Portuguese loanwords in Urdu

By Rauf Parekh

Language is a strange phenomenon. It can influence history, politics and culture. The Hindi-Urdu controversy can be cited as the proof of this assertion. Conversely, language itself is influenced by history, politics and culture. The influx and assimilation of English words into Urdu after the political rise of the British in the Indo-Pakistan subcontinent is an example of it.

But before the arrival of the British, the Portuguese had appeared at Calicut with Vasco da Gama discovering the sea route to India in 1498. In fact, Portugal had begun its colonial expansion in the early fifteenth century and had taken over vast areas in West Africa and South America. Goa and some other areas in southern and western India, too, came under its control. With their ascendance, the Portuguese language also gained prominence and it began exerting its power to influence other languages. Today it is the national language of both Portugal and Brazil.

The influence of the Portuguese language on Urdu, Gujarati and Konkani, a dialect of Urdu spoken in southern India and around Mumbai, is reminiscent of the times when the southern and western Indian shores came under a European power that declined with the rise of the British. Moulvi Abdul Haq is perhaps the first scholar to have mentioned the words borrowed from the Portuguese language by Urdu. His article on the subject appeared in the July 1949 issue of the quarterly Urdu. A little later, Dr Muhammad Umer in his book Urdu mein dakheel eurapi alfaaz (1955) elaborated the issue. Here are a few of such words and this writer has obviously drawn heavily on the two sources mentioned above.

The mango season has just begun and when you enjoy Alfonso, a variety of mango, don’t forget that the word is a variant of Portuguese aafonsa. In some south Indian languages it is also called hapus or aapus. Another fruit favoured by many is pineapple. In Urdu we call it ananaas but the word has been borrowed from Portuguese. Pineapple is native to South and Central America and the Portuguese brought it to India with them. Just as so many other things borrowed from other cultures have done, pineapple, too, brought its name with it. Its name was nana in the native language. Spaniards called it pinas and Portuguese ananaas. A kind of orange is known as Santra or sangtra in Urdu. The fruit, brought to the subcontinent by the Portuguese, is named after Cintra — a place near Portugal’s capital Lisbon — famous for the product. Papaya, known as papeeta in Urdu, is of Caribbean origin from where it found its way into Portuguese and then into Urdu.

Almaari, an Urdu equivalent for a chest of drawers, is from Portuguese armario. To keep an almaari safe, you must lock it and secure the chaabi, or key. Kunji is another word for ‘key’ in Urdu and is still preferred by some over chaabi because chaabi sounds alien to them, since it has its origin in Portuguese chave, meaning key. In some west Indian languages such as Gujarati, even today a key is called chavi, which is closer to the origin.

Angrez, or an Englishman, a common word in Urdu, is from Portuguese ingles. An interesting derivative is angrezan and angrezni, meaning an Englishwoman. Another innovation is angreziyet or ‘Englishness’, all originating from the same Portuguese word ingles.

In Urdu, aya means a nanny or a female attendant on children. Its origin is from Portuguese aia, a fact verified by John T. Platts in his A dictionary of Urdu, classical Hindi and English.

The safety pin is called alpin or aalpin in Urdu and it entered the dialects of southern India and then Urdu through Portuguese word alfinete. A similar-sounding word alfin still exists in Gujarati and Konkani, giving a clue to the source. In Urdu istari is the flat-iron used to iron out wrinkles in clothes. Istari is derived from a Portuguese word estirar meaning stainless iron.

Bucket is baalti in Urdu and the origin is Portuguese balde and a similar-sounding word is still in use in some subcontinental dialects to denote ‘bucket’. A priest or chaplain is called paadri in Urdu which is simply ‘padre’ in Portuguese and English as well. Padre literally means ‘father’ but then ‘father’ too is used to address a priest. Padre reminds one of church and a church in Urdu is girja. The origin is Portuguese igreja meaning church.

Pagaar is used to denote ‘salary’ in Urdu but the earliest use was in west and south-west India, especially Gujarat and Mumbai. From there it got currency in colloquial or regional varieties of Urdu. It is from Portuguese pagar meaning ‘wage’ or ‘salary’.

The word pirach or pirich, meaning saucer in Urdu, has its origin in Portuguese pires. A barrel is pipa in Urdu and it is the same in Portuguese. Saya is ‘shade’ or ‘shadow’ in Urdu and is from Persian but there is another word saya that means ‘petticoat’ or ‘a long gown worn by women’. It is used in Urdu sometimes pejoratively to mention a western kind of attire. This ‘gown’ is in fact saia in Portuguese.

There are many other Urdu words that are of Portuguese origin, such as neelaam (auction) and toliya (towel), but fearing that you don’t have more faaltoo time I end the piece here just adding that faaltoo is extra or unnecessary or useless in Urdu. The origin is Portuguese faltu.

drraufparekh@yahoo.com

Is this Jinnah’s Pakistan?

Raza Rumi

The massacre of Ahmadis in Lahore has once again exposed the inner fissures of our society. As if treating them like second class citizens was not enough, the attacks on their private space of worship has confirmed that militant Islamism is now an embedded reality. Those who have been denying the presence of Punjabi Taliban will have to construct another web of denial and disbelief. We saw signs of that after the fateful tragedy. Instead of constituting investigation teams and ensuring that all necessary leads are collated, senior officials of the Punjab government made a direct reference to RAW, the infamous Indian intelligence agency.

That the terrorists can attack anyone and anywhere is now an established reality. The fact that they chose Lahore and a vulnerable community is a clear message. Indeed, Pakistan as a state should reconsider its goals and strategy of survival. The symbolism of the day chosen for the heinous mass murders is also significant. It was Yaum-i-Takbeer when Pakistan’s atomic prowess was proved on the global stage. Perhaps the greatest delusion of the state’s might and invincibility seems to have been blown to bits. The process of bigotry that started in the 1950s culminated in Zulfikar Bhutto’s tragic action of declaring Ahmadis as non- Muslims in 1974. The Zia years deepened this culture of intolerance. Whilst we may have secured our ‘external defence’ through the much touted nuclear deterrence, internally Pakistan and its hapless citizens are more vulnerable than ever. Fundamentalism is a cancer that has widely spread in the body politic. Yet few wish to tackle it. For the past two years, get-Zardari debates have dominated Pakistan’s public discourse punctuated by the anti-Americanism of the right. The interior minister has been portrayed by the media Taliban as a corrupt nincompoop; and blood thirst for him is evident from the news pages and TV screens. Taliban apologists cannot confront the military establishment directly but the truth is the fight against the Taliban requires political stability and a domestic consensus. The right of Ahmadis to worship and lead a normal life according to the Constitution of Pakistan has been violated. What should a community do when the state and non-state actors are all geared to hound them? Is this Jinnah’s Pakistan? No.

We have gone too far and pessimists are now saying that the process of destroying Pakistani society is irreversible. There is still hope that we shall overcome this menace if Pakistani public opinion is fashioned to look a little deeper inside and not find all sources of evil in Washington or Delhi. The electronic media has a critical role to play but lack of self-regulation and introspection is missing. If anything, we find more and more analysts and commentators siding with the militants. Pakistan’s fight against terrorism has entered a new, decisive phase. If the political forces are not going to unite against this menace then they should learn a lesson or two from history. The secular and moderate political parties will be the obvious victims of this menace. Similarly, Pakistan’s military establishment needs to revise its paradigm of national security. If the offshoots of Taliban and al Qaeda are going to destroy Pakistani society and further incapacitate the state then what good are nuclear weapons and state-of the- art equipment? Clearly, there is a need for concerted action now. Political mobilisation against terrorism, involvement of moderate religious leaders and media campaigns must precede further military action in the north. We cannot let Taliban sympathisers run media campaigns and interfere in state operations.

Most importantly, the governments at the federal and national level need to acknowledge that the state and its civilian institutions have lost their core capacities due to decades of misgovernance. Police reform and reorganisation of intelligence agencies is perhaps most vital at this juncture.

The battle for Pakistan’s survival cannot be lost. This is the only country we have.

Published in the Express Tribune May 30th, 2010.

Terrorism, Shameless Religious Bigotry and Pakistani Mindset

Raza Habib Raja

As I write these sentences, the details of the most shameful attack on the religious sites of Ahmedis in Lahore are unfolding. However, this is not new as Pakistan has been the victim of this brazen behavior repeatedly. The thirty years of state sponsored “true” Islam is showing its colors. In Pakistan all the minorities are constantly harassed and state’s protection has often proved completely ineffective when a serious attack occurs. Although the counterargument can also be made that state is not also able to protect even when Muslims are attacked.

In case of Ahmedis it is a well known fact that they have been victims of state induced discrimination also apart from being openly hated by the public. In fact even today as this most in human barbarity was unfolding I had the opportunity to actually hear people in my office saying that though terrorism is bad Ahmedis deserved it. Muslims are an extremely intolerant group and yet extremely sensitive when it comes to their own religious sensitivities. And when such minorities are under attack the state protection has often been particularly inadequate and public condemnation virtually absent. After all we all remember Gojra where the government was completely unable to provide protection to the Christians when attackers attacked their houses and literally burnt people alive. In that incidence, there was no “sudden’ attack but mob actually first assembled after being provoked by the religious clergy and then systematically executed the attack. But even much more horrific was the aftermath where instead of widespread condemnation, the public response was apologetic. That incidence was not a political failure alone. It was national shame and depicted weakness at every level of our society’s moral fabric.

What is really dangerous is the complete inability of the media as well as general public to even effectively condemn, let alone stop, horrific acts like religious violence and even general terrorism. The aftermaths of every shameless incidence of hate filled religious bigotry as well as terrorism follows more or less similar pattern. A few sporadic and weak protests are raised while the majority either calls it a grand conspiracy of the West to defame Islam or gives even more hypocritical apologetic defense. Ours is a shallow society which is ready to get enraged over cartoons and Facebook but completely impotent when something far more sinister happens. Killing of so many innocent people should draw far more condemnation and yet all we do is to knit conspiracy theories. In fact our intellectual abilities are generally geared towards knitting conspiracy theories and providing apologetic defense to monsters like Taliban.

In my opinion the failure to condemn and criticize is even more horrifying than the actual tragedy because this insensitivity provides the conducive environment for future sustenance of this hate filled behavior. Our society features rabble rousers and bigots like Zaid Hamids and Dr. Amir Liaqat as the media stars who are actually patronized by mainstream media and promoted by the corporate sector through advertisements. Such characters have openly incited hatred against the Ahmedi community and have also given apologetic defense to terrorism. In civilized countries such people are hated and in our side these are actually adulated. It is this shameless insensitivity, not the grand conspiracies of the West, which breeds terrorism and religious bigotry.

There will be people who would say that in Pakistan even the Muslims are target of terrorism and so therefore this time reference to religious bigotry should not be made. After all, the incident is likely to have been carried out by Pakistani Taliban who have also conducted suicide attacks in the Sunni majority areas. MY RESPONSE WOULD BE THAT WE ARE NOT EVEN ABLE TO CONDEMN THESE MONSTERS WHEN THEY ATTACK US. Therefore to expect that our public will condemn when they attack minorities is actually expecting too much and in fact I know that when it comes to minorities like Ahmedis and Shias, actually such incidences are not even construed as something wrong. Due to hatred against the minorities such incidence would actually find little to no condemnation.

And even when such attacks are conducted against the general public they are conveniently blamed on the grand conspiracy of USA. THE CENTRAL ISSUE IS OF OUR MINDSET WHICH IS DELUSIONAL AND HAS BEEN NURTURED THROUGH ISLAMIC MYTHOLOGY ACCORDING TO WHICH MUSLIMS ARE SUPERIOR IN CALIBRE AS WELL AS VIRTUE AND THEREFORE CANNOT INDULGE IN ANYTHING SINISTER LIKE TERRORISM. In Pakistan, this pattern of thinking is also supplemented by a strong dose of ultra nationalism which assumes Pakistan with its nuclear arsenal to be spearheading the revival of the lost glory of Islam. Primarily this mindset is outward looking and assumes that due to Pakistan’s “supreme” importance in the above context, all the non Muslim forces are jealous and therefore trying to create a conducive environment to purge our nuclear arsenal through planting extremism. According to this delusional mindset, the key conspirator is USA which due to its Jewish appeasement and own insecurities against resurgence of glorious Islam is trying to destabilize Pakistan to find an excuse to purge its nuclear arsenal. INHERENTLY RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY IS ALSO STRONGLY IMBEDDED IN THIS MINDSET BECAUSE OF ASSUMED SUPERIORITY OF “PURE” MUSLIMS AND DEEP SUSPICION OF NON MUSLIMS. Consequently even those sects such as Ahmedis who identify themselves as Muslims are often called agents planted by the British and later on USA to wreck havoc in the Islamic world’s “unity”. Hatred against non Muslims and conspiracy theories become the main paradigm through which we see the world.

This mindset has become particularly vigorous after 9/11. Throughout the post 9/11 period, I have just listened to non sense conspiracy theories and complete irrational apologetic defense. Everything is generally blamed on USA and in this process we end up strengthening dark nihilist forces of terrorism and religious extremism. In fact I remember when these monsters attacked Islamic International University, after two day students were protesting not against Taliban but against Kerry Luger bill!

In near past, just because USA was forcing us to take a timely action against the militants, we were all against it because in our heads it was against us and our “own” people. Those delays eventually enabled the militants to have a complete foothold in places like Swat. When news regarding the Taliban atrocities started to emerge, we refused to believe them because some of the western channels were also airing them. As late as 2009, when flogging video went on air, instead of being appalled, the entire media thrust was on proving that it was a fake. It had to be propaganda against Islam and us. The Nazam-e Adl deal was virtually endorsed by our media and a large section of sensation loving romantic nationalist urban middleclass. And when ANP successfully maneuvered the situation to expose that militants were indeed animals, almost overnight they became bad Taliban who had been created by USA. We conveniently overlooked the fact that in fact USA had been pressurizing us to take action earlier and only a few days before we were reacting violently to opposition to Nazam-e-Adl by calling it interference in our internal affairs. And not surprisingly when reality dawned about Taliban by virtue of a live speech of Sufi Muhammad, we were quick to point out to the possibility of emergence of “Bad” Taliban. In this parallel universe every fact had to be spun to be consistent with the original premise.

Our irrational and hypocritical hatred of the West which is characterized by chanting slogans against them while begging for their visas and foreign aid has now reached such gigantic proportions that even when clearer evidence is presented in front of our eyes about what creed of people Taliban are, we are completely unable to condemn them. Instead we are either calling barbarism a reaction or trying to bifurcate them into good and bad Taliban. A “strategic” asset, created by our own armed forces and defended to madness by our own media, is now believed to be partially bought over by USA. USA the devil becomes our sole point and in that hatred we completely overlook where we are heading. As blood litters our streets, rather than collectively denouncing the ideology of hate and barbarism, our sole reaction is pointing to the same premise in one way or the other. This sole reaction shows the depleted soul of the nation.

We are ready to hold rallies when a few are killed due to a drone attack but speechless when literally hundreds are killed by the Taliban monsters. Rather than trying to fight the miserable creed of monsters we are coming up with new spins of national sovereignty, reaction to US policies, nuclear arsenal, grand conspiracy of US and God knows what else. Consequently, it is becoming exceptionally difficult for the government to muster the political will to sustain this fight which is no longer physical. The hatred is misplaced, the enemy is within, but we are totally oblivious to it and in the process strengthening the forces of extremism through appeasement, apologetic defense or outright denial

Right now it has to be understood that despite differences, at least in one critical aspect, USA’s and our interests are common: we face a common enemy. And yet just because they are saying it, we are opposing it and in the process treading on a self destructive path. Our every new interpretation is contradictory to the previous one, but it does not matter; because irrational instincts are driving our introspection. It stretches beyond that. Anyone who opposes Taliban vehemently and does not buy these wild theories is labeled as an unpatriotic, liberal elitist or someone who is a sellout.

The effects of this mindset, if unchecked, will go beyond the current battle against Taliban. As the anti US rhetoric is whipped into frenzy and becomes a popular rallying point, the politics will no longer be an art of identifying core issues and striving to address them but merely expanding the borders of this parallel universe

Blowback In Lahore

By Omar Ali

http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?265617

Terrorists (Punjabi Taliban) simultaneously attacked two Ahmedi sect mosques in Lahore during Friday prayers and killed over 80 people. First thoughts on this evil attack: The choice of target is easy to understand. Ahmedis are a persecuted and vilified minority in Pakistan and “mainstream” news organizations feel no compunction about attacking them, so the ground is already prepared. e.g. GEO TV’s religion presenter (and phoney doctor) Amir Liaqat Hussain, a former minister, encouraged people to kill them if they “overstepped their bounds” and an Ahmedi doctor was promptly killed; there was some fuss in the liberal press but his programme aalim-Online is still on TV and writes a particularly vicious column in a major newspaper.

Of course, the day is also significant. May 28 is the anniversary of Pakistan’s nuclear explosion and is a national day of jingoism, so the jihadis probably regarded it as appropriate for such an action.

Media playing in the hands of Mullas – Ahmedi Massacre

Consider this scenario: officially more than 100 people were killed in attacks on Ahmedi mosques in Lahore on Friday, May 28, 2010. Unofficially, Ahmedis say that more than 150 are dead. The media very quickly started calling the mosques as “place of worship” for they fear that the wrath of mullas would be on them. Suddenly the Aalmi Majlis-e-Tahffuz-e-Khatam-e-Nabuwat springs into action and demands “removal of Qadiyanis from ‘key’ posts immediately”. the meeting was reported prominently in Monday’s Jang and can be accessed here:

http://ejang.jang.com.pk/5-31-2010/images/1415.gif.

The meeting is held in Sargodha of all places and chaired by none other than Senator Sajid Mir who is elected on a PML-N ticket.

The meeting demands removal of Qadiyanis from all important positions and says that “masajid say mushabiha Qadyani Ibadatgahon kay naqshay tabdeel karaye jayen”. This is absolutely absurd by the mullas and is tantamount to spreading hatred at a time when the Ahmedis have been attacked in broad daylight. I have a very basic question to the mullas. Are they in key positions because they are Ahmedis or are they there because of their education and merit? I wish our mullas were educated enough to get to key positions in the country.

PML-N’s role is also not clear at this point in time. Sajid Mir is an important Senator, PML-N is ruling Punjab and the incident happened in Lahore only. I believe one of the attacked locations is close to Nawaz Sharif’s Model Town residence. Some sense has to prevail right now and PML-N has to play a positive role right now.

As far as the media is concerned, be a little considerate. We have lost more than 100 good Pakistanis. Please do not rub salt on someone’s wounds. Jang group’s key journalist, Hamid Mir has already been tainted by his comments against the Ahmedis. Some discretion is warranted from the media going forward.

Lashkar-i-Jhangvi / Sipah-e-Sahaba’s connection traced to Ahmadi massacre in Lahore

In Picture: Rana Sanullah, PML-N’s Law Minister (Punjab Government) with the head of Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan in an election rally

Lashkar-i-Jhangvi connection traced to Lahore attacks

By Abdul Manan
May 31, 2010

LAHORE: One of main suspects in the attacks on the Ahmadiyya community, Abdullah, has close ties with the banned organisation Lashkar-i-Jhangvi (an offshoot of Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan) and has been associated with the Fidaeen of Malik Ishaq, one of the founders of Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, people close to the accused told The Express Tribune on Sunday.

Abdullah and an accomplice were captured when they attacked the Ahmadi place of worship on May 28 in Model Town, Lahore. Abdullah is reported to have told the police about his origins and his father’s name during preliminary interrogations.

According to a police report which was published on May 29, Abdullah was a resident of Saja village of Tehsil Khanpur, district Rahimyar Khan, and his caste is Chachar. His family, the police said, moved from Rahimyar Khan to Karachi about a decade ago.

Abdullah’s relatives, who requested anonymity, told The Express Tribune that the local police were continuously conducting raids in the area and that they had refused to reveal they were related to the accused.

One relative said that during the 1990s, Ishaq had visited the area and stayed with Abdullah’s family. He said Abdullah’s family had helped Ishaq in collecting wheat, funds and sacrificial hides from the area for Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan, an outfit which was not banned at the time.

The relative said that after Ishaq’s arrest in 1997, Abdullah’s family migrated to Karachi. He also said that Abdullah preached and recruited many others for jihad in Sahja Town.

Sahja Police SHO Inspector Amanullah Warraich told The Express Tribune that he and various teams of law enforcement agencies in the area are trying to locate Abdullah’s father and his family, but have yet not succeeded.

The head of the Chachar family, Sardar Sadiq Chachar, told The Express Tribune that around a thousand members of the family lived in Mouza Jangi of Sahja Town, and none of them were members of Abdullah’s family.

He said that majority of Chachars migrated to Karachi where they attended madrasahs and started preaching around the country.

Raees Haji Ehsan, a relative of Abdullah’s family, said that Abdullah’s father migrated from Sahja to Karachi a decade ago. He also admitted meeting Abdullah in Rahimyar Khan in December last year, where he was living with members of the banned Sipah-i-Sahaba and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi.

A close friend of Ishaq and former office bearer of Lashkar-i-Jhangvi, who requested anonymity, told The Express Tribune that there are still 2,500 trained Fidaeens of Malik Ishaq currently in Rahimyar Khan. He said that Abdullah was trapped by one of these men and was sent to the tribal areas for training.

He also said that Ishaq’s trained fidaeens have changed their strategy of violence due to lack of leadership, and have divided Rahimyar Khan into different zones where they recruit people.

DPO Rahimyar Khan Babar Sarfraz, however, denied the existence of fidaeen in the city and said that it was a peaceful place. According to him, religious harmony prevails in the district and reiterated that Abdullah’s family had migrated from the city.

Published in the Express Tribune, May 31st, 2010.

Update: May 31

One more arrest

Law enforcement agencies arrested a suspect named Hazrat, who they say is a key figure in connection with the Lahore attack.

Law enforcement personnel recieved a tip off from arrested suspect Abdullah during interrogation. He told them that the Ferozwala resident provided logistic support. Officials said this is an important arrest and will help them make further arrests.

Two other suspects from Raiwind and one from Mazang were also held.

Source: Express Tribune

If I am missing......

by Saeeda Diep


Friends, comrades
This is to bring into your notice my constant harassment by the intelligence personnel; if i am missing you might have an idea. Here is the letter i have sent to a higher official.

May 19, 2010

To,

A.I.G Police Special Branch , Mrs Helena Iqbal Saeed

Subject: Harassment by personnel of different intelligence agencies

Respected sir,

I am a citizen of Lahore a social and peace activist, founder of Institute for Peace and Secular Studies. As such I have been involved in numerous social and right based activities for the last fifteen years. My activities involve peace initiative with our neighbors particularly India and additionally involved in campaign against various injustices prevalent in our society regarding minorities, women, poor and the underprivileged. For reasons that I can not fathom these lawful activities have led to my constant harassment by the intelligence agencies of the country.

Following my protests against the horrors of Shantinagar massacre in 1999, my visits to India as part of people to people peace initiatives and visits of some Indian delegates to my home, I have been constantly harassed by various intelligence agencies.

I have been taken to various police station , forcibly picked up from the Lahore Press Club by the intelligence personnel to be later dropped outside their office near the Lahore Zoo, constantly threatened on the phone through “private caller ID” and harassed through regular visits to my home. Additionally my mobile phone and contact diary have been stolen. What is more depressing is that these agencies always ask the same questions’ who is you husband and provide us the detail of your family? ’Why are you interested in peace with India since India is our enemy’, ‘What is the source of your funding?’

I am a law abiding citizen of Pakistan with no links to any religious organization or a political party, and I work for the benefit of the people of my land within my constitutional rights and nothing to hide from anyone. If intelligence agencies have an issue with what I do, I appeal to you to kindly instruct all security agencies to carry out formal investigation where I should be permitted to answer all allegations, suspicions and question. This is my basic right and i request you to ensure it should not be denied.

Over the last few weeks I have found intelligence personnel stationed outside my house they have often sought entry into my house which I have not allowed without demanding the proof of their identity. Three officials have shown me their identity cards purportedly issued by the ISI, IB and the special branch. Sadly their manner of interrogation has always been impolite, menacing and threatening.

I urge you to please examine the following possibilities
• Are these officials harassing me under instructions from their seniors, or
• Is it possible that the higher authorities have nothing to do with the harassment of a woman who is a peace and human right activist and these officials are acting at their own .

In view of the above I appeal to you to look into my complaint and order these personal to refrain, from interfering with my right, and harassment, those found guilty for transgressing their powers and acting outside the law should be suitably punished under the law.
I should like to make it clear that if the intelligence personnel do not stop festering me I shall have no option but to take this grave personal issue to the superior courts.

Please note Since I have been harassed to the extent that I have begun to fear not only for my personal life, but the life of my children as well .I have deposited copies of my petition with my lawyer and human rights organizations so that they may take appropriate action in case something untoward happens.

Hope my submission will receive your sympathetic and immediate attention.

Sincerely,

Saeeda diep
91-G Johar Town Lahore
0300-844-5072

CC:President of pakistan
Prime Minster of Pakistan
Chief Minster of Punjab
Governor Punjab
D.G ISI
D.G IB
D.G FIA
D.G MI

Attacks in Lahore: Wajib-ul-qatal!!

by Saad Mansoor

95 people killed and hundreds wounded but what I failed to understand was that what was the fuss about? My family and friends were truly horrified, in fact saddened, disgusted and many other things, but I remain confused, why?! Were not those who died Ahmedis? Correction; Qadiyanis? Were those not Ahmedi Mosques? Correction: Qadiyani places of worship? Didn't the maulvi sahab say these people were wajib-ul-qatl?


Not long ago I was in a debate with someone at my workplace who advocated how and why ahmedis are wajib-ul-qatl i.e. those whom a Muslim is duty bound to kill. The fact that the term was never present in the days of Prophet Muhammad pbuh or the four succeeding righteous caliphs aside, the term is accepted by almost all the clerics of Pakistan who rely on jurisprudence of the clergy of medieval age of Islam when religion was abundantly used to crush any dissenting voices against the Ummayad, Abbasid and Ottoman caliphs.

The point?! Point of the matter is that all these clerics like Mufti Muneeb and religo-political leaders like Munawar Hasan, Fazal-ur-Rahman and others firmly believe that Ahmedis should be killed. They are not alone, they are joined in the fray by almost the entire educated middle class of Pakistan who firmly believed until a year back that Taliban are good and their version of shariat will prevail, as Islam will emerge victorious over the West.

They also believe that, tazeers that is man made punishments like killing the apostates and the blasphemer, flogging the alcoholics and the unveiled and stoning the adulterer are necessities without which our faith would be incomplete.

They believe that Taliban are on the right path, in fact many women among this 'educated' middle class of ours firmly believe that Taliban's prohibition of female education was entirely justified. Obviously a major chunk of these women remain in denial and would have us believe that it was all media propaganda and not Taliban but Indian agents destroyed these schools in disguise.

The media, staffed by this exact middle class, sympathizes with Taliban. It is the same media who was madly criticizing the government when it was reluctant in signing the Swat Nizam-e-Adal pact and when it was conducting an operation. But today it was a new low altogether, the shameless display of yellow journalism in their relentless effort to link this event with India, the US and Israel was unbelievable.

Today every deobandi, salafi, ahl-e-hadis and ahl-e-tashee madrassa in Pakistan tells its pupils that Ahmedis are wajib-ul-qatal. Every imam of every mosque believes that Ahmedis are to be killed on sight. Our media refuses to call those killed 'jaan bahaq' i.e. lost their lives-the proper Urdu term but prefer to use halaak i.e. died and maaray gaye i.e. got killed for the victims of terrorism. And the biggest media group runs a television show where by the faithful are told to take matters into their own hands unhindered by any threats of suo moto notices.


So my point is, what is the fuss about? Is this not what we belief in? Did we finally realize that the mutant in the mirror is us?

The term crocodile tears is not befitting here because there are no tears, just a lot of noise about whether we should be using the words mosques and sect of Islam for the victims. A lot of complains but not a lot of condemnations, be it media, clerics, politicians or the educated workforce every eye is dry. Pakistan committed murder today!!

What’s front page news in Saudi Arabia?

It never fails to amaze me how in a country where women are only seen covered head to toe in black and get educated and work in mostly gender segregated institutes, and yet men are completely obsessed with them. The latest is a fatwa that originated in Egypt and was recently renewed by Shiekh Al Obiekan in a TV interview. He was asked if it was alright to breastfeed a grown man in order to be able to raise the segregation rule between a man and a woman and he replied with a yes! This was given major coverage in both AlWatan Newspaper and AlRiyadh Newspaper. But before I go into the details of the fatwa, some background information:

Breastfeeding is encouraged in Islam up to the age of two, after which the child has to be weaned. If a woman breastfeeds a child that is not her own, that child becomes her son by breastmilk and she and her daughters do not have to cover from him when he becomes an adult. However she has to breastfeed him before he turns two and it has to be five separate fulfilling sessions of breastfeeding. This is popular in Saudi Arabia especially among sisters because then they won’t have to worry about segregating their kids later. The cousins would be considered as “breastmilk siblings”.

It all began in May 2007 when an Egyptian Sheikh called Mohammed Atiya came out with a fatwa advising women to breastfeed their male coworkers if their job entails spending time alone together. Shiekh Atiya was quickly fired from his post at the Azhar University and the whole thing was swept under the rug. Until this week when Shiekh Al Obiekan, a royal judicial consultant at the Saudi Ministry of Justice renewed it all by replying to a question on a TV interview. He stated that in cases where a household needs an unrelated man like a driver to repeatedly visit the house, it is allowed for the woman of the household to breastfeed the stranger so he becomes a relative! The shiekh’s only condition is that the man does not drink directly from the woman’s breast but that the milk be pumped and then offered to the man in a glass. But this condition was revoked by another sheikh, Abi Ishaq Al Huwaini, who insists that the breastmilk must be sucked by the man directly from the breast!

The whole issue just shows how clueless men are. All this back and forth between sheikhs and not one bothers to ask a woman if it is logical, let alone possible to breastfeed a grown man five fulfilling breastmilk meals. As I’m writing this, I’m cringing at just the thought of it. I’m a huge advocate of breastfeeding and I’ve exclusively breastfed my three kids for at least six months each. Plus I’ve also done the “breastmilk sibling” thing for two nephews and a niece. Breastfeeding a baby is hard work and it takes a toll to be able to produce enough for a one year old, I can’t even imagine how much a thirty year old would need. Women do not produce breastmilk on demand, you have to have had a baby recently and breastfeed that baby daily or otherwise the milk will dry up within a few days. Also breastmilk is not that appetizing, it has the look and taste of skim milk, so not that many men would be able to stomach five meals of it. Moreover the thought of a huge hairy face at a woman’s breast does not evoke motherly or even brotherly feelings. It could go from the grotesque to the erotic but definitely not maternal!

Here - Drink This!

Susie of Arabia!

Warning: Please go to the bathroom to relieve yourself BEFORE reading this post. I don't want to be responsible for you wetting yourself... don't say I didn't warn you.

Just when you thought some things couldn't get any more bizarre in this part of the world than they already are, a learned Saudi cleric, Sheikh Abdul Mohsen Al-Obeikan, is doing some quick backpedaling after publicly supporting a fatwa (religious ruling) which basically says that it's okay for working women to breastfeed male co-workers, as this would be a legitimate way of getting around gender segregation in the workplace here in Saudi Arabia.

Three years ago, an Egyptian sheikh caused quite an international ruckus when he was asked in a televised interview about whether it was acceptable for an adult male to drink the milk from a lactating female co-worker in order to establish a maternal bond of sorts, thereby precluding the strict gender segregation rule in the workplace. As if the question itself wasn't bizarre enough, the fact that he answered a resounding "YES!" was enough to provoke widespread shock and disbelief, as well as plenty of head shaking and hair pulling.

According to Islam, if a nursing mother breastfeeds an infant who is not her own on five separate occasions, a legally recognized familial bond is established between the two of them, plus the nursing donor's immediate family. This means that if the child is a male, when he grows up, the gender segregation issue does not come into play - meaning that the woman and her daughters would not have to cover up around him and they can socialize together. Apparently this is done frequently in Saudi families between sisters so that gender segregation won't affect the families getting together once their children are grown, since all the cousins would then be considered "milk siblings." At the same time, it also means that these cousins would not be allowed to marry each other, as is often done within Saudi families. This also implies that there would logically be no chance of any illicit sexual relations between any of them since that would be incest.

This milking bond came into question last year when 75-year-old Syrian widow, Khamisa Mohammed Sawadi, who was living in Saudi Arabia, was arrested and sentenced to 4 months in prison and 40 lashes because two young men (one of them her "milk" son) entered her residence bearing several loaves of bread. The two young men were also arrested and sentenced to about the same punishment as the old woman. The last I read about this case was in December 2009 stating that all appeals were denied for all three and that the sentences stand. I have to admit that at 50-something, it might be hard to believe that the woman actually breastfed her husband's nephew. But why on earth would it be a crime in the first place to be kind and considerate to an elderly woman? Something is seriously wrong for this to be a crime.

Sheikh Al-Obiekan seemed to think that drinking a woman's pumped breastmilk out of a glass and not suckling directly from the woman's breast is a perfectly reasonable and acceptable way to skirt around and avoid the strict religious ban on gender mixing in this society. But in a bizarre twist to this already unbelievable story, another equally intelligent and enlightened religious scholar and voice of reason disagreed with that (don't get too excited just yet!). This other guy said that the milk should be suckled right from the woman's breast! Forget the fact that Islam also says that nursing should be done during the first two years of a child's life and mentions nothing at all about the ridiculous notion of woman nursing a grown man.

I'm just trying to imagine a prim and proper Saudi woman here covered in black from head to toe whipping out her breast - five separate times, mind you - and offering it to an unrelated man just so she can legally work with him! The whole image is just so absurd. I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. Don’t these religious scholars have more important issues to worry about than to continually fantasize about womens' breasts? And what exactly are they trying to do to Muslim women? And how is the woman's husband supposed to take all of this?

Death of Collective Wisdom

Ahmad Nadeem

“Is there a competition going on in Pakistan between institution to earn shame and notoriety for their nation?” my colleague asked me casually while we were having some drinks and watching a news television. “We are on that path for last 40years”, I answered stubbornly. Can there anything such shameful to force you behave that stubborn over your national pride? There is, hold your breath, Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists, the top body of media and custodian of ‘freedom of speech and civil liberties’, in a press release issued by its Secretary General, Mr Shamsul Islam Naz, has “officially’ appreciated the blocking of the Facebook Website.

This was followed by the Lahore High Court orders of a blanket ban on entire social media website depriving 2.5 million Pakistani’s an access to major internet services. Just because there was ‘one page’ out of millions, set by a silly American kid to make cartoons of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). The same could have been blocked instead, but things work differently in Pakistan. A decision has to be popular rather than sane, the illiterate bearded men on streets with sticks and guns ought to be satisfied.

The ‘Superior Judiciary’ is custodian of freedom of speech, right of association and guarantees to protection of person, property and business of every citizen. It has the power to declare any act of executive as unconstitutional which is violative of the Articles 17, 18 and 19 of the constitution. These article provide the guarantee against any threat to freedom of speech, freedom of association and freedom of doing lawful business.

The court also is custodian of rights guaranteed in Article 24 of the Constitution in a strict commanding language squarely prohibits the depriving of any person of his property save, in accordance with law. It provides protection against any order passed against a citizen without providing him an opportunity to be heard. Since the order of blanket ban has been passed thousands of small scale enterprises using Facebook have gone out of business without having an opportunity to explain before court that a blanket ban is against the constitutional guarantees provided in above articles. Their only fault was that ‘someone else’ did some silly thing to hurt the sentiments of others and they got punished for that ‘silly kid’.

While PFUJ appreciates the punishments of 2.5 million for someone else fault, what will be its reaction if Hindu minority demands ban over ‘cow slaughter’, will they be treated in same manner as constitution guarantees ‘equal treatment before the law’. Certainly they, as subjects of state have a right to demand that their religious beliefs are not hurt. Can PFUJ condemn India when same happens over there in future? What happens when custodian of constitutional guarantees start acting according to popular demands ignoring the document which is basis of a nation state?

As individuals, we are prone to wrong decisions, as it is a human trait. There is nothing to be shameful, but then one must be ready to pay the price. Making a wrong decision does not justify sticking to the same. That is why nations build institutions, so that collective wisdom prevails and there is little or no chance of error or egoistic behavior.

The nations which have functional institution can still progress when they have government in wrong hands or even with a flawed system. A nation where institutions are absent or lose their direction, even being governed by Chairman Mao of China, Abraham Lincoln of USA or even by the great philosopher Carl Marx would not lead them to anywhere. The worst consequence is that entire nation pays the price of blunders of institution and only time can decide for how long such price is to be paid.

This is the case of Pakistan for last 40 years. Pakistan army led by General Zia ul Haq made the blunder of hanging ZA Bhutto and putting the nation on path of radicalization. In order to keep hold of power Zia destroyed every institution of state from where he felt threatened. Political institutions were maturing and divide was ideological in these times, even with difference of opinion the politicians were able to sit on one table. The 1973 constitution is proof of that maturity. He corrupted the political workers and destroyed the political parties by using brutal force and Arab perto-dollar and patronized sectarian and ethnic-ism.

Similarly he destroyed the institution of judiciary by inducting incompetent and corrupt judges from a particular religious sects and ethnicities. Resultantly, we got notorious Molvi Mushtaq Ahmad heading the judiciary where once legends like Justice Dorab Patel were seated. The institution of media which plays the role of eyes and ears of the society was the most vibrant and independent institution in Muslim world having people like Faiz Ahmad Faiz and Habib Jalib with unimpeachable integrity. It was filled by religious fanatics and corrupt cronies.

As a result of hypocritical use of Islam and radicalization for purpose of getting ‘cannon fodder’ for American cold war in Afghanistan, Zia destructed institutions which could support tolerance. We, as a nation are paying the price of his actions. The terrorism and extremism is not only costing in blood but also economy has gone to drain adding more poor, illiterate and jobless violent youth. Still we have not learned any lesson from mistakes of past and have miserably failed to re-build the broken institutions.

Just think of the PFUJ, the top body of journalists in 1970′s and its sacrifices for freedom of speech during censor of Zia’s dictatorship. Think of judiciary where people like Justice Dorab Patel were seated. And think of a society where every body participated in Shia processions and Sunni Millad’s without a fear of suicide attack. We are paying price of mistakes of past with blood, hunger, illiteracy and terrorism. The same army which made that blunder is paying for it, with their own blood while fighting the monster created by its greedy generals of past.

The mistakes of today are much more grave and fatal.

In a global village of this century the blunders of institutions being committed in a competition mode have far grave consequences. Ajmal Kasab or Faisal Shahzad does not represent Pakistan, our institutions does! World might forgive for the acts of these individuals but the damage caused by by institutions is irreparable and will cost heavily. Hats off, to Pakistan Federal Union of Journalists for acting on popular demands rather than rationality. You have done what Faisal Shahzad could not do – a suicide attack on freedom of speech and basic rights – of which your institution is a custodian.

Had the journalists body considered of those who lost their businesses without being heard, those who were denied the right of association and those who lost a medium of communication without any fault on their part – its decision would have been different. By appreciating the ban, the journalist body has not only validated the censorship but infringement of constitutional rights of citizens and the violation of grantee that no order shall be passed without providing citizens an opportunity to be heard. No wonder the headlines in international media these days carry the names of top Pakistani journalists for their links with terrorists and enticing killings.

Morn over the death of Faiz Ahmad Faiz and Dorab Patel and learn to live with the death of institutions and collective wisdom.

A Facebook Party

This looks like a season for setting up alternative political parties in and for Pakistan. While some are struggling inside the country to revamp the existing structures or create new ones, others are trying to setup new parties outside.

In Pakistan, Maulana Fazlur Rehman of JUI-F got members of the alliance of religious parties together to revamp it in preparation for the next elections. Similarly, some people have proposed setting up a party of eunuchs in the country. They intend to field candidates in every constituency with the brief message that “we will not make any promises that we cannot fulfill. Others cannot fulfill promises either but we admit that we cannot. All we say is field honest candidates. If you cannot find any then vote for us”. A very clear and crisp message! Even more commendable is the fact that these people made an effort to pose as an alternative despite the socio-cultural bias of the society towards eunuchs. Inherent prejudice was a reason that actress Musarrat Shaheen, who was brave enough to contest elections against Maulana Fazlur Rehman, could not win from Dera Ismail Khan.
However, it is truly appreciable that the eunuchs thought of finding an alternative internally when former dictators like Pervez Musharraf are busy scouting out people in the UK and the US who could bank-roll his political movement in Pakistan. Recently, I had a chance to go to one of the events organized from the forum of ‘Pakistan First’ established and managed by the former head of the Pakistan Cricket Board, Naseem Ashraf. Although the media was asked to come to the event, it was just for a post-meeting briefing by the former dictator. The main event was a private meeting in which he hoped to rope in some of the rich professional expatriate Pakistanis with a desire to make a dent in the politics of the country of their birth. The idea behind calling the press was to show-off that the former general had sufficient support amongst the Pakistani community.
But not everyone invited to the party was a confirmed supporter. Many were there to hear what he had to offer. There were others like an entrepreneur from Philadelphia and another one from Washington state who seemed keen to invest their money in the general. They looked impressed with Musharraf’s facebook following which the former dictator touted happily just like he used to cite the figures of mobile phones and motor-cycle purchase in the Pakistan he ruled as a sign of economic progress. Little did he know that spurious consumption goes up also in non-performing economies.
Sadly, numerous rich and influential Pakistani expats believe they can parachute into the country’s politics or bankroll potential politicians and thus gain a political foothold. Although the old dictator claimed he would hold elections in the party, he claimed he would initially nominate office-bearers. Most important, he did not offer any idea or agenda to attract people to the party. Every question was answered with a ‘we will tell when the time comes’ kind of a slogan.
It looked like a political reconnoitering mission in the US. Reportedly, Musharraf did a better job of speaking then his handlers in the US like Naseem Ashraf. Not to mention the fact that Ashraf was one of the better lot. There were others who seemed to be representing the MQM. While talking to those present, these rather dubious gentlemen claimed that they lived in the US only on Musharraf’s orders. They had returned to Pakistan but returned on the former dictator’s insistence. When asked by people if he did nothing but move around on Musharraf’s beck and call, the gent insisted that he had a life and was happily married. The same gent also claimed Musharraf’s innocence in signing the NRO saying that nothing moved in Pakistan without orders from Washington.
This particular gentleman, who was part of a gang of three, represented a dubious organization called Pak-American Communication which cannot be found on the web. Someone claimed that the people might have represented the MQM. In that case, the only possibility is that there is some wedge within the MQM that Musharraf plans to benefit from. There are educated people within the ethnic party not happy being pide-pippered by Altaf Hussain.
Thus far, the former dictator does not even have a name for his political party. Perhaps, ‘The Facebook’ Party or ‘Made in the US’ might be an appropriate name.

Published in the Express Tribune, May 23rd, 2010.

Jihadi public schools? —

by Ali K Chishti

The roots of problem lies in state policy of using violance as foreign policy tool, religious seminaries were corrupted by the bulks of petro dollar coming in the days of Soviet Afghan war as they are multiplied hundred times in Zia era. Their role in this regard is restrained to propagation of the state adopted policy through the mosques…apart from this this propagation is extended to the school and college youth by none other than the qutbian venom spitters IJT and JI through their dozens of magazines of vide variety for the school kids to the university students… The chain of schools established by them with different names and slogans have given them the opportunity to sing anthems like “bharat hei hamara hadaf” and “crush India and Crush America”. Indeed they have done all this in more sophisticated way. Why the hell state has allowed this maniacs to establish their own schools and colleges with Jihadi agenda and deviated interpretations….

Slogan of Crush America

One of the misconceptions about the jihad phenomenon is regarding the role played by the madrassa in propagating the jihadi culture inside Pakistan. While there is no doubt that madrassas sponsored by certain countries in the past have played an important role in inculcating hateful vehemence among their students, they were not alone in their endeavours. The public and private schools have been equally involved in the propagation of jihad as a concept. Shifting the blame onto the madrassas alone is politically convenient for the government, as madrassas also lend themselves to an intellectually easy analysis and explanation of the phenomenon. But this analysis ignores the social, economic and political dimensions of militant Islam and the role played by the state in promoting a militant culture and mindset in the country. Moreover, the use of jihad by the state for the achievement of foreign policy goals is also glossed over by giving undue attention to the proliferation of madrassas and focusing on them as nurseries of terror. It is a fact that for every militant thrown up by a madrassa, there are dozens who never got even close to religious education. Instead, they were just plain criminals before they chose to elevate themselves to the status of jihadis. Talking of a crackdown on madrassas may make eminent sense, but it offers very little in terms of actually getting to grips with the problem. In fact, unnecessary and often misplaced emphasis on religious education is nothing more than a clever ruse to deflect attention from the real issue: the general state of education in Pakistan.

There is no doubt about how a specific religious ideology is being propagated that explicitly promotes hatred, violence and prejudice towards various sects within Islam as well as non-Muslims and how the entire public and private school curricula are designed to promote, inculcate and incite the spirit of ‘jihad’ and hatred among children as young as five. In a recent report by the UN that helps us understand the jihadi indoctrination of three generations of Pakistani students, we are told how and why cosmetic measures like teaching liberal subjects and science in madrassas will hardly make any difference to the jihadi culture that has taken root in Pakistan.

The age-old analysis that madrassas alone breed the hate and irrationality that results in international jihad is itself a distorted worldview. The educational material in most secular and so-called ‘English-medium’ schools is, at times, equally hateful. Parts of their textbooks tell lies, craft hate, and incite readers for a new world order called pan-Islamism, hence ideologically confusing the students who already suffer from a serious identity crisis. Faisal Shahzad, the failed Times Square bomber, an upper middle-class English speaker, who never even attended a madrassa, was himself a product of these English medium schools in Pakistan.

Interestingly, the theme of hatred and militancy in the curriculum can be clearly distinguished between the pre- and post-1979 educational contexts. There was no mention of these in the pre-Islamisation period curricula, while the post-1979 curricula and textbooks openly eulogise war and militancy and urge students to become mujahideen and martyrs. But the target is not only India or Hindus. The curriculum targets all non-Muslims and countries and seeks to teach a particularly virulent version of radical and militant Islam to Pakistan’s children. The most significant problems with the current curriculum and textbooks are: i) insensitivity to the religious diversity of the nation; ii) incitement to militancy and violence; iii) perspectives that encourage prejudice, bigotry and discrimination towards fellow citizens, especially women and religious minorities and other nations; and iv) the glorification of war and the use of force.

All this hatred and indoctrination should also serve as a reality check for those who delude themselves into believing that, somehow, India and Pakistan can live together in peace. This is not possible until there is a complete overhaul of the educational curriculum in Pakistan and the process of reverse indoctrination is completed. Going by what is being done to the Pakistani children — not only in madrassas but also in schools runs by the Pakistani state — the entire educational curriculum needs to be seriously monitored and altered on a war-footing.

The writer is a political analyst who can be reached at akchishti@hotmail.com

Jawed Karim

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to:navigation, search

Jawed Karim
Jawed Karim
Born	1979 Merseburg, East Germany
Ethnicity	Bengali-German
Website www.jawed.com

Jawed Karim (Bengali: জাওয়েদ করিম) (born 1979, East Germany) is a co-founder of the popular video sharing website YouTube. Many of the core components of PayPal, including its real-time anti-fraud system, were also designed and implemented by Karim.

Karim was born in Merseburg, East Germany, in 1979 and moved to West Germany in 1980. His father, Naimul Karim, is a Bangladeshi researcher at 3M. His mother, Christine Karim, is a German scientist and research associate professor of biochemistry at the University of Minnesota.^{[1] [2]}

Karim grew up in Germany, and his family moved to the United States in 1992. He graduated from Central High School and attended the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.^[3] He left campus prior to graduating to become an early employee at PayPal, but continued his coursework, earning his bachelor's degree in computer science in 2004.

While working at PayPal, he met Chad Hurley and Steve Chen. The three later founded the YouTube video sharing website in 2005.^[4] YouTube's first video^[5] was uploaded by Jawed on April 23, 2005.^[6]

After co-founding the company and developing the YouTube concept and website with Chad Hurley and Steve Chen, Karim enrolled as a graduate student in computer science at Stanford University while acting as an advisor to YouTube.^[7] When YouTube was acquired by Google, Karim received 137,443 shares of stock, worth about $64 million based on Google's closing stock price at the time.^[8]

In October 2006, Jawed gave a lecture about the history of YouTube at the University of Illinois' annual ACM Conference entitled YouTube: From Concept to Hyper-growth^[9]. The lecture material also contained pictures and videos of Jawed, Chad and Steve from the garage days of YouTube. Jawed returned again to the University of Illinois in May 2007 as the 136th and youngest Commencement Speaker in the school's history.^[10][11]

More recently, Jawed has launched a venture fund called Youniversity Ventures, with the goal of helping current and former university students to launch their business ideas.

[edit] References

1. ^ With YouTube, Student Hits Jackpot Again, The New York Times, October 12, 2006.
2. ^ Surprise! There's a third YouTube co-founder, USA Today, October 11, 2006.
3. ^ YouTube: OurGuys, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Department of Computer Science
4. ^ Video websites pop up, invite postings, USA Today, November 21, 2005
5. ^ YouTube's first video
6. ^ jawed.com
7. ^ YouTube Founders, YouTube.com
8. ^ New York Times: YouTube’s Payoff: Hundreds of Millions for the Founders, The New York Times, February 7, 2007.
9. ^ [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nssfmTo7SZg
10. ^ Welcome to Engineering at Illinois, University of Illinois
11. ^ 136th Commencement Address, University of Illinois, May 13, 2007.

[edit] External links

• Jawed Karim's Personal Website
• Jawed's YouTube Profile
• YouTube: From Concept to Hyper-growth
• Youniversity Ventures
• With YouTube, Grad Student Hits Jackpot Again - New York Times (Oct 12, 2006)
• Surprise! There's a third YouTube co-founder - USA TODAY (Oct 12, 2006)
• Whiz Kid: Jawed Karim, a graduate of St. Paul Central - Star Tribune (Oct 13, 2006)
• He went off to college to make his fortune - The News-Gazette (Oct 16, 2006)

The real Culprits

Yasser Latif Hamdani

As the second most populous Muslim nation state after Indonesia, our dilemma is no different from the confessional states of Europe that over time became the staunchest defenders of civil liberties and secularism

Rakesh Mani was kind enough to mention my article ‘Faisal Shahzad’s radicalisation’, (Daily Times, May 10, 2010) in his article ‘The University of God’ (Daily Times, May 20, 2010). While I agree with most of his observations about Islamic organisations on American university campuses, I must raise a note of dissent in so far as his treatment of Pakistan and Pakistanis is concerned.

First of all, Pakistan’s fixation with faith has nothing to do with the creation of Pakistan, which was in any event not on the basis of religious ideology. This is a moot point for most objective historians studying the creation of Pakistan. Indeed the champions of religious ideology were entirely opposed to the creation of Pakistan. Jinnah’s references to Islam — few and far between — were to reinforce the idea that a pluralistic constitutional democracy is indeed a cardinal principle of the dominant religio-cultural system to which his constituency belonged.

Mani makes an important point when he speaks of a Bengali being Bengali before he is a Muslim or a Hindu or a Punjabi being a Punjabi before he is a Muslim or a Hindu. I am sure he would be surprised — to say the least — that those were the exact words that the founding father of Pakistan used when explaining to Mountbatten why Bengal and Punjab ought to be kept united as late as mid-May in 1947. The League’s ‘Two Nation Theory’ was a counterpoise to Congress’s ‘One Nation Theory’ and not regional identities. The great irony of the partition of India is that it was the Congress that insisted on dividing Punjab and Bengal on religious lines and not the Muslim League. Indeed Mr. Jinnah endorsed Sarat Chandra Bose’s plan to keep Bengal united as late as June 3 but it was vetoed by Nehru. Unfortunately, this is one of those nuanced realities that nationalist mythologies on both sides cannot grasp or articulate.

This is not to say that through the Objectives Resolution and beyond we have not mixed the state and religion. The crowning glory of the Islamist project is the 1973 Constitution, which restricts freedom more than it protects it (precisely why actions like a blanket ban on Facebook is possible constitutionally in Pakistan). However, it is here that Mani errs again. The most fanatical Muslims are not almost exclusively Pakistani. Indeed Pakistan contributes — proportionally — a far fewer number of fundamentalists, extremists and terrorists than the Arab world for example. Roughly 16-20 percent of the terrorists in recent times planning an attack in western countries have been Pakistanis. Somalia — a much smaller country — contributes a higher number of extremists and terrorists.

On the other hand, it is no doubt a very interesting fact to put out that Indian Muslims, only a few million less than Pakistan’s total population, contribute even fewer terrorists in the West. Indian Muslims in the West come across as much more conservative and religious minded than the Pakistanis and yet hardly any terrorists have come from it. There are — in my opinion — two possible reasons for it. One, if the Muslim diaspora was ever studied, it would show that Pakistanis in the West outnumber Indian Muslims by 20 or 30 to 1. Secondly, Pakistan has inherited the legacy of the Afghan War, not India. This second point is at the heart of the issue.

The important thing that Mani should have noted is not how Pakistanis tend to be more fanatical, which is not true — after all Mani’s friend from Karachi who he mentions in his article as being a clubbing type party girl is also a Pakistani — but how every terrorist plot finds a connection to Pakistan’s northwest. The issue here is not that Pakistanis are terrorists, but Pakistan’s government has tolerated far too long militancy and terrorist organisations on its soil. And then there is a broader issue. A great majority of terrorists are not Pakistani. They are global jihadists informed and indoctrinated by the ideology of Ikhwanul Muslimeen and Hizbut Tahrir, two organisations whose roots are firmly outside of Pakistan. By focusing on Pakistan and forgetting that 15 out of the 19 hijackers on September 11 were Saudis and none of them were Pakistanis, by forgetting that the mastermind of 9/11 was an Egyptian working in an organisation led by the Egyptians and the Saudis, Mani is glossing over the real causes of Islamist terror worldwide. By singling out Pakistan and feeding a misperception about its history, the real cause, i.e. the last hurrah of revivalist Islamism, is obscured. It is the Qutbian-Maududian Islamist ideology that needs to be taken to task and the failure to recognise that will only lead to more heartbreak.

Pakistan as a constitutional democracy with a rising Muslim bourgeoisie is the greatest hope against this riding tide of Islamist revival. Democracy has always ensured that Islamists are kept out of the power equation. The great battle for the soul of Islam is being fought in our streets, our assembly halls and our courts. Pakistan is going through the pangs of rebirth and with it will come a reformation of the Islamic world itself. As the second most populous Muslim nation state after Indonesia, our dilemma is no different from the confessional states of Europe that over time became the staunchest defenders of civil liberties and secularism. Only in our case, the information age has accelerated the speed of this evolution. This also explains the knee-jerk reaction of the pillars of our state to Facebook, but that is a whole different issue.

Yasser Latif Hamdani is a lawyer based in Islamabad. He can be reached at yasser.hamdani@gmail.com

Zia's Children

By Ayesha Siddiqa

As the entire Pakistani nation watches video footage of a 17-years-old
girl screaming on their television screens during the process of her
torture at the hands of the brutal Taliban in Swat, one wonders if the
mothers, sisters, daughters and the male members of this nation will
ever take time out to think about this system of justice advocated by
these men who are not even qualified to interpret the Quran and Sunnah.

How did these men know that she had committed adultery? Or were
the men in Iran, who ran a jeep over both the arms of a young boy to
punish him for stealing sure about his economic circumstances?
Sadly, all this will be justified in certain quarters as upholding of
Sharia. But the legal system of any land is meant to do justice
which is not just the application of some legal norms, but the
application of law in conjunction with sensitivity towards the
economic, social and political conditions of a place.

The application of Sharia is extremely complex as it entails a
stringent mechanism for evidence. For instance, a witness has to
meet certain conditions. The witness has to be one: (a) who has
never been punished for any crime, (b) has always said all his
prayers in time, (c) never urinated standing up, (d) never eaten from
a market place, (e) never committed any major sin, (f) never
committed any minor sin, and
(g) never failed to carry out obligations prescribed by Quran and
Sunnah. These conditions are so stringent that according to Pakistan's
former Chief Justice Sajjad Ali Shah even he would not qualify
to be a witness.

Referring to the case of the girl flogged in Swat, the fact of the
matter is that this is one example of the dire conditions of women
in a large number of Muslim societies where there is no legal system
for this particular gender to prove their innocence. In Pakistan in
particular where the Hudood laws were formulated under the Zia
regime, the objective was not to bring justice in the society but to
throttle all forms of justice. In this respect, the Taliban in Swat and
those who ruled Afghanistan for some time are Zia'children. They
use force arbitrarily and apply laws without the real context to
enhance their own power.

For those, who think of General Ziaul Haq as an exemplary
marde momin, it would be beneficial to read Tahir Wasti's seminal
work --- Application of Islamic Criminal Law in Pakistan: Sharia
in Practice". The book published in January this year and authored
by a man, who has experience of both Islamic law and British common
law, is the first detailed research enlisting the ramifications of the
application of sharia law in Pakistan. The writer argues that Zia's
decision to impose Nizam-e-Islam on February 2 1979 was not a
sincere act. Wasti, in fact, argues that had the military dictator been
sincere he would have also invoked the law of Qisas and Diyat as
part of his Islamic regulations that mainly consisted of the five laws
pertaining to: drinking, Zina (adultery), Zakat and usher, highway
robbery, and theft. The punishment for some of these crimes is not
even prescribed in the Quran.

The reason that Zia left out Qisas and Diyat, which finally became an
ordinance in 1990 during Benazir Bhutto's government and finally
passed as a law after twenty minutes of debate in parliament
under Nawaz Sharif was because he was too eager to hang Bhutto.
Such a law would not have allowed for the approver Masood
Mehmood, which, in turn, means that Bhutto could not have
been sentenced to death.

Not surprisingly, Bhutto had filed a review petition number 5-R of
1979 on 13/02/1979 in the Supreme Court asking that his case be
tried under Sharia or Nizam-e-Islam through first invoking the law
on Qisas and Diyat. Notwithstanding the fact that while in power
Bhutto himself played to the gallery by using religion, in case of
his trial his plea to use the religious law was primarily as a legal
point that would technically stop the Zia government from sentencing
him to death. Interestingly, as Wasti points out in his book, Zia kept
returning the draft of this law until he had managed to put Bhutto
to death. The Supreme Court justices gave a split decision on the
Bhutto case arguing on page 29 of the decision of the said review
petition that under section 302 of the PPC read with section 109 of
the PPC, this was a case of unintentional murder in which there was
no room for the witness of an approver. The decision including the
said review petition by Bhutto is reported in PLD 1979 Supreme
Court 741 and the two volumes on "Bhutto's Trial Documents"
published by Justice Afzal Haider.

Zia's government also challenged other cases in which such a law
needed implementation. Unfortunately, the author states, it were
judges like Justices Tanzeel-ur-Rehman and Afzal Cheema who
helped Zia cheat the entire country by bringing about amendments
in the sharia law that suited the military dictator's interests and
allowed him not to pass the law on Qisas and Diyat as long as he was alive.

What is even sadder is that such discrepancy in Nizam-e-Islam
was never seriously challenged by any quarters. Even after the Qisas
and Diyat law came into force, first as an ordinance, and later, as
law, no one really pointed out the problem in invoking the said law.
As Wasti points out in his book, since it is difficult to find a witness,
the law of Qisas was never implemented and the government
basically uses tazeer or diyat to pass judgments. Diyat allows for
compromise in case of murder, a law which was framed not to bring
peace and justice in the society according to religious principles,
but to suit the interests of the more powerful. There are cases
after cases reported in Wasti's book in which poor and weak
people were forced to accept a compromise and forgive the
murderers of their loved ones. The law even encouraged
exchange of women as part of a settlement. Reportedly, since
the law came into force some judges showed their magnanimity
by ordering the payment of blood-money in addition to exchange
of women. Interestingly, the system was never fully challenged
by the legal community due to what senior lawyer and now
human rights activist Iqbal Haider termed, on the floor of
parliament in 1990, as greed of the legal community. This law
permits lawyers to claim their fee without putting in effort that
they would otherwise have to do to in defense of their clients.

The screams of the young Swati girl are the knock on the door of
the entire society to wake up and not allow these men and others
like them, who are at best Zia's children in terms of their sense
of legal fairness, to bring violence in this country in the name
of religion. This is not just about better treatment of women but
also a matter of justice for all and peace and tranquility in the
society. What is being presented as sharia is in reality a system
that protects the unquestioned power of those who have monopoly
over violence and resources in the society. A legal system is an
ever-evolving process that needn't mimic the past without taking
into account the circumstances. In the words of Maulana Amin
Ahsan Aslahi, religion of the past is history of the present which
can only be used as a good reference point and no more.



The writer is an Islamabad-based social scientist and author
of Military Inc. Email: ayesha.ibd@gmail.com

FacebookGate

Faraz Rana

Depictions of the Prophet (pbuh) are banned in Islam so people (presumably, Muslims) don’t idolize the images. The lawyer in me will tell you that a non-Muslim drawing a similar image, especially in jest, will not violate that rationale. Nor will Muslims ever confuse a cartoon with a serious depiction. Of course, using technical legal arguments to quell incensed religious rhetoric is about as effective as eradicating objectionable content on cyberspace by blocking it. Oh, wait.

The debate on FacebookGate and the underlying arguments on the limits of free speech will never be resolved by rational minds. So, in case you missed it, here is just a quick sampling of the conversations sprouting all over, coincidentally, Facebook.

The Facebook group was a collective effort to malign Muslims. The group was intended to be a demonstrated exercise in free speech by some bloggers, as a direct response to the decision by the producers of another TV show to curtail their creative outlet in the face of death threats. As often happens on the Internet, the ones with the most pent up vitriol for just about everything under the sun tend to have the most free time to vocalize it. The group was hijacked and the posts became offensive. What is interesting, though, is that the group was not very popular until people started pointing fingers at it. After that, it went Facebook viral and the offensive content just perpetuated itself. It is as if Muslims snatched the offensive content from the jaws of obscurity and brought it back to life for the whole world to see.

I don’t believe in free speech when it offends my religion. You are out of luck. Free speech is a concept that exists outside your belief system. It even exists outside the legal limitations imposed on it by the United States Supreme Court. It will continue to exist so long as humans are capable of free thought. What makes free speech so vexing, however, is that it becomes important to people only when it manages to offend someone. Otherwise, you call it, in legal parlance, “small talk.”

Think about what your mother told you when you were bullied as a kid. She was a playground sage and understood that fighting back only worked if the bully wasn’t twice your size. Even then, how many times were you going to fight him? It is a fact known for hundreds of playground years that bullying someone is only fun if you can get a predictable reaction out of the bullied. Ignore them, she would lecture, and the bully has no raison d’etre.

They don’t make fun of other religions. Everyone is against the Muslims. Two words: Family Guy. If you are not a fan of the American cartoon show, the “I dream of Jesus” episode is a particularly funny episode. It is available on Youtube. The irony is free, as well. Find mocking Christianity to be too 8th century? Spend some time on the Internet, and you will find a website dedicating to ridiculing virtually every race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, belief and preference known to man. There are even Facebook groups dedicated to hating women. Yes, the entire gender.

We need to fight back when people attack our religion. We are soon going to run out of people to fight. Muslims are not winning any popularity contests (Miss USA Pageants, a different story), which means finding a more effective way to vocalize our presence. The history of Islam is filled with parables about how being a good Muslim is an effective way to fight ignorance. Perhaps highlighting our meaningful contributions to society, rather than staging protest after protest, might be a better way to spend our free time.

Boycotting Facebook will show them our collective strength. Not even close. We created Facebook groups about how we were going to quit Facebook. We could not help but make use of the powerful and innovative forum Facebook has created for people to communicate and launched our own protest groups on Facebook. Mark Zuckerberg was just sitting back and smiling that everyone showed up to play in his own backyard. When a Muslim creates an innovative way to communicate on the Internet, perhaps a kitab-e-shaqsiat for you Urdu speakers, we can then perhaps think about dictating the rules of the game.

Well, I’m just bored and need to fight for something. Great! Last time I checked, Muslims were going through an existential crisis, marred at the very least by poverty, illiteracy and the inability of all of us to agree on anything remotely relevant. Islam is a beautiful religion. Lets spend our free time practicing it, helping others follow it and helping the poor. When we have overcome our collective troubles and fed and empowered even the weakest amongst us, we can shift our attention to figuring out how to celebrate Eid on the same day.

As an appointed bureaucrat, supreme court justice or elected official of a country with a majority Muslim population, it is our duty to dictate what is morally acceptable to our population. Shame on you, the government of Pakistan. Once the dust settles, you deserve the greatest blame for turning a farce into an international incident. It is your job to transcend the knee-jerk sways of your people and implement the functions of a government, much like how every other government acts in the face of impassioned protests. Never mind that you once again managed to associate our country’s great name with a message so myopic that it was barely comprehensible to the outside world. Lets not even bother to romanticize the message of a nation’s founder who, in his inaugural address, promised that the state would not interfere in the religious affairs of its citizens, much less dictate to a nation of 170 million what they should consider “sacrilegious.” All of this pales in comparison to the amazingly swift manner in which you acted. You may have noticed our country has had some problems as of late. If you could only use the same efficiency to value and save human lives, we might not care so much about your moral inclinations.

On the bright side, when it is time to eradicate corruption from the halls of our government, we do know how to get your attention.
I am a spiritual leader or Imam and I found the views on Facebook to be offensive so I instigated a protest in my neighborhood. What in the world were you doing on Facebook in the first place?

Faraz Rana, a lawyer based in New York

The author can be reached at Farazarana@gmail.com