What do you reckon happens when you take the religion away from the Family of the Prophet and hand it over to darbaris?
The most blatant lie that covers page after page of history textbooks is that Pakistan was created for the promotion and propagation of religion. In fact when the Muslim League was established in Dhaka in 1906 one of the foremost principles was the creation of loyalty to the British rulers and to promote greater understanding between Muslims and the British government.
The idea of religion barely entered the discourse of the Muslim League until the elections of 1937, when the League lost elections and the Congress won decisively. It was at that time that religious nationalism was invoked vigorously to create a feeling of unity among the Muslims of Uttar Pardesh (UP), Bengal and Punjab in order to provide the League an ideational basis of support.
Pakistan was mainly created for the protection and promotion of the class interests of the landed aristocracy which formed the League. The meeting at which the League was formed was attended mainly by the landed elite which feared that if the British left India and representative government was established, the traditional power of the loyal Muslim aristocracy would erode, especially since the class composition of the Congress reflected the educated urban and rural middle classes seeking upward mobility and a share in political power.
The peasant movement in Bengal was mobilised for purely political purposes since its aims and ideology conflicted radically with those of the landed aristocracy.
(Source : dawn.com)
Another Eid picture.
I mean, except for people from central and north Punjab, is there anyone who really thinks that Pakistan is a free country? Except for some delusional Urdu-speaking mohajirs in Karachi, probably nobody else.
We should be doing matam at the birth of Pakistan.
Jinnah went to Dhaka and told the Bengalis that only Urdu will be national language of Pakistan, when he could himself hardly speak Urdu.
The fact that Islamists can use Jinnah to argue for an Islamic state as much as seculars can use him to make a case for a liberal state suggest that Jinnah never actually stood for anything.
I’ve got a
lot of good
ideas but not
will get me
August. — Eileen Myles
(Source : vscograam, via i-like-your-beard-ok)
(Source : justmakemexscream, via banksyssecretwife)
Tehran seems not to mind seeing yet another offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood take a beating. Some in Tehran thought that after the Arab uprisings of 2011, the U.S. had concluded that the Middle East’s future was in the hands of moderate Sunni Islamist national movements — Hamas’s intellectual brethren. For a moment, it seemed that Islamist parties were ready to sweep elections throughout the region. Washington wanted to be on the right side of history.
But to Iran, the United States was tilting towards the wrong Islamic movement. Once in power, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt showed stronger allegiance to its ideological partners in Syria — fighting Tehran’s ally Assad — and spent more time flirting with Saudi Arabia than with Iran. Moreover, Tehran’s suspicion of Washington’s favorable view of the Muslim Brotherhood also fit with another idea it believes America has flirted with: that Turkey’s Islamist democracy, led by the Muslim Brotherhood’s political ally Recep Tayyip Erdogan, presents the best model for the region.
For some in Tehran, the current Gaza war —and Arab states’ reactions to it — show Washington was wrong to side with the Muslim Brotherhood and its allies. These Sunni Islamist groups lack the popular support to win the political fight for the region’s future. And most importantly, Tehran believes that these Sunni movements cannot compete with Iran’s ability to stabilize and lead the region. Nor do they have the popular backing to balance Iran’s regional or ideological influence.
Whether Tehran’s perceptions of American calculations are correct or not is, for now, irrelevant. The Iranian government has once again demonstrated — this time through silence rather than venomous rhetoric — that to the Islamic Republic, the Palestinian cause is a means, not an end.
(Source : foreignpolicy.com)
There is another type of election rigging that Imran Khan never talks about. Namely, the rigging that got him into power in KPK. Imran Khan owes his victory there to the Taliban, who relentlessly targeted the ANP for its anti-Taliban stance. Imran got a free pass in KPK because he did not have any competition there, thanks to his Taliban buddies.