Why Pakistan Produces Jihadis



Monday night’s arrest of Faisal Shahzad, a 30-year-old Pakistani-American accused of planting a car bomb in Times Square on Saturday, will undoubtedly stoke the usual debate about how best to keep America safe in the age of Islamic terrorism. But this should not deflect us from another, equally pressing, question. Why do Pakistan and the Pakistani diaspora churn out such a high proportion of the world’s terrorists?

Indonesia has more Muslims than Pakistan. Turkey is geographically closer to the troubles of the Middle East. The governments of Iran and Syria are immeasurably more hostile to America and the West. Yet it is Pakistan, or its diaspora, that produced the CIA shooter Mir Aimal Kasi; the 1993 World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef (born in Kuwait to Pakistani parents); 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed; Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl’s kidnapper, Omar Saeed Sheikh; and three of the four men behind the July 2005 train and bus bombings in London.

The list of jihadists not from Pakistan themselves—but whose passage to jihadism passes through that country—is even longer. Among them are Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, Mohamed Atta, shoe bomber Richard Reid, and John Walker Lindh, the so-called American Taliban. Over the past decade, Pakistani fingerprints have shown up on terrorist plots in, among other places, Germany, Denmark, Spain and the Netherlands. And this partial catalogue doesn’t include India, which tends to bear the brunt of its western neighbor’s love affair with violence.

In attempting to explain why so many attacks—abortive and successful—can be traced back to a single country, analysts tend to dwell on the 1980s, when Pakistan acted as a staging ground for the successful American and Saudi-funded jihad against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. But while the anti-Soviet campaign undoubtedly accelerated Pakistan’s emergence as a jihadist haven, to truly understand the country it’s important to go back further, to its creation.

Pakistan was carved out of the Muslim-majority areas of British India in 1947, the world’s first modern nation based solely on Islam. The country’s name means “Land of the Pure.” The capital city is Islamabad. The national flag carries the Islamic crescent and star. The cricket team wears green.

From the start, the new country was touched by the messianic zeal of pan-Islamism. The Quranic scholar Muhammad Asad—an Austrian Jew born Leopold Weiss—became an early Pakistani ambassador to the United Nations. The Egyptian Said Ramadan, son-in-law of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Banna, made Pakistan a second home of sorts and collaborated with Pakistan’s leading Islamist ideologue, the Jamaat-e-Islami’s Abul Ala Maududi. In 1949, Pakistan established the world’s first transnational Islamic organization, the World Muslim Congress. Mohammad Amin al-Husayni, the virulently anti-Semitic grand mufti of Jerusalem, was appointed president.

Through alternating periods of civilian and military rule, one thing about Pakistan has remained constant—the central place of Islam in national life. In the 1960s, Pakistan launched a war against India in an attempt to seize control of Kashmir, the country’s only Muslim-majority province, one that most Pakistanis believe ought to be theirs by right.

In the 1970s the Pakistani army carried out what Bangladeshis call a genocide in Bangladesh; non-Muslims suffered disproportionately. Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto boasted about creating an “Islamic bomb.” (The father of Pakistan’s nuclear program, A.Q. Khan, would later export nuclear technology to the revolutionary regime in Iran.) In the 1980s Pakistan welcomed Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the Palestinian theorist of global jihad Abdullah Azzam.

In the 1990s, armed with expertise and confidence gained fighting the Soviets, the army’s notorious Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) spawned the Taliban to take over Afghanistan, and a plethora of terrorist groups to challenge India in Kashmir. Even after 9/11, and despite about $18 billion of American aid, Pakistan has found it hard to reform its instincts.

Pakistan’s history of pan-Islamism does not mean that all Pakistanis, much less everyone of Pakistani origin, hold extremist views. But it does explain why a larger percentage of Pakistanis than, say, Indonesians or Tunisians, are likely to see the world through the narrow prism of their faith. The ISI’s reluctance to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism—training camps, a web of ultra-orthodox madrassas that preach violence, and terrorist groups such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba—ensure that Pakistan remains a magnet for any Muslim with a grudge against the world and the urge to do something violent about it.

If Pakistan is to be reformed, then the goal must be to replace its political and cultural DNA. Pan-Islamism has to give way to old-fashioned nationalism. An expansionist foreign policy needs to be canned in favor of development for the impoverished masses. The grip of the army, and by extension the ISI, over national life will have to be weakened. The encouragement of local languages and cultures such as Punjabi and Sindhi can help create a broader identity, one not in conflict with the West. School curricula ought to be overhauled to inculcate a respect for non-Muslims.

Needless to say, this will be a long haul. But it’s the only way to ensure that the next time someone is accused of trying to blow up a car in a crowded place far away from home, the odds aren’t that he’ll somehow have a Pakistan connection.

Mr. Dhume, the author of “My Friend the Fanatic: Travels with a Radical Islamist” (Skyhorse Publishing, 2009), is a columnist for WSJ.com.



Filed under Al Qaeda, FATA, Islam, Islamabad, Pakistan, Religion, Taliban, Terrorism, USA, violence, War On Terror

159 responses to “Why Pakistan Produces Jihadis

  1. Midfield Dynamo

    Perhaps this man was made an offer he could not refuse, or is he just a pawn for a media hype geared to mobilize a wider strategy. From his face he looks like an innocent kid who is enjoying the fruits of his labor, and since he has wife and children would not want to kill innocent people on the street. His style of beard though suggests his religious inclinations, which could have, despite his worldly successes inspired him to leave such a horrendous impact on humanity.

  2. Freida Pinto

    An interesting analysis as to ” Why Pakistan Produces Jihadis.”
    After partition Pakistan enjoyed a diverse portion of minority groups. Speaking in main cities as Karachi- Lahore-Islamabad_Quettta-Hyderbad when I lived there we all manged to get along with respect. Our children went to school and played together. With so many different religions they enjoyed and celebrated all the religious holidays,
    There was NO TALK of getting rid of any religion we respected ALL religions and we grew as a people that made Pakistan a great country.
    I see now the sadness and the polarization of terror & unless ALL the people of Pakistan from big cities to small villages in one voice say “No more killing of our brothers, sister, mothers, fathers!!!” it will never stop.
    Islam has been hijacked by extreme fanatics who in the name of a peaceful and loving religion where all religions are respected want power in the name of Islam, they despise the education of the masses as they are aware that education brings knowledge and light.
    Everyone reading this should ask the question what have I done and what can I do to save Pakistan?

  3. Anwar

    A very skewed analysis except for the fact that it was American funded jehad against Soviets that gave birth to the institution of terrorism with support from and an American proxy dictator Zia…
    Other observations are peripheral

  4. anaisanais

    It’s really sad to see this happening again and again.Why are some crazy pakistanis hell bent on destroying what little credibility the nation is trying to build through its war on terror?I really wonder,what makes someone go through this effort,regardless of fear for one’s life and the price the family would pay for these acts.The sooner fundamentalists are laid to rest,better for pakistanis who are today helplessly watching their country ravaged by this scourge.

  5. PMA

    “A very skewed analysis…….Other observations are peripheral”

    Anwar Sahab, Mr. Sad Ananda’s bio says that after earning his bachelor’s degree in sociology from the University of Delhi he earned a master’s degree in international relations from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs, and a master’s in journalism from Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism.

    He works for prestigious WSJ and is an expert on Asian affairs and the author of ‘My Friend the Fanatic: Travels with a Radical Islamist’. We must take his advise.

    We must “replace our political and cultural DNA. Pan-Islamism must give way to old-fashioned nationalism. Our expansionist foreign policy must be canned in favor of development for the impoverished masses. The grip of the army, and by extension the ISI, over national life will have to be weakened.”

    And on the cultural side his advise is that “local languages and cultures such as Punjabi and Sindhi must be encouraged to help create a broader identity, one not in conflict with the West [?]. School curricula ought to be overhauled to inculcate a respect for non-Muslims.”

    I think we ought to listen to this young Indian man.

  6. AZW


    American funded Jihad finished in 1989, some full 21 years ago. The US was out of the region for most of the 1990s. The pan-Islamic zeal of General Zia was carried forward one way or another by the security apparatus of Pakistan Army and decision makers.

    There is an inconvenient truth staring in our faces. Almost all of the terror acts in the West for the past 10 years have had some connection to Pakistan; whether it is planning, financing, or execution.

    We have talked about our internal contradictions and our Islamic inspired almost messianic zeal on PTH before as well. We probably don’t need Mr. Sadanand Dhume to tell us that our confused identity with Islam throughout our history is coming back to bite us. We wince uncomfortably as our internal demons find their way out in the hands of confused individuals or young men of Pakistani origins, when they blow themselves on the streets in the West. There is a reason we are the most dangerous nation on earth, and this has everything to do with our policies, our ideologies and our practices of the past decades.

    Blame US, West, Israel or India as much as you want. Hide behind conspiracy theories and evil machinations mantra that gives you a little comfort now. Or you can raise your voice and say enough of this tamasha,. Get that chip off the Pakistan’s shoulder by facing it head on. Separate religion from the Pakistani identity now. Stop treating the whole world as your enemy. Start investing in your country by investing in the human capital. Or keep worrying about the strategic depths or pan Islamism or being a fortress of Islam. There are a few certainties in life; but keeping up with this blame them attitude will certainly result in the country being exactly at the same spot, if not behind a few decades from now.

  7. AZW


    That Mr. Dhume is a rather young Indian who happens to write for WSJ, can you point out the fallacy in his rather pointed argument. Or is there a better alternative to his broad suggestions in second to last paragraph?

  8. Anwar

    My dear AZW and PMA- let me assure you that I am a hard core secularist – and by the way WSJ lands on my breakfast table every morning – at 6:00 AM to be precise! Anyone who reads this paper from one end to other can easily find its ultra right tilt… with a mission of carrying out the White Man’s Burden all over the world. And if you guys think WSJ is a divine revelation – then so be it. It only entertains those writers who follow its philosophy. This alone can raise a flag.
    Yes, the military establishment in PK is responsible for the mess this country is in but do not forget this establishment is well entrenched and married into the civilian bureaucracy. Someone has to break this coital lock.
    Pakistan’s misfortune is the lack of good caliber statesmen who can articulate better future for the country because of its human potential and resources and strategic location. .. Poverty, lack of education and future for the masses renders them vulnerable to faith based shelter.

  9. null

    ” Pan-Islamism has to give way to old-fashioned nationalism.”
    yeah right we should stop caring for the Ummah and be narrowly nationalistic and be more interested in ethnic chauvinism
    Next we should abandon the Quran and Sunnah too to please these guys.

  10. Majumdar

    (Incidentally I have met Mr Dhume, although he was not a well-known person then.)

    Btw, is it true that this Faisal dude is a son of a retired AVM of PAF?


  11. Tilsim

    @ null

    If Pan-Islamism means the promotion of hatred, intolerance, blind pursuit of power and creating a culture that inculcates a false sense of superiority across borders, then yes we should abandon it. This is what pan-Islamism represents at present. It is not a force for good, it is a force for evil acts and chaos.

    For goodness sake is the Maududi inspired version of Islam which Zia put into practice, following the Quran and Sunnah? Has it promoted goodness and humility in society or instead created narrow minded zealots with a huge fear of others and a false sense of their own superiority. Please reflect. Abandoning this way of thinking is not abandoning the Quran and Sunnah – quite the opposite.

  12. null

    I agree with you entirely
    What is I oppose is trying to remove Islam from society and affairs of the state and then slowly from people’s hearts too which is the agenda of these people

  13. PMA

    AZW (May 6, 2010 at 3:28 am):

    No Syed Sahab, no one can argue with a superior mind, particularly one convinced of his own superiority. As my friend Anwar has said, there are plenty of them out there “with a mission of carrying out the White Man’s Burden all over the world.” We Pakistanis by now are used to being lectured upon for all of our sins – real as well imaginary. Our Faisal Shahzads give them enough of excuse to spit out the ready-made laundry list. Of Course there is no ‘us vs. them’ here. Acknowledging that would disturb certain superior sensibilities. It is all about us. Only us need to be corrected. Otherwise it is a perfect world we all live in.

  14. Tilsim

    Good to know that you agree here. Being a Muslim is not a problem but being a Muslim with no moral or spiritual compass, a massive ego and a blind pursuit for power is a huge problem – for everyone, muslims and non-muslims.

    As for Islam’s involvement in affairs of the state, I don’t agree with it because it drains all the morality and spirituality from the faith and makes it a hollow political movement. Frankly political Islam is a great turn-off.

  15. emrun

    It is quite hard to deny the facts presented. Also, there is a good read available ‘Murder in the Name of Allah’ which analyses the root causes of intolerance in Pakistani scociety. One may google it. What is happening now, was predicted well back in 1960s.

  16. Bin Ismail

    Let’s revise some basic questions and their answers [Q & A]:

    Q#1: Was Pakistan created in the name of Islam?
    A#1: No. Pakistan was created in the pursuance of the politico-economic wellbeing of the Muslim-majority states of undivided India.

    Q#2: Was the Pakistan Movement exclusively a fight for Muslims?
    A#2: No. Jinnah said, “….I am NOT fighting for Muslims, believe me, when I demand Pakistan.” (Jinnah, Press Conference, 14 November 1946)

    Q#3: Did Jinnah envisage an “Islamic Republic”?
    A#3: No. Jinnah said, “…. make no mistake – Pakistan is NOT a theocracy or anything like it.” (Jinnah, Message to the people of Australia, 19 February 1948)

    Let’s begin with retracing our steps to our true genesis.

  17. PMA

    Sardar Khan (May 6, 2010 at 9:33 pm). You have spoken the unspeakable. You a ‘narrow minded Pakistani nationalist’. The ‘high priests’ are coming to get you. You must be banished.

  18. AZW


    You can do much better than chiming in with the resident bigot Mr. Sardar Khan. From all I have read from Mr. Khan, his world is demarcated clearly along Muslim vs. Hindus and Jews. He needs to be left alone, slide around in his bigotry than to get some words of encouragement.

    Mr. Dhume’s points about Pakistan may seem condescending, or an outright bitter medicine. This was my initial reaction too. But is he really off the mark? Why do we equate our critical self analysis to self loathing? Why patriotism has to be blind? What has our failed policies given us? How many of our mistakes need to be hung out in public, we be declared the most dangerous nation on earth before we realize that as bad as Mr. Dhume sound, he is uncomfortably right on the mark.

  19. PMA

    AZW (May 7, 2010 at 2:49 am):

    No it is not the likes of Mr. Dhume. It is the likes of Mr. Shahzad that give them the sword. Dhumes will do what they are suppose to do. Stick it to you where it hurts the most. What Sardar Khan has done above is made a raw expression in the ‘war of words’ that goes on all over the print and electronic media. Only difference being that he does not have the sophistication of a Columbia journalism graduate. The question is not whether Mr. Dhume is right on the mark or not. A lot goes on in other countries as well that could be pointed out as gruesome and inhumane. You and I could air that filth and we too will be on the mark. But that is not our mission in life. We are more concerned about our own home than that of our neighbors. Our tragedy is that we have fallen so low that even third rate people are pointing fingers at us.

  20. Bin Ismail

    @ PMA (May 7, 2010 at 5:33 am)

    “…..We are more concerned about our own home than that of our neighbors….”

    Very well said. Let’s put our own house in order. Pakistanis should understand albeit late, very late, that the responsibility of neither the ummah nor the world rests on our frail shoulders. Our own mess, and our own mess alone, should be our concern. We should not be yearning for words of encouragement, as charity, while we truly do not deserve them. Rebuttals to criticisms will not serve our country or our love for it. Introspection and self-reform will.

  21. Prasad

    First rate / third rate doesn’t matter. What matters is the reality on ground. You need to explore if something can be done with the vernacular press which is largely responsible for this skewed approach to problems over decades and which (incidentally) is yielding ‘rich dividends’ now

  22. Voldemort

    Our tragedy is that we have fallen so low that even third rate people are pointing fingers at us.

    Exactly the mindset that drove the likes of Faisal Shahzad to that diabolic plan. How can a Hindu act superior to a Muslim and tell him that he is wrong? Mr. As-a-Muslim-I-am-superior-to-y’all PMA, you need to wake up and smell the chappals. There are hundreds of Muslim countries on this planet – several of them are even more backward than Pakistan – and hundreds of thousands of Muslim immigrants from those countries living in the US, yet you don’t see them plotting against the very country that gave them the life they lacked back home.

  23. Banned from PTH

    Hey folks I am back! Remember the guy who challenged you Pakistanis to search the keyword ‘Pakistan’ in any international daily to check where you stand..??
    I know you cant forget that Indian chauvinist 😀

    Mera post delete karne se kuch change hua? Fir se Pak in news for all wrong reasons. And People like PMA would keep repeating the same “concerned about our own home”(London,Mumbai,Times square etc are not your home idiot!), “third rate people pointing fingers “(Aj ka taaza khabar about 3rd rate people- IITian Nitin Nohria becomes first non-white dean of Harvard Business School,Formula 1 confirming new grand prix in India) phases.

    I dont lie unlike the few Indians in this site who likes using sugary words to tease their neighbors in the name of advising. I know I had successfully hurt you again and God will not spare me for this. But hey, we used to hate a classmate for having an overprotective brother who used to abuse us. It was only one day when he broke down confronting his brother in school about how he had no friend due to the latter’s actions that everyone saw the boy’s good side and he started making great friends too.

  24. bushra naqi

    Mr. Dhume’s critical analysis is a piece of journalism and not a denunciation of Pakistan. It would be well if we learned to take such criticism well instead of coming out vociferously on the defensive, which only makes matters worse and not better. A bit of balm on our egoes will not make the glaring realities go away.

    For too long we have encouraged anti americanism to flourish on our soil. For too long we have made america the scapegoat of all our troubles. For too long we have walked only a path of narrow parochialism and shunned global

    The difference between other muslim countries and ours is that here the state has been sorely undermined and non state actors can do anything with impunity. Panislamic values are predominant and values of nationalism, allegiance to the state and its dictates are nonexistent. Only the law of the jungle prevails.

    In such a scenario naive young people like Faisal Shahzad are imbibing all the misplaced and misconstrued conspiracy theories floating around
    which can lead to heinous acts. Lets instead give our young folks the truth by facing the reality ourselves and foregoing the denial syndrome.

  25. AZW

    PMA: The question is not whether Mr. Dhume is right on the mark or not….. Our tragedy is that we have fallen so low that even third rate people are pointing fingers at us

    Our tragedy is that we don’t care if Mr, Dhume or other critics of our failed policies are on the mark or not.

    Our tragedy is that we mourn our sunken levels when Indians pinpoint our faults; we just don’t mourn the fact that we have sunk to the lowest of the lows.

  26. PMA

    Bushra Naqi (May 7, 2010 at 1:10 pm) there is a war going on out there. A war between the Radical-Arabs and the West. Planting and empowerment of the European Jews in the heart of the Arab-land, and imposition of corrupt Dictators, Sheikhs and Kings as rulers over Arab masses seems to be the chief grievances at the center of this conflict. Most Muslims all over the world, Arabs and non-Arabs alike, although disturbed by the events go about their daily life without getting involved. They don’t make any news. However a small percentage, a very small percentage mind you, does act upon its rage and commits terrorist acts. That fraction however does make the news. We all condemn these acts of terrorism and most parents are watchful that their kids don’t grow up to be terrorist. But few will fall through the cracks, especially the poor and the emotionally vulnerable. Pakistan is caught in this war by proximity. Pakistanis are neither inherently violent nor pan-Islamists. Most are worried about their day to day existence. But as long as a war is being waged at the borders of Pakistan, some ill advised emotional young men will be in the news. And those with an agenda of their own will air it with their own twist to their own advantage.

  27. PMA

    AZW (May 7, 2010 at 6:13 pm):

    You may twist the words as you like, but what you have just said above is your take and not mine.

  28. Urban Angst

    “However a small percentage, a very small percentage mind you, does act upon its rage and commits terrorist acts. That fraction however does make the news. We all condemn these acts of terrorism and most parents are watchful that their kids don’t grow up to be terrorist. But few will fall through the cracks, especially the poor and the emotionally vulnerable. Pakistan is caught in this war by proximity..”

    That’s your take and not the rest of the world’s. Ofcourse the systematic brainwashing of poor boys in Madrassas as well as in school textbooks, the narrative of Muslims being wronged everywhere, the sense of victimhood-“Islam is in danger” sentiment, the donation boxes in shops, the “go to Jihad” slogans on the walls, the ISI and the military that wants to take surreptitiously what it could not take through open war (and yet not even close to taking either Kashmir or Kabul), yes these things are irrelevant. Its just a few that get through the cracks, ain’t it? Islam is definitely a religion of peace, but unfortunately many of its practitioners aren’t. As somebody said, please smell the chappals.

  29. Urban Angst

    reuters: “Pakistanis pose as Indians after NY bomb scare”

    Looks like many from the land of the pure want to pose as “third-raters” now.

  30. Hayyer

    “Our tragedy is that we have fallen so low that even third rate people are pointing fingers at us”
    Is Mr. Dhume third rate, whatever that means because he repeated what others, including western journalists have been saying for some time? What makes him third rate, reiterating a commonly held belief, or the fact that he is a Hindu from India?
    Are all Indians third rate? Possibly; it is a conditioned view, as much as is the view that all Muslims from Pakistan are terrorists. The wily Hindu and the violent Muslim are stereotypes mostly. There are plenty of wily Muslims and violent Hindus. One should avoid conditioned responses as far as possible.

  31. Vajra


    Why? It is so much easier to slot one’s brain into auto-pilot and tap out whatever platitudes the opinion-generating sub-system produces. Beats thinking any day.

  32. Prasad


    Would be highly obliged if you can simplify your posts and make them comprehensible for the benefit of ordinary bloggers

  33. Vajra


    And whatever gave you the impression that I was writing for the ‘benefit’ of ordinary bloggers? I am afraid that you’ll have to take things as they are…..or go elsewhere! Delightful thought, that last.

  34. Prasad

    Vajra , I guess not just me but most of us will need to avoid your posts since you will end up converting PTH into a loony asylum full of very heavy lines/ paras that only you can create (and hopefully decipher ) !!

  35. Vajra


    You are remarkably persuasive. Are you a cut-piece cloth salesman when you are not peddling these dazzling pieces of prose to PTH?

    I promise to stop after the first lunatic is created. I am hopeful that you can decipher my message. That last was the correct use of hopeful. This is called an example, as in exempli gratia. It is sometimes instructive; however, I am not by nature an optimist.

    Actually, I am lying. It is likely that the first lunatic will be discovered rather than created, if inane and banal posts are a clue to the internal make-up of the perpetrator; it is also likely that we already know that natural’s identity. Please post a few more messages to put the matter beyond doubt.

    PS: You might like to try
    I guess not just I but most of us……

    that only you can create (and, it is to be hoped, decipher)……

    next time around. What you wrote originally was grammar that only you could create, and only you can explain to the justly-enraged Muses (unfortunately, ‘explain’ rather than ‘decipher’: you are using Roman letters and we can all ‘decipher’ your mails, more’s the pity; would you be open to the idea of using Sumerian cuneiform in future posts, in the interests of the sensitive nerves of the readership on PTH?).

    Has it occurred to you that there might be some reason for your inability to, er, decipher my dense prose, other than my dense prose?

    This was a such a boring afternoon till you lunged out of ambush.

  36. Vajra


    BTW, on a matter of satisfying my insatiable curiousity: if your planning for your retirement home consists of filling it with heavy lines/ paras, where do you propose to put the (other) lunatics?

  37. Prasad

    Phew…goodness gracious ! Vajra go get yourself some treatment before it is too late!

  38. Prasad

    Vajra..well I am still reading…well feels nauseating…well afternoons HAVE to be boring with you being around!! very heady indeed

  39. Vajra


    Obviously BTM Layout follows Farrokh Bulsara rather than that relatively obscure and indecipherable Queen, Elizabeth Windsor, as far as language and syntax are concerned. Actually, all things considered, that’s an improvement on what passes in that neck of the woods.

  40. Prasad

    Yeah you are bang on. Just turn right and you will hit NIMHANS. I can coordinate a bed for ya. Dude chill maadi

  41. Bin Ismail

    Regardless of how Mr. Dhume analyses the situation, let’s examine the question on more dispassionate grounds – why Pakistan produces Jihadis. This was not an overnight development. There was a series of deviations from Jinnah’s vision of a secular Pakistan. Each following deviation happened to bring us closer to the situation we find ourselves confronting today. Now, it is for the nation to discontinue its movement along this descending spiral. Let us first examine our successive deviations:

    Deviation#1: 1948 – Objectives Resolution: Thus was flung open the permanent backdoor for drawing religion into politics.

    Deviation#2: 1953 – Punjab Government sponsors anti-Ahmadi riots by sponsoring Jamaat Islami, Majlis Ahrar and Jamiat Ulama-e Islam.

    Deviation#3: 1956 – Pakistan named “Islamic Republic” in its first constitution, thus promising a defining and decisive role for the clergy, in the running of the country.

    Deviation#4: 1973 – Article 2 of the 1973 Constitution: “Islam shall be the State Religion of Pakistan”. This opened the door for Islam to be misused and abused to the convenience of the various political forces in the country.

    Deviation#5: 1974 – 2nd amendment to the 1973 Constitution, declaring Ahmadis “not Muslims for the purposes of Constitution and Law”. A precedent was set for getting the Parliament to bow before the clergy – a bow which in due course turned into a perennial prostration.

    Deviation#6: 1979-onwards: The Soviet presence in Afghanistan drew in US support for the Mujahideen, who eventually evolved into Al Qaeda. Pakistan’s involvement in this strategy to keep the Soviets away from the Arabian Oil zone, left Pakistan entangled in this Jihadist-producing network. This entanglement subsequently enhanced local extremist trends.

    Deviation#7: 1984 – Anti-Ahmadiyya Presidential Ordinance issued by Zia: An ultimately unique legislation that set a precedent for denying any religious community its fundamental religious rights.

    All these deviations from Jinnah’s secular Pakistan, led our dear country step-by-step to the situation that presently afflicts it.

  42. Akash

    Buddy, you do write with a Thesaurus and “Rules of Grammar” at hand. Prasad may not be so wrong pointing that out.

  43. Vajra


    I don’t; I only look up quotations, to get the exact wording. I have never used a thesaurus; it seems utterly redundant. As for grammar, Wren and Martin was good enough for me, but that was 42 years ago.

    I hate inexactitude in word or phrase, or expression, and sometimes this distracts me from the general sense of what is being said. Perhaps that is a good thing; few comments are worth reading for intrinsic merit, for their logic or their argument. I write an old-fashioned style, but what do you expect of an elderly man?

  44. Prasad

    Thanks Akash.

    Vajra: We learnt not to hype discussions laced with jargons long time back in our daily corporate roles as it meant utterly demotivating the listening audience. While I appreciate your intention to indulge in fine discussions, gets diluted when phrases get very complicated…Thus, it was a genuine suggestion to keep posts readable & for the larger benefit of ordinary mortals

    your recent posts elsewhere were simpler. Thank you

  45. Tanzeel

    Here is the detailed reply to Sadanand Dhume’s biased article.


  46. Tanzeel

    Sadanand Dhume’s article “Why Pakistan produces Jihadis” in WSJ has not only focused International Community’s attention towards Pakistan but its an attempt to isolate the nation from other Islamic countries which seems like a smart effort of building opinions to develop another international coalition against Pakistan with the support of Afghanistan. A typical RAW based agenda in Journalism.

  47. Vajra


    Thank you for condescending to instruct me on how to make presentations and write papers, as derived from the lessons you learnt in your corporate role.

    I note in passing that irony is not your failing; you write

    hype discussions laced with jargons long time back in our daily corporate roles as it meant utterly demotivating the listening audience.

    A word of advice to you: try not to jump to conclusions about what an anonymous person’s background and personal history, and what he can or cannot do, based on insufficient evidence. I say this in amusement, not in annoyance.

  48. Vajra


    Why does it not seem to you like an accurate description of what is going wrong? Your political analysis of its positioning apart, which parts of the article did you disagree with, and why? Was he factually wrong?

    Do you, in short, have anything to offer other than your own opinion in support of your conclusion?

  49. Vajra,

    I have responded Sadanand’s article with through explanations in my personal blog –article name”Pakistan under microscope”.

    Please click on my name to access article.

    tanzeel . wordpress . com

  50. Vajra


    Much appreciated.

    I admit I am surprised. More after I read your comments.

  51. yasserlatifhamdani

    Needless to say WSJ’s article is extremely stupid and idiotic.

    It deliberately glosses over facts. Pakistan was not created in the name of Islam. Maududi was not some ideologue in Pakistan…. Muhammad Asad was not Pakistan’s early UN Ambassador or whatever Dhume is claiming … the list goes on.

    It is a shameless attempt to connect dots where there are none.

    Faisal Shahzad is the product of radicalization of Islamic Youth on American campuses… he didn’t travel to Waziristan out of his love for geography you know. He was indoctrinated in the US for god’s sake.

    Frikkin’ Americans made him an American and we are still responsible. Is there no shame?

  52. AZW


    Going by your logic, the Madrid attacks were Spanish government and society’s fault, London bombings were British fault, shoe bomber Richard Reid was provided training in America, Canadian Group of 7 (arrested and getting convicted one by one) are Canadian society’s problem.

    That would suit all of Pakistanis just fine as only ideological, financial, or execution training is imparted to all of them. Doesn’t matter that all of them headed to Pakistan where willing handlers are delighted to see confused ABCDs looking to find a reason for their existence. Hey Americans, it was your mess. We only trained them.

    As far as Pakistan being created in the name of Islam, probably half of the population believes in this myth. Doesn’t matter if Dhume is wrong. For most of Pakistanis who are pained at condescending tone of Dhume, he is right on most accounts.

  53. YLH

    No he is not. He is an idiot.

    Here is my response both to your comments and the article above:


  54. YLH

    Since I am in moderation … Read my response on Daily Times today.

  55. Vajra


    Dhume hasn’t done his homework, he is condescending and he has a very sketchy argument. He may even be an idiot, as you say. While we can agree with you that some of the grounds he has used to build a case are defective in fact or in interpretation, the fact is that many people, Pakistani as well as Indian, think the same way as he does. We can dismiss some of these peripheral issues, with that observation. Nevertheless, his core argument is one which needs attention.

    Your point about radicalisation taking place elsewhere is valid. However, questions remain.

    It just isn’t good enough to say that Pakistan is merely an unwilling host to the world’s terrorist orphans. Why this country of all those available? Was state sponsorship of terrorist outfits a factor in building the infrastructure of terror that those same state organs are now trying to break down, with patchy success?

  56. Voldemort

    OK, so now Faisal Shahzad is American?? The lengths to which some Pakistanis would go to disown one of their own is just amazing! The thing is (and this does not apply to all Pakistanis lest it be misunderstood) you can take a Jihadi out of Pakistan (as in the case of this dude), but you cannot take the Jihad out of him.

  57. karun

    Breaking news:

    Ajmal Amir Kasab was an alumnus of Rutgers Univ. where he was brainwashed and indoctrinated into being a killing machine.

  58. harbir singh nain

    Modified version of the comments I made on Dhume’s article on facebook

    Sadanand Dhume’s piece made me cringe, mostly because pakistanis could very well claim that the Indian hawks come out to defame pakistan and pakistanis every time something happens, and often it does seem like Indian media persons don’t miss the opportunity to crap on Pakistan.

    Nevertheless, the article by Dhume, right or wrong, raises only half the issue. Indeed pakistan has an unresolved relationship with Islam, but equally important (or even more so) is the fact that partition was accompanied by pakistan getting less of the than was expected, with India’s actions to deny Pakistan what it expected, and pakistan’s subsequent obssession with establishing parity with India, to not be less, to extract from India’s grip that which was considered rightly pakistan’s, to not accept that pakistan should accept its inability change the status quo established by India, to not accept that the south asian hindu carried a bigger stick than the south asian muslim.

    That has led pakistan into a rabbit hole. What it hoped to establish it could not through “normal” means, so it has sought leverage against the larger India, where ever and however it could get that. and that has usually meant making itself useful to other countries in exchange for the leverage they provide pakistan (SEATO, CENTO, the pro china tilt were all about India), and it has meant that pakistan has repeatedly turned to methods that magnify its influence beyond what its real weight would give it. the tribesmen in 1947, the agents provocateurs in 1965, the support for khalistanis, kashmir, kargil, have all been instances of pakistani leadership trying to get its way through indirect actors. And there is afghanistan of course, also the same thing.

    So many attempts come from pakistan not just because pakistan has been touched with pan-islamist zeal, but because it has legitimized and “productionalized” militias of religious nationalism. it did so to increase the leverage of the pakistan state, and it got that, but pakistan also got with it a factory for producing jihad drunk islamists.

    That leaves moderate pakistanis embarrased and frustrated, but it opens a question that is, in my mind, unresolved. To what extent are moderate pakistanis in concordance with the military and religious complexs’ anti-india attitudes and methods? This is an important question because the answer to it determines whether most pakistanis are victims of unaccountable military and religious authority, or if most of them are sympathetic enough to the military and the mullahs that their opposition to the military and religious establishments is never enough to effect change, and effectively makes them as responsible for their state’s religio-political dysfunction.

  59. Luq

    If an American of Pakistani origin were to get a nobel prize in physics, would YLH disown him just as quickly?


  60. Vajra

    May 10, 2010 at 1:27 pm

    Breaking news:

    Ajmal Amir Kasab was an alumnus of Rutgers Univ. where he was brainwashed and indoctrinated into being a killing machine.

    the Indian hawks come out to defame pakistan and pakistanis every time something happens, and often it does seem like Indian media persons don’t miss the opportunity to crap on Pakistan.

    You are so right.

    It isn’t just Indian media persons, all kinds of creeps come out of the woodwork at such times to crap on Pakistan. It does seem at times that these types can only express themselves through an unusual orifice, not the one usually in vogue for expression of views.

    To move on to the rest of your post.

    I haven’t had occasion to agree with you earlier, but on this occasion, you so clearly have identified one of the essential characteristics of the matter.

    What is surprising about Pakistan’s attitudes and feelings towards India is not how the brain-washed peasant or urban working class feels, not how the active member of any of the jihadi organisations feels, not how members of the civil or military establishment with a vested interest in creating the relationship always on the boil feel, but how the liberal, secular, democratic Pakistani feels. They should feel that liberal, secular, democrats are in the same fight, whichever country they belong to. They should feel a feeling of kinship, a feeling of camaraderie. Instead, what appears is often a grudging acceptance of support in their own internal battles, dropped and abandoned very soon in favour of a virulently jingoistic stance.

    This is inexplicable, without taking into account the transactional balance sheet that apparently many of them carry in their heads. Apparently the rudeness, the cynicism, the condescension, the outright brutality of Indian attacks on their religion, their culture, their nationhood, their founding fathers, their politics, their Army’s propensity to be found where it is least wanted and most harmful, their intelligence services’ egregious interference in politics, the distortion of the landholding patterns, the crude self-aggrandisement of the Army – all these sting, and the cumulative irritation is enough to drive even sane and balanced persons around the bend.

    This is today. You are right to point out that there was a legacy of meanness and short-changing them which has made it almost impossible for a Pakistani of our sort to even be seen to be talking to us on friendly terms; it implies tacit submission to the uncouth behaviour that we have extended towards them, of which the post I quoted was a fine example. Most of the time, they see Indians at their worst, as uncouth, boorish, ill-mannered, supercilious and overbearing, not to mention overwhelmingly convinced of the essential rightness of everything that they stand for.the rightness of everything Indian, and the wrongness of everything Pakistani. It is not the facts which matter; it is the manner and the attitude with which these are conveyed.

    I think you have it exactly right in pointing out that in their effort to balance the scales, to even the overwhelming odds against them, the Pakistani establishment took recourse to a combination of overt and covert war-making. They did this to seek redressal of historical wrongs, not all of which were creatures of their perception.

    The result, as you correctly point out, was not a success; in addition, as a by-product, they got jihad factories which refused to stop production when they were no longer needed.

    Regarding the attitude of moderate Pakistanis, and I assume that that is equivalent to liberal, secular and democratic Pakistanis, yes, they have to decide to oppose the forces which have harmed Pakistan the most, historically, or they have to decide to back those forces. This is a hard choice to make, as even today, the bulk of the Pakistani population probably thinks that the traditional Pakistani way of handling things was correct, and to oppose this large majority is not easy.

    On top of this systemic difficulty, if we add the incoherent fury and bitterness caused by the apish antics of a few Indians, the worst specimens that we could dread to see in any international forum, leave alone a Pakistani forum, we are putting a huge strain on human character. It would be superhuman to rise above these provocations and take the correct balanced view, and it is unlikely to happen unless we can, on our part, do some soul-searching and deal with them rather more fairly than in the past.

  61. globetroter

    It is of no importance WHERE the indoctrination (to terrorism etc.) takes place.

    Decisive is who does it on the basis of what ideology or religion or related texts and histories.

    In today’s internet, mobile phone and email environment the question “where” is irrelevant.

    WHO is indoctrinating, financing, co-ordinating, sending out etc. and which texts, examples, inspirations, narratives etc. he is using – that is to be asked.

  62. PMA

    AZW (May 10, 2010 at 2:40 am):

    Being in the trenches so to speak, I and perhaps you too can appreciate what YLH is saying. Where Faisal Shahzad was radicalized? I agree with YLH.

    I have seen many ‘green, wet behind the ears’ Pakistani boys arriving in the USA for further studies. Majority of them come from Pakistani middle class with middle class upbringing and values, far away from the killing fields of Waziristan and Madrassas. Majority of them concentrates on studies and some benign social activities, mostly confined to other Pakistani boys.

    Let us move towards international politics. The USA has made Israel the most powerful country in the Middle East and there is very little that Arabs can do about it. The ongoing Middle East conflict has radicalized generations of Arabs. After sixty years there is a hard core of Arab radicalism – both of secular and of religious variety. The later in an effort to increase its numbers has traditionally tried to recruit other Muslims. American university campuses are a convenient recruiting place for that. Typically the appeal is not ‘pan-Islamism’ but ‘Islamic cause’. Most Pakistani boys do not fall into that pit, but few do.

    Then the question comes why Pakistanis and not the other non-Arab Muslim students. Iranian and Turkish students traditionally do not ‘hang around’ with Arab students. All of them being Middle Eastern there is too much of ill feeling between Arabs and Turko-Persians. In case of Pakistan that is not so. Few Pakistani boys do join the ’cause’ and rest is known to us as is the case of Faisal Shahzad. Move to radicalism is an ‘individual personality trait’ exacerbated by the social conditioning. Most will not make that move, but few will. The Arab radicals prey on this lot. Unable to continue their activities in their home countries they have moved to relatively easier places like Somalia, Sudan, Yemen and Waziristan. And yes into the free societies of Western Europe and North America. Then the question is who is responsible for the acts of Faisal Shahzad. I would say; the Muslim and the Western Worlds and above all, Faisal Shahzad himself.

  63. Pakistan doesn’t produce Jihadis, they rather nourish them.

  64. Archaeo

    Points to ponder:

    It is of no importance WHERE the indoctrination (to terrorism etc.) takes place.

    Decisive is who does it on the basis of what ideology or religion or related texts and histories.

    It is in other words unimportant whether this indoctrination is taking place in Pune or in Nagpur; it is being done on the basis of Hindutva ideology, on a perverted, Semiticised distortion of the Hindu religion, and based on the texts and histories of Veer Savarkar, the Hindu Mahasabha and the Sarsanghchalaks of the RSS.

    In today’s internet, mobile phone and email environment the question “where” is irrelevant.

    WHO is indoctrinating, financing, co-ordinating, sending out etc. and which texts, examples, inspirations, narratives etc. he is using – that is to be asked.

    Precisely so.

    The role of the RSS, and its appendages, the VHP, Bajrang Dal, Shiv Sena and a number of others (list available on request) is significant.

    It is they who indoctrinate, finance, coordinate, send out, etc., to parody the language used in a Hindutva specimen’s recent post. And they base their work on texts, examples, inspirations and narratives extracted from an history of the purest hatred for others not belonging to the same religion.

    “Ecrasez l’infame.”

  65. AZW

    PMA, Yasser:

    No one is denying that US campus support a more conservative strain of Islam. No one is denying that is not just Pakistanis who have been linked with terrorism plots in Europe and United States. Nidal and Abdul Muttalib were not Pakistanis. But Pakistanis are forming the largest percentage of plotters and executers of terrorism acts in Europe and the United States. This link is to ignore at our own peril. And Pakistan and Pakistanis are, and will be paying the price for being figured so prominently with these acts.

    The problem is not confined to the United States. Britian and Canada have arrested high profile cases of Pakistani descent youth who have plotted to kill their fellow residents. Britian estimated that 80% of the terrorist plots on its soil can be traced directly back to Pakistan. RAND calculates that Pakistani descent youth form the largest percentage of terrorism cases in the west. Every single terrorist plot across the western world of the past 15 years has a connection to Pakistan. This is a distinction that not even Saudi Arabia possesses.

    I can relate anecdotally to the post Zia pan Islamic zeal that permeates through the Pakistani youth that hit adolescence in the 1980s and 1990s. I have cusorily and better known many of them. They rejoice at the terrorism acts in the West, all that time while they live and make their livings here. Many of them are supremely confused, and all they are able to do is to impart their confusion to their younger siblings or children. All it is needed for any of them is to fall prey into a manipulative handler and they would morph into yet another Faisal Shahzad. All of them live in Canada or England.

    That Pakistanis form the majority of these wannabe terrorists points towards chicken finally coming home to roost in Pakistan. That Dhume and Hoodbhoy are pointing to a potent combustible mix of religion with virulent anti Americanism/anti semitism holds a lot of weight. Simply blaming it on US, Canada, Britian and others is a blatant deflection from recognizing the rot that has been festering in our consciousness for a long time. Faisal Shahzad made 13 trips to Pakistan in the last four years. He was frequenting Karachi’s North Nazimabad Jihadi mosque that still exhorts Jihad against the west right now as we speak. London bombers group head trained with Al-Qaeda in Pakistan. Pakistan is the central hub for all the spokes that spring up in news every few months or so. That Faisal Shahzad is a rather dumb fellow is probably a blessing for Pakistanis as no one got killed due to his crude attempts to wantonly kill the civilians. But if the state, and even the observant ones among us continue to deflect the blame, then I do not honestly know what it will take us to wake from this blissful slumber.

  66. Luq


    Your analysis is honest, straight to the point and accurate. Brilliant !!!


  67. YLH


    If you had bothered to read the article you would have gotten the distinction between the Jihad manufactured by a cynical establishment feeding on poverty i.e. Kasab… and the nonsense that happened in New York.

    If you had read with an open mind and a clean conscience, you would have realized that in the final analysis this will only amount to a shifting of focus from South Punjab … where the anti-India militancy is created! If anything … this whole thing will backfire on India’s efforts to bring anti-Indian militancy in South Punjab to an end.

    So fine go ahead and make stupid comments based on ignorance… but sometimes I wonder if iodized salt is completely missing in India.

  68. YLH

    AZW and Luq,

    I don’t know why either of you are making strawman fallacies. Is it my argument that Pakistan doesnot have a problem with Islamism? Or that Pakistanis or people of Pakistani origin are not involved in terrorist attacks…

    Let us go back to the question: Was Faisal Shahzad radicalized in Pakistan?

    Let us confine ourselves at present to the class that Faisal Shahzad came from. For this class…. Zia’s Islamization was so hypocritical, so ridiculous, such a sham that most young people from affluent families rejected it.

    For this class …. Zia’s Islamization had the opposite effect. Atheism and alcohol consumption rose disproportionately in Pakistan. Nobody has denied that Pakistan has a clear and present danger in form of Islamism… how ironic that people like you are questioning my commitment to the cause of undoing General Zia’s legacy… but this stupid article above… doesn’t do anyone any good. So I am sorry but I just don’t accept this parroting of rhetoric that is at root cut off from common sense.

    It is ironic that once someone like me questions certain basic issues with a story (for which we are threatened with dire consequences) …. everything I have done – and I have done a lot whether people here care to admit as much- against Islamism and terrorism in Pakistan is forgotten… and I am accused of “deflecting”. Well so be it. What I wrote is based on fact. The fact is that the FS landed in the US, he was a somewhat westernized liberal young man … who wanted to get an education and make a living as a consultant. His radicalisation thus happened not in his formative years but his latter ones. He didn’t have a beard in Pakistan. He didn’t marry a Hijabi Muslimah.

    How did he get religious? Even Americans say his radicalisation was gradual. How then does it have to do with his formative years in Pakistan. Could it be that he read “Reluctant Fundamentalist” and became a copy cat… well possible. But more likely is that he manufactured an identity for himself which has nothing to do with Pakistan…

    Now we absolutely need to smash the infrastructure that nourishes terrorism … we also need to smash South Punjab’s militancy which is class based and the product of a manufactured Jehad by the state…. there are no two opinions about it. But US must also put its own house in order.

  69. YLH


    I do not own or disown anyone. An American of Pakistani origin is an American of Pakistani origin.

    I think the hypocrisy you referred to is entirely absent on my side.

    Perhaps you would explain why Amir Khan the British boxer is just a British Boxer and not a Pakistani British boxer… but those British citizens guilty of 7/7 were “Pakistanis”.

  70. YLH

    Here is Fouad Ajami’s view:


    Unlike Dhumes and zakaria type fools… Ajami is a real academic who knows his shit.

  71. Majumdar

    Yasser Pai,

    You have got a point when you ask where FS got radicalised. But there is something beyond that.

    Mere radicalism doesn’t kill people. It is when radicals acquire the means and training to kill people that the real shyte begins. And that is where Pakistan (or more broadly the Af-Pak region) comes in. The business of imparting these skills goes on unrestricted in many parts of Pakistan, it had open state patronage in past, possibly chunks of the state apparatus still backs such IITs (the type that arjun mian keeps speaking about). FS, Reid, Ajmal Kasai were all trained in such IITs in the Af-Pak region.

    (This is not to say that such skills are not or cannot be imparted elsewhere. Mohd Atta and his friends to the best of our knowledge were not trained in the Af-Pak region, most likely it was in West that they were trained. But Pak is one of the major training grounds)


  72. YLH

    Absolutely. That is why we are fighting a war in the North West.

    However where does Clinton get off warning us of “dire consequences”. Surely they should take some responsibility for it.

  73. YLH

    PS my response was with respect to the article above.

    If the claim is that Pakistan has failed to control extremists which then train radicals … I agree.

    But that is not the objective of this crooked article above is it?

  74. Majumdar

    Yasser Pai,

    It is difficult to ascertain the motivation of the author. But there is no denying the points that the author has raised:

    1. The role of Pak based camps in training miscreants.

    2. The fact that overseas Pakistanis/Pak born immigrants form a large chunk of such miscreants (as compared to many other Muslim nations/populations)

    As Adnan bhai and others have argued, this is far more important (and not the least to Pak itself) than the motivation or credentials of this author.


  75. Prasad

    YLH: //But that is not the objective of this crooked article above is it?//

    I think that is a prime objective of this article though – diluted in my view

    sadanand dume //Pakistan’s history of pan-Islamism does not mean that all Pakistanis, much less everyone of Pakistani origin, hold extremist views. But it does explain why a larger percentage of Pakistanis than, say, Indonesians or Tunisians, are likely to see the world through the narrow prism of their faith. The ISI’s reluctance to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism—training camps, a web of ultra-orthodox madrassas that preach violence, and terrorist groups such as the Lashkar-e-Taiba—ensure that Pakistan remains a magnet for any Muslim with a grudge against the world and the urge to do something violent about it//

  76. globetrotter

    to archaeo

    You point out to the hindu terrorists only. Why pick only on hindus?

    Statistically they are doing far less damage than those of the islamic breed.

    You are right when you write: “Semiticised distortion of the Hindu religion.”

    Thus you rightly reveal that hindu terrorism/fascism is a reaction to and a result of islamic terrorism and fascism. So the real inspirers of hindu terrorism and fascism also are the semitics, the fascist muslims, the monotheistic-totalitarian world-viewists, the wanna-be world conquerors in the name of an arab god – that in deed is right analysis by you.

  77. Prasad


    I think Christian Missionary activities are by far the biggest reason for upsurge for Hindu Fascism. Thankfully the activities are largely peripheral in nature

  78. Archaeo


    This is the usual foolish and immature argument that the community has come to expect from you wandering wise men.

    The Hindus have in part, it would be nice to think a small, unthinking, mindless part, been influenced by the effects of Christianity and Islam, not much by Judaism. This shows a fundamental weakness in the beliefs of those who are so influenced, but only of those influenced, not the others.

    Obviously they had little confidence in their own beliefs, to be so easily swayed.

    It is also pathetic that you consider the Hindu fascist and terrorist to be the creation of Islamic fascists, pathetic for two reasons.

    First, the reference was to semiticisation, that is, influence from both Christianity and Islam, not Islam alone. But then, to such as you, armed as you are with only a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. There is no room in the pretty little heads of such unthinking people for understanding a bigger picture than that which they have bound themselves to see.

    Second, your cheap resort to blaming others for your own predicament in becoming a terrorist and fascist sectarian mirrors the Al Qaeda’s pleading of external injury as justification for their outrages. Both are equally unacceptable; both must take responsibility for their own filthy actions without hiding behind the petticoats of these pathetic arguments.

    It is clear that the semiticisation of a segment of Hindus has progressed deep; they are now imitating both the Provisional IRA as well as the Al Qaeda. The resemblance is so close that we now begin to understand Bciv’s bitter taunt: you are nothing but the uncircumcised Taliban, unclean both in mind and in person.

  79. globetrotter

    to archeo

    Learn to avoid condescending language.

    Christian influence in creating hindu fascism is minor, although the anger which these fascist hindus show towards christians is often larger since the christians are weak and can be attacked with less risk. Fascists are cowards (so also the hindu ones), so they choose the weaker enemies to demonstrate their powers.

    Hindu fascism is different from the islamic one because it has only a defensive-reactive character (confined to the indian subcontinent). Islamic fascism has global ambitions, reach and intentions and they also have many (muslim) states supporting them.

  80. Archaeo

    @globe trotter

    As a rule, fools start on their foolish journeys by shedding their sense of reality. You, for instance, are a perfect example.

    In post after post, you have heaped condescending platitudes, nothing more, on entire civilisations, on entire belief systems, and never stopped to wonder if you knew it all. What can be more condescending than your own attitude? Physician, heal thyself.

    The only false coin that you have to offer is Islamophobia. Go peddle your wares elsewhere, please; you have no buyers here, for usre, and you may as well discover that that is true elsewhere as well on your own.

  81. AZW


    I would be the last person to doubt your resolve. There is no argument here at all.

    The fight in FATA is the military aspect of this struggle. This struggle goes on daily in Pakistani collective psyche. In the age of the internet, it has begun affecting our diaspora who communicate, read and travel frequently to Pakistan. We have a large number of Pakistani descent men wreaking havoc in different countries.

    It is not just US campus phenomenon. Of course you are correct that some US campuses and mosques are cesspool of radical Islamic thought. But I do believe that virulent anti Americanism is due to a confluence of our quasi Islamic policies run by the state specifically since Zia’s time. Even Ajami’s article is hinting at the strong Pakistani connection.

  82. Vajra


    This silly article by one silly author should not create a rift in the ranks of the liberal, secular, democratic elements in Pakistan. Please. This is too trivial.

    Yasser, please be sure that all of us have appreciated your correction of the ‘skew’ in the article; there are some who have even responded very thoughtfully with a deeply-felt response detailing how this indoctrination happens and indicating its differential impact among different expatriate or immigrant communities. There is no failure to understand and appreciate your point of view, none at all.

    All that people are trying to say, not in contradiction but in supplementation of your analysis, is that there is a system, an apparatus in Pakistan which converts a frustrated rage into a terrorist capable of expression of his insane state of mind. Surely you can agree that the two go together? This does not require us to claim that either aspect is whole by itself.

  83. dharmayoddha

    My question is totally different. IF pakistan produces jihadis, (for whatever reason) what is stopping people like me from becoming dharmayoddhas. ? (As a counter to jihadis)

  84. Vajra


    Nothing at all.

    First, correct yourself. You are referring not to jihadis in the Muslim tradition, but perverts who have adopted the name as cover for their bestiality. So you will emulate terrorists, not jihadis. Let us be clear on that point.

    Now for your question and your proposal. You are, in fact, participating in a time-honoured intellectual tradition.

    The tradition is that through the ages, those of limited intellect, those who are normally restricted by society’s sympathy and kindness to the disabled to domestic chores and rural drudgery, have wondered, and finally asked, as have you: If a dog bites a man, why may not a man bite a dog?

    The traditional response, which I offer you freely: There is no reason why not. It is just not in the nature of either a dog to act as a man or a man to act as a dog.

  85. globetrotter

    To archaeo

    More and more muslims (the more honest and intelligent ones) are now getting islamophobia (=fear of islam. The translation “hatred of islam” is wrong). I read a letter in the daily time once which illustrated this. The treatment which islam gives or threatens to give to ex-muslims prevents them from speaking out openly. It is very easy for a muslim to declare any other muslim as apostate and get him eliminated.

  86. YLH


    No one has disputed the Pakistan connection especially post Zia but isn’t the entire article above flowing from “pakistan was created in the name of Islam and is Pan-Islamic”?

    I know you don’t agree with the basic premise. Then why are you defending this crap? Especially since it is quite clear that Faisal Shahzad was not radicalized in Pakistan.

    It is a national bias on part of the author.

  87. Bin Ismail

    @ globetrotter (May 12, 2010 at 5:06 pm)

    “…..this 7th century ideology from Makkah…..”

    The earliest Indian religions, that heavily contributed to what is now called Hinduism date back to around 5000 BC. Vedic Hinduism dates back to 1500 BC, Zoroastrianism to around 1200BC, Judaism to around 1300 BC, Christianity to 30 AD. Am I to conclude that your problem with “this 7th century ideology from Makkah” is the fact that this is the most modern and least primitive of all major religions?

    “…..Muslim feudals, mullahs, hindu-humiliators, Nehru-haters, Gandhi-haters, caliphatists, pan-islamists, Panjabi or pathan muslim racists, bin-Kasim worshippers, outright idiots, violence lovers, islamo-fascists, pseudo-secular muslims…..”

    Ran out of adjectives?

  88. dharmayoddha


    If dog bites man, why shouldnt man bite dog?
    Who is talking about biting dog? Why should I bite the dog back? I just pick up my rifle and shoot the dog dead. Simple. Incidentally, I do believe that hindu nazism is the ONLy answer to islamo-fascism.

  89. Nusrat Pasha

    Unbiased participants may find the following references from the Quran useful :

    1: ” There is NO coercion in matters of religion. ” (2:256 )

    2: ” Whoever chooses to believe LET him believe and whoever chooses to disbelieve LET him disbelieve ” (18:29)

    3: ” Those who believe and then disbelieve, then again believe and then again disbelieve, and then advance in disbelief, Allah will not grant them forgiveness nor will He guide them to the Path ” (4:137)

    Conclusion: Even for repeated apostasy there is no penalty awarded in this life to be executed through human hands.

    4: ” Permission to fight is given ONLY to those against whom war is waged, because they have been wronged ” (32:39).

    5: ” Your religion is for you and my religion is for me ” (109:6)

  90. Bin Ismail

    @ globetrotter (May 12, 2010 at 10:42 pm)

    1. “…..This 7th century ideology from Makkah is fossilized after its founder died. Other older ideologies have moved on (changed, absorbed new ideas etc.). This is the typical fate of an absolutist-finalist ideology…..”

    The Quran, which according to Muslim belief, is the word of God, is complete in its text. Nothing can be added to or subtracted from its actual text, and nothing has. However, the possibility for new interpretations is endless. Throughout history, men of God – the saints and Sufis have been offering fresh interpretations of the text of the Quran. The mystical minded were able to discover new and diverse paths of mysticism from the verses of the Quran, throughout these 14 centuries. The philosophical minded were able to draw new philosophies from the words of this book.

    The prime objective of this book is to guide and lead man to his Maker. With changing times and evolving needs the Quran will continue to extend this guidance to all who sincerely and humbly seek it.

    The problem that has always afflicted the clergy, moreso the politicized clergy is that it remained committed to using and exploiting the Quran to gain and prolong its authority over the masses. The Quranic mysticism appealed least to them because they were least bothered with the path that led to the spiritual union of man and God. Therefore, their interpretations were always stern and authoritative. The sad fact, is that you seem to have gotten your exposure to Islam through either the writings of such extremist clerics or predisposed anti-Islam orientalists.

    I wholeheartedly acknowledge your right to your opinion as well as to uphold it. However, may I humbly suggest that a more academic approach would warrant an more unbiased study.

    2. “…..Modernity is not defined by when you are born but whether you are changing, absorbing new ideas and progressing NOW or not…..”

    Islam’s modernity lies in its applicability to ever-changing circumstances. Let me repeat – Islam’s modernity, not the mullah’s. The pundit is not Sanatan Dharm. The rabbi is not Judaism. The priest is not Christianity and the Mullah is not Islam.

    3. “…..I did not run out of adjectives/substantives at all – you can have more: megalomanics, wanna-be Abraham-cum-Moses, urdu-lovers, moghlai-lovers, feudals wanting to preserve their land-holdings, wait-and-watch types .. so on and on..…”

    Good. Now we have a new updated list which runs as follows:
    “…..Muslim feudals, mullahs, hindu-humiliators, Nehru-haters, Gandhi-haters, caliphatists, pan-islamists, Panjabi or pathan muslim racists, bin-Kasim worshippers, outright idiots, violence lovers, islamo-fascists, pseudo-secular muslims, megalomanics, wanna-be Abraham-cum-Moses, urdu-lovers, moghlai-lovers, feudals wanting to preserve their land-holdings, wait-and-watch types .. so on and on …”

    This is verbosity incarnate – the pinnacle being “..so on and on…”.

  91. Vajra


    Who asked you not to run around foaming at the mouth biting dogs? All I said was that each animal has its own nature and it is revealed by the animal’s actions. If you choose to act like a dog, you are a dog.

    Of course, you can act like another animal – an animal with a rifle. Nobody is stopping you. Start this minute; let not a moment pass.

    In that connection, I would advise you not to forget that others have rifles and use them effectively. If effete armchair warriors like you, who slay thousands with your tongue alone, were really so fierce, why aren’t you in Chhatisgarh? The Parivar really needs you there.

    You gasbags make me sick.

  92. Nusrat Pasha

    @ globetrotter (May 12, 2010 at 10:42 pm)

    In response to the four questions you’ve raised:

    Q1. “Why does your arabic-islamic allah not forgive the disbelievers? Are they bad human beings?”

    Answer: Allah can forgive whoever He wants to – believer or disbeliever. This is solely His prerogative. “He forgives whoever He chooses” (Quran 2: 284). As to who is good and who is bad, again Allah is the Final Judge. We read in the opening chapter of the Quran, “Master of the Day of Judgement” (Quran 1:4).

    Q2. ” The way islam treats or intends to treat ex muslims means that there is coercion/intimidation in islam.”

    Answer: The Quran does not permit humans to punish humans for apostasy. As for God, indeed it is His choice. A warning from Allah is not coercion – it’s simply a warning. And its purpose is to save His creation from suffering.

    Q3. “non-muslims have lesser rights than muslims under islam – that too is a form of coercion.”

    Answer: Trust me you would not be able to prove that from the Quran.

    Q4. “If allah punishes those who choose to disbelieve then the coercion is very much there upon the disbelievers.”

    Answer: Allah is not whimsical. Allah is the Master of the Day of Judgement (Maalik-i yaumid deen), He is also the All-knowing (Aleem) and also the all-Wise (Hakeem). Therefore if He, in His absolute knowledge and wisdom does choose to punish someone, it would obviously be for the right reason.

    Lastly, please bear in mind that Islam is not defined as what Muslims do or how Muslims act. Muslims can claim allegiance and yet depart from Islam.

  93. globetrotter

    to nusrat pasha

    Thanks for your posting. I hope you can free muslims from the cowardice, opportunism and duck-mause-dom, which islam injects in them through the mullahs. However, the problem of contradictions and ambiguities in old “holy” texts remains to plague us all. If an old text is called holy then this problem becomes bloody and severe.

    To bin Ismail

    Muslims are promising themselves and us (=non-muslims) a new interpretation of kuran etc. since centuries and decades. But it is not working out that way. Why not?
    You also wrote: “…the possibility for new interpretations is endless.” … but that only means ENDLESS new conflicts.

    A text from god can have only one interpretation all the time. Otherwise it is a man-made text (of trial and error). If a text can be interpreted variously then it cannot be from one-and-only god. If a text can be misused then too it cannot be from god. If god writes then he will take care that his text just cannot be misused or ambiguously laid out. Here I have prinicipial problem with muslims who talk of re-interpreting kuran or of the possibility of it.

    BTW : I forgot the Iqbal-adorers and Jinnah-worshippers on the Pakistan band-wagon. The latter were so enamoured of Jinnah (his english suits, his being barrister, his afternoon tea-drinking, his success as lawyer (becoming a multi-millionaire), his suave maners etc.) that they said “we will follow him (the great leader) wherever he leads us, even if to hell.
    And in deed he did just that.
    The Germans use to sing about Hitler: “The fuehrer commanded. We follow thee”. There were Jinnah-worshippers of the same type on thie Pakistan band-wagon. They resurrect themselves periodically in Pakistan, even in the GHQ in Rawalpindi.

    As regards Iqbal-adorers, they seem to realise now that he is de facto confused-useless – his ideas will only lead to more islamic fascism and backwardness and bootlicking of arabs and iranians (persians).

    Islam’s relationship to honesty and non-violence is unresolved still. Unless that is cleared among all muslims 100% – new interpretations will bring no relief.

  94. Bin Ismail

    @ globetrotter (May 13, 2010 at 6:08 pm)

    1. “Islam” and “Mullaism” are two distinctly separate entities. Please try not to mix them. Please also try not to interchange them. Frankly I would not be surprised if this seemingly unintended mix-up has more to do with your sweet will.

    2. Why is Jinnah admired? Certainly not for the reasons you suggest. He is admired for his impeccable integrity, his clarity of vision, his wisdom, his untiring labour, his magnanimity and his leadership.

    Take some time off and also take your goggles off and patiently ponder over these points.

  95. dharmayoddha


    Effette warriors me? For the record I am a pure blooded rajput warrior. I have a track record. My cousins are in the army right now fighting muslim terrorists in kashmir. I too can fight. But yes, I can slay thousands with my tongue alone. All the pakis I have met have told me that India must give up kashmir. To which I reply, I will do to the muslim minority in rest of india , what you do to hindu minority in kashmir. believe me, pakis get DAMN upset. They have double standards. Know what I call them? (Double baap ki aulaad). Believe me I can slay thousands with my words, and lakhs with my guns.

  96. Urban Angst


    This is not really helping. All this hyperbole about slaying thousands with your words are uncalled for. There are people here who want to understand the nuances of the issue, and posts by you do not aid in that understanding. You seem to be forcing every issue into a “Muslims are bad” framework; not sure that is the solution to anything at all.

  97. Hayyer

    Another one of those kagzi pehalwans of Hindustan. These are the serial killers. They turn up serially that is.
    Dharmayoddha, what makes you say such things, especially on PTH where the discourse is anything but martial. Over here they don’t like killing of any sort, or promotion of class, creed or religion. There are other challenging sites on the net; why not try your skills there.

  98. Ranger

    Vajra : “All I said was that each animal has its own nature and it is revealed by the animal’s actions. If you choose to act like a dog, you are a dog.”

    Vajra should know all about dogs… given that he behaves like one… a faithful one at that… at the service of the Paki owners of this website……forever willing to snap at those with the temerity to hurt the fragile sensibilities of the said owners….. willing to crawl when asked only to bend….leaping to the rescue all the time…. .

    Same could be said about the other Indian guy Hayyer…..thought it must be said he is a little more sophisticated from what I have seen….

  99. Ranger

    If only a few more Indians were like Vajra and Hayyer…. Yasser bhai would be the Law Minister of Greater Pakistan then…..

    Greater Pakistan would of course include the land formerly known as India.. 🙂

    They are true gems, this Vajra and this Hayyer….

  100. Ranger

    Dharmayodha bro … getting a little carried away, are we ? Cool it bro…

  101. Vajra


    No, no, never can it be ‘effete warriors me’.

    Not unless there is more than one animal in there struggling to come out.

    For the record, nobody cares if you are a pure blooded Rajput warrior. Evidently you have no knowledge of the history of your country, or the history of the origins of your race, otherwise you would make less noise of your pure blood. Find out why wily Brahmin priests converted whole tribes to Hinduism through the fire sacrifice, and what is the origin of Suryavanshi, Chandravanshi and Agnivanshi. You might get a shock. You will also get a shock if you search a little; there are many Rajput Mussalmans, and some of them, Pakistani, among them, proven and highly decorated warriors.

    I really dislike ignorant, ill-read fools.

    Your track record? Are you joking? Since when did haematology indicate a track record? You are what you have done, not what your blood constituents are. Your Rhesus factor (o felicitous phrase) does not show if you are courageous or have proved that courage in any worthwhile way; it may indicate that you will gray prematurely.

    As for your cousins in the army fighting terrorists in Kashmir, all honour to them. They took a difficult path, qualifying a difficult examination, going through two different difficult institutions.

    You didn’t.

    You have no business claiming their pride as yours. You are the one that shied away from doing what they did, that avoided combat in favour of mouthing brave words in front of the mirror and the computer monitor.

    You say you too can fight. You and who else? If you could fight, you would have fought. It is the empty vessels, the phonies who talk about fighting without ever coming close to a war. If you had ever heard a bullet whistle past, and felt the loosening of your bowels when you face death, you would know that no warrior brags like this. The ones who do are the craven cowards who skulk behind the reputation of their cousins, or take comfort from their lineage, since they have nothing else to take comfort from.

    As to your taking on the Muslim minority in the rest of India, the police will see about that, there is no need for anyone else to bother. Rioters and looters are vermin, not warriors. There is the Indian Penal Code for you, and nothing else.

    Since I am not a Pakistani, your brave words intended to spread consternation among Pakistanis really fail to impress me. And, needless to add, whatever you have said about calling them double baap ka aulad must be truthful. What did they say after you woke up?

    There is no question of believing you. If you could have slain thousands with your words, we would see the bodies. What we see is thousands of words, not thousands of bodies. We are unlikely to see anything more, not from a paper tiger like you who thinks that lakhs can be slain from guns, when even the most skilled soldiers hardly kill a hundred men even during the course of the longest wars. If you really have cousins in the Army, which I doubt, since every word of yours is such empty bragging, you can ask them, and they will set you right.

    That just shows what you know and what you are worth as a fighting man, even as a fighting man in potential.

    Now go back to your evening homework, and stop reading war comics. Or somebody will have to tell your house master what you’re up to.

  102. Hayyer

    Why do your sort want to wage war on PTH of all places? Surely you can find forums where martial talk is welcome.
    We Indians are not on PTH by invitation. You can project the Indian perspective without projecting hostility.

  103. Prasad

    Ranger, dharmayodha

    We are PTH’s guests. not the otherway round. You can chide your compatriots if they veer around. You cannot go your host and hurl abuses.

    I think there is a way to discuss. You may want to refer to the discussions between Globetrotter /Bin Ismail/ Nusrat Pasha. Some serious discussions but thoroughly enjoyable since every sentence results in logical debate/clarification of issues

    Remarks on Hayyer is uncalled for – he is one of those who just concentrates on issues. Nothing else

  104. Bin Ismail

    @dharmayoddha (May 13, 2010 at 8:29 pm)

    1. “…..For the record I am a pure blooded rajput warrior…..”

    On a lighter note, and assuming that your anger has not entirely consumed your sense of humour, your words remind me of this interesting character of Draco Malfoy (Harry Potter by J. K. Rowling) who calls himself a “pureblood”.

    2. “…..Believe me I can slay thousands with my words, and lakhs with my guns…..”

    You didn’t mention the impressive figures you could achieve by using the nukes. Was that an oversight or devout adherence to the principles of Ahimsa?

    @Ranger (May 13, 2010 at 9:49 pm)

    “…..If only a few more Indians were like Vajra and Hayyer…..”

    If only a few more Indians were like Vajra and Hayyer…..meaningful discussion and rational debate would become much more possible.

  105. globetrotter

    To bin ismail

    Islam cannot and should not be separated from mullahism and sects and sectarianism. Otherwise the thing becomes too theoretical and unrealistic. This will also exert pressure on the mullahs etc. to behave properly. Let the mullahs and other muslims know that their misbehaviour, idiocies, irresponsible words etc. soil the image of what they so much love. Islam is already 1400 years old – hence it has to be judged by its results on the ground. I don’t have any sweet will anymore – I am too old and have lived long enough to believe in some sweet will (but I am not a cynic).

    Jinnah was not impeccably integer. His reaction (to give one example) after the “direct action day” (August 1946) in which muslims killed hindus in order to tell them what it will be like if the muslims don’t get their Pakistan – this reaction disproves that he was a man of integrity. His vision was also unclear since he did pact with some mullahs. Wisdom is not something on which I can comment. It is a very subjective judgement by his fans. I would have called him a great and wise leader if he had left behind a public-made will stating that the hindu population in Pakistan should be restored to the pre-June 1947 level with full human rights and compensations. If he had done that (and if it had been implemented) we would have today seen a very different Pakistan. His untiring labour was only for muslims, ergo, it was narrow-minded – not for non-muslims, not for all of mankind. He was jealous of Mahatma Gandhi – that is no sign of magnanimity. He got the title Qaid e Azam (Great Leader) as retaliation against Gandhi being called Mahatma (Great Soul). “If their leader has a world-known title then our leader should have one big title too” – that kind of an envy. Jinnah-worshippers believe that he was integer, of clear vision, wise, magnanimous, great leader etc. – but none of that is true or factual.

    BTW: what islam introduces is not just monotheism but envious monotheism – a monotheism around a jealous god who tolerates no one else. Hindu monotheism is more henotheistic – there is no intolerance towards other gods. The jewish religion introduces this jealous god Yahveh and islam posits upon him the arabic-tribal word for god and makes him even more narrow-minded and jealous. Thus “shirk” is regarded in islam as a terrible crime to be punished with death. Islam’s absolutism, finalism and jealousy-based god-concept is a fiery dooms-day mixture.

  106. globetrotter

    to bin ismail

    vajra is too soft on islam and Pakistan. He even said that I ought to write also against hinduism on a pakistani forum, may be in order to appear balanced. Hindus are a frightened, suppressed, idiotized, devilized, scoffed-at “community” in Pakistan – what use is writing against them or against hinduism in a pakistani forum?

    Meaningful debate is possible only if old ideologies and religions are not glorified. Glorifying all these umpteen Mohammads (from the 7th century arab strongman right up to M. bin Kasim, M. A. Jinnah, M. Zia ul Hak, M. this and M. that…) also needs to be kept out.

  107. Hayyer

    Your Jinnah narrative is prejudiced and you need to read more on the subject to see the larger picture.
    As for your repeated attacks on Islam; I don’t see how they are relevant to the subject or to this site. Are you proposing to Muslims and Pakistanis as a general remedy for their problems that they abandon their faith?
    There was another blogger here some time ago who responded to every issue raised on PTH with an attack on Islam and Arabs. You are similar. Having had your say, you seem to have said all that you have to say. Why not get out of your groove and show us something more interesting than your hangups.

  108. Bin Ismail

    globetrotter (May 14, 2010 at 3:20 pm)

    1. “…..Islam cannot and should not be separated from mullahism…..”

    Unquestionably, this proposal could have emanated only from your unique lexicon. Although, I thought we were through with this issue, still let me explain. “Islam” is a revealed religion whose belief-system, mode of worship, code of ethics and philosophy are all contained in its revealed scripture the Quran. The message of the Quran is for the entire human race.

    “Mullahism” on the other hand is the authoritative attitude of the clergy, on account of which, it seeks to acquire and maintain absolute monopoly over the right to interpret Islam and administer the affairs of, and serve as the final judge over those who claim to subscribe to this faith. Mullahism asserts this control either through social leverage or through political power.

    2. “…..Jinnah was not impeccably integer. His reaction (to give one example) after the “direct action day” (August 1946) in which muslims killed hindus…..”

    Maulana, with due respects to your fatwa, Jinnah’s impeccable integrity is something that has been endorsed even by his committed rivals – you being an outstanding exception of course. The Direct action day was intended to be a day of peaceful public processions and meetings. Mob behaviour is not always predictable, as you may have witnessed during the demolition of the Babri Mosque of Ayodhya and the widespread killing of Muslims during the communal riots of Gujrat. Anyway, most authorities agree that the Muslim casualties during the direct action day outnumbered the Hindu casualties. On a suggestive note, when examining cases of mob violence, we must not lose sight of the unfortunate fact that South Asians generally exhibit a more volitile temperament.

    3. “….. I would have called him a great and wise leader if he had left behind a public-made will stating that the hindu population in Pakistan should be restored to the pre-June 1947 level with full human rights and compensations…..”

    No offense, but somehow I have this feeling that even if it were so, you would have chosen to refrain from extending this courtesy to Jinnah. However, to add to your already unfathomable knowledge and wisdom, you may like to regally glance at these quotes:

    a) “….in the name of Humanity, I care more for them [the Untouchables] than for Mussalmans. ” (Jinnah, Speaking about the Shudras, during his address at the All India Muslim League session at Delhi, 1934)
    b) “…..We have many non-Muslims – Hindus, Christians and Parsis – but they are ALL Pakistanis. They will enjoy the SAME rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.” (Jinnah, February 1948)
    c) “…..The two states [Pakistan and India] will be friends and will go to each other’s rescue in case of danger and will be able to say ‘hands off’ to other nations. We shall then have a Munroe Doctrine more solid than in America.”(Jinnah, November 1946)

    4. “….. His untiring labour was only for muslims…..”

    He was equally industrious, during his days in the Congress and worked for the Congress with equal diligence.

    5. “….. He was jealous of Mahatma Gandhi…..”

    He was a coworker with Gandhi as long as they were together in the Congress. Later, due to his difference of opinion, he parted ways, with grace and dignity. This jealousy that you seem to have discovered after six decades was somehow not perceived back in those days.

    6. “….. what islam introduces is not just monotheism but envious monotheism – a monotheism around a jealous god who tolerates no one else…..”

    Another perceived jealousy. Since Allah is the only God, according to Islam, it logically follows that none other exists.

    7. “….. Thus “shirk” is regarded in islam as a terrible crime to be punished with death…..”

    Nowhere in the Quran, is shirk punishable by any punishment through human hands. Shirk is a spiritual ailment, not a crime in the social sense.

  109. globetrotter

    to bin ismail

    There is a big discrepancy between islam’s theory and practice. And that since 1400 years continuously with the same excuses and sweet promises of future betterment being brought forth by the apologists.

    As regards islam’s theory (the faithful may call it revelation) even here one sees too many aspects that fall short of divinity. (E.g. Kuran says: when the sun sets it falls into a muddy hole, or property is divided among inheritors but the prescribed fractions do not add to one, change between “we and he” as god speaks leading to doubts about whether god speaks or someone else in his name etc.)

    We need a god who unambiguously encourages independent thinking, rationality, non-violence and honesty. Here the “we-god or he-god” of kuran falls short too. Muslim mystics also added to the confusions in their own fashion.

    One (and only) good thing about wahhabis is that they refuse to adore even Mohammad.

    That “direct action day” got out of hand is not what I charge Jinnah with – but that he responded after the tragedy in a cynical fashion (like Rajiv Gandhi did after Indira was killed by sikhs and the congreswallahs went on a killing spree against sikhs). If he had cared for dalits more then why did he not demand bigger fixed representation for them, why only for muslims? He showed sympathy for dalits in order to embarrass (hc) hindus, not because he was really bothered about the dalits. Jinnah was a lawyer – expect honesty from a lawyer? Lawyers are by professional compulsions and attitudes opportunists. Gandhi (himself one too) openly denounced the lawyer profession and talked of his shame as a lawyer.

    Nice quotes from Jinnah help the Jinnah-worshippers soothe their egos. If Jinnah really had been a caring persons then he would have left behind such a will wishing the restorationof the hindub population in Pakistan. His wonderful quotes are aplenty – actions none. Death stared him in face in 1948 – he should have written such a will and he would have come upon this necessary idea if he had been really sincere. Will you not as a faithful muslim believe that allah guides the sincere? If this crucial guidance (of writing such a will) did not come – then either allah is not the great, wise, tolerant god “al alamin” (incl. of hindus) or Jinnah was not sincere.

    If allah is the only god then what about shiva, vishnu, brahma, durga, ganesha etc.? All to be consigned to the dungeons, or kicked out with violence as done by Mohammad (the most exemplary muslim) in Makkah in 630 AD?

    In open, Jinnah, the lawyer that he was, pretended to have parted company from Gandhi with grace – but some of his caustic remarks on Gandhi in private tell a different story. That is how lawyers are.

  110. globetrotter

    To bin ismail

    “Dear People,
    Islam (or any religion for that matter) can not be blamed for atrocities perpetrated in its name any more than guns can be blamed for murders.
    Natural extension of this line of thinking would be to oppose gun control, nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament.

    writes Syed Ehtisham in pakistan_futures yahoogroup (14.05.10, 12:33 pm)

  111. PMA

    globetrotter (May 14, 2010 at 7:21 pm):

    “after Indira was killed by sikhs and the congreswallahs went on a killing spree against sikhs”

    It was only ‘Hindus of India’, both inside and outside the Indian Congress party that went on Sikh killing rampage in 1984. The ‘Muslims and Christians of India’ even if members of the Indian Congress party did not take part in that barbaric madness.

  112. Urban Angst


    and your point being…?

  113. PMA

    Urban Angst (May 14, 2010 at 8:55 pm):

    Just trying to point out the dishonesty of our resident nuisance, this time under the pseudonym of ‘globetrotter’. In 1984 communal riots Indian Hindus killed innocent Indian Sikhs. No getting off by saying that it was the “congress wallahs” who did that. It is like saying that in Gujarat riots it was Bharatiya Janata Party Wallahs that butchered two thousand innocent Indian Muslims. Indian communal riots are not political party based even if inspired by a certain political party. They are always on the religious lines, free for all feast. Mostly Hindus massacring non-Hindus.

  114. dharmayoddha

    Sorry all my paki friends for getting carried away. I was venting my spleen on @Vajra. It is pompous windbags like him that make me go mad. @Vajra, know the meaning of your name? The weapon of Lord Indra. Incidentally, I DID apply for the Combined Defence Services exam, cleared my written but was rejected in SSB. That doesnt mean I am coward. Only I couldnt come up to the exalted standards of the Indian army. All your remaining words are just that, hot air. Incidentally I am Chandravanshi Rajput. I KNOW there are Muslim Rajputs. Doesnt mean they are my brothers.
    Oh the one I called double baap ki aulaad, just lifted his chair to hit me, didnt. (He got scared) Incidentally, dont teach me what wins wars. Kill ratio. In Kashmir we got a ratio of 1 to 60.
    My sense of justice is clear. What happens to my community, happens to your community. Period.
    More than the pakis I hate idiots like you. You are the first on my hitlist.

  115. Vajra

    @dharmavakta (since you seem to have fought no fights, and have just sounded off and nothing more)


    It’s Pakistani (or Paki, you being the soul of courtesy) friends all of a sudden, is it? Suddenly feel isolated in your chakravyuha, is it? Just to remind you, cretin, this is how you started:

    My question is totally different. IF pakistan produces jihadis, (for whatever reason) what is stopping people like me from becoming dharmayoddhas. ? (As a counter to jihadis)

    Other than venting your spleen, there’s not much you can do, is there? Not even pass the SSB. If there’s one thing worse than being a coward, it’s being an incompetent with two left feet, the kind that can’t put his money where his mouth is. Now that you have failed, a suggestion for you: get into the police. Then you can beat up people in the safety of a police station, with no danger whatsoever; your kind of dharmayuddha.

    It’s rich that you talk of hot air, considering that you have nothing but that to contribute, enough to inflate a zeppelin.

    Now, about your profound knowledge of what a Vajra is, and what a Chandravanshi Rajput is, what is it that you are trying to prove? Is it that you think anybody doesn’t know these bits of trivia (apart from your personal antecedents, which can be of interest only to you and your kinfolk) and needs to learn from an ignoramus like you? There are those here who have forgotten more than you will learn in your wordy little life, so take your Amar Chitra Katha knowledge and put it where the monkey put the nuts.

    If you know kill ratios, you also know what the value of your bragging of dozens, hundreds, thousands is worth: only hot air.

    And don’t talk of my community without knowing what it is. To those here who already know, you are just making even more of a butt of laughter of yourself.

    I am of course deeply impressed to be on your hitlist.

    You blowhard, do you think those empty words scare anybody? Let me share a little joke with you. As my real name indicates, you will never see me, only feel the force of my blows.

    How old is your hitlist, and how far have you progressed? Or are you still gulping down your Complan like a good little boy? 😀

  116. Vajra


    Resident nuisance?

    Please say that you were only joking. It will be a bad joke in that case, but far better than if you mean it, if you have some insight into the future, that is.

  117. Urban Angst


    “Indian communal riots are not political party based even if inspired by a certain political party. They are always on the religious lines, free for all feast. Mostly Hindus massacring non-Hindus.”

    Having lived through a few of these riots myself, I completely agree. But I am intrigued by your stress on Hindus here. Are you trying to make a larger point regarding the Hindus?

  118. Bin Ismail

    @ globetrotter (May 14, 2010 at 7:21 pm)

    1. I would highly appreciate if you could take the trouble to give the specific references from the Quran. I would feel privileged to explain them.

    2. The first person “We”, with reference to Allah, that appears in the Quran, can be for more than one reasons:

    a) The Royal “We” which is prevalent in several languages.
    b) “We” meaning ‘Me and my messengers’.
    c) “We” meaning ‘e and my angels’.

    3. There are no Jinnah-worshipers around, other than those that inhabit your imagination. Differentiating between admiration and worship should not be such a demanding job.

    4. If Muslims are free to worship their one God – Allah, followers of other faiths too are similarly free to worship whoever they deem worthy of worship. This is any individual’s personal business. The Quran introduces Allah as the one and only God, but does not impose any sanctions on followers of other religions:

    a) “There is no coercion in matters of Religion”(Quran 2:256).
    b) The Quran also teaches “And revile not those who they worship beside Allah”(6:109).

  119. Prasad

    Bin Ismail //when examining cases of mob violence, we must not lose sight of the unfortunate fact that South Asians generally exhibit a more volatile temperament.//

    You couldnt have said it more appropriately. Add to this other factors such as lack of education, poverty and corruption. you have got a perfect recipe for disaster.

    PMA – I’d say whoever is in majority, minorities bear the brunt thanks to the above concoction. Recent riots in Meerut (where muslims went awry during a procession and entire city had to bear the brunt/curfews etc for weeks) was just not reported by the Indian press since it could escalate like wild fire. Similar with regular problems in Old Hyderabad and Kasargod.

    Hindus were fortunate to have Raja Ram Mohun Roy, Swami Dayanand Saraswati, Vivekananda, Aurobindo, Narayana Guru and other enlightened souls guiding the religion and showing the right way over the last 2 centuries. They just did what was absolutely required – guided the community to reorient to changing times. Pandit Nehru and Ambedkar set many things right in the Hindu practices by bringing in multiple enactments into the constitution. The community has largely remained immune to conflagrations. If you observe, Sir Syed, MAJ and many others similarly initiated reformist movement within the muslim community as well. Unfortunately there is absolutely no traction post partition ( atleast in India). This is a big void!

    I only hope more enlightened muslims show guidance to the community ( thoroughly needed now) and guide to the right path instead of just depending on Darul uloom and their 1000AD equivalent fatwas

  120. Prasad

    for instance Dr Zakir Naik is a big challenge in the system today. I am not sure why he is so popular amongst Muslims. He only preaches Wahabi version of Islam, aims to orient the entire muslim population of India towards Soudi and follows very text bookish version of Kuran interpretation

    I happened to see one of the videos where his children recite some poems they have learnt. You will be surprised to note they have arabian accent!

    If everyone starts following him, local culture and tradition could easily get wiped out of the world map in just one generation. very alarming indeed

  121. Prasad

    This is where Globetrotter and confusions /interpretations revolve

  122. Prasad

    Bin Ismail: You may want to answer in this context where the community is headed. Do you think Zakir Naik equivalent interpretation of islam combined with Madrassa education is eventually good for the community?

    what is being done by the community to counter such a combination

  123. globetrotter

    To PMA

    I was not in Delhi in Oct. 1984. However I was told by sikhs that many if them were sheltered by the BJP-wallahs. There are animosities between hindus and muslims and similarly hindus and sikhs because of the separatist tendencies of the muslims and the khalistani sikhs. The word Khalistan has the same meaning as Pakistan. Hindus went at the throats of the sikhs (indiscriminately, as happens in riot situations) because of this. How far religion as such played a role here? Muslims in congress did not take part in killing sikhs because they knew that they can enjoy on the sidelines how hindus kill each other – just as there was jubilation in GHQ in Rawalpindi when the Khalistan movement was at its peak and hindus (sikhs are a hindu sect as written in their own holy book) killed each other in the name of Khalistan (=Pakistan= land of the pure). Riots in India are in deed religion-based – due to the presence of islamic-arabic imperialism coming from (Baghdad and Makkah) in India since 1200 years.

    to bin Ismail

    I am not a kuran expert and do not need to be one. I have better things to read and spend my time on. Relevant quotes from Kuran are available on internet (esp. in websites maintained by ex-muslims) if you look open-mindedly and critically.

    As regards the “we” and “he” confusion regarding allah in the kuran – you have missed the point. I know what this “we” stands for (you need not have explained that) but what is that “he” for? So kuran is not by/from allah but from someone else? How else do you explain the “he” reference to allah?

    If there are no Jinnah-worshippers around then it is bad for Pakistan. I may disdain them for the sake of my own ideas of politics, but Pakistan needs them. Jinnah was an opportunist, but he can be used by those who wish to secularize Pakistan and bring some reason and honesty into its polity.

    You quote:
    “There is no coercion in matters of Religion”(Quran 2:256).
    “And revile not those who they worship beside Allah”(6:109).

    But kuran does exactly that through some other sentences, commands and contexts. Here again don’t ask me for quotes but consult some website maintained by ex-muslims (who have to live in fear and anonymity and can express themselves only through the internet). The kuran is a tricky book of manipulations through various moods and whims. The liberal muslim will always find what he wants to soothe his self. But these sentences are abrogated by other later sentences written after Mohammad got political and military successes and power.

    … The Arabic words ‘nasikh’ and ‘mansukh’ are both derived from the same root word ‘nasakha’ which carries meanings such as ‘to abolish, to replace, …
    “In technical language these terms refer to certain parts of the Qur’anic revelation, which have been ‘abrogated’ by others. Naturally the abrogated passage is the one called ‘mansukh’ while the abrogating one is called ‘nasikh’…”

    The principle of naskh (abrogation) is referred to in the Qur’an itself and is not a later historical development:


  124. Vajra

    @Bin Ismail (if you are still on your feet after the latest assault)

    I hope that you have finally learnt your lesson, and will stop your cheeky attempts to interpose a straw or two of fact and logic and reason between our mahayoddha and his mission, of converting all of Pakistan back away from Makkah’s slavery.

    It is truly wonderful that we can be enthralled by an eccentric who is incapable of a single statement of authority defending his strange views of the world, and depends merely on saying that what he says is backed up somewhere else, by someone else, in terms that he can’t reproduce, but thinks will support his views when they can be found, presumably by a search party despatched for the purpose by curious intellects.

    He re-writes history and holy scripture with equal abandon. To him, there is no contradiction in an account of Hindus going for the throats of Sikhs (indiscriminately, you understand, as happens in riot situations) and the hapless Sikhs being discriminatingly sheltered by the most virulent and murderous Hindus of them all.

    Apparently there are two types of Hindus (we live and learn); those who hate the Sikhs virulently, and those who hate the Muslims virulently. Three, actually, as our hero has forgotten Kandhmal, and the Hindus who go around butchering Christians in their frustration at finding no Muslims nor Sikhs near enough to vent their spleen on (as another Hindu hero described his hysterical nonsense).

    No faction has anything to do with any other; the Sikh-hating ones are against Sikhs, but not Muslims, and had no problem with the Muslims watching from the sidelines their butchering the Sikhs, while the Muslim-haters are against Muslims and butcher them, men, women and babies, but not Sikhs, whom they rescue in times of riot and other moments of indiscriminate massacre.

    I am temporarily unable to describe the actions of the third, due to excess of emotion. If this were not about such brutal massacres, this would have been the stuff of high comedy. Unfortunately, for Hindus, this is the most toxic nonsense that can be used against them, and it is difficult to sit through these ceaseless outpourings of poison.

    The moron first, in post after post after post (the Latin phrase ad nauseam must have been coined by some tired observer of his equivalent two thousand five years ago), was full of references to passages in the kuran (sic) which bore out in exact and minute detail his most lurid fantasies about what Islam does or does not represent. However, when pressed, it comes down to the accounts he has read by others, which he cannot quote or reproduce, in commonly available web-sites, one of which is cited, which to this dullard represents a scholarly standard sufficient to challenge direct study in the case of others, and to obviate direct study in his own case.

    Be aware that he is not discriminatory about his ignorance of the basic sources that he speaks about so lightly and with such stupidity. Besides making assertions about the Quran which he apparently has never read, and which are based on what others may – or may not, he cannot remember precisely, so it is moot – have written, he makes equally robust assertions, just as wrong, about the Granth Sahib, which also, beyond doubt, he has never read.

    Every single assertion of his, whether political, related to comparative religion or historical, is a concoction of his own mind. This ‘mind’ apparently has no ideas, no rational thoughts, only a putrefying mass of tightly-held prejudices, which he will not give up no matter how many facts are produced which contradict him.

    I am beginning to think that if PakTeaHouse serves to attract such damaged brains and such weird views, it ought to be shut down. Perhaps this character is actually an Islamic fanatic opponent of the liberal Pakistani sentiment which started this blog, creating these straw men and fictitious characters like G. Vishvas merely in order to raise a general outcry and get the site closed.

  125. Vajra

    @Bin Ismail, others

    It looks like our protagonist is not really forgetful, after all, merely a shrinking violet (yes, I know, it is a strange and disturbing picture, but bear with me while I explain).

    He has not lost track of where he found all those passages in the Quran which he is dying to cite but can’t; they were all thrown around, like the handy ammunition used by chimpanzees in the cages of a zoo when they fight bonobos in the neighbouring cage, and don’t ask what that is, by his friends and supporters on another blog-site.

    No doubt our little genius would not like this website brought into public view, or his writings and the writings of other bigots there brought to notice.

    One reassuring thought: Vishvas uses the same terms, phrases and concepts over there that he has been doing over here. It is reassuring to know that new ideas cannot grow in that sterile dump.

  126. Bin Ismail

    @ Prasad (May 15, 2010 at 10:53 am)

    “…..is eventually good for the community?…..”

    I believe that an immediate and complete separation of Religion and State is the best thing and “is eventually good for the community” – not only the Muslim community but also for the worldwide Human community.

    Sir Syed’s jihad was essentially towards emancipating Muslims from the Madrassah and making Muslims realize that secular education was equally essential for them. Jinnah’s jihad was aimed at secularizing the politics of the Muslims. The services of these two great men for the Muslims of the Subcontinent are immensely greater, in my opinion, than those of the entire clergy put together.

    @globetrotter (May 15, 2010 at 1:56 pm)

    1. “…..I am not a kuran expert…..”

    Thank you for sharing this piece of information with us.

    2. “….. the “we” and “he” confusion regarding allah in the kuran…..”

    The Quran is the Word of God. Allah addresses man in all modes, first person ( I, We), second person (You) and third person (He). Allah speaks in the first person mode when He wishes to address man directly. He use the royal “We”, when a regal tone is adopted. “You” or the second person mode is employed when man is taught the etiquette of supplication. The third person mode of “He” is used when the mutual acquaintance between God and man is intended to be renewed and refreshed.

    3. “…..The principle of naskh (abrogation) is referred to in the Qur’an itself…..”

    The Quran leaves no room for the concept of naasikh and mansookh. Allah says:

    a) “We, indeed have revealed this Exhortation, and most surely we will guard it” (Quran 15:9).
    b) “This indeed is the Noble Quran – in a Preserved Book.” (Quran 56: 78-79)

    The very concept of the Quran being guarded by Allah and being well-preserved belies the widely misunderstood concept of naasikh and mansookh. In my humble opinion, whenever the clergy fails to offer an interpretation for any verse of the Quran, they wriggle out of the situation by declaring that verse abrogated.

    Your claim that “…..The principle of naskh (abrogation) is referred to in the Qur’an itself and is not a later historical development…..” would understandably suit you and all those maulvis who have endorsed it. However, for academic purposes, let me suggest that the principle of naskh is not internal to the Quran, but in fact relates to the principle of a Quranic injunction replacing an outdated revealed commandment, that has outlived its life, appearing in a previously revealed Book.

    @ Vajra (May 15, 2010 at 3:22 pm)

    “…..It looks like our protagonist is not really forgetful…..”

    True. He is neither forgetful nor forgettable.

  127. Vajra

    @Bin Ismail

    Better and better! I shall be waiting on the sidelines with bandages and balm. 😀

  128. dharmayoddha

    @ Vajra

    Oh lord please grant me patience. Who is this idiot windbag vajra to criticize everything about hindus? What kind of idiot are you? Meet me coward. More than these islamic terrorists, I hate left liberal pseudo intellects like you, hiding behind a computer and mouthing garbage in purple prose. Meet me coward. Let me see your vajra ghaat. I live in Mumbai. Lets fight. It is anti-hindu pseudo intellects like you who encourage islamic terrorism.

  129. Sharmishtha

    Sigh! I really miss Ganpat…could the moderators not lift the ban on him? Maybe ration his comments per post to avoid repeated staccato outbursts? At least his comments had humour, unlike the comic-book heroics or the heavy-handed Edwardian prose now on display in the comments section.

  130. Vajra


    You have contributed about six times – total – in the last one year; please correct me if I’m wrong.

    If you want an improvement in the comments on display, why not get involved? What do you think this is, the multiplex at the local mall? Or the modern version of a Roman day at the Colosseum? Presumably replete with vestal virgins and ready thumbs?

  131. Vajra


    OK, OK, I grant you patience.

    What else?

    Oh, yes.

    Please show me every instance where I have criticised Hindus. I have criticised you, all right, and you need criticism, probably a lifetime supply. But Hindus? You seem to be unable to differentiate between yourself and the entire set of people believing in Hinduism.

    And you don’t have to do much about the situation: we are already fighting. Your kind of fight. All noise and hot air. And don’t speak so loudly; the Shiv Sena will hear you and come and break your legs. Only a son of the soil is allowed these bombastic displays.

  132. Sharmishtha

    But, Vajra, I do not wish to be more involved. It is “Pak Tea House”, not “Chandni Chowk Dhaba”. I’m interested in reading what Pakistanis have to write about themselves and the world. But the comments section just gets taken over by Indians all the time. And if that is to be the situation, then I would prefer at least to be entertained. OK, back to lurking.

  133. Vajra


    Isn’t that the point of these interventions? To preserve this as a place where people are free to discuss points raised in the blogs without an injection of nationalist or bigoted rhetoric from the Indian side?

    If you care to take a look, I comment only on points of history or of social fact, typically on a Pakistani post, sometimes on an Indian post. These are few and far between.

    However, sometimes, most unhappily, there are unpleasant occasions which demand a different response. A majority of my posts are in response to Indian belligerents who break in and make complete asses of themselves, and indirectly of us, even though we might ourselves have a purely enquiry-based agenda. This response becomes necessary because of the extremely tolerant attitude of the site and its administrators, and their determination to allow the greatest latitude to posters, even those who are proven trolls, because otherwise those trolls take up an enormous amount of time and energy; remember what used to happen to Yasser Hamdani.

    I think that in this respect, in being willing to defend a pleasant place to discuss matters of mutual interest, it is a more wholesome attitude than to abandon it to the barbarians.

    Ultimately, it’s a question of individual choice. I don’t see why you shouldn’t do what you think best. Even if it includes hanging about watching the fun, and sniping at others doing your dirty work for you. And, believe me, it is extremely dirty work.

  134. Vajra

    @G Vishvas

    Vajra thinks ex-muslims are bigots. Actually they are frightened fugitives from islamic bigotry.

    Vajra has demonstarted here how he visceral-hates hindus and velvet-loves muslims…….

    Do you have a single piece of evidence to back this? Or is it a figment of your fevered imagination like most of the things you profess?


    By now you should have enough to learn what kind of idiot I am. The short answer is, a very different kind of idiot from what you are. The difference being, while I know I am an idiot, you don’t know that you are one.

    More than these islamic terrorists, I hate left liberal pseudo intellects like you, hiding behind a computer and mouthing garbage in purple prose.

    Good, progress. So now there is no need for you to prance around on a cock-horse pretending to be a dharmayoddha. Just admit that you are nothing more than a buddhi-viprita, and leave it at that; you aren’t capable of writing two mails one after the other without tying yourself up in knots, so don’t try.

    Meet me coward. Let me see your vajra ghaat. I live in Mumbai. Lets fight.

    Sure, once you have proven yourself. Your claims, prior to mine, are that you can slay hundreds, thousands. First slay one enemy of the country, and then open your mouth and challenge people. You can’t expect me to engage with riff-raff.

    PS: Have you added a second name to your hit-list, or is it still stuck at one?

  135. Bin Ismail

    @ globetrotter (May 15, 2010 at 6:57 pm)

    1. “…..I have better books of knowledge…..”

    Oh yes! How could anyone not notice your superior wisdom?

    2. “….. The kuran declaring its own perfection, finality, immutability and unchangeability – that is logically insufficient…..”

    Logically, there had to be a “last revealed book”, whichever it may be, in the chronological sense. As for the preceding scriptures, they were all perfect in their own times. Eventually, God chose to reveal His final word, which incidentally happens to be the Quran. You and I, obviously do not see eye to eye on this.

    3. “….. The occurence of “he” in the kuran referring to allah shows that kuran is from someone else…..”

    Let me help you out with this. A father will sometimes say to his son, “your father loves you”. Now obviously, he’s not refuting his own fatherhood or pointing to someone else.”

    4. “….. How does islam treat ahmedis and bahais (although these poor fools continue to praise kuran and Mohammad in order to find grace in the eyes of the muslims)? Has god abrogated/replaced parts of kuran through Bahaullah and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad?…..”

    In matters of faith, I don’t really think anyone bothers to find grace in someone else’s eyes. One simply believes what he believes. The very foundation of Religion rests on seeking the pleasure of the Deity one adores.

    According to Bahais, Bahaullah essentially claimed to be the founder of a new faith. Bahais consider Bahaullah as a messenger independent of Muhammad. They believe that the Aqdas was a revealed book containing the new law that had replaced the Quran.

    According to Ahmadis, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad essentially claimed to be a servant of Islam, and subservient to Muhammad. They believe that his mission was limited to the Quran. Ahmadis believe that the Quran is the last Book of God and the final Revealed Law.

  136. Bin Ismail

    @ globetrotter (May 16, 2010 at 5:13 pm)

    “….. Pakistan sans islam will not produce any jihadis.
    Islam sans Pakistan will continue to produce jihadis…..”

    Any country sans fanaticism will not produce terrorists. Fanaticism sans any country will continue to produce terrorists.

  137. dharmayoddha


    I am a son of the soil in mumbai, and belong to shivsena, and speak fluent marathi. And I was very very active in mumbai during january 1993. Sorry to say it on public space but I got 6 (kills)to my credit. I am not hot air. I can fight. And you first. Maybe I keep you second, the first on my hitlist is that another windbad, pontificating on secularism, the Times of India. All editors on my hitlist first.

  138. Vajra


    I doubt it, SSB Fail hero; all that is probably what you tell your little sister to impress her. Or bring out of your secret untold dreams when you are in front of a computer screen.

    You may think that you are being original, with your wild-eyed and quite futile words about editors and anybody displaying any knowledge or learning, but you are echoing the words of another gasbag, who said,”Whenever anyone talks to me of culture, I reach for my gun!” All fourth-class minds, all members of the lumpenproletariat think alike.

  139. AZW


    I am a son of the soil in mumbai, and belong to shivsena, and speak fluent marathi. And I was very very active in mumbai during january 1993. Sorry to say it on public space but I got 6 (kills)to my credit. I am not hot air. I can fight. And you first. Maybe I keep you second, the first on my hitlist is that another windbad, pontificating on secularism, the Times of India. All editors on my hitlist first

    Mr. Dharmayoddha:

    Usually your comments deserve nothing but a simple term called “ignore”. However no matter how stupid one may be, there is a point when online admissions of murder and threat to others life must be taken seriously. Stupidity is not an excuse for this behaviour in your comment.

    Your comment on May16, 2010 @ 9.31 pm will not be deleted. It will be preserved along with your IP address 61.17.206.xx (it originates in Pune, Maharashtra). Your comment will be forwarded to a few people from India who may consider taking this matter to the authorities and see if the law needs to be involved for admissions of murder and threats to life to the editors of The Times of India. Moderators, please do not remove the above comment by Dharmayoddha.

    Furthermore, you will not be allowed to post any more at the PTH. Even if they go through for some reason, be assured they will be deleted diligently by the moderators. Do not bother posting any more here.

    Moderator, PTH

  140. aurora

    The moderator expunges when the debate is going fine. It becomes a boxing match with one side having its hands tied on the back (by the moderator).

    Helping one side like this will increase backwardness of the mind. Protectionism leads to backwardness.

  141. Nusrat Pasha

    Alongside the fact that people grossly misunderstand the message of Islam, Muslims too tend to overlook an extremely pertinent saying of the Holy Prophet – all his sayings are pertinent – but this one appears to be an extremely relevant reminder in the present global scenario. The Prophet said: “Hubb ul watni minal eeman”, meaning ‘love and care for one’s country is part of faith’.

    This hadees establishes that it would be obligatory for a Muslim citizen of Pakistan to be loyal to Pakistan, a Muslim citizen of India to be loyal to India, a Muslim citizen of USA to be loyal to USA and so on and so forth. To strike against one’s own country would contravene the imperatives of faith.

  142. aurora

    Loyalty can mean trying to convert the “wretched” non-muslims to “noble” islam. A muslim can say that he is being truly loyal (patriotic) to his nation by converting it to islam from its present day “decadent kuffar” state. A muslim in India can say that by destroying indian religions and gods and establishing islamic prayer (as commanded in Kuran by the islamic one-and-only god) he is being more loyal than those, who are tolerant of the sinful kuffar.

  143. Bin Ismail

    @ aurora

    “…..The moderator expunges when the debate is going fine…..”

    Would you do us the honour of defining the word “fine” ? In my humble opinion, the qualities of decency, courtesy, rationality and objectivity, put together, render an on-going debate fine. Their absence does the opposite.

  144. @aurora

    Will you confirm that you are not the frequently banned G. Vishvas, aka ‘globetrotter’?

  145. aurora

    A response must be first read by the person at whom it is aimed. It should not be deleted too quickly even if happens to be subjectively “unfine”.

    One puts in some time and effort to write a response and it does not reach the person for whom it is written. This is no fine way of debate.

  146. Bin Ismail

    @ aurora (May 17, 2010 at 7:52 pm)

    Loyalty can only mean one thing and that is fulfilling ones duty and responsibilities, as a citizen, to the state. The word “hubb” actually goes beyond loyalty – it connotes “love and loyalty”.

    Regarding any effort to forcibly convert, the Quran states clearly: ” There is no coercion in matters of religion. ” (Quran 2:256 ).

    You can blame individuals for their unseemly conduct, but would not be justified in attributing that conduct to the religion they claim to adhere to.

  147. aurora

    Religions contain contradictions. So religious people are confused and hence each tries to blame the other.

    It is not that some followers bring a bad name to this religion – it is this religion which brings a bad or confusing guidance to them and misuses them. Blame is on the creator of this religion.

    Love, loyalty etc. cannot be objectively defined – so everyone makes what he wants with it.

    A book that uses words that are not exactly defined or cannot be exactly (or objectively) defined – such a book is bound to end up causing confusions and then a fascist leader arises to “clarify” it, even claiming god’s directives for his actions. To say such a book is from god is an insult to god’s intelligence and wisdom.

  148. Bin Ismail

    @ aurora (May 17, 2010 at 8:31 pm)

    “…..To say such a book is from god is an insult to god’s intelligence and wisdom…..”

    Anyone suffering from a mental block will in all likelihood have difficulties in comprehension. Prejudice is the greatest contributor to a mental block. The insult, therefore is neither to the Book nor to its Author – it is to the biased mind not prepared to listen and examine.

    My sympathies.

  149. AZW

    Aurora/G. Vishwas:

    You were banned before at the PTH for following a single track anti-Muslim rant in every thread. Changing names will not help you being welcomed back here. You are not welcomed at PTH. Take your rants somewhere else. Moderators, if this person’s comments somehow get through, please remove them.

    Moderator (PTH)

  150. Bin Ismail

    @ aurora (May 18, 2010 at 4:57 pm)

    1. “…..Do you know who the author of the kuran is?…..”

    Allah is the Author of the Quran.

    2. “…..Mental block comes when intimidation (threats of violence) and bribery (sweet promises) is practised in the name of a god or god-concept or so-called god…..”

    If you recall your school days, which possibly could not have been very distant in the past, the teacher would remind the student that if he studies he passes, if he does not he fails. Such a reminder would best have been categorized as a “reminder”, not as “intimidation” or “bribery”.

    You have my deepest sympathies.

  151. albtn

    belief=manipulation of the simple-minded?

  152. Urban Angst

    Here we go again…..

  153. Bin Ismail

    @ albtn (May 18, 2010 at 7:15 pm)

    Belief = Belief

    Of course there are levels of certitude.

  154. albtn

    How does one quantify levels of certitude without making experiments, without defining quantitative parameters and units? How does one assure himself whether his level of certitude is really high or not, and not just some conceit or self-deceit? How do the simple-minded, the gullible and the timid fair in all this, especially in the religiously controlled and indoctrinated narrative? What of those who manipulate others – how do you expose them? Or do you say god will somehow take care (does he really)?

  155. @Urban Angst

    We need the equivalent of the neutron bomb, tailored to the needs of unsuspecting blogs affected by fungus like this.


  156. albtn

    Nazis called jews pestilence. Vajra uses a different word, namely fungus, but same mentality.

    If you can’t answer someone’s questions then call him a dog (or fungus) and shoot him.

  157. @G. Vishvas

    That is hardly a fair defence. If you refuse to acknowledge responses given to you, and do so selectively, picking up whatever fits your single point agenda (is it any longer a single point agenda? you are being to get confusing) , why blame others for your miseries?

    Second, you are hardly the representative of an embattled minority in control of the economy of the geography where you are, under assault by an organised fascist group with a single undisputed leader. Why do you think you are a Jew, and why do you think I am a Nazi? Or is it merely a colourful parallel?

    As we have seen before, very often, you use technical terms as if they are infinitely elastic in scope. They are not, otherwise they would presumably not be used to define scope. Under the circumstances, the opposite suggests itself, and I offer it to you as an explanation: perhaps the mind demonstrating this rigidity is infinitely inelastic. This is admittedly not an original suggestion and others have made it with greater subtlety and wit.

    Thirdly, this air of self-pity does not become you. You have not been cornered by a ravening pack of fanatics intent on destroying an independent minded thinker who merely sought to instruct his misguided neighbours on the blindness of their views. Instead, it is the come-uppance of a bigoted view of a single religion, and a focussed effort at insisting, on poor or absent evidence, that it is wrong in its entirety. It was a situation of your own creation.

    It is also a shifting stand that you have taken. While you started by being anti-Islamic, your recent posts seem to imply a doubt about divinity itself, an implied agnosticism, or even atheism.

    I have no problem with that, but need to ask you: what is it your intention to convey? That the God of Islam is uniquely wrong, or that the concept of God is a piece of mass hypnosis? Before you sink into further self-pity, this is being asked of you by an agnostic.

    It is not sure that you have thought about these matters, but at least asking you about them gives you an opportunity to present your position. That is, if the moderators fail to realise that you have shifted shape once again.

  158. Bin Ismail

    @ albtn (May 19, 2010 at 2:31 pm)

    “…..How does one quantify levels of certitude without making experiments…..”

    How? You may, in your infinitely insatiable curiosity, be eager to try this. Quantify your own level of unquantified certitude by grabbing with both hands an electrified fence with a yet-not-experimented-by-you warning sign that reads “Warning. 1000V”. You will find certitude.

  159. Bin Ismail

    @ albtn (May 19, 2010 at 7:38 pm)

    1. “…..Let everyone has his own relationship with his god or god-concept – there is no need to make a public fascism or show out of it…..”

    That sounds sensible enough, if your new and novel definition of the term “fascism” is politely overlooked.

    2. “…..So the son of ismail has also started writing incoherent banter. Give answers and not outrages…..”

    The reply I gave, was very much an answer. Your question, if I may remind you was: “How does one quantify levels of certitude without making experiments?”

    If in all other situations, that you happen to confront, you tend to respond to glad tidings and warnings, both, by “making experiments” merely in order to establish your own level of certitude, then you should also have taken my reply as a coherent answer.