Discussion in 'General Multimedia' started by ejazr, Sep 28, 2010.
Some interesting revelations and some confirmations on what many would already know
She was a bigot like most pakistanis. did she shout at the top of her voice about freeing kashmir. it was under her PMship that terror started in india.
Pakistan politcal arena is a tough place, espicially for a woman. You have to show street cred by bashing India and harping on Kashmir. You can never go wrong with these two.
But outside everyone, even rtd army personnel start talking sense.
The media, following the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, tells us that she represented the "liberal" and "democratic" face of Pakistan. If this is liberal, what is fundamentalist?
This video is clipped from a documentary titled "the plight of Kashmiri pandits" and shows hate propaganda from across the border in that eventually lead to militancy in Kashmir.
This video shows how Pakistani politicians brainwash Kashmiri Youth into terrorism. It is all about the false pride.
The Ghazni referred to in the video was a mass murderer and a cowardly robber, who sacked the Somnath temple and killed many Hindus. Ms. Bhutto claims in this video that the "blood" of Ghazni flows through the veins of Kashmiris.
Her death is attributed to terrorism (Or was she murdered due to political reasons?). This is yet another evidence for "As you sow, so you reap".
Ms. Bhutto never had peace in her life. May her soul rest in peace, at least now.
Thats what a bigot is first kill 1000s of people with your rhetorics when you are in power and then talk sense when you are out of it and blame the army.I think these days Musharraf also talks lot of sense when he says he wasnt responsible for the kidnapping of Afia siddique
vir starts the interview introducing benazir saying " ............ but with benazir bhutto you never think as her being former anything, you never think of the past", and how very wrong he was!
anyways i felt benazir started to talk a lot of sense around this time when this interview was taken, dont know how honest she was, or was it done to sooth the americans who wanted stable indo-pak relations but for sure i would have liked to see how would the indo-pak relations have evolved had she been given another chance in whatever capacity. to fair, zardari in his initial days as the prez did seem to talk some sense but then i guess he was pretty much done in by the establishment, also i doubt zardari has a hold and appeal similar to what benazir had, so may be our experience this time round would have been slightly better.
that said i have a sense that india's relations were never better with pakistan than when musharraf was in charge, though he also happens to be someone who was seen as one of the key masterminds behind kargil.
Well a bigot a person who is inteolerant to other person's view and has very prejudiced positions. What you are highlighting means that she was a hypocrite atleast in that sense. She may be a bigot too considering the way her father talked about Bengalis but don't know for sure.
About her asssasination, there are many theories of how the same rouge elements of the intelligence agencies are involved as well. If you look at the UN report there are many fishy items that were highlighted such as the collusion of MI personnel in getting rid of evidence and others.
But from a Pakistan centric point of view, Benazir if allowed a free hand would have been good for Pakistan. She was smart and articulate, and also had mass politcal appeal within Pakistan. That made her powerful enough to challenge the security establishment.
No politician or political party can survive without India bashing.
It is ingrained in the Pakistani psyche.
The bias in Pakistani textbooks was also documented by Y. Rosser (2003). She wrote that
â€œ in the past few decades, social studies textbooks in Pakistan have been used as locations to articulate the hatred that Pakistani policy makers have attempted to inculcate towards their Hindu neighboursâ€, and that as a result "in the minds of generations of Pakistanis, indoctrinated by the 'Ideology of Pakistan' are lodged fragments of hatred and suspicion. â€
( Abuse of History in Pakistan: Bangladesh to Kargil, by Dr. Yvette C Rosser)
The bias in Pakistani textbooks was studied by Rubina Saigol, Pervez Hoodbhoy, K. K. Aziz, I. A. Rahman, Mubarak Ali, A. H. Nayyar, Ahmed Saleem, Y. Rosser and others.
A study by Nayyar & Salim (2003) that was conducted with 30 experts of Pakistan's education system, found that the textbooks contain statements that seek to create hate against Hindus. There was also an emphasis on Jihad, Shahadat, wars and military heroes. The study reported that the textbooks also had a lot of gender-biased stereotypes. Some of the problems in Pakistani textbooks cited in the report were:
â€œ Insensitivity to the existing religious diversity of the nationâ€; "Incitement to militancy and violence, including encouragement of Jihad and Shahadatâ€; a â€œglorification of war and the use of forceâ€; "Inaccuracies of fact and omissions that serve to substantially distort the nature and significance of actual events in our history";
â€œPerspectives that encourage prejudice, bigotry and discrimination towards fellow citizens, especially women and religious minorities, and other towards nationsâ€ and â€œOmission of concepts ... that could encourage critical self awareness among studentsâ€. (Nayyar & Salim 2003).The Pakistani Curriculum document for classes K-V stated in 1995 that "at the completion of Class-V, the child should be able to "Understand Hindu-Muslim differences and the resultant need for Pakistan. â€
A more recent textbook published in Pakistan titled "A Short History of Pakistan" edited by Ishtiaq Hussain Qureshi has been heavily criticized by academic peer-reviewers for anti-Hindu biases and prejudices that are consistent with Pakistani nationalism, where Hindus are portrayed as "villains" and Muslims as "victims" living under the "disastrous Hindu rule" and "betraying the Muslims to the British", characterizations that academic reviewers fond "disquieting" and having a "warped subjectivity".
Ameer Hamza, a leader of the banned terrorist group Lashkar-e-Toiba, wrote a highly derogatory book about Hinduism in 1999 called "Hindu Ki Haqeeqat" ("Reality of (a) Hindu"); he was not prosecuted by the Government.
Therefore, it will take time for Pakistan to normalise their mindset with rationality being the centrepiece.
We must understand that Pakistanis have been brought up in this hate psyche through their educational system and how can they not believe what is officially prescribed for them in their education system? When they grow up with this baggage, it automatically reflects in their lifestyle, family life (since their parents too are the product of this educational system) and workplace.
All Pakistani Politicians talk sense when are out of the power. Its like a patient with bipolar disorder given more attention becomes violent and sane when treated without suggestions but only medication. Pakistanis politicians wear a very portable mask. When mucking around in international forums they pretend to be very liberal ultra modern suite wearing bureaucrats but when are back into their places do become fanatic flag bearer of Islam.
Here is Benajir Butto. The damage was done for India rest all is shallow, bias and irreparable.
Even Musharaf pretended as a pragmatic statesman. He was the same person who rolled down Nawaj Sharif; when he (NS) started to sound reasonable and for his efforts to settle Kashmir with India. But just after when his tenure was going to end he started negotiating with India on the same frame work of Nawaj sharif govt.
I can not see if there is any manual or constitutional guidelines for Pakistani politics to follow specially their foreign policy. Same musharaf attacked us in Kargil, same came to Agra for the peace deal, same set the tempo and became ready to take extra ordinary steps on Kashmir, same said the will of kashmiri people is more important, same told USA not to interfere as Kashmir is Pakistan's, same said categorically if Kashmir issue would have been resolved as Kashmir an independent state the Yasin Malik et al were already convinced by him to join Pakistan instantaneously after independence.
There are many more example when Pakistani's politicians first started ranting in UN security council declaring Kashmir as a part of Pakistan by blood etc. Now the same Pakistani Qureshi asking a plebiscite, fair elections, will of Kashmiris when their own illegally occupied part of Kashmir has no representation and is a factory of insurgencies/military operations against India. Subjugating POK provinces into federal of Pakistan after 50 years, declaring few parts as Independent Kashmir with puppet cleric as PM. Gifting north slopes of Kanchenjunga mountains to China etc etc.
Every thing is super convenient for Pakistan as long as India is getting pain and pricks.
Separate names with a comma.