And what kind of bull crap justification is 'ke drones bhee tou kids ko murder kar rahai hain'. So
because drones are doing it then somehow its ok for Talibans to do that too?
There are two things.
1- the idiot molvies are ''justifying'' it
2. Normal folks, who are wary of such an excessive hype over this incident and the unending noise being created by the ''liberal'' crowd who never say anything against other killings.
its the disproportionate response in this particular matter that is making people suspicious.
1- the idiot molvies are ''justifying'' it
2. Normal folks, who are wary of such an excessive hype over this incident and the unending noise being created by the ''liberal'' crowd who never say anything against other killings.
its the disproportionate response in this particular matter that is making people suspicious.
I agree. There are unwise extremist on both sides.
Biggest problem of our nation is that we are never together on any tragedy and its always like 'oh jab hamara banda maraa thaa tou aap ne gham nahi kya, tou ab aap ke bande pe ham gham nahi karain ge'. There is no hamara tumhara, we all should be one Pakistani nation. Malala is a 14 year old kid. Even if she was wrong in supporting some ideology, she was still a kid. The anger is not that Taliban tried to kill a liberal person, but they tried to kill a Kid.
And what kind of bull crap justification is 'ke drones bhee tou kids ko murder kar rahai hain'. So because drones are doing it then somehow its ok for Talibans to do that too?
TLK sahab, this "bull crap" is not a justification of any killing by anyone. its a question about the credibility of those who are crying out loud on this incident but keep their mouth shut when it comes to 100s of children being killed by drones.
now dont say that "we do condemn drones killing too" because its very much evident that a mere condemntion is not whats being done here in the case malala...
but anyway, i've said all this in another thread few days ago, and got enough labels of "taliban" already : )
TLK sahab, this "bull crap" is not a justification of any killing by anyone. its a question about the credibility of those who are crying out loud on this incident but keep their mouth shut when it comes to 100s of children being killed by drones.
now dont say that "we do condemn drones killing too" because its very much evident that a mere condemntion is not whats being done here in the case malala...
but anyway, i've said all this in another thread few days ago, and got enough labels of "taliban" already : )
So I should not open my mouth and condemn Malala's incident because I failed to condemn drone attacks or student killings in Karachi? Ya tou sab incidents ko condemn karo, yaa kisi ko bhee nahi karo, is that the rule of the game now?
I would respectfully submit that in this forum, liberal has negative connotations. While in principle I have no major qualms abt your statement it is also true the profressives and liberals in every country are agents oglf change for the better, dragging the conservatives kicking and screaming into civilization.
After my listing of liberals in reply to Muqawee, I think original position on liberals spot on. Conservatives are the root of most problems. Liberals clean up after the mess the conservatives create. Be it persecution of minorities, religious intolerance, women's rights, fair and equitable pay, climate change, health care for all.
Loo forward to hearing what about liberals you disagree with. True liberals are about 10% or less of population. They are the visionaries.
I beg to differ. Just because someone is liberal does not make that person or nation or group, a peace loving entity.
So I should not open my mouth and condemn Malala's incident because I failed to condemn drone attacks or student killings in Karachi? Ya tou sab incidents ko condemn karo, yaa kisi ko bhee nahi karo, is that the rule of the game now?
no, condemn what is wrong. but dont blow things out of proportion. and when we stand by someone lets not pick and chose and let others feel left out because they were not declared hero by our great lort america. and just because they lived in an area where the great lord claims they were attacked from. this is whats required from an individual
The question is why those liberal don't raise their voice to this scale when thousand children killed in other parts of the world? Who is the responsible for killings in Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan? People who use religion? NO.
Why don't these liberals condemn media who don't run special transmissions on these killings? Why Mulla is an easy target to criticism?
Maybe you just need to open your eyes and ears and observe and listen.
Arundhati Rai is an example in India.
Jeremy Skegal is one who is against drone strikes - a US reporter.
Norm Chomsky is a liberal who is against war I. Iraq.
so was the late Howard Zinn.
Bernie Sanders is the ultimate liberal - an honest politician who spoke against Iraq war.
Howard Dean was against Iraq war.
Matt Taibi is an outspoken critic.
DailyKos.com is a liberal site that is honest.
Not all democrats are liberals. BUT ALL LIBERALS ARE PEACE LOVING. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Thesexare the liberals I am talking about. I wonder if TLK can find any flaws in any of above.
Maybe you just need to open your eyes and ears and observe and listen.
Arundhati Rai is an example in India.
Jeremy Skegal is one who is against drone strikes - a US reporter.
Norm Chomsky is a liberal who is against war I. Iraq.
so was the late Howard Zinn.
Bernie Sanders is the ultimate liberal - an honest politician who spoke against Iraq war.
Howard Dean was against Iraq war.
Matt Taibi is an outspoken critic.
DailyKos.com is a liberal site that is honest.
Not all democrats are liberals. BUT ALL LIBERALS ARE PEACE LOVING. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Thesexare the liberals I am talking about. I wonder if TLK can find any flaws in any of above.
May be you need to open your mind a bit more. The definition of liberal, as understood in US, is different from what it is in Pakistan. Since you don't know about pakistani dynamics, you don't need to confuse the pakistani ''liberal'' issue with the US or any other one.
Maybe you just need to open your eyes and ears and observe and listen.
Arundhati Rai is an example in India.
Jeremy Skegal is one who is against drone strikes - a US reporter.
Norm Chomsky is a liberal who is against war I. Iraq.
so was the late Howard Zinn.
Bernie Sanders is the ultimate liberal - an honest politician who spoke against Iraq war.
Howard Dean was against Iraq war.
Matt Taibi is an outspoken critic.
DailyKos.com is a liberal site that is honest.
Not all democrats are liberals. BUT ALL LIBERALS ARE PEACE LOVING. NO EXCEPTIONS.
Thesexare the liberals I am talking about. I wonder if TLK can find any flaws in any of above.
There are many religious minded people who oppose brutalities irrespective of religious affiliation. Does that give me chance to claim 'ALL RELIGIOUS-MINDED PEOPLE ARE PEACE LOVING'?
selective condemnation is what that makes credibility of each group (Religious / Liberals) doubtful
no, condemn what is wrong. but dont blow things out of proportion. and when we stand by someone lets not pick and chose and let others feel left out because they were not declared hero by our great lort america. and just because they lived in an area where the great lord claims they were attacked from. this is whats required from an individual
and the leaders, lets not talk about them : )
I am not sure what Malala has to do with USA. Ok yes USA is also condemning the incident, but is Malala not Pakistani? I can speak for myself and many like mine that we are just protesting the barbarianism of Taliban in this particular incident and no more. Its just like we did when Sialkot brothers incident happened, or when Rangers in Karachi shot the guy in his legs and let him die.
May be you need to open your mind a bit more. The definition of liberal, as understood in US, is different from what it is in Pakistan. Since you don't know about pakistani dynamics, you don't need to confuse the pakistani ''liberal'' issue with the US or any other one.
Goes for you too. I gave a universal definition of liberals. Don't matter where they are. They are the agents of change no tiff's anew or buts.
I listed Rai from India. Don't know any from Pakistan. But I am sure there are Rai like progressives in Pak also. So Mr. Mard you are free to open your eyes or free to continue your d tired argument of us liberals vs Pak liberals.
Those religious minded people who oppose brutalities are peace loving. ALL the folks who have similar outlook as folks I listed are Peace loving. And they are what I call liberals.
You cant deny liberal bashing appears to be instinctive in this forum and by extension in indo- Pak.
There are many religious minded people who oppose brutalities irrespective of religious affiliation. Does that give me chance to claim 'ALL RELIGIOUS-MINDED PEOPLE ARE PEACE LOVING'?
selective condemnation is what that makes credibility of each group (Religious / Liberals) doubtful
Goes for you too. I gave a universal definition of liberals. Don't matter where they are. They are the agents of change no tiff's anew or buts.
I listed Rai from India. Don't know any from Pakistan. But I am sure there are Rai like progressives in Pak also. So Mr. Mard you are free to open your eyes or free to continue your d tired argument of us liberals vs Pak liberals.
you are exhibiting the traits of those evil conservatives. getting all angry and antsy with your use of adjectives.
I am not sure what Malala has to do with USA. Ok yes USA is also condemning the incident, but is Malala not Pakistani? I can speak for myself and many like mine that we are just protesting the barbarianism of Taliban in this particular incident and no more. Its just like we did when Sialkot brothers incident happened, or when Rangers in Karachi shot the guy in his legs and let him die.
you dont know what malala has to do with us? let me tell you. its same malala who when projected as writing that diary was awarded and honored like everyone else in Pakistan loves TTP and only she hates them. some even went to extrem of naming her for nobel price for peace!
and then, when she got shot, it was condemned by US on highest level. fine theres nothing bad in it, everybody condemned it and should have condemned, but where is the US high level condemnation for the kids they kill every day in drones? what about the thousand pakistani kids who's parents they killed just declaring the "suspected extremists"? what a term and license to kill
and one more thing which links this case with US, TTP claimed responsibility, you forgot who is this TTP? its the same organization Raymond Davis had close relations with, visited them several times, had phone contacts with their commanders. who raymond davis? yes the same Raymond Davis, for which even Obama openly lied that he was a diplomate, only to back track later.
even one more thing, who is Molvi Fazlullah who accepted the responsibility and said he will [arrange to] attack again, even kill her father... yes the same molvi fazlullah who when was about to be captrued alive in swat operation, was recuded and airlifted by ISAF forces by helicoptors, under who's command? US. and later was believed to be treated in bagram base.
Those religious minded people who oppose brutalities are peace loving. ALL the folks who have similar outlook as folks I listed are Peace loving. And they are what I call liberals.
You cant deny liberal bashing appears to be instinctive in this forum and by extension in indo- Pak.
Religious-minded can be liberal and liberal can be religious-minded and both can condemn brutalities. People on this forum are just raising their voice against the selective condemnation. Show me any post which favored attack on Malala in absolute terms on this forum (If I missed that).
Even religious parties in Pakistan are not favoring this attack. They are raising question about the enormous coverage of single event ignoring thousands of such incidents that are happening for more than a decade.
I am not sure what Malala has to do with USA. Ok yes USA is also condemning the incident, but is Malala not Pakistani? I can speak for myself and many like mine that we are just protesting the barbarianism of Taliban in this particular incident and no more. Its just like we did when Sialkot brothers incident happened, or when Rangers in Karachi shot the guy in his legs and let him die.
to add something, yes malala is pakistan, sialkoti brothers were pakistani... but are not those innocent kids getting killed every other day in drones are pakistani? why nobody makes this much noise for them on every level? because they were killed by drones, and US says drones are good?
i think i know the answer, it was in your other thread the other day "living in the usa" : )
Religious-minded can be liberal and liberal can be religious-minded can be liberal and both can condemn brutalities. People on this forum are just raising their voice against the selective condemnation. Show me any post which favored attack on Malala in absolute terms on this forum (If I missed that).
Even religious parties in Pakistan are not favoring this attack. They are raising question about the enormous coverage of single event ignoring thousands of such incidents that are happening for more than a decade.
Where did I state anyone here favored attack on Malala?
Your statement "liberals can be religious and vice oversaw" shows lack of understanding of what a true liberal is. A true liberal
1) is religious or not
2) believes in freedom to practise faith ( I am against rule in France re hijab)
3) believes in equality for ALL
4) separation of religion from govt
5) women's rights
6) workers rights
7) fair pay and healthcare
8) Environmental sustainability.
This definition off top of my head. One does not need to google to get right definition.
PS. Hope my response passed Mr. Mard 's antsy meter.