11-17-2007, 04:55 PM
Dears,
Your words canot help to create sense for the things which were, are and will be insensible, inhuman and against the peace.
If what I concluded about Amir's words regarding BAROOD and BLOOD etc lead to some misunderstanding about what he wants to say, I would regrettfully state that these words in continuety of the relevant para of his post are still not understandable as carrying some different meaning than what I understood. He said
"they (MMA) also produced their DRAMA of "HISBA BILL" just to make people fool, otherwise "ISLAMISATION/TALIBANISATION" requires no "HISBA BILL" what it requires only "BLOOD" and "BAROOD" and i can confirm their are very few who can afford to loss their lives..."
It appears from this statement that he used the words that Islamization/Talibanization requires nothing except BLOOD AND BAROOD. Now I dont know how to deduce a meaning that this BLOOD and BAROOD is what Islamization/Talibanization is facing from opponents (and not requires for flourishing). I am concentrating on words and not what was in mind when Amir wrote it. There could be some problem in understanding of english.
Further, I know rigids cannot be brought to humanity and logic.
I dont oppose what we are doing at Kashmeer since ages, it could be our political requirement and a cause to stregthen our country's existence and a reason to make the indians busy at their home so as to avoid other issues like water storage and political unrest created by indians. I can understand these political and regional strategies and I already said that these are not totally undue.
However, in my view it is wrong that we give these things a name of Jehad as our (sinful) political leaders and matlab parast MMA like religious leaders have been doing since ages. The same were in power when this so-called name of Jehad was on peak and same are in power when it is being called as Terrorism. Only Musharraf cannot do all the things. Why the others so-called faithful are associating him like son of so-called "REHMATUALLAH" General Zia, son of FATEH JEHAD-e-AFGHANISTAN Hamayun Akhter, like Qazi, like MMA, like FAZAL-ur-REHMAN and all others like chaudries and sheikh Rasheed etc who were at some point of time in history calling it Jehad. Can only one MUSHARRAF do all the things if whole of this leadership go against him. If whole of army go against him. Can he do. What the guys are talking about here. USA can only have one option, i.e. to attack muslims if we dont agree to its requirements. Can USA attack whole of the world (muslims) if we get united. I wonder about logics created to satisfy own feelings by declaring some one AMRECAN GHULAM etc who tries to bell the cat. Your substantial political religious leaders are USA ghulams indirectly to whom ur minds dont accept.
Yes, I know for an individual the things done by him have to be dependent on his intention as faith depends upon intentions. Still, grossly wrong things done by good intentions do not lead to good results on national level whatever the intentions are.
As suggested by some "VERY CONSENTING" fellows of the forum it would be better if we dont go far in this discussion as it will never bring results.
Yes, Amir,
I agree to you in so far that
"JIS KI QISMAT MAY ALLAH HI NAY HIDAYAT NAHI LIKHI US KO KOI BHI NAHI SAMJHA SAKTA..."
Becoz you may sitting on left side of God when he wrote in my fate to remain BAY HIDAYAT. And Becoz you may be someone providing consultancy to God. (NAOOZBILLAH). As ur statement reflects.
Regards,
Kamran.
Your words canot help to create sense for the things which were, are and will be insensible, inhuman and against the peace.
If what I concluded about Amir's words regarding BAROOD and BLOOD etc lead to some misunderstanding about what he wants to say, I would regrettfully state that these words in continuety of the relevant para of his post are still not understandable as carrying some different meaning than what I understood. He said
"they (MMA) also produced their DRAMA of "HISBA BILL" just to make people fool, otherwise "ISLAMISATION/TALIBANISATION" requires no "HISBA BILL" what it requires only "BLOOD" and "BAROOD" and i can confirm their are very few who can afford to loss their lives..."
It appears from this statement that he used the words that Islamization/Talibanization requires nothing except BLOOD AND BAROOD. Now I dont know how to deduce a meaning that this BLOOD and BAROOD is what Islamization/Talibanization is facing from opponents (and not requires for flourishing). I am concentrating on words and not what was in mind when Amir wrote it. There could be some problem in understanding of english.
Further, I know rigids cannot be brought to humanity and logic.
I dont oppose what we are doing at Kashmeer since ages, it could be our political requirement and a cause to stregthen our country's existence and a reason to make the indians busy at their home so as to avoid other issues like water storage and political unrest created by indians. I can understand these political and regional strategies and I already said that these are not totally undue.
However, in my view it is wrong that we give these things a name of Jehad as our (sinful) political leaders and matlab parast MMA like religious leaders have been doing since ages. The same were in power when this so-called name of Jehad was on peak and same are in power when it is being called as Terrorism. Only Musharraf cannot do all the things. Why the others so-called faithful are associating him like son of so-called "REHMATUALLAH" General Zia, son of FATEH JEHAD-e-AFGHANISTAN Hamayun Akhter, like Qazi, like MMA, like FAZAL-ur-REHMAN and all others like chaudries and sheikh Rasheed etc who were at some point of time in history calling it Jehad. Can only one MUSHARRAF do all the things if whole of this leadership go against him. If whole of army go against him. Can he do. What the guys are talking about here. USA can only have one option, i.e. to attack muslims if we dont agree to its requirements. Can USA attack whole of the world (muslims) if we get united. I wonder about logics created to satisfy own feelings by declaring some one AMRECAN GHULAM etc who tries to bell the cat. Your substantial political religious leaders are USA ghulams indirectly to whom ur minds dont accept.
Yes, I know for an individual the things done by him have to be dependent on his intention as faith depends upon intentions. Still, grossly wrong things done by good intentions do not lead to good results on national level whatever the intentions are.
As suggested by some "VERY CONSENTING" fellows of the forum it would be better if we dont go far in this discussion as it will never bring results.
Yes, Amir,
I agree to you in so far that
"JIS KI QISMAT MAY ALLAH HI NAY HIDAYAT NAHI LIKHI US KO KOI BHI NAHI SAMJHA SAKTA..."
Becoz you may sitting on left side of God when he wrote in my fate to remain BAY HIDAYAT. And Becoz you may be someone providing consultancy to God. (NAOOZBILLAH). As ur statement reflects.
Regards,
Kamran.