Sunday, December 11, 2016
China - Prevent 'immature' Trump being manipulated by conservative forces: analyst
A Chinese analyst urged China to make US president-elect understand the importance and complexity of Sino-US ties and prevent him from being manipulated by some conservative forces after Trump questioned whether the US should continue its "one-China policy" Sunday unless Beijing makes concessions on trade and other issues.
"I don't want China dictating to me," Trump said as he made a vehement defense of his recent phone conversation with the Taiwan leader.
"I don't know why we have to be bound by a one-China policy unless we make a deal with China having to do with other things, including trade," he added in the interview on Fox News Sunday.
He was responding to a question on his taking that call this month from Taiwanese leader Tsai Ing-wen, breaking with decades of US diplomatic tradition that recognizes Beijing as the sole representative of China.
Trump said he had just a couple of hours' notice that the call was coming, not weeks or longer as has been reported.
Besides trade, Trump said China was not cooperating with America on its handling of its currency, on North Korea and its nuclear weapons, or on tensions in the South China Sea, where he said China is building "a massive fortress."
Trump said it would have been disrespectful not to take the call from Tsai, who he said wanted to congratulate him on his election win.
Li Haidong, professor of China Foreign Affairs University, attributes Trump's comments to his inexperience. "Trump is a novice at dealing with diplomatic and international relations issues," Li said, "He is inexperienced in sensitive and complicated issues except for business and trade. His knowledge about Sino-US relations, particularly the Taiwan question, is very superficial, which gives him the nerve to say whatever he likes."
"As a businessman, he thinks it's quite normal to do business, but he hasn't realized that the Taiwan question is not a business to China. The Taiwan question is not negotiable," Li added.
Li doesn't believe Trump has a plan to challenge the one-China policy by making such comments.
"It's still too early to come to that conclusion," Li said, adding "these ideas may come from some of his conservative consultants, not necessarily from him."
"His focus is on domestic issues such as the economy and employment, so perhaps he doesn't think very deeply about diplomatic issues," Li said, "in addition, Trump is highly unpredictable. Many of his remarks have shocked the American elites, but he's very fickle as well, he may eat his words sometime soon. "
Li said the mainstream of the US society are very clear about their China policies, of which the one-China policy is the core and the cornerstone. "Diplomatically, Trump is still immature, so we need to point out to him how serious the problem is and exert pressure on him."
"We should make him understand the importance and complexity of Sino-US ties and prevent him from being manipulated by some conservative forces," Li added.
"I don't want China dictating to me," Trump said as he made a vehement defense of his recent phone conversation with the Taiwan leader.
"I don't know why we have to be bound by a one-China policy unless we make a deal with China having to do with other things, including trade," he added in the interview on Fox News Sunday.
He was responding to a question on his taking that call this month from Taiwanese leader Tsai Ing-wen, breaking with decades of US diplomatic tradition that recognizes Beijing as the sole representative of China.
Trump said he had just a couple of hours' notice that the call was coming, not weeks or longer as has been reported.
Besides trade, Trump said China was not cooperating with America on its handling of its currency, on North Korea and its nuclear weapons, or on tensions in the South China Sea, where he said China is building "a massive fortress."
Trump said it would have been disrespectful not to take the call from Tsai, who he said wanted to congratulate him on his election win.
Li Haidong, professor of China Foreign Affairs University, attributes Trump's comments to his inexperience. "Trump is a novice at dealing with diplomatic and international relations issues," Li said, "He is inexperienced in sensitive and complicated issues except for business and trade. His knowledge about Sino-US relations, particularly the Taiwan question, is very superficial, which gives him the nerve to say whatever he likes."
"As a businessman, he thinks it's quite normal to do business, but he hasn't realized that the Taiwan question is not a business to China. The Taiwan question is not negotiable," Li added.
Li doesn't believe Trump has a plan to challenge the one-China policy by making such comments.
"It's still too early to come to that conclusion," Li said, adding "these ideas may come from some of his conservative consultants, not necessarily from him."
"His focus is on domestic issues such as the economy and employment, so perhaps he doesn't think very deeply about diplomatic issues," Li said, "in addition, Trump is highly unpredictable. Many of his remarks have shocked the American elites, but he's very fickle as well, he may eat his words sometime soon. "
Li said the mainstream of the US society are very clear about their China policies, of which the one-China policy is the core and the cornerstone. "Diplomatically, Trump is still immature, so we need to point out to him how serious the problem is and exert pressure on him."
"We should make him understand the importance and complexity of Sino-US ties and prevent him from being manipulated by some conservative forces," Li added.
Sanders: Trump's dismissal of Russian interference 'makes no sense'
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Sunday criticized Donald Trump for dismissing a recent CIA assessment that concluded Russia intervened in the U.S. presidential election to help the billionaire win the presidency.
"This is very serious stuff. I think we go forward. But I don't want to go backwards," Sanders said Sunday on CBS's "Face The Nation."
"We've got to take a hard look at the role that the Russians played in this election process. We'll see where the investigation goes. But for Donald Trump to summarily dismiss all of this makes no sense to me at all."
The Washington Post reported on Friday that a secret CIA assessment concluded Russia intervened in the presidential election to help Trump win the White House.
Trump in an interview that aired Sunday blasted the recent report, saying he thinks it's "ridiculous" and "just another excuse."
"I don't believe it," the president-elect said in an interview that aired Sunday on "Fox News Sunday."
"I don't know why and I think it's just — you know, they talked about all sorts of things. Every week it's another excuse."
Sanders said on Sunday he is focused on making sure the president-elect fulfills the promises he made during the campaign.
U.S. - Let’s get the facts right on foreign involvement in our elections
Michael McFaul
That most people acknowledge Trump’s victory should now free us to have a serious discussion about the role of foreign interference in the 2016 presidential election. During the campaign, mentions of foreign meddling quickly became partisan and polarized, blocking any real examination of the facts, let alone a discussion of prescriptions. Even Obama administration officials seemed to tiptoe around these issues, not wanting to appear to use their privileged access to classified information to help the Democratic Party’s candidate, Hillary Clinton. But now the election is over. Before the next one, we need to know the facts — investigate what did and did not occur — so that we can develop procedures, policies and laws to strengthen the integrity of our electoral process before 2020. This is not a partisan plea; it is a national security issue. We know some facts, and they are disturbing. For instance, we know that Russian actors stole data from people working at the Democratic National Committee. We know that another foreign actor, WikiLeaks, published data stolen from the DNC to adversely affect Clinton. We also know that WikiLeaks and others published data stolen from John Podesta, Clinton’s campaign chairman, in order to try to damage further the Democratic candidate. We also know that WikiLeaks did not publish similar kinds of data from the Trump campaign or the Republican Party.
We do not know precisely if the Russian government or its intermediaries transferred the data they stole to WikiLeaks. We do not know with certainty if the Russian government (or any other actor) stole data from Trump and the Republican Party but chose not to release it to WikiLeaks. We do not know if WikiLeaks had obtained data on Trump and the Republican Party but made an editorial decision not to release this information. I don’t know, but we need to know.
We also know that Russian hackers were probing computers that contained information on voter registration, and poking around at actual voting machines and tabulators. Thankfully, this clear Russian capacity to disrupt Election Day activities, including vote counting, does not seem to have led to actions influencing the election outcome. But what about the future? National popular votes are less vulnerable to hackers because manipulating millions of votes without detection is difficult. But our electoral college system makes us more susceptible to tampering, because simply under-counting a small fraction of votes in a few targeted precincts of a few key states can change the electoral outcome. Despite our federal, decentralized system of voting, can we nonetheless implement measures to prevent voting fraud in 2020, when technologies to manipulate voting data will have improved? I don’t know, but we need to know. And what about the capacity of other actors, both foreign and domestic? Will they now be more tempted to engage in voter manipulation in 2020? Are there policies and negotiations that, if started now, could prevent such actions by 2020? Should there be international norms about regulating such behavior, as disrupters have made clear their intention to intervene in future European elections? We need to know.
In addition, we know that Russian-government-controlled “media” outlets such as RT and Sputnik campaigned openly for one candidate, Donald Trump. Sputnik even tweeted the hashtag #CrookedHillary. We have laws preventing foreign governments from contributing financial support to candidates. Should we have similar laws about in-kind support? Such regulation seems hard, in tension with our First Amendment, but shouldn’t our lawmakers wrestle with the issue? Should Sputnik and RT employees be accredited as journalists or as foreign agents under the Foreign Agents Registration Act? I don’t know. But we need to know.
Stories also have circulated about Russian and other foreign actors involved in the production of fake news, as well as collaboration between Russian (and other foreign) and American leaders and movements regarding common political agendas, that is, a new “Illiberal International” to replace the old Communist International. What was the full scope of these activities? Did any of these actions influence the election outcome? I don’t know, but we need to know. The Obama administration just announced that it plans to conduct an investigation of Russian cybertheft during the 2016 election. That is a good start (although let’s hope this investigation started long before now!), but it is not enough. First, a serious investigation will take longer than one month; second, the authors of such a report must be bipartisan; third, the scope of such an inquiry must include other forms of interference beyond hacking; and fourth, the actions (and maybe non-actions) of the executive branch during the 2016 campaign must be part of the study.
The only way to generate comprehensive answers to these questions and many more concerning the integrity of our electoral system is for Congress to authorize and support a bipartisan investigation, staffed in part by academics and experts, so that we know better what happened and therefore can make important policy changes before the 2020 elections. Such an investigative commission is exactly what Reps. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) and Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) proposed this week in their new bill, the Protecting Our Democracy Act, which would establish “the National Commission on Foreign Interference in the 2016 Election.” Ideally, the act could be expanded to include H.R. 5181, the Countering Foreign Propaganda and Disinformation Act of 2016, as these issues must be analyzed and addressed together, and not treated separately.
All Americans — Republican, Democrat and other — should want free and fair elections. We must diagnose the problem, including dispelling possible myths about the extent of the problem, before recommending prescriptions. Establishing this commission is an excellent bipartisan step toward preserving this most sacred American value.
Madonna and Hillary: ‘Witch’ and ‘Nasty Woman’ as Sisters in Arms
By CARYN GANZ and PATRICK HEALY
“I was called a whore and a witch,” Madonna said on Friday in a searing speech about the sexism and bullying that women face in the music industry and the culture at large.
“Such a nasty woman,” Donald J. Trump interjected in October as Hillary Clinton pointed out holes in his Social Security plan during their final presidential debate.
Madonna and Mrs. Clinton: both trailblazers, both polarizing figures, and both attacked for actions, choices and behavior that are broadly accepted — even applauded — when done by their male peers. Madonna herself made a connection between the two women before her speech Friday, saying it was “really important to make a stand and speak my mind” about women’s rights after Mrs. Clinton’s loss in November.
Our pop music editor, Caryn Ganz, and deputy Culture editor and former political correspondent Patrick Healy looked at how Madonna and her speech put Mrs. Clinton’s candidacy in fresh perspective.
PATRICK HEALY: Caryn, I’m coming off 18 months covering the presidential campaign, and frankly I’ve been wondering if Mrs. Clinton would ever give a speech like Madonna’s on Friday — calling out sexism in America and the rules that trap women but not men. “If you’re a girl, you have to play the game,” Madonna said. “Don’t have an opinion that’s out of line with the status quo.” Madonna and Mrs. Clinton have been controversial in part because they didn’t play “the game.” It’s easy to forget, amid their celebrity and longevity, that Madonna and Mrs. Clinton were once renegades: speaking out and pursuing power in ways that were considered overly ambitious for women. They fought for equality and respect — and they sought the kind of influence and money and fame that men have. Mrs. Clinton’s place and legacy in our culture is just starting to be considered and debated. But only after her speech yesterday did I start to think about her and Madonna as sisters in arms.
CARYN GANZ: Mrs. Clinton is so buttoned up and Madonna is so, well, unbuttoned, that I think many people have been hesitant to make this connection. And because Madonna has used sexual expressiveness as code for all kinds of liberation, she hasn’t been courted as a political ally. But now that both of them have reached a certain age, the sexism they’ve faced for decades has become something more insidious, paired with ageism.
HEALY: A lot of people don’t see sexism hurting Mrs. Clinton — after all, she won the Democratic nomination — but she and her advisers did. As for the sort of “liberation” that Madonna pioneered, Mrs. Clinton has a complicated relationship with it. She came of age in the era of women’s lib, and yet — to help Bill Clinton’s career in Arkansas — she changed her last name from Rodham to Clinton and got new hairstyles and glasses. And when she was most visibly liberated, including in her hard-charging performances in political debates, she got called “likable enough” by Barack Obama in 2008 and a “nasty woman” by Mr. Trump this fall. Madonna, in her speech Friday, recalled that she got so much abuse after releasing her “Erotica” album and “Sex” book in 1992 that she felt like “the most hated person on the planet.”
GANZ: In a 2008 “Weekend Update” segment about Mrs. Clinton’s initial presidential run, Tina Fey said: “Maybe what bothers me the most is that people say that Hillary is a bitch. Let me say something about that: Yeah, she is.” (Ms. Fey later proclaimed, “Bitch is the new black.”) I thought about this when Madonna put the song “Unapologetic Bitch” on her most recent album, “Rebel Heart,” the record where she started to speak openly about the discrimination she’s faced as a female artist over 55. Madonna has referred to herself in many ways in songs over the years, but she waited until 2015, on her 13th album, to reclaim “bitch.” HEALY: Mrs. Clinton knew some people used that word about her. Like Madonna, she answered the haters with a strong work ethic. Mrs. Clinton put in 18-hour days, thought deeply about policy, and was a tireless campaigner even if she wasn’t the world’s most natural politician. Madonna is no Adele: She wasn’t born with a once-in-a-generation talent and voice. But she succeeded through work, grit and guts.
GANZ: But she was born with a once-in-a-generation ability to understand and command the power of connecting her voice to her image. Nobody did this the way Madonna did before her, though many have followed her example. Knowing that as a woman, her appearance would be a talking point, Madonna co-opted this scrutiny as a weapon from the beginning of her career, forcing everyone to talk about what she looked like by evolving — it was a conversation she essentially started herself. But as she has gotten older, the commentary about her work is almost entirely centered on how she looks rather than how she sounds, and whether what she is wearing or saying is “appropriate for a woman her age” — a question that musicians like Mick Jagger, who is 15 years older than Madonna, have never had to answer. And certainly no other candidate was the subject of stories about what he wore to the debate and what his clothes meant. (Continuing investigations into Mr. Trump’s hair aside.)
HEALY: I remember Mrs. Clinton telling me during the 2008 race that she probably woke up two hours earlier than Barack Obama each day because she had to do her hair and makeup, and he could just roll out of bed and into a suit. She has had no room for error in what she says or how she looks, her advisers felt, while a candidate like Mr. Trump could sound like a crazy man on Twitter, and many voters shrugged. Then again, Mrs. Clinton is far more of a perfectionist than Mr. Trump, as is Madonna.
GANZ: But Madonna and Mrs. Clinton have had their perfectionism interpreted as a pathology. As women cutting a path no woman had traveled before, they had no choice but to be as precise and detail-oriented as possible, knowing the slightest failure would invite a deluge of criticism. Madonna is known to control every aspect of rooms in which she will appear, down to the color of the lampshades. While Mr. Trump was making brash statements, Mrs. Clinton was tweeting point-by-point policy plans and rigorously preparing for the debates.
HEALY: But Mrs. Clinton could also take control too far, like keeping her State Department email on a private server. “I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible,” she wrote in 2010. And in 2008, she rarely talked about being a woman because she wanted to control her image — she wanted voters to think she would be as tough as any male commander in chief. GANZ: Trailblazing is a solitary game. They’re both lonely warriors who reached a critical moment this year: the time when they had to speak up for their achievements and call out their haters.
HEALY: As Madonna said in her speech, “I remember wishing I had a female peer I could look to for support.” But she and Mrs. Clinton have a mixed record as allies of feminists. Mrs. Clinton put aside her career to support her husband’s, and stood by him during his extramarital affairs, and she supported some policies, like a welfare overhaul, that critics regarded as anti-family. She was also a champion of women’s rights as human rights — even as she opposed gay rights like same-sex marriage. Do Mrs. Clinton and Madonna bear any responsibility for being polarizing figures, Caryn?
GANZ: Oh, certainly, although Madonna has always been a steadfast supporter of gay rights (something Mrs. Clinton can’t claim). Madonna designed herself to be a polarizing figure, and her breed of feminism has evolved over the years — at times she’s been more focused on self-satisfaction than the advancement of womankind. She has defended Sean Penn from accusations of domestic abuse. She wrote one of the most famous songs about not having an abortion. And she’s also often been a covert feminist: On “Material Girl,” a song still cited as an ode to consumerism, Madonna is the winner because “experience has made me rich, and now they’re after me.” It wasn’t the objects she was after, or the men — it was the power. And that was in 1984.
HEALY: Mrs. Clinton has been labeled power-hungry since she was a young woman. And it drove her crazy, advisers said, because Mr. Trump and other men never faced that accusation. She felt held to the double standard that Madonna spoke about on Friday. I can imagine Mrs. Clinton listening to that speech and just saying “Yaaaas” over and over.
Singer-turned-preacher Junaid Jamshed personified Pakistan's contradictions
Shamil Shams
Pakistani celebrity Junaid Jamshed has died in a plane crash. His metamorphosis from a pop singer into an Islamist symbolizes the transformation of Pakistani society where religious extremism has overtaken music and art.
Pop-singer-turned-preacher Junaid Jamshed is a perfect embodiment of Pakistan's many contradictions - its transformation from a moderate to a religious extremist country, its generosity and hypocrisy, its love for music and its equal contempt for culture and diversity. Jamshed was among the passengers of the ill-fated commercial plane that crashed on Wednesday, November 7, en route from Chitral to Islamabad. But for many, the 1990s pop icon had died in 2004 when he quit music and became an Islamic preacher who condemned music and fine arts.
Jamshed's metamorphosis and the transformation of Pakistani society were happening simultaneously. After eight years of General Zia-ul-Haq's authoritarian rule, who after coming to power in 1979 had unleashed a massive Islamization drive, Pakistan was finally opening up to controlled liberalization. So when Jamshed's musical band, Vital Signs, launched their first album in 1987, it took the nation by storm. The band, of which Jamshed was the lead singer, was highly westernized with modern looking, clean shaven young men clad in jeans and t-shirts. The band's earliest hit song, Dil Dil Pakistan (Love, love, Pakistan), however, still echoed the ultra-nationalism that Zia-ul-Haq's regime had been promoting for nearly a decade.
In 1988, after Haq died in a plane crash, Pakistan elected its first female prime minister, Benazir Bhutto. Democracy had been restored in the country and Pakistan had now embarked on economic and cultural liberalization processes despite the fact that the powerful military did not relinquish its support for the Islamic groups inside the country and the neighboring Afghanistan. Irrespective of what was happening on the state level, the early 1990s nonetheless saw the emergence of a number of popular musical groups. Jamshed is widely considered as one of the pioneers of that musical wave.
While the cultural openness was largely an urban-based phenomenon, the 1980s Islamism discourse in Pakistan remained potent and widespread.
"Junaid Jamshed represented our contradictions. Jamshed was a pop singer but he, too, was influenced by Zia-ul-Haq's Islamization, albeit he realized it much later in his career," Arshad Mahmood, a social activist and author of the book "Saqafati Ghutan" (Cultural Suffocation and Muslim Society), told DW.
Many hats
Even after renouncing and denouncing music, Jamshed didn't leave the spotlight. After September 11 attacks in the US and the fall of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan in 2001, a variety of shows on security and religious topics started to dominate Pakistan's TV channels. Televangelism, too, took over the country and Jamshed was at the forefront.
Jamshed became active in the Tablighi Jamaat, a puritan Deobandi group, that claims to be an apolitical organization but many Pakistani experts say that it gives ideological impetus to most extremist and militant religious organizations in Pakistan, including the Taliban.
"The Tablighi Jamaat cashes in on the popularity of celebrities. The cultural icons whose activities have been restricted due to terrorism find a new career in this religious organization," writer and poet Salman Haider, told DW.
Jamshed, however, found himself in hot water after his video became viral on social media in 2014 in which the late singer appeared to insult Aisha, the youngest wife of the prophet of Islam. The followers of the Sunni sect of Islam, particularly the Hanafis, revere Aisha and the prophet's other spouses, and any slur against them is considered outrageous.
After realizing that he had made a mistake, Jamshed swiftly released another video rendering an apology. "I confess to my mistake," he said. "I did not do it intentionally." But hardline Islamic groups and jihadists were unwilling to forgive him.
"We demand an immediate arrest of Junaid Jamshed, who is a cursed person," Mobin Qadri, a spokesman of Pakistan Sunni Tehreek party said following the incident.
Jamshed also started his clothing line for men and women, although as a preacher he continued to sermonize against women's driving and their equal rights.
"Jamshed used his popularity for financial gains. He was retrogressive to the core but he could be seen with fashion models at the same time," Mahmood underlined.
Moshin Sayeed, a Karachi-based fashion journalist and designer, took a jibe at Jamshed on Facebook after the late celebrity's fans started paying glowing tributes to him on social media following his death.
"My condolences to the Muslims of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan on the huge loss of a big businessman of religion and clothes. While there's no dearth of brokers of the former, my concern is who will fill the vacuum at Junaid Jamshed Lawn and clothing empire," wrote Sayeed.
A musical icon, nonetheless
It is rare that Pakistan's liberal sections and religious people celebrate and mourn someone with an equal amount of respect. Jamshed's untimely death has affected most Pakistanis. At the same time, the debate over who Jamshed actually was, and what he represented, has started on social media. While the liberals celebrate Jamshed as a musical phenomenon who ushered in a glorious era of pop singing in Pakistan, the religious groups remember him as an Islamic scholar who gave up a glamorous life to devote himself to Islam.
Mohmmad Salman, a cultural critic, believes it is Jamshed's music that will be remembered as his true legacy.
"The emergence of Vital Signs on Pakistan's musical scene in the late 1980s was no less than a phenomenon. It was a band comprising young, good looking guys, composing, singing and performing their own songs. It caught the fancy of the nation and the rest is history," Salman told DW.
"Junaid's contribution should be understood in the context of the band. Vital Signs signified a turning point in the history of Pakistan where its youth discovered its voice in music," Salman added.
Many of Jamshed's fans felt betrayed by his decision to quit music but they were shocked at his death and have taken to social media sites to post his famous ditties that he crooned with a lot of heart.
"I felt anger and revulsion for Jamshed for many years but today I am sad, not because he was a musical genius or a brilliant born-again religious scholar but more because he was a person I loved," wrote a Facebook user.
په خیبر کې د غار دور لرغونو اثارو اهمیت
د خیبر پښتونخوا د لرغونو اثارو محکمې او پيښور میوزم ډایرکټر ډاکټر
عبدالصمد وایي په خیبر ایجنسۍ کې د دوی د یوې تازه سروې ترمخه څه
نا څه ۳۰،۰۰۰ کاله پخواني اثار موندل شوي دي.
ډاکټر صمد وایي دغه لرغوني ځایونه یوازې په جمرود سیمه کې موندل شوي دي، او ممکنه ده د خیبر په نورو سیمو کې هم ورته اثار موجود وي. ډاکټر صمد وایي ((د ارکیالوجیکل نظره دا یوه لویه کامیابي ده، موږ سره د څه نا څه اتو ملکونو نه خلکو د دغو اثارو د تفصیل لپاره رابطې کړي دي،په دغو کې د بده مت اثار دي، د سکانو او انګریزانو د وخت دي، او تر ټولو پخواني د هغو
په خیبر پښتونخوا او فاټا کې دا تر ټولو لرغونې اثار دي چې په دې وروستیو کې په جمرود کې موندل شوي دي. په اسلام اباد کې د ایشین سویلایزیشن مجلې مدیر او په قاید اعظم پوهنتون کې د ټیکسلا انسټیټیوټ مشر ډاکټر غني الرحمان وایي د خیبر ایجنسۍ پشمول یو شمیر قبایلي سیمې ډیر زوړ تاریخ لري او په جمرود کې وروستی دریافت ډیر مهم دی. ((د خیبر پښتونخوا د لرغونو اثارو محکمه بلکل صحیح وایي دوی په دغو سیمو کې میاشت دوه وړاندې سروې پیل کړې وه، د دوی ټیم به روزانه دغو سیمو ته تلو، دا له تاریخي نظره ډېره غني سیمه ده، پخوا به بهرنیان راتلل خو اوس د امنیت له وجې څوک نشي راتلی، په پاکستان کې د لرغونو اثارو د کیندلو کار لومړی انګریزانو یا نورو اروپایانوکړی و، دغې سیمې بیا په دې حواله له پامه غورزول شوې وې. اوس د دې غارونو موندل، په غرونو کې سرنګونه، په دغو لیکل، د بده مت نښې نښانې ، دا شان بیا د مغل دور ،دا ټول ډیر تاریخي ارزښت لري، په پاکستان کې په نورو سیمو کې داسې کار شوی و، خو دغلته ندی شوی نو دا یوه لویه کامیابي هم ده))
د قاید اعظم پوهنتون د ارکیالوجي څانګې استاد ډاکټر سدید عارف وایي د دغو لرغونو اثارو موندل ښکار کوي چې دا سیمې داسې نور پخواني اثار هم لري. ((د دې سروې اهمیت دا دی چې انګریزانو په۱۹۰۵ م او ۱۹۰۶م کالونو په دغو سیمو کې سروې کړې وه، له دغې وروستو په دغو سیمو کې چا داسې سروې او کیندل نه ووکړي، دا له هغې وروستو لومړی وار دی، د خیبر پښتونخوا د ارکیالوجي محکمې چارواکو دا یو لوی کار کړی دی، د غارونو د دور بیا د بده مت اثارو موندل یوه لویه کامیابي ده، او باید چې په دې کې وړاندې کار هم وشي. ))
بلخوا د خیبر ایجنسۍ پولیټیکل چارواکو مشال راډیو ته ویلي دوی غواړي چې د قبایلي سیمو د دغو لرغونو اثارو په اړه مالومات او دغو د خوندي کولو د کار لپاره په فاټا سیکټریټ کې یوه بیله څانګه جوړه کړل شي.
http://www.mashaalradio.com/a/28169968.html
#India: Persecution of Christians reaches alarming levels
This is religious discrimination, pure and simple.” The United States Commission for International Religious Freedom also points put towards the growing intolerance as it reported: “In 2015, religious tolerance deteriorated and religious freedom violations increased in India. Minority communities, especially Christians, Muslims, and Sikhs, experienced numerous incidents of intimidation, harassment, and violence, largely at the hands of Hindu nationalist groups. Members of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) tacitly supported these groups and used religiously-divisive language to further inflame tensions. These issues, combined with longstanding problems of police bias and judicial inadequacies, have created a pervasive climate of impunity, where religious minority communities feel increasingly insecure, with no recourse when religiously-motivated crimes occur. In the last year, “higher caste” individuals and local political leaders also prevented Hindus considered part of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Dalits) from entering religious temples. Additionally, the national government or state governments applied several laws to restrict religious conversion, cow slaughter, and foreign funding of NGOs.
Moreover, an Indian constitutional provision deeming Sikhs, Buddhists, and Jains to be Hindus contradicts international standards of freedom of religion or belief. Based on these concerns, USCIRF again places India on Tier 2, where it has been since 2009. However, USCIRF notes that India is on a negative trajectory in terms of religious freedom. USCIRF will continue to monitor the situation closely during the year ahead to determine if India should be recommended to the U.S. State Department for designation as a “country of particular concern,” or CPC, under the International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA) for systematic, ongoing, egregious violations of religious freedom.
“Christian communities, across many denominations, reported numerous, and increased, incidents of harassment and attacks in the last year, which they attribute to Hindu nationalist groups with the BJP’s tacit support.
In early 2016, an advocacy group reported that there were at least 365 major attacks on Christians and their institutions during 2015, compared to 120 in 2014; these incidents affected more than 8,000 Christians. For example, in November 2015, Hindu nationalists severely beat 40 Christians worshiping in a private home in Telangana state, killing one woman’s unborn child. In February 2016, a mob of 35 people beat Father Jose Kannumkuzhy of the Ramanathapauram Syro-Malabar diocese and three lay church officials in Tamil Nadu state. Reportedly, local police seldom provide protection, refuse to accept complaints, rarely investigate, and sometimes encourage Christians to move or hide their religion,” USCRIF further reported. “In 2015, local governments appeared to capitulate to demands for or compel accusations of “forced
conversation” made by the RSS to curtail the activities of Christian groups, leading to government-sanctioned restrictions. For example, in February 2016, the Dahar village council in Madhya Pradesh state issued a 5,000 rupees fine (US$75) to the local Christian community for “breaching peace and harmony,” after local RSS members claimed that they were trying to convert Hindus. In May 2015, authorities in Dhar District, Madhya Pradesh, banned on “law and order” grounds a Pentecostal meeting that occurs annually. The community reported that they sought and were issued the appropriate permits, which were revoked later due to what the community believes was RSS pressure. According to human rights Christian communities, across many denominations, reported numerous, and increased, incidents of harassment and attacks in the last year, which they attribute to Hindu nationalist groups with the BJP’s tacit support.”
Pakistan comes under fire for its crackdown on Ahmadiyya Muslims
"We're obviously very concerned about the reports that Punjab counter-terrorism police have raided the international headquarters of Ahmadiyya -- Muslim community in Rabwah," state department deputy spokesperson Mark Toner said on Friday.
According to Toner, the country's laws that restrict peaceful religious expression, particularly by the Ahmadiyya community, "are inconsistent with Pakistan's international obligations".
Pakistani laws do not recognise the Ahmadiyya community as Muslims and forbids them from calling themselves members of that religion. But Toner pointedly emphasised that Ahmadiyya is a "Muslim community".
USCIRF was harsher in its criticism.
"USCIRF condemns the brutal raid on the Ahmadiyya offices, the first such raid since Pakistan amended its constitution 42 years ago declaring that Ahmadis are 'non-Muslims'," said Thomas J. Reese, a Catholic priest of the Jesuit order.
"Pakistan's anti-terrorism laws should not be applied to the peaceful Ahmadiyya community simply because they are Ahmadis," he added.
The USCIRF noted in a statement that Pakistan's Punjab province, where the raid took place, "has a deeply troubling religious freedom record" with two-thirds of all blasphemy cases originating there.
On Monday the counter-terrorism department raided an office of the Ahmadiyya community and arrested several people for producing religious publications, Tehreek-e-Jadeed and Al-Fazal that the Punjab government had declared as "seditious and treasonable" in 2014.
During this raid "police beat and arrested several Ahmadis who later were charged under provisions in Pakistan's penal code and Anti-Terrorism Act", USCIRF said.
http://timesofahmad.blogspot.com/2016/12/pakistan-comes-under-fire-for-its.html
Pakistan -Destructive nature of strategic partnership of Deobandi clergy and Saudi religious establishment
Aamir Hussaini
Saudis and Qataris Salafi Wahhabi Are not Spokesmen For Sunni Islam
Deobandi Clergy, Clerics from Nidwa and from Jammat-i-Islami always deceive Sunni Muslims about reality of Saudi and Qatari brand (so called) Islam. They depict it Sunni Islam. They give legitimacy all those ideas which were presented by Ibn-i-Taymiyya and Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab while calling them great Sunni scholars and reformers. They wrongly link their Takfiri ideas to mainstream Sunni Islam.
Deobandi clergy and their organizations in fact are strategic partners of Saudi and Qatari Salafi clergy. They promote Wahhabi ideology in the name of Sunni Hanafi Islam. We can see Deobandi Clergy, Nindwa clerics and leaders of Jamaat-i-Islami always on side of Saudis and Qataris in every regional conflict in Middle East and they radicalize Deobandi and Jammati youth and make them foot soldiers for Saudi and Qatari ruling class.
Pakistan based Deobandi Clergy opened doors of their religious seminaries for Saudi Wahhabist Jihadism and sectarianism in 80s after Shiite Iranian revolution and Pakistani dictator General Zia-ul-Haq also patronized them fully while provided every facility to train militarily young Deobandis. Massive Saudi funding and patronage from state elements Deobandis distorted much Sunni Islam for interests of Saudis and other Gulf rulers. Still Deobandi clergy deceives Sunni world and masses.
Their role as strategic partner of Saudis and in distorting face of Sunni Islam is hidden and Sunni world like Al-Azhar or Sunni leaders from central Asia and North Africa do not know their original face and role. Surprisingly when Sunni world organized a conference in Grozny capital of Chechnya of Russian federation Deobandi clerics from India, Bangladesh and Pakistan were invited there.
From Pakistan Deobandi cleric Tahir Ashrafi was leader of the Deobandi delegation in that conference despite his nonstop campaign for Saudi agenda and support of Saudi Invasion on Yemen. Pakistan based Deobandi clergy invited Saudi ministers and clergy when Saudi Arab started war against Yemen and formed military alliance against Houthi Yemen tribes and forces of Ali Abdullah Saleh former President of Yemen. Saudi Day was commemorated by Deobandi Clergy in Pakistan. Wafaq-ul-Madaris organized big public meetings in which Saudi official clerics and Ministers for chief guests.
Pakistan based Deobandi clergy proved their partnership with Saudi rulers and religious establishment on every global and regional conflict arose either in Middle East or in North Africa. Deobandi Clergy supported stance of Saudi Arabia on Syria despite massive Sufi Sunni killings and destructions of Sufi Sunni shrines and mosques by Saudi backed Salafi Takfiri and Jihadist groups like Al-Nusra front.
Deobandi clergy always has criminal silence on Saudi backed and funded campaign against Sufi Sunni Islam. They provided every time refuges to all those Takfiri organizations and leadership which are involved in killing Sufi Sunni ,Shiite, Christians and other religious communities, attacks on Shrines,mosques,Imambargah,churches,temples and on processions of Milad and Ashura. Enemies of pluralism, diversity always get the support from Deobandi clergy. Fake Ahle-Sunnat Waljammat-ASWJ aka Spiah Sahaba Pakistan-SSP is best example to know about crimes of Pakistan based Deobandi clergy in Pakistan.
You cannot find even a single powerful Deobandi religious seminary which declares itself indifferent from ASWJ or so called Jihadists. You cannot get even a single statement from a Deobandi clerics in Pakistan against Takfirism of ASWJ or other Takfiri groups active in Pakistan. They save Takfiri and so called Jihaidists in the name of Sunnism.
Saudi religious establishment is funding Deobandism in south Asia to marginalize Sufi Sunnis and distort face of mainstream Sufi Sunni Islam in India, Bangladesh and Pakistan. With massive funding and sources provided by Saudis Deobandi Islam is replacing Sufi Sunni Islam with Wahhabism in the name of Deobandi Sunni Hanafi Islam. Many political faces like Nawaz Sharif, Shahbaz Sharif , Imran Khan have changed their early Sufi Sunni inclinations and now they have become supporters of Deobandi inclined toward Saudi Wahhbist Islam.
Hundreds of Sufi Sunni mosques were captured by Deobandis with help of Deobandi Militants and support of state elements. According to some social scientists proportion of Sufi Sunnis in Muslim Population has been decreased from 80% to 60-50 and proportion of Deobandi Population have been increased from 10% to 30-35%. This is alarming situation. Punjab, Sindh, Baluchistan are more affected.
Many social scientists says that Deobandi Islam itself has been transformed due to strategic partnership of Deobandi clergy with Saudi Wahhabist religious establishment. In Sindh, Baluchistan, Punjab and KPK mainstream Deobandi Islam has been transformed from non-violent peace for all school of thought to Takfiri militant and Jihadist political Islam. Takfirism is prominent aspect of Deobandi Islam in Pakistan.
ASWJ, Khatam-Nawbat International and Deobandi Jihadist organizations have strong roots in Deobandi mainstream Deobandi religious seminaries. Wafaqul Madaris an umbrella organization of Deobandi Seminaries could not run without those Deobandi clerics who are promoters of Takfirism , Jihadism and militancy in Pakistan. Saudi intervention and funding destroyed moderate aspects of Deobandi Islam and strategic partnership with Saudi ruling class proved fatal for Deobandi Islam, Although this partnership helped many Deobandi clerics and leadership in changing their social class and now we can see many Deobandi political and religious leaders as billionaires and millionaires in Pakistan.
Saudi Arabia not only changed tendency of Deobandi religious seminaries but environment of modern universities of Pakistan also. Deobandi , Jammat Islami and Salafi powerful lobbies in universities radicalized many students and faculty members. Social scientists say that Saudization of Pakistani society is being done due to strategic partnership of Deobandi Clergy, networks of Jammat Islami, Jamat—ud-dawa, with Saudi religious establishment.
Saudis and Qataris not only made a strategic with Deobandi, Salafi clergy and Jammat-i-Islami but they created their Rafique Hariri here in Pakistan. Mian Nawaz Sharif is Rafique Hariri of Saudi Arabia and Qatar in Pakistan. Ruling elites of both countries have invested huge capital on Sharif Family.
But not only on Sharif Family but there are many other powerful political elite families who got petro- dollars from Saudi and Qatari Royal families and now that families are protecting interests of Saudi and Qatari Royal families in Pakistan. Rafique Hariri of Pakistan Nawaz Sharif is playing very important and crucial role in marginalizing mainstream Sunni Islam while making friendly environment for promotion of radical, militant and Takfiri Deobandi and Salafi Islam.
Mainstream Sufi Sunni Islam and its followers are facing very serious challenges from such strategic partnership. Space for mainstream Sufi Sunni Islam is shrinking more and more. In the name of reforms we are seeing arising of Takfiri tendencies in Sufi Sunni Islam also like Pakistan Sunni Tehreek which is resisting flexibility of Sunni Barelvi Islam for many Sufi rituals and practices and another type of puritanism is gaining strength in Barelvis.
On issue of Mumtaz Qadri and Asia Bibi we are seeing fundamentalist and Takfiri extremism in some circles of Barelvi clergy. Deobandi clergy is exerting on Barelvi clergy to adopt more strict and Takfiri line against Shiite community in Pakistan althought still they could not get success in this regard.
Tehreek Minhaj-ul-Quran, Dawat-i-Islami and Sunni Itehad Council although deflected Deobandi’s move and they did not play on ground of Deobandis but some small groups like a faction of Sufi Sunnis organization Jamaat-i-Ahlesunnat Pakistan, JUP made an alliance with Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz. Sahibzada Abul-Khair and Awais Noorani son of Shah Ahmad Noorani unfortunately joined Pakistan Defense Council made by JuD and ASWJ which is protecting interests of Saudi Arabia in Pakistan. This is nonsense move and act made by these two Sufi Sunni leaders and totally against interests of Sufi Sunnis of Pakistan.
In my thought Sufi Sunnis clergy of Pakistan should link itself with center of Al-Azhar of Egypt as Sufi Sunni clergy of India and Bangladesh did. All India Ulema and Mashaiekh Board-AIUMB organized international Sufi Conference in Dehli and they called Vice Chancellor of Al-Azhar University Prof.Ahmad El-Tayib as Chief Guest ,same act was repeated by Sufi Sunni clergy of Chechnya of Russia in August 2016 and Ahlesunnat Waljammat Bangladesh mainstram Sufi Sunni organization headed by Mufti Bangladesh Jalal-Ud-Din Umari invited Vice Chancellor of Azhar University Ahmad el-Tayib in their representative conference.
Newly elected office holders of Jammat-i-Ahlesunnat Pakistan should organized such International Sufi Sunni conference in Pakistan and invite Sunni clerics from all over the world including Ahmad El-Tayib of Al-Azhar University and they should give same message to the world given by Sunni clergy in Grozny.
25 SHIA MUSLIMS INCLUDING WOMEN KILLED IN TERRORIST ATTACKS IN 2 MONTHS
At least 25 Shia Muslims were killed in terrorist attacks during first two months of Islamic calendar (Moharram and Safar) but no human rights organization has noted it so far, let alone condemned it. Today, the world is observing global human rights day.
The details of the genocide against Shia Muslims in Pakistan are available on Pakistan page of the www.shiitenews.org and a chart is also produced here to see the brief details of the targeted murders of innocent Pakistani Shia Muslims.
Deobandi terrorists belonging to Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Sipah-e-Sahaba (ASWJ), Taliban, Jundulla and their Wahhabi allies such as al-Qaeda and Daesh are involved in the genocide against Shiites in all over Pakistan.
Deobandi terrorists belonging to Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Sipah-e-Sahaba (ASWJ), Taliban, Jundulla and their Wahhabi allies such as al-Qaeda and Daesh are involved in the genocide against Shiites in all over Pakistan.
Shia women in a passenger bus were identified and assassinated by the ferocious terrorists in Quetta but neither women rights organizations nor human rights organizations condemned these murders. They should have raised the issue around the world but they chose to remain silent.
http://www.shiitenews.org/index.php/pakistan/item/26187-25-shia-muslims-including-women-killed-in-terrorist-attacks-in-2-months
Pakistan - Finding Dr Abdus Salam
This week we have been reminded that a citizen of Pakistan had won a Nobel Prize for Physics. Ah, but that was 37 years ago. In fact, the Nobel Laureate we are talking about died 20 years ago. Sometimes, we wait for so long to recognise an achievement that had brought glory to the nation.
I am, of course, referring to Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s approval, in principle, to rename the National Centre for Physics at Islamabad’s Quaid-e-Azam University as the ‘Professor Abdus Salam Centre for Physics’. An official statement issued on Monday also said that the prime minister had approved a grant of five annual fellowships for Pakistani PhD candidates working in the field of physics at major international universities.
The statement noted that Dr Salam was the first Pakistani to receive a Nobel Prize and that “his remarkable achievements earned fame and prestige for the country which rightly deserves to be valued”.
What does this mean? Is this late – very late – acknowledgment of the exceptional accomplishment of an exceptional individual an indication of a resolve to confront the dark forces of bigotry and intolerance that have plagued Pakistani society? Is the prime minister serious about the objectives of the National Action Plan?
But first we should come clean about how Dr Salam was treated because he was an Ahmadi, though his faith could not negate his nationality and the rights that he should have enjoyed as a citizen of this country. On his part, he never wavered on his sense of belonging to this country.
A report published on Tuesday mentioned that institutions, roads and places have been named after him all over the world and a number of countries, including Britain and Italy, had offered him citizenship. Dr Salam did not accept these offers and he was finally buried in Pakistan, according to his wishes.
It is painful to recall that when, after he had been awarded the Nobel Prize, he was invited by the physics department of the Quaid-e-Azam University – the same place that will bear his name – Dr Salam was unable to enter the premises because of agitation by students who belonged to a right-wing religious party. This happened in December 1979.
Some protests are possible even now, after the formal recognition of the great physicist. There have been numerous attacks on minorities in Pakistan but the Ahmadiyya community has specifically been targeted. Emotions expressed in this regard are very strong and our political leaders have generally not shown the courage to commiserate with the beleaguered community.
In any case, Dr Salam deserved to be honoured for raising Pakistan’s banner in the domain of science and research. It has been rare in our history to attain such a distinction. The prize was awarded to Dr Salam but it also belonged, in a sense, to Pakistan. He was our hero and a source of pride and eminence for all of us. It was unfortunate that he was hounded out of Pakistan and he decided to establish the prestigious International Centre for Theoretical Physics in Trieste, Italy.
We know that Dr Salam, particularly after he had won the Nobel Prize, was very keen to promote the cause of education and scientific research in Pakistan. If we had been able to benefit from his expertise and his international standing in a structured manner, the situation would possibly not be as dismal as it is today. Alas, we sometimes get overpowered, collectively, by bigotry and narrow-mindedness and become blind to what is actually in our own national interest.
However, one likes to think that this decision to finally pay tribute to Dr Salam is also prompted by a fresh resolve to foster higher education in science in Pakistan. The need to attend to our abject deprivations in the field of education was never so compelling. Some headlines this week provide an appropriate reference to the existing quality of our educational and intellectual resources which serve as a contrast to the heights reached by Dr Salam.
For instance, on Monday the National Assembly Standing Committee on Cabinet Secretariat was told that just 2.09 percent students who sat for the Central Superior Services (CSS) test passed while 92 percent failed in English. One headline read: ‘92pc CSS candidates fail in English’. The Federal Public Service Commission representative said that this was a matter of concern, indicating that the quality of education in the country was deteriorating.
Nobody would doubt this sombre observation. A steady decline in the country’s human resources is manifest in the shortage of officers for various important assignments. Another manifestation of this trend is the poor quality of performance in all sectors. The irony is that this dearth of talent overlaps with the multitude that is unemployed.
There has been this talk about the need to declare an ‘education emergency’ but it is hard to decipher the strategy that would transform the entire education system. As a starting point, perhaps, it would be necessary to erase the influence that the religious militants and fanatics have exercised at various levels in our society. The radicalisation of our youth in madressahs must stop. Persecution of any minority group should be considered a threat to the security of Pakistan.
For a country so impoverished in educational and cultural assets to try to disown one of its own citizens who excelled on the world’s stage is incomprehensible. Yet this is what happened. While Dr Salam was awarded his Nobel Prize long ago, another individual acquired a similar rare distinction and was almost rejected by the same elements that undermined the stature of Dr Salam.
True, the Nobel Peace Prize given to Malala Yousafzai is not a prize in the knowledge sector. But here we have a young individual, a teenager, being honoured. She, too, has created a global impact as a role model. The fact that Malala has generally been maligned in her own country is alarming and shows that the Taliban still have considerable influence in our society.
Hence, one measure of the emancipation of Pakistani society would be the vindication of the likes of Dr Salam and also Malala. Can Nawaz Sharif embark on this mission in a resolute manner? In less than a week, we will observe the second anniversary of the massacre of our schoolchildren in Peshawar. That would be an appropriate occasion for our rulers to renew their commitment to protect Pakistan from terrorists, extremists and bigots.
Pakistan -The ungrateful nation
S Nabiha Shahram
Will we continue being a nation where intellectuals and thinkers are punished, rather than being prized for saying the right things?
Mughal Empire was known for its beautiful architecture. The architecture reached its pinnacle of glory during the period of Shah Jahan. It was promoted in a period of 100 years by Akbar, Jahangir and Shah Jahan. The royal family is no more there, but those Mughal traditions left a lasting impression. We seemed to be inspired more by the concrete buildings. We totally forgot as per our convenience that Mughals patronised artists, writers, and poets too.
In the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, being a democratic nation, we proudly follow the selective royal culture till date. A country where rulers and invaders are always personified and labelled as heroes. Intellectuals and Sufi saints are not considered worthy enough. We pick and choose traditions and values from the history according to our suitability and then continue it. We dishonour our true heroes by condemning them in their lifetimes and then try to undo our act by renaming buildings on their names after their death. The best we have done is to name road on our war hero, M M Alam road, a model town underpass after Faiz Ahmed Faiz, Istanbul Chowk after Patris Bukhari will be named respectively. Prime Minister had given the approval to rename Centre for Physics at Quaid-i-Azam University as “Professor Abdus-Salam Centre for Physics.” Again, just renaming or naming a building is the only tribute we pay. That too after the death of our national pride, not to mention the kind of rejection they face in their lifetime. Do we really not deserve such heroes? A short account of the Pakistani Noble Laureate Dr Abdus Salam life goes like this.
Dr Abdus Salam returned to his homeland after his graduation studies at Cambridge and joined Government College Lahore. He later became the head of the department at Punjab University. He was thoroughly disappointed as none of these positions allowed him to conduct research. “No one cared whether I did any research, worse I was expected to look after the college soccer team as my major duties besides teaching undergraduates.” Due to his religious beliefs, he faced further prejudices.
He went to Cambridge for the PhD in theoretical physics in 1952. He was the youngest professor at the Imperial College of Science and Technology. In 1979, he was awarded Nobel prize for his research on the “existence of forces carrying particles called W+, W and Zo bosons.” He received the award attired in a traditional Pakistani dress. But at the same time “Pakistan never considered owning him up as one of the countrymen,” in the words of Pervaiz Hoodbhoy. Even his alma mater Government College denied giving him any residence. This very isolation made him leave Pakistan in 1954. Upon his death, his brother requested for state protocol on the Noble Laureate coffin arrival, but there was no response from the government.
But we seem to undo all the wrong acts by renaming a building and a road on his name that too after his death. Roads in Geneva and Trieste had been named after him long before. Again the only tribute he got was Government College naming their departments of Mathematics and Physics after him. While we were busy seeding politics based on religion, sect and hatred, the non-Muslim countries were awarding him with Noble Laureate, honour and patronization.
Our very own media remained tight-lipped on his death. But probably, this is the only way we know how to treat our heroes as a policy. Reminding the readers how Air Commodore was thrown out of the forces on the allegations that he is not capable and not a learned person. “I felt as if I am hit by something badly upon learning that I am given before time retirement.” This forced retirement was given to a legend who was more than a war hero. In 1980 upon the completion of his course at Royal College of Defense Studies in London, officially issued a report on the note of comparing him with British military commander Viscount Slim. This report in itself was an honour.
The list of our disrespecting homages is quite long. Another genius, a prolific writer and a man who went to extraordinary lengths in literature was ‘Josh Maleeh Abadi’. An impeccable linguist and a remarkable poet, he migrated to Pakistan in 1958, despite Jawaharlal Nehru’s insistence against it. He was awarded Hilal-e-Imtiaz in 2012 long after his death, received by his granddaughter. Josh in his book “Yadoo ki Baraat,” lashes out at opportunists who dominated the new born country; a critic of political and religious parties. In his words,“Karachi nay chotoo ko ubhara aur baron ko dafna dia.” Such was the state of unhappiness of a profound intellectual on our society.
Saadat Hassan Manto, who viewed the society’s hypocrisy critically, said that in our double social standards a woman cannot run a tonga for earning but can run a brothel.
He faced cases for obscenity in writing but was never convicted. His entire life and death were a witness on the hostility he faced by the state and society. Critics of our society at any era were not very well received by the people and state both. The only reason and source of taking out Europe from dark ages towards enlightenment were the critical thinkers. They challenged the monarch of their time. They introduced enlightenment and renaissance in arts. But if we keep on strangling and silencing our intellectuals and critical thinkers we will be in the whirlpool for a long and unlimited time. Even today we are no different despite the so-called social awareness.
The launching ceremony of Malala Yousufzai autobiography was cancelled in her own hometown. The diversity, difference in opinion is handled by rejection and hatred.
Habib Jalib the revolutionary poet, political leaders always recite his verses to charge up the crowd. The kind of fate Jalib faced is a tight slap on our face. His son Yasir was running a chicken while his daughter is running a driving school. They are not plundering and are not a part of the hierarchy corruption standing tall and strong in the face of adversaries. But the kind of fate our scholars, thinkers and intellectual face makes anyone think twice. Is it better to open a restaurant and pass it on to the next generation or to pass on the knowledge and intellect? Will we continue being a nation where intellectuals and thinkers are punished, rather than being prized for saying the right things? Being nation who lives like a hog under a tree eating all the acorns but never bothering to look up and see where they come from.