Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
ShahLatif

What makes a patriot, and what makes a traitor?

Recommended Posts

I have recently seen a lot of heated debates that eventually boil down to mudslinging and name-calling, the most common being a 'traitor'.

The question is: what is patriotism from an ISLAMIC perspective???

What does islam and shii school of thought say about loyalty to a NATION-STATE?

For instance, imagine if Pakistan and india go to war over some dispute. As shias, are we supposed to obey our Marja's recommendations or to Mushy or Manmohan's?

Do nation-states override Ummah? Remember a nation-state is defined by a constitution that may or may not be islamic.

If loyalty to a nation-state is a reigious duty, then should the American-born muslims stand by America's imperial adventurs carried out in the name of 'national-security'???

In the end I will quote Iqbal:

In taaza khudaaon main bara sub say WATAN hay

Jo parahan uska hay wo mazhab ka KAFAN hay

In other words, watan-parasti is the antithesis of religion, according to Iqbal.

Edited by ShahLatif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.

Edward Abbey

I always try to make that distinction (and I fail occasionally, I am only human). Many here are convinced that I hate Pakistanis as a people and Pakistan as a country. But those who care to actually read my posts know that I don't hate the Pakistani people, but its regime , particularly the policies and actions of the said regime (and its die hard knee-jerk apologists).

Edited by Satyam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.

Edward Abbey

I always try to make that distinction (and I fail occasionally, I am only human). Many here are convinced that I hate Pakistanis as a people and Pakistan as a country. But those who care to actually read my posts know that I don't hate the Pakistani people, but its regime , particularly the policies and actions of the said regime (and its die hard knee-jerk apologists).

Nice quote indeed. However, don't you think it borders on anarchism? After all, any modern government would play politics to safeguard its own interests and prolong its stay in power. By what standard you judge a government's actions to be altruistic? Plus can we trust an individual (the patriot in this quote) to decide what constitutes anti-state activities of a government and then start acting according to his own conscience? (remember Bush has been using this argument a lot saying : let history decide if my actions viz iraq were justified)..

Edited by ShahLatif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hubbul watni aik natural thing hai

bhai mery khyal main(jo k ghalat bhi ho sakta hai)

k ham aik islamic mulk main rehty hain

agar ham per koi mulk attack kerta hai tu ham kya karengay?

apnay mulk ka difa karengay na???

ab aap dekhiye k mir jafar aik ghadar tha

lakin tipu aik patriot

hana?

kiss wajha sey

woh apnay mulk ka difa ker rha tha

aur aap baat kerty hain marha ko follow kerny ki tu janab

main yeh baray wasooq sey keh sakta hoon k marja agar keh bhi deena k apnay mulk ka difa karoo tabb bhi aap log koi na koi bahana dhoond lo gay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have recently seen a lot of heated debates that eventually boil down to mudslinging and name-calling, the most common being a 'traitor'.

The question is: what is patriotism from an ISLAMIC perspective???

What does islam and shii school of thought say about loyalty to a NATION-STATE?

For instance, imagine if Pakistan and india go to war over some dispute. As shias, are we supposed to obey our Marja's recommendations or to Mushy or Manmohan's?

Do nation-states override Ummah? Remember a nation-state is defined by a constitution that may or may not be islamic.

If loyalty to a nation-state is a reigious duty, then should the American-born muslims stand by America's imperial adventurs carried out in the name of 'national-security'???

In the end I will quote Iqbal:

In taaza khudaaon main bara sub say WATAN hay

Jo parahan uska hay wo mazhab ka KAFAN hay

In other words, watan-parasti is the antithesis of religion, according to Iqbal.

Is iqbal some sort of Hujjat on you?

Why quote the example of a war between India and Pakistan, one a Sunni majority state and the other a secular state with a hindu majority.

Why not cite an example of an Iran-Iraq conflict, which are both Shia majority countries, or a Pakistan Afghanistan conflict, in this case both Sunni majority countries.

A most interesting scenarios would an Iran-Pakistan war, a Shia Majority state calling itself Islamic, and a Pakistan, with a sizable Shia population but a Sunni majority state calling itself Islamic.

This would be a tight-rope . . . lovely bazigari would be seen :P

A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.

Edward Abbey

I always try to make that distinction (and I fail occasionally, I am only human). Many here are convinced that I hate Pakistanis as a people and Pakistan as a country. But those who care to actually read my posts know that I don't hate the Pakistani people, but its regime , particularly the policies and actions of the said regime (and its die hard knee-jerk apologists).

The quote is worth casting in imperishable bronze and placing it at the front door of every parliament and every ministry in the world.

Mohibe watan aur watan parast me zamin asman ka farq hota hae, hubbul watani se parhez nahi par yaqinan watan parasti haram hae, kyuke: La ilaha il Allah.

Jahan hubbe watan aur La Ilaha illAllah kaa takraao hoga. whana kya karo gay, yeh batao, iss mein interested hein hamm

Nice quote indeed. However, don't you think it borders on anarchism? After all, any modern government would play politics to safeguard its own interests and prolong its stay in power. By what standard you judge a government's actions to be altruistic? Plus can we trust an individual (the patriot in this quote) to decide what constitutes anti-state activities of a government and then start acting according to his own conscience? (remember Bush has been using this argument a lot saying : let history decide if my actions viz iraq were justified)..

No. It does not border on anrachism at all.

The essence of democracy is power from the grass roots up, as said by Cicero 2,500 years ago- Government of the people, by the people, for the people.

The most important part is "for the people. The more a government strives for increase in the common weal, the better a government it is.

Any government that foregoes this striving to perpetuate its hold on power, becomes undemocratic and unpatriotic thereby.

The people, [sadly, here we find demogoguery winning over common sense almost always] are the sole judges and the best judges.

There CAN, and there WILL come a time when people at large will be informed enough, and therefore wise enough, ti be NOT TAKEN IN by demagogues and rabble-rousers.

hubbul watni aik natural thing hai

bhai mery khyal main(jo k ghalat bhi ho sakta hai)

k ham aik islamic mulk main rehty hain

agar ham per koi mulk attack kerta hai tu ham kya karengay?

apnay mulk ka difa karengay na???

ab aap dekhiye k mir jafar aik ghadar tha

lakin tipu aik patriot

hana?

kiss wajha sey

woh apnay mulk ka difa ker rha tha

aur aap baat kerty hain marha ko follow kerny ki tu janab

main yeh baray wasooq sey keh sakta hoon k marja agar keh bhi deena k apnay mulk ka difa karoo tabb bhi aap log koi na koi bahana dhoond lo gay

O bhai tumharay khyal aam tore peh ghalat hotay hein.

Pakistan Islami mulk hai? La hawla wala quwwata illa billah?

Hubbe watan ka t'aluq sirf halat-ejang ya kisi dusray kay hamley se nahin hai.

Hubbe watan yeh bhi hai agar Chief of Army Staff mulk peh fauji qabza kar lay to uss swine ki mukhalfat karo . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The essence of democracy is power from the grass roots up, as said by Cicero 2,500 years ago- Government of the people, by the people, for the people.

The most important part is "for the people. The more a government strives for increase in the common weal, the better a government it is.

Any government that foregoes this striving to perpetuate its hold on power, becomes undemocratic and unpatriotic thereby.

Aasee

So who defines the rules for the grass-roots movement?

Pat Buchanan, Chomsky, Hamza Yusuf, and Louis Farrakhan all despise Bush for very *different* reasons that are sometimes poles apart. Now each can act as per his own conscience since they follow their *own* definitions of patriotism. Each will follow his own rules of protest. Some can potentially get violent (imagine a white-supremacist group taking heed to Buchanan's fear mongering). Hypothetically speaking, together they can bring down a government that they deem to be anti-state for *different* sets of reasons. Apart from their hatred of Bush they will rarely agree on anything. What would you call this situation?

Is iqbal some sort of Hujjat on you?

Tell me what you find wrong with his idea?

Why quote the example of a war between India and Pakistan, one a Sunni majority state and the other a secular state with a hindu majority.

indo-pak partition is a classic example of the division of a muslim community in two nation-state by a colonial power.

Why not cite an example of an Iran-Iraq conflict, which are both Shia majority countries, or a Pakistan Afghanistan conflict, in this case both Sunni majority countries.

Iraqi shias follow an iranian ayatullah as their marja, vote for iranian backed SCIRI and come out in *huge* numbers demonstrating for Hezbullah.

The iran-iraq war was fought along the arab-persian divide. That divide isn't as powerful anymore, esp. with shia dreams of empowerment that are bolstered by iranian politics in the region. This despite all the bad treatment the iraqi refugees have received at the hands on the iranians (but that's hardly unique, I have yet to find a refugee group in the whole world that was *respected* in their host country)..

Edited by ShahLatif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have recently seen a lot of heated debates that eventually boil down to mudslinging and name-calling, the most common being a 'traitor'.

The question is: what is patriotism from an ISLAMIC perspective???

What does islam and shii school of thought say about loyalty to a NATION-STATE?

For instance, imagine if Pakistan and india go to war over some dispute. As shias, are we supposed to obey our Marja's recommendations or to Mushy or Manmohan's?

Do nation-states override Ummah? Remember a nation-state is defined by a constitution that may or may not be islamic.

If loyalty to a nation-state is a reigious duty, then should the American-born muslims stand by America's imperial adventurs carried out in the name of 'national-security'???

In the end I will quote Iqbal:

In taaza khudaaon main bara sub say WATAN hay

Jo parahan uska hay wo mazhab ka KAFAN hay

In other words, watan-parasti is the antithesis of religion, according to Iqbal.

The Shia are quite divided on the issue of the definitions of nationhood, statehood, and governance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as i am concerned,i think islam always teaches us to follow the righteous and just path...so if one's country is on the right side...support them otherwise raise your voice againt it.'Cuz if someone is a true patriot then they wouldn't want to bring harm to ther country...which wrongly supporting one's country would ultimatley lead too.

Simlarly if two muslims countries or even a secular and a muslim country go to war...i guess it would be our duty as muslims to support the opressed and wronged ones!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
O bhai tumharay khyal aam tore peh ghalat hotay hein.

Pakistan Islami mulk hai? La hawla wala quwwata illa billah?

Hubbe watan ka t'aluq sirf halat-ejang ya kisi dusray kay hamley se nahin hai.

Hubbe watan yeh bhi hai agar Chief of Army Staff mulk peh fauji qabza kar lay to uss swine ki mukhalfat karo

yeh tu aap ki zara nawazi hai k aap k hyal main mery tamam khyal ghalat hoty hain

lolz

array bhai main aik topic shurro kerta hoon uss main contribute zaroor kijiyega

aur mery khyal main pakistan aik islamic country hai

aap mainye ya na maniye

aur yeh bataiyee k yeh shia sunni ka kya chakkar hai

ham sab musalman hain.......... khuda ka wasta hai!!!

Edited by al-syedia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aur mery khyal main pakistan aik islamic country hai

agar pakistan aik islamic country hay toe aisay islam ko saat salam. I didnt know islam stands for jihalat, corruption, tabqati-istehsaal etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the division of India into Pakistan and Bangladesh was a huge mistake! Look at how much Bangladesh is suffering..and Pakistan and India would have made a great combination..Islam was spreading very fast when they were all one state..

It would have been better if all these Muslims had been united under one flag..

Now nationalism has become such a big issue people forget the bigger unifying factor:islam..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the division of India into Pakistan and Bangladesh was a huge mistake! Look at how much Bangladesh is suffering..and Pakistan and India would have made a great combination..Islam was spreading very fast when they were all one state..

It would have been better if all these Muslims had been united under one flag..

Now nationalism has become such a big issue people forget the bigger unifying factor:islam..

You've prolly read some history we all are entirely unaware of . . . or are you authoring one?

agar pakistan aik islamic country hay toe aisay islam ko saat salam. I didnt know islam stands for jihalat, corruption, tabqati-istehsaal etc.

Chorro Bhai, sayaanay bayaanay ho keh bachchay keh munh aa rahay ho . . . jahaan baithey ho, Allah Allah karo, aur hamm sabb keh haqq mein duaa karo keh Parwardegaar hamein khaaki taa'oon say nejaat dilaaey . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
agar pakistan aik islamic country hay toe aisay islam ko saat salam. I didnt know islam stands for jihalat, corruption, tabqati-istehsaal etc

aap nay yeh wohi baat kee hai k islam is a religion of extremeism

tu iss islam ko saat salam

bhai jaan islam is perfect but muslims are not

Chorro Bhai, sayaanay bayaanay ho keh bachchay keh munh aa rahay ho . . . jahaan baithey ho, Allah Allah karo, aur hamm sabb keh haqq mein duaa karo keh Parwardegaar hamein khaaki taa'oon say nejaat dilaaey

haan jee bilkul

aap jaisay siyana na hee banay hamain Allah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

I would quote a Hadith from Imam Sadiq(as) "To prefer a person with bad character of your nationality/cult over a person of good character of some other nationality/cult is "taasub"". This hadith is very concise and accurate in meaning. It has defined everything for us. Support the one who is on haq regardless of his nationality/cult. So if a pathan or a shia is aggressor, i would definately distance myself from them and would support the oppressed.

In this way Iqbal said "In taaza khudaaon main bara sub say watan hay". And it is an allusion to imperialist ideology in which your nation is supreme over all your interests. Patriotism is something which is quite natural and is recognised by quran when Allah said "O Mankind! We have created you from one male and one female, and then We made you into different races and tribes so that you may know (and easily recognize) each other." But later in this verse Allah says "Surely the most honorable of you in God's sight is the person who is most upright in character among you." (49:13)

The hadith of Imam Sadiq(as) quoted earlier reiterates what is mentioned in last part of this verse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latif:

What does islam and shii school of thought say about loyalty to a NATION-STATE?

Why are you asking this question in URDU section? It looks like Latif has some skeletons in the cupboard. :D

In other words, watan-parasti is the antithesis of religion, according to Iqbal.

Then why don't you first convince Iran to open its borders with Southern Iraq and declare the shia state?

watan-parasti anti-thesis of religion? How about Hasan Nasrallah when he says that he is 100% Lebanese.

Satyam:

A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.

abey, kya Pak tumhari hukoomat he? agar nahin he to Pak par kyoon p** karte rehte ho yahan? agar waqai apne hi quote par yaqeen rakhte ho to Manmohan ko gaaliyan do na, yahan aa kar Pak par kyoon nukta-cheeni karte ho?

And Latif, you were SO quick to endorse his views. Like you said earlier, Hindustan tumhara baapu-ji he na.

Now listen what this quote means, and try to understand the reason. It's the INTENTIONS which matter. There is a difference between a person criticizing the government with the aim to strengthen his country, and a person criticizing the governments while openly questioning the very existence of the country.

You belong to the second category. Like you said in another thread, you are fed-up with Pakistan itself, not just this government.

If you are man enough then stop hiding behind Islam, and come out and say openly that yes, you are traitor to Pakistan. And you will work with enemies of Pakistan like Satyam, who have not accepted Pak's existence even now.

Edited by Excalibur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Latif:

Why are you asking this question in URDU section? It looks like Latif has some skeletons in the cupboard. :D

if there was a 'Pakistan-india' forum I would have asked it there. the intended audiance is in the title, nothing ulterior here.

Then why don't you first convince Iran to open its borders with Southern Iraq and declare the shia state?

wait till the shia part of iraq seceeds.

watan-parasti anti-thesis of religion? How about Hasan Nasrallah when he says that he is 100% Lebanese.

Wrong example. Nasrallah is more pro-syria and pro-persian than any other leader in Lebanon. 100% etc. is meant for pan-arabist crowd.

And Latif, you were SO quick to endorse his views. Like you said earlier, Hindustan tumhara baapu-ji he na.

Show him where in this post did I endorse his quote. In fact, I raised an objection to it, in a *civilized* way without using abay-tabay. May be that's why some people didn't get it.

Now listen what this quote means, and try to understand the reason. It's the INTENTIONS which matter.

And has God given anyone access to peoples' hearts to read their intentions?

I thought intentions are people's *personal* business.

You belong to the second category. Like you said in another thread, you are fed-up with Pakistan itself, not just this government.

This thread isn't about me, answer the questions I raised. If you want to discuss me fee free to open another thread.

If you are man enough then stop hiding behind Islam, and come out and say openly that yes, you are traitor to Pakistan. And you will work with enemies of Pakistan like Satyam, who have not accepted Pak's existence even now.

If you are muslim enough then try to answer the questions raised in the thread as a muslim would. That is:

a ) with decency,

b ) with logic

c ) any credible sources

otherwise it's no point trying to shoot the messenger with your keyboard.

Edited by ShahLatif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
if there was a 'Pakistan-india' forum I would have asked it there. the intended audiance is in the title, nothing ulterior here.

What the hell does "India-Pakistan" has to do with this topic? You are asking question from Islamic point-of-view, then where does INDIA come from?

As soon as you mentioned MATA-JI, you showed all your skeletons. So it IS about Baapu-ji, and your love affair with the polytheists.

wait till the shia part of iraq seceeds.

So you are asking them to divide Iraq and unite with Iran. Good. Since you are planning to divide countries based on sects, I wonder if you will ask Iranians to give up Balochistan and Kurdish parts of Iran. After all, they are sunnis. And this is just one example.

So dear Latif, do you think Iranians will do it?

Wrong example. Nasrallah is more pro-syria and pro-persian than any other leader in Lebanon. 100% etc. is meant for pan-arabist crowd.

So you are saying that Nasrallah is LYING with he has that he is Lebanese?

Irrespective of who it is meant for, irrespective of whether Nasrallah considers himself shia first; when he says that he is Lebanese then it means that he is patriotic to Lebanon, and will not do anything which may harm his country.

DOES IT MAKE YOU ASHAME OF YOURSELF?

Show him where in this post did I endorse his quote. In fact, I raised an objection to it, in a *civilized* way without using abay-tabay. May be that's why some people didn't get it.

And has God given anyone access to peoples' hearts to read their intentions?

Yeah, civilized way was when you called America to be Pakistan's BAAP. Stop this holier than thou attitude, and see that anyone who ridicules his own birth-country is called 'namak-haram' and a coward.

God HAS given access for others to see what other people's intention are. It is called common-sense. Your reason of starting this topic here in Urdu forum is ONLY against Pakistan, and is not intended as an Islamic topic. It is obvious from your posts about how you have given "hope" for Pakistan.

This thread isn't about me, answer the questions I raised. If you want to discuss me feel free to open another thread.

It is YOU who started this thread with a clear intention to criticize Pakistan as a country, and so you will be discussed for sure. And if you need answers then go ask Nasrallah and Iran. Your questions don't make sense.

If you are muslim enough then try to answer the questions raised in the thread as a muslim would. That is:

a ) with decency,

b ) with logic

c ) any credible sources

For starters, your ILLOGICAL and INDECENT anti-Pakistan questions is answered by the CREDIBLE SOURCE of Nasrallah when he called himself a LEBANESE.

otherwise it's no point trying to shoot the messenger with your keyboard.

Yeah. And there is no point in shooting a country with your keyboard either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Satyam:

abey, kya Pak tumhari hukoomat he? agar nahin he to Pak par kyoon p** karte rehte ho yahan? agar waqai apne hi quote par yaqeen rakhte ho to Manmohan ko gaaliyan do na, yahan aa kar Pak par kyoon nukta-cheeni karte ho?

Uberpatriot, what I write is my business. I was asked for an opinion and I gave it. Pakistan is not in Africa or 1000 miles away in the ocean. We are neighbours and whether you like it or not, we will continue to express out opinions (especially when asked for).

If you don't like it complain to the mods.

Oh and if and when I think that my govt is acting against the interests of my country, I will do what I can to fight it. There is such a thing called VOTE in my hand. It is still a quite powerful weapon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, so you will give your opinion when asked for it?

jaao, dobara parrho ja kar. Latif ISLAMI point-of-view se sawaal kar raha he. Uss ne kaafrion se sawal nahin kiya. Ab jaao ja kar Daliton ki mukhalifat mein juloos nikalo Dehli mein, and leave Pakistan to be discussed by Pakistanis.

Edited by Excalibur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Latif, I think you are asking this question of loyalty to one's country ONLY because you have "given up hope in Pakistan".

In other words, your question about loyalty to country is not the CAUSE, it is the EFFECT of your disbelief in Pakistan.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What the hell does "India-Pakistan" has to do with this topic? You are asking question from Islamic point-of-view, then where does INDIA come from?

May be if you re-read my first posting it will add up to you.

I have mentioned the use of 'traitor' in heated debate, These debates happen primarily among the pakistani-indian shias on the forum.

As soon as you mentioned MATA-JI, you showed all your skeletons. So it IS about Baapu-ji, and your love affair with the polytheists.

Excalibur

I don't call any country my 'mata'. If you assume this and try to mock me for this non existent belief you are using a straw-man argument.

So you are asking them to divide Iraq and unite with Iran. Good. Since you are planning to divide countries based on sects, I wonder if you will ask Iranians to give up Balochistan and Kurdish parts of Iran. After all, they are sunnis. And this is just one example.

Iraqis were given an option before: an islamic revolution led by Ayatullah al-sadr. That didn't work out. Now the US is there, and balkanization seems more than a possibility.

If the iraqi shias have been pushed into the arms of iranians it's not their fault. The sunni regimes have pushed them to this extreme.

If the iranians repeat the same *mistake* of alienating sunnis of baluchistan can I stop them?

Ideally i'd like all muslims to be united in one *block*. If that's not too practical, I'd rather see all SHIAS in one block. call it crescent or whatever.

So dear Latif, do you think Iranians will do it?

Iraqi shias are natural allies to the iranians.

If iranians play smart they can appease the sunnis, by addressing their grievances.

So you are saying that Nasrallah is LYING with he has that he is Lebanese?

how do you define a lebanese again? someone who worships the boundaries?

remember lebanon was a *part* of syria.

and being pro-iran isn't necessarily *anti-lebanese* either.

So for those who operate in binary logic, it appears as a lie. His line of reasoning seems to favor the idea that syrian and iranian interests are NOT against lebanon.

Remember hizb has openly *thanked* syria and iran for their support.

for those who understand history and geopolitics better, it doesn't appear as a contradiction AT ALL.

Irrespective of who it is meant for, irrespective of whether Nasrallah considers himself shia first; when he says that he is Lebanese then it means that he is patriotic to Lebanon, and will not do anything which may harm his country.

Obviously, and seeking help from iran and syria isn't going to harm lebanon as per his logic.

Remember that Nasrallah stood by Syria when a majority of sunnis are christians were against them.

Yeah, civilized way was when you called America to be Pakistan's BAAP. Stop this holier than thou attitude, and see that anyone who ridicules his own birth-country is called 'namak-haram' and a coward.

Even today pakistan and the US are war-gaming together.

I wish I could find a more derogatory term for this *relationship*.

If Pakistan was squarely in the anti-imperialist block I would have NO REASON whatsover to use this language.

And btw, if you can't prove your claim that I'm a namak-haram from an *islamic* perspective, I will maintain that you have slandered me (not that I really care, but let's see what you can produce?).

God HAS given access for others to see what other people's intention are. It is called common-sense. Your reason of starting this topic here in Urdu forum is ONLY against Pakistan, and is not intended as an Islamic topic. It is obvious from your posts about how you have given "hope" for Pakistan.

So if I had posted the same posting under another alias, would have rebutted it on logical grounds? or you would attacked the poster as usual?

This is internet, stop being personal, try to start addressing the questions, and *admit* if you don't have answers.

It is YOU who started this thread with a clear intention to criticize Pakistan as a country, and so you will be discussed for sure. And if you need answers then go ask Nasrallah and Iran.

And what's best to counter me than to refute me on logical grounds?

Your questions don't make sense.

Meaning they don't make sense to you or in general?

Apparently others have tried to participate.

For starters, your ILLOGICAL and INDECENT anti-Pakistan questions is answered by the CREDIBLE SOURCE of Nasrallah when he called himself a LEBANESE.

hizb has also thanked openly Iran and syria for their cooperation during the current crisis.

Btw, you seriously think you can refute my logic by bringing up, of all the people, the example of Nasrallah???? And that on Shiachat?

Hizbullah is a classic example of pan-shiism. I will be amazed if you didn't know this before. In fact, it has become an icon of pan-ISLAMISM lately.

Hizb proves my points more forcefully than any other phenomenon, and I wonder why you had to mention it in the first place?

To make it easier for you: Here's what's hizbullah's own flag reads, in case you didn't know:

Ath-thoratul/muwaqamatul ISLAMIYA fi labnan

now tell me, what comes first here - lebanon or islam?

Yeah. And there is no point in shooting a country with your keyboard either.

Sorry but I don't believe a term 'shooting the country' exists.

PS. I have PMed you to lay off personal insults, CCed Peer on that. Urdu kee baat hay toe urdu walon main rahay, As for behess, wo jitni chaho kar lo, yeh forum hay he issy liyeh..

Edited by ShahLatif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
May be if you re-read my first posting it will add up to you.

I have mentioned the use of 'traitor' in heated debate, These debates happen primarily among the pakistani-indian shias on the forum.

You talk of India-ji only because India is what enemies of Pakistan would like to join. No people of any other country even NEED to ask this question.

Excalibur

I don't call any country my 'mata'. If you assume this and try to mock me for this non existent belief you are using a straw-man argument.

And why are you being so infuriarated if I call Bharat anyone's Mata?

"Straw-man's argument"? hahaha. You are funny. :P

Iraqis were given an option before: an islamic revolution led by Ayatullah al-sadr. That didn't work out. Now the US is there, and balkanization seems more than a possibility.

If the iraqi shias have been pushed into the arms of iranians it's not their fault. The sunni regimes have pushed them to this extreme.

If the iranians repeat the same *mistake* of alienating sunnis of baluchistan can I stop them?

Let's say it happens, and Iraqi shias do join Iran due to anarchy created by Qaeda terrorists. Still, this union would not be called the first choice of Iraqi shias. They would be called to be forced to join Iran as a last resort, even though they tried their best to live with their fellow sunni Iraqis.

So even in that hypothetical case, your argument is null. Iraqi shias consider themselves "Iraqi" shias who would like to keep the integrity of their country.

Ideally i'd like all muslims to be united in one *block*.

LET'S START FROM PAKISTAN!! :!!!:

If you don't this present Pakistan government then support someone else. But why hate your own country?

If that's not too practical, I'd rather see all SHIAS in one block. call it crescent or whatever.

Where would YOU be in that "shia crescent"?

Iraqi shias are natural allies to the iranians.

Pakistani shias are natural allies to shias of other nationalities as well.

If iranians play smart they can appease the sunnis, by addressing their grievances.

So it is ok for Iran to keep its integrity, but not ok for Pakistan?

how do you define a lebanese again? someone who worships the boundaries?

Irrespective of what boundaries of Lebanon are or should be, Nasrallah DOES consider himself a Lebanese, and Lebanon includes not just Muslims but also Christians.

Obviously, and seeking help from iran and syria isn't going to harm lebanon as per his logic.

Of course, it is not going to harm Lebanon. But how does getting help from Iran and Syria make him non-lebanese? Even though he considers Iran and Syria his friends, he still calls himself a Lebanese and not Syrian or Iranian.

Remember that Nasrallah stood by Syria when a majority of sunnis are christians were against them.

Nasrallah may have stood by Syria, but he did not call for disintegration of Lebanon. He still considered Lebanon his home and himself Lebanese. You are doing just the opposite of it in case of Pakistan.

Even today pakistan and the US are war-gaming together.

So what? Americans are actually sitting with all shia leaders of Iraq. Do you consider America to be their BAAP as well?

I wish I could find a more derogatory term for this *relationship*.

Yes, go ahead. And then go weeping to mods when your compliments are returned. This is what is called 'traitor' of a land.

If Pakistan was squarely in the anti-imperialist block I would have NO REASON whatsover to use this language.

If Pakistan is not your utopia then WHY DON'T YOU CRITICIZE THE GOVERNMENT INSTEAD OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY? Go support MMA, they are "anti-imperialist", believe me.

And btw, if you can't prove your claim that I'm a namak-haram from an *islamic* perspective, I will maintain that you have slandered me (not that I really care, but let's see what you can produce?).

And I will maintain that you have slandered the whole country and every citizen of that country by calling America our BAAP. We Pakistanis consider it offensive and derogatory term to be used against us.

About "Islamic perspective", well, no one in Islamic world even ASKS this question. It is only some self-hating people like you who argue about it.

The "Islamic perspective" is obvious from the fact that Hasan Nasrallah, a devout shia leader, considers himself Lebanese, and not just shia.

The "Islamic perspective" is obvious when we see that when America asks Seestani his comments on draft constitution, he replies: "You are American, I am Iranian, let Iraqis decide about their country".

The "Islamic perspective" is obvious when we see that Ahmedinejad considers himself the leader of "Iranian" nation.

So if I had posted the same posting under another alias, would have rebutted it on logical grounds? or you would attacked the poster as usual?

Beta, you are not the first one to ask this question. There are many of your beloved arab-wannabe-Wahhabi Pakistanis who would just LOVE to start speaking Arabic and call themselves Arabs. I talk to such people all the time.

And so my response would have been the same. You people live in a utopia you have created sitting in your bedrooms. You have forgotten that Pakistan is your identity. And that NO Islamic country in the world cares about you or your grand ideals of creating ONE ISLAMIC UMMAH UNDER ONE KHILAFAT.

Meaning they don't make sense to you or in general?

They don't make sense to anyone. This is the utopia people like you have.

Ok. Tell me. How does Pakistan's disintegration could help in creation of ONE Islamic ummah"?

hizb has also thanked openly Iran and syria for their cooperation during the current crisis.

Like I said before, how does thanking Iran and Syria mean that Hezbollah want to be a part of Syria or Iran?

Btw, you seriously think you can refute my logic by bringing up, of all the people, the example of Nasrallah???? And that on Shiachat?

I do.

Hizbullah is a classic example of pan-shiism.

That's good. I would like to help shias, and muslims in general, everywhere in the world too. But how does it mean that Hezbollah does not consider itself Lebanese and ONLY shia organization?

To make it easier for you: Here's what's hizbullah's own flag reads, in case you didn't know:

Ath-thoratul/muwaqamatul ISLAMIYA fi labnan

now tell me, what comes first here - lebanon or islam?

And when did I start weighing country over religion? Each has its own importance. Some people consider nationality important and some consider religion important. But even those who put religion first do not work for the disintegration of their own country. It's because they are not traitors like you.

Sorry but I don't believe a term 'shooting the country' exists.

Would you be happy if I would have used "bombing Pakistan" instead?

PS. I have PMed you to lay off personal insults, CCed Peer on that.

There is no point PM'ing me. I did not insult you personally.

And I take your insults personally when you call America our BAAP, and admitting to search for an even derogatory term against Pakistanis.

Edited by Excalibur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You talk of India-ji only because India is what enemies of Pakistan would like to join. No people of any other country even NEED to ask this question.

And why are you being so infuriarated if I call Bharat anyone's Mata?

There are about the same number of SHIAS in india that are in pakistan. My question was primarily intended toward Pakistani-indian shia crowd.

Why or why not I asked is irrelevant. Answer the question and let the forum members make their own conclusions.

Since this dialogue is b/w you and me, calling Bharat 'mata-ji' means either you consider it your own or mine. My guess is the latter.

Let's say it happens, and Iraqi shias do join Iran due to anarchy created by Qaeda terrorists. Still, this union would not be called the first choice of Iraqi shias. They would be called to be forced to join Iran as a last resort, even though they tried their best to live with their fellow sunni Iraqis.

So even in that hypothetical case, your argument is null. Iraqi shias consider themselves "Iraqi" shias who would like to keep the integrity of their country.

The iraqi shias I know have given up hope in reconciliation. These include one wakil of Sayyid Sistani, who was also a close associate of Sayyid Al-Hakim. I see this guy on a regular basis. These people were exiled in Iran and despite some bad treatment still consider iran to be their ultimate ally.

A shia iraqi state thats surrounded by sunni neighbors will definitely be closely aligned with iran. That's the most obvious conclusion one can draw.

My argument regarding pan-shiism would have been void had we been talking in the 1980s. Things have changed considerably since then.

LET'S START FROM PAKISTAN!! :!!!:

If you don't this present Pakistan government then support someone else. But why hate your own country?

Actually Excalibur: I do support many characters within pakistani politics for various reasons.

However, tell me when Pakistan was actually free of the Army's grip, and I will tell you if I supported or opposed that government.

Right now I support anyone who opposes Paki army. Be it MMA or Grand alliance or whatever. Some are pro-US and some anti, I don't support PP when it comes to pro-us attitude and I don't support MMA on pretty much everything except for their pro-iran stance etc.

Where would YOU be in that "shia crescent"?

Where did I say I will be in it?

I do look forward to it though, it only empowers shias in general.

Pakistani shias are natural allies to shias of other nationalities as well.

Well nationalities are a secondary issue to begin with, in my opinion. These aren't imposed by religion as per my knowledge. As Iqbal said:

Baazu tera Islam ke quwwat say Qawi hay

Islam tera DAIS hay too MUSTAFAVI hay

now Iqbal is a utopian indded. So was shariati, so were many others. I love to believe in some of them.

So it is ok for Iran to keep its integrity, but not ok for Pakistan?

I don't support nation-states as such. That was the idea behind this thread. These are temporary institutions created by western powers. Deep down we all know they have only divided the muslims. Iran isn't my ideal either. I'm just hoping they get to survive in one piece, but not counting on that. As for Pakistan, with the current regime in place, I don't see much hope. On the contrary, I have repeated in 10s of my mails that Pakistan's survival lies in democracy. Democracy can redeem a fractured pakistan as it is now.

Irrespective of what boundaries of Lebanon are or should be, Nasrallah DOES consider himself a Lebanese, and Lebanon includes not just Muslims but also Christians.

His lebanese identity is indeed significant, but how does that undermine his pan-shii credentials?

Of course, it is not going to harm Lebanon. But how does getting help from Iran and Syria make him non-lebanese? Even though he considers Iran and Syria his friends, he still calls himself a Lebanese and not Syrian or Iranian.

You dont have to look at it in binary terms. If you seek help from others they will wield significant influence on you.

Why do you think he stood by Syria when majority was angry at syria in the wake of Hariri's murder? Did he event as much as hint at Syria's involvement, while everybody else was frothing in anger?

Nasrallah may have stood by Syria, but he did not call for disintegration of Lebanon. He still considered Lebanon his home and himself Lebanese. You are doing just the opposite of it in case of Pakistan.

If you want to discuss my ideas with regards to destruction etc. of pakistan, open another thread. This thread started with a simple theoretical question: how does islam view a nation-state. Let's stick to that.

So what? Americans are actually sitting with all shia leaders of Iraq. Do you consider America to be their BAAP as well?

In the iraq forum I have raised objections to some of the leaders behavior. Remember I had heated arguments with Khoi sahib's grandson.

Yes, go ahead. And then go weeping to mods when your compliments are returned. This is what is called 'traitor' of a land.

I don't have to go weeping to anyone, you were copied on all PMs - in fact they were addressed to you. You are more than welcome to debate as long as you stick to the topic of the THREAD! If I open a discussion where I don't insult anyone, and I have NOT, then you should show some coutesy as well. Remember you used enough counter-insults in an earlier thread. This thread started with a simple question, yet anyone who reads your *first* response will find a bizarre rage in it.Can I recommend something so you chill out?

If Pakistan is not your utopia then WHY DON'T YOU CRITICIZE THE GOVERNMENT INSTEAD OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY? Go support MMA, they are "anti-imperialist", believe me.

I must repeat, look at this thread and try to stick with its subject. Open another thread to discuss me if you want.

And I will maintain that you have slandered the whole country and every citizen of that country by calling America our BAAP. We Pakistanis consider it offensive and derogatory term to be used against us.

My own family lives in pakistan. The US regime isn't in anyway related to pakistani people. Yet for Pakistani establishment its a different story. Unless you are a part of the ruling junta you got no reason to be offended.

About "Islamic perspective", well, no one in Islamic world even ASKS this question. It is only some self-hating people like you who argue about it.

The "Islamic perspective" is obvious from the fact that Hasan Nasrallah, a devout shia leader, considers himself Lebanese, and not just shia.

The "Islamic perspective" is obvious when we see that when America asks Seestani his comments on draft constitution, he replies: "You are American, I am Iranian, let Iraqis decide about their country".

funny you quote Sayyid Sistani. The same media also considers him the MOST INFLUENTIAL person in iraq. An iranian that is. Ever wondered why? it's called pan-islamism or pan-shiism or whatever.

If nationalities were so important, 3 out of 4 Iraqi Grand Ayatullahs wouldn't be NON-IRAQI. The Pakistani one hasn't even visited Pakistan in decaded as per my knowledge. Sistani sahib's son-in-law is Kashmiri. Their sons all sound like Arabs. to me najaf and qom are headquarters of pan-shiism. They are a living proof that nationalities are less significant than one's religion.

The "Islamic perspective" is obvious when we see that Ahmedinejad considers himself the leader of "Iranian" nation.

And that somehow proves I'm a traitor???

Beta, you are not the first one to ask this question. There are many of your beloved arab-wannabe-Wahhabi Pakistanis who would just LOVE to start speaking Arabic and call themselves Arabs. I talk to such people all the time.

And so my response would have been the same. You people live in a utopia you have created sitting in your bedrooms. You have forgotten that Pakistan is your identity. And that NO Islamic country in the world cares about you or your grand ideals of creating ONE ISLAMIC UMMAH UNDER ONE KHILAFAT.

finally you get to the topic. You think it's a pipe-dream yet that dream is materializing in front of our own very eyes. I'm an idealist, and you can't blame me for that. I'm not alone, Jamaludding Afghani say lay kay Sayyid Baqir As Sadr tak you will see a lot of shia luminaries that talk about panislamism.

If no-one cares, its their GOVERNMENTS. The people do see eye to eye on a LOT of issues.

Their countries' establishments have been put into place to serve the colonial interests.

They don't make sense to anyone. This is the utopia people like you have.

As I said there has been people on the forum right in this thread who have responded.

It *has* made sense to people.

Ok. Tell me. How does Pakistan's disintegration could help in creation of ONE Islamic ummah"?

This thread isn't about disintegration of anyone. It's about identities. Stick to the topic and open another thread as advised earlier.

Like I said before, how does thanking Iran and Syria mean that Hezbollah want to be a part of Syria or Iran?

It's not. But it proves that their affiliations don't have to go with the majority's. For instance, officially, Lebanese government is rabidly anti-syrian, save shia ministers. Yes, the affiliations are along SECTARIAN lines.

That's good. I would like to help shias, and muslims in general, everywhere in the world too. But how does it mean that Hezbollah does not consider itself Lebanese and ONLY shia organization?

I didn't say it's one or the other. I referred to which identity takes precedence.

And when did I start weighing country over religion? Each has its own importance. Some people consider nationality important and some consider religion important. But even those who put religion first do not work for the disintegration of their own country. It's because they are not traitors like you.

how do you know I work toward the disintegration of Pakistan?

Would you be happy if I would have used "bombing Pakistan" instead?

it would be another ridiculous statement like your earlier try obviously,

There is no point PM'ing me. I did not insult you personally.

And I take your insults personally when you call America our BAAP, and admitting to search for an even derogatory term against Pakistanis.

It was directed toward the US pakistani relationship.You have NOTHING to do with that relationship, neither do *majority* of pakistanis.

Edited by ShahLatif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HR    14

At the conference in houston, Imam Asi spoke about this in quite depth. The topic was "The reason for our ummah's downfall" They are gonna release the DVD soon. It was really interesting.

Zeeshan gave a pretty convincing answer to the first two questions in your original post Shah Bhai. To discuss things with people who can't do it in a civilized manner is useless but I guess you are more patient than I am.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At the conference in houston, Imam Asi spoke about this in quite depth. The topic was "The reason for our ummah's downfall" They are gonna release the DVD soon. It was really interesting.

HR

I'm sure you remember the gist of it. Pls. do share when you have time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Why do you guys start from disintegration of Pakistan? Why not start from Iran or Iraq?

You enemies of Pakistan use all these Islamic lectures only to show your desire to destroy the state of Pakistan.

HR:

To discuss things with people who can't do it in a civilized manner is useless

If someone is offensive enough to openly hope for the destruction of the whole country, to call another country the "baap" of Pakistanis, and to start one thread after another condemning that country, then he should be prepared to have the compliments returned in kind.

Enemies of Pakistan born within Pakistan, wanting to see Pakistan disintegrate, striving to achieve this goal, are traitors of Pakistan. If you think the word traitor is offensive then stop being one.

Edited by Excalibur

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • easier. If you have the ability to cast a vote then I doubt you have to wake up, use the latrine outside, in the dark, or walk a few miles to get dirty water. Or work in sweat shops. https://ourworldindata.org/extreme-poverty/ Look up child prodigies, then you will notice a pattern in their households. Their parents had a method of direction, that allowed proper growth and those who had terrible homes, somewhere along the lines, they directed themselves using YT. it is all about the correct form of inspiration no matter the age.
    • assalaoalikum  which book or website contains questions and answer ,asked and given by Maula ALI (as)? post link for website
    • On the last one, why dont we have marriage help centers up in the west? If people can get married before university, even though a lot of corruotion happens even in high school, imagine how many would get married sooner?
    • Surah An-Nisa, Verse 80: مَّن يُطِعِ الرَّسُولَ فَقَدْ أَطَاعَ اللَّهَ وَمَن تَوَلَّىٰ فَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ عَلَيْهِمْ حَفِيظًا Whoever obeys the Apostle, he indeed obeys Allah, and whoever turns back, so We have not sent you as a keeper over them. (English - Shakir) Obeying & Serving Prophet & the Ahlul Bayt (peace & blessings of Allah be upon them) is an obligation on us. Allah has made them our Vali. So obeying & serving them on the command of Allah means obeying & serving Allah. One should however be careful that he should not become "Abd At-taghut" ( servant of taghut) as mentioned in the following verse: Surah Al-Maeda, Verse 60: قُلْ هَلْ أُنَبِّئُكُم بِشَرٍّ مِّن ذَٰلِكَ مَثُوبَةً عِندَ اللَّهِ مَن لَّعَنَهُ اللَّهُ وَغَضِبَ عَلَيْهِ وَجَعَلَ مِنْهُمُ الْقِرَدَةَ وَالْخَنَازِيرَ وَعَبَدَ الطَّاغُوتَ أُولَٰئِكَ شَرٌّ مَّكَانًا وَأَضَلُّ عَن سَوَاءِ السَّبِيلِ Say: Shall I inform you of (him who is) worse than this in retribution from Allah? (Worse is he) whom Allah has cursed and brought His wrath upon, and of whom He made apes and swine, and he who served the Shaitan; these are worse in place and more erring from the straight path. (English - Shakir)  
    • Well, l am getting into my '2nd childhood'.
×