You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
India-Pakistan
An edifice of dishonesty -- Mohammad Nafees
2013-11-18
[Pak Daily Times] No death in the country has ever been a cause of so much controversies and debates as did the death of Hakeemullah Mehsud. A subject that was so far a taboo for discussion became a common debate and everybody began asking what type of Islam we, as a nation, want to follow: the bad boy Islam of the Taliban or the peaceful Islam that the rest of the people follow. Views began pouring in from different schools of thought carrying logic and reasons that opposed or supported one of these two forms of belief. By declaring Hakeemullah Mehsud a 'shaheed' (martyr) Maulana Munawwar Hasan of the Jamaat-e-Islami
...The Islamic Society, founded in 1941 in Lahore by Maulana Sayyid Abul Ala Maududi, aka The Great Apostosizer. The Jamaat opposed the independence of Bangladesh but has operated an independent branch there since 1975. It maintains close ties with international Mohammedan groups such as the Moslem Brotherhood. the Taliban, and al-Qaeda. The Jamaat's objectives are the establishment of a pure Islamic state, governed by Sharia law. It is distinguished by its xenophobia, and its opposition to Westernization, capitalism, socialism, secularism, and liberalist social mores...
 (JI) became a courageous man not for the Taliban only but for those intellectuals as well whose western education is highly despicable for the Taliban and their supporters. The military came out calling Mehsud a 'terrorist' and claimed that the people of Pakistain and the army are very clear on what the state of Pakistain is and who its enemies are. The statement issued by the ISPR on this issue asked for an apology from the JI chief for calling the terrorist shaheed. This prompted the maulana to challenge the interference of the army in political matters as unconstitutional.

By raising a constitutional question, the JI chief provided some analysts a reason to equate this conflict with the historical struggle of the civilians against military supremacy. They described the stand of the JI chief as the sign of a fresh attempt by the civilians to break the long status quo maintained by the army against the civilians' right to run the country. Maulana Fazlur Rehman
Posted by:Fred

00:00