have a perspective.

I have never said or supported ANP, I don't know where you get that assumption from. Punjab was divided according to Cliff's Boundary commission. The Muslims in North India and West india didn't stood up for Pakistan on the call of Jamat-e-Islami Hind or Molana Abul Kalam Azad, or like minded people. They only came to realization because of struggle and efforts of Quaid-e-Azam. The same Quaid-e-Azam whose namaz-e-janazah prayers were denied by migrated Mullahs of Pakistan. Balochistan was came under accord of allegiance with Pakistan, and if their Sardars are saying anything against that accord today, they are lying. The FATA was guaranteed their territorial rights and they aligned on those conditions.

I don't know what yardstick you are using, but surely your profound thoughts that no one in Pakistan is eligible to be Pakistani (just because Mullahs cannot make their claim) are quite ludicrous. Pakistan movement main agar aap mujhay KATH MULLOON ke naam aur efforts proof kar deyn to aap ke perspective ko tasleem kar leta hoon main.

cyborg909 · #24 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHMAD\

Mistakes cannot be rectified by blunders. If extra-constitutional steps were taken before 1971, it shouldn't have been repeated. But Zia sahab, oh well where should I start about self proclaimed Mard-e-Momin sahab.

If that's not finding excuse than what it is? If that's not playing victim card then what it is?

I have never said or supported ANP, I don't know where you get that assumption from. Punjab was divided according to Cliff's Boundary commission. The Muslims in North India and West india didn't stood up for Pakistan on the call of Jamat-e-Islami Hind or Molana Abul Kalam Azad, or like minded people. They only came to realization because of struggle and efforts of Quaid-e-Azam. The same Quaid-e-Azam whose namaz-e-janazah prayers were denied by migrated Mullahs of Pakistan. Balochistan was came under accord of allegiance with Pakistan, and if their Sardars are saying anything against that accord today, they are lying. The FATA was guaranteed their territorial rights and they aligned on those conditions.

I don't know what yardstick you are using, but surely your profound thoughts that no one in Pakistan is eligible to be Pakistani (just because Mullahs cannot make their claim) are quite ludicrous. Pakistan movement main agar aap mujhay KATH MULLOON ke naam aur efforts proof kar deyn to aap ke perspective ko tasleem kar leta hoon main.

Yaar we can go on and on like all old threads without reaching any agreement so lets stop arguing and lets come to core issue. Why Pakistan was made once we establish that then we can settle all the issues accordingly. Fair enough?

Bashing Mullah is easy and God knows I have done my share, but as I have asked before what non-mullah's has done for pakistan?

maverick86 · #25 (**permalink**) 08-10-2012, 11:30 PM

so a lot of water has proverbially passed under the bridge in this thread, but cyborg, actually regarding the east pakistan point, there is a pic up there that is just revolting ...what the pakistani soldier is doing to the east pakistani man. nonetheless, the point of this and other slides was to reflect that the middle class has changed to a more conservative mindset, one that is littered with idionsyncracies and hypocritical values. I am not saying it was utopia....far from it, but at least the trajectory was right, we were going somewhere, but our progress just nose-dived....i am not saying PPP didn't have a contribution, they did ..... especially to appease rightwingers....and the stupidity of nationalization, but Zia perfected the 'perfect storm'...

cyborg909 · #26 (**permalink**) 08-11-2012, 12:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maverick86

so a lot of water has proverbially passed under the bridge in this thread, but cyborg, actually regarding the east pakistan point, there is a pic up there that is just revolting ...what the pakistani soldier is doing to the east pakistani man. nonetheless, the point of this and other slides was to reflect that the middle class has changed to a more conservative mindset, one that is littered with idionsyncracies and hypocritical values. I am not saying it was utopia....far from it, but at least the trajectory was right, we were going somewhere, but our progress just nose-dived....i am not saying PPP didn't have a contribution, they did ..... especially to appease rightwingers....and the stupidity of nationalization, but Zia perfected the 'perfect storm'...

and my point was we cry so much abt that we completly forget the reasons behind 1973 constitution, one have to keep things in perspective, why is that after making pakistan in 1947 no serious effort was made to have sharia law and nothing happened, all the religious right wing parties couldn't make a dent heck ppl just shrugged of Fatima Jinnah loss to ayub, or race riots in east pak and against Urdu speaking in Sindh in Ayub reigns, Ayub put Maulana Maududi in jail with court awarding death penalty and only KSA and Muslim state pressure able to get him out on the issue of Ahmedi, yet post 1971 everything changed, why?

maverick86 · #27 (**permalink**) 08-11-2012, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyborg909

Sorry no one stopping u to live ur merry immoral life as u wish in ur chardiwari we have issue when u want ur immoral life imposed on rest in open. I can also post same era pics with same title showing how wadera were screwing harees, how east pakistan happend which had nothing to do with any religious sentiment, how today's liberal were yelling surkh hai surkh hai asia surkh hai, the so called goras tourists were drug tourists going all over subcontinent,

Gimme a freaking break, U gonna post that retard NFP and then cry abt an illusionary life style that only existed in selected cities among selected economic class, its same as Glen Beck and other republicans mourning the loss of American way of life ala 50.

Even in Zia time all cinema use to run porn, today u can enjoy it in ur home, alcohol is freely avaiolable watching fashion show, tv shows and stage shows we all know no one stopping from immoral life, heck just looking at edhi jhoola we all know no one is dying horny in Pakistan.

Seriously disappointed, i expected better from someone of ur intellectual capacity.

i am disappointed you took my remarks there at face value....i was replying to halofreak and his judgmental posts.....it was meant to be an ironic statement hence the inverted commas around the 'immoral merry life'.....

AHMAD\ · #28 (**permalink**) 08-11-2012, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cyborg909

Yaar we can go on and on like all old threads without reaching any agreement so lets stop arguing and lets come to core issue. Why Pakistan was made once we establish that then we can settle all the issues accordingly. Fair enough?

Bashing Mullah is easy and God knows I have done my share, but as I have asked before what non-mullah's has done for pakistan?

jo inch- 1/2 inch ki izzat mili bhi hai woh non-mullah hi ki marhon-e-minnat hai.....aur us per bhi aap ka danda aisa chala ke koi Italy ja ke betha, koi Malaysia aur koi BD.

To sir accept karna seekhiye, niyat per shak karna band kijiye....accept karna seekhiye ke SAB PAKISTANI HAIN, AUR PAKISTAN SAB KE LIYE HAI...aur SAB SE PEHLE PAKISTAN!
Jab Mullah is baat per razamand hongay to phir hi negotiation ho sakti hai kisi baat per.

cyborg909 · #29 (**permalink**) 08-11-2012, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by maverick86

i am disappointed you took my remarks there at face value....i was replying to halofreak and his judgmental posts.....it was meant to be an ironic statement hence the inverted commas around the 'immoral merry life'.....

In that case my sincerest apologies (no sarcasm)

cyborg909 · #30 (**permalink**) 08-11-2012, 04:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AHMAD\

jo inch- 1/2 inch ki izzat mili bhi hai woh non-mullah hi ki marhon-e-minnat hai.....aur us per bhi aap ka danda aisa chala ke koi Italy ja ke betha, koi Malaysia aur koi BD.

To sir accept karna seekhiye, niyat per shak karna band kijiye....accept karna seekhiye ke SAB PAKISTANI HAIN, AUR PAKISTAN SAB KE LIYE HAI...aur SAB SE PEHLE PAKISTAN!
Jab Mullah is baat per razamand hongay to phir hi negotiation ho sakti hai kisi baat per.

Yaar main nay kab inkaar kia u r the one deciding who has say or no say in Pakistani affairs and which Mullah has denied that, there are hindus in JI who are members of JI seriously man when has mullah denied that, bash mullah for all the short comings im with u but atleast be fair,.