Secular Atheists and their Logical Fallacy (Pukhtoon Nationalism)

[Wrayun]

Simply put, a logical fallacy is an argument that sounds very much rational and appealing however it is completely illusionary designed to trigger emotional and sentimental responses (in this case from Pukhtoons when it comes to "Pukhtoon" nationalism). These arguments are construed in a way to obscure the minds of the target audience (Pukhtoons) using very well structured rhetorical points (Pukhto, Pukhtoonwale, Pukhtoonyat, Pukhtoonistan, Pukhtoonkhwa) based on false ideas (majority of the Pukhtoons are not atheists, nor secularists). Secular atheists make the claim of being Pukhtoon nationalists, yet the very core of their foundational beliefs are in total contrast to that of the Pukhtoon people (99.99% of them being conservative Muslims). Secular atheists claim that they speak for the Pukhtoon masses and their interests (without taking a vote). They claim they wish to preserve Pukhtoon culture (much of it in complete disagreement towards secular values and standards).

It is then no surprise that Pukhtoons have more then once resisted atheistic secular nationalists and their beliefs. The only way secular atheists could ever have their way with Pukhtoons is by inviting foreign armies to occupy Pukhtoon lands. Which they did (In Pakistan example Swat, Waziristan, and in Afghanistan Americans and Russians), all while claiming to be Pukhtoon "nationalists".

If secular atheist Pukhtoon nationalists are against occupation, where is the resistance? Was there one against the Russains? Is there one against the Americans? What about the Pakistanis?

[شمله ور خراساني]

Nationalism is an offspring of Romanticism. Romanticism was the ideology of people who wanted to be irrational and emotionally driven fornicators.

Hence, Pashtun Nationalism is closely tied to immorality. This is why prominent Pashtun Nationalist Belor owns porn cinema's in peshawar. And famous Pashtun Nationalist singers and poets promote fornication and alcoholism in their poetry and songs.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

Simply put, a logical fallacy is an argument that sounds very much rational and appealing however it is completely illusionary designed to trigger emotional and sentimental responses (in this case from Pukhtoons when it comes to "Pukhtoon" nationalism). These arguments are construed in a way to obscure the minds of the target audience (Pukhtoons) using very well structured rhetorical points (Pukhto, Pukhtoonwale, Pukhtoonyat, Pukhtoonistan, Pukhtoonkhwa) based on false ideas (majority of the Pukhtoons are not atheists, nor secularists). Secular atheists make the claim of being Pukhtoon nationalists, yet the very core of their foundational beliefs are in total contrast to that of the Pukhtoon people (99.99% of them being conservative Muslims). Secular atheists claim that they speak for the Pukhtoon masses and their interests (without taking a vote). They claim they wish to preserve Pukhtoon culture (much of it in complete disagreement towards secular values and standards).

It is then no surprise that Pukhtoons have more then once resisted atheistic secular nationalists and their beliefs. The only way secular atheists could ever have their way with Pukhtoons is by inviting foreign armies to occupy Pukhtoon lands. Which they did (In Pakistan example Swat, Waziristan, and in Afghanistan Americans and Russians), all while claiming to be Pukhtoon "nationalists".

If secular atheist Pukhtoon nationalists are against occupation, where is the resistance? Was there one against the Russains? Is there one against the Americans? What about the Pakistanis?

Youre making some mistaken assumptions, which I cant blame you for.

A person can be a completely secular and athiestic/agnostic, and still be cognizant of what the nation wants, accepts and is ready for.

Previous secularists never understood this. They wanted the country to move at their pace. And so they introduced what was in essence a foreign concept and used foreigners to institute it.

Amanullah Khan, Tarakai, Amin, etc etc all suffered from this

So I think the conclusion that is reached, is that one can be athiestic and secular, but this should be restricted to ones own personal view. A policy for the nation and for the Pakhtun people cannot be based on these ideals. It needs to be coated in a medicine the people can accept, which is Islam

Its funny, because some secularists got the point but it was too late. We all saw how Dr Najib became Sayed Mohamed Najibullah, opening speeches with Bismillah and restoring the original Afghan flag, and reciting hadiths and suras. But people saw through the facade. However had that been the original communist approach, there wouldnt have been such a backlash.

The point is our politicians must be aware of what our people are willing to accept, and be machiavellian in our approach. Push our agenda covertly by utilizing Islam. You cant remove Islam because someone else will fill that void.

I think its perfectly possible for a secular athiestic pashtun to have pashtun interests in mind. Is it not in pashtun interests to be educated and prosperous?

As for resistance, this is a simple minded assertion. We secularists are caught between a rock and a hard place. Despite what one might think, I despise the current foreign system as much as a I despise an ISI controlled Taliban regime. Where do we fit? Should we go back home and pick up an AK so the ISI establishes its strategic depth? What a waste of education and English. At the same time we cant develop our own "path" because as secularists we cannot group ourselves separately and promote a separate agenda.

[BehavedMaseed]

Wrayun.

You got owned by our dear brother Lewanay Zalmay.

You cant accept the fact that not all Pashtuns beleive in Fantasys and its sad to see that some of us are still stuck in the 7th century. I am not being offensive but its truely sad that you guys sit in westenr countries, criticing their secular system while you preach to your fellow poor and oppressed brothers and sisters in third world muslim countries to follow rules and beliefs that best suited the bedions of arabia and their own savage ways.

Go and Debate with our brother LZ because from what i read he has owned you so many times. Even Qurratgai khor told you very clearly that Pashtuns did not start with Islam so what did they follow then? Islam came to us in a form of a big arab army with big swords and our ancestors died fighting to repel, imgine they did boot out the savage arab imperialists, we could have been abit more civilised and progressive and a better unified nation sadly we got another 2 or 3oo years left before we leave this medevil phase.



Kind Regards

[BehavedMaseed]

Dear Wrayun,

What secularists(many are Muslims) demand is that yes we can be Muslims but in order to keep things more neat, organized and easy to comprehend - lets celebrate the two. The reason you find so many atheists here, is again many are extremely educated. I have noticed duriing my short stay that this entire site(with the exception of few) is full of college grads or under grad students. This is a phase many are going through. They begin challenging everything. But its fine. We should assist them.

You are arguing that its a logical fallacy, all they argue is that we want to see Pashtuns free.

My question to you(I hope you take no offence, as I have utmost respecr for you) is that we have already witnessed and reaped the benefits of Islamic Shariah(Talibanization of our culture) can we really try it again? Have we not had enough? Do we really have to get into the stone age to realize that Islamic extremism isn't helping us?

Look at India, Hindu majority yet they have endorsed secularism with open-hands. I once used to ask a member named Akbar Khan(who is also really educated) questions regarding Islamic Shariah but my questions are left unanswered.


Logically, would it not be better if we can have 50 individuals dedicated to our politics and our politics only. would it not be better if we have a special police that does not force us to pray?

I can tell you right now that if I don't pray, no one can force me too. Even if someone does stoop low and beat me to pray my mind will be too busy in choosing designer clothes(Relax,its an example).

I would like to further discuss this with you and I would also like our Atheists, Gulalai, Levanaye, Toramana, Dawezai and many others to come forward, please.

You can be a perfectly good law practicing Muslim and be secular at the same time. Secularists just beleive that you keep relgion out of politics.

You can be a beleiver of god and be secular as well. Its the usual Propaghanda of Islamists who force you to choose sides because they themselves are insecure about their views so they always turn violent to inforce their view upon you.

Ask yourself, why do we live peacefully in Secular socieites? where is there no relgionous conflicts there while in Muslim countries Muslims slaughter eachother on disagreements of interpretating quranic texts and hadith.

We secularists dont beleive in laws that do not suit this time and era. Take the rape laws for example, if a woman is raped then she HAS to produce three male witnesses who were PRESENT at the rape for the case to be heard, if not, she would be whipped for bringing it up.

How can we in a secular society allow such laws to be implimented when there is no need for them in the first place?

Relgion in my PERSONAL view is torture and emotional blackmail. Simple as that. and thats my own view.

Kind Regards

[Wrayun]

Wrayun.

You got owned by our dear brother Lewanay Zalmay.

If that deduction came from anyone else besides a frequent copy pasta spammer, it would hold some substance.

[akbarkhan]

The point is our politicians must be aware of what our people are willing to accept, and be machiavellian in our approach. Push our agenda covertly by utilizing Islam. You cant remove Islam because someone else will fill that void.

Machiavellian in your approach? Covert by utilizing Islam?

These are tried, tested and miserably failed ideas, please keep them in same drawer as your socks. Even the foot soldiers of the resistance know the Machiavallian and Straussian approach intrinsically, let alone the upper echelons.

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

Machiavellian in your approach? Covert by utilizing Islam?

These are tried, tested and miserably failed ideas, please keep them in same drawer as your socks. Even the foot soldiers of the resistance know the Machiavallian and Straussian approach intrinsically, let alone the upper echelons.

explain how they are tried, tested and failed?

[شمله ور خراساني]

explain how they are tried, tested and failed?

dr. Najibullah

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

dr. Najibullah

thank you for bringing him up. i already referred to him earlier, when i mentioned Afghans "seeing through the facade"

let me ask you this though wrora:

if Dr Najib led the coup against Daud Khan in 1979 and talked then, the way he talked in 1986 would the coup not have been successful?

[akbarkhan]

explain how they are tried, tested and failed?

Well, if I have to explain it to you then it means that you have no idea what the Machiavellian approach is! There are countless examples of this tried, tested and failed method in Afghanistan.

As my honourable friend Shamlawar has pointed out, Dr. Najib was a staunch Machiavellian - do I need to explain his failures?

Compared to Amin, Najib was a little toddler in Machiavellian school of political thought. Amin, the Afghan Machiavellian giant was disposed off like an autumns leaf with all his skill and might - a complete failure!

Do you know why Machiavellian approach doesn't work in Afghanistan? Because the ranks of resistance idealize, study and practice Omar Farooq's politics. Omar Farooq's approach combined with Islamic ethos forms a formidable method, a method that has been tried, tested and yielded success on many fronts in our history.

So with the exception of Amir Abdur Rahman Khan, who was not a Machiavellian as he had his own distinctly fermented way, tell us which Machiavellian political leader was a success?

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

Well, if I have to explain it to you then it means that you have no idea what the Machiavellian approach is! There are countless examples of this tried, tested and failed method in Afghanistan.

As my honourable friend Shamlawar has pointed out, Dr. Najib was a staunch Machiavellian - do I need to explain his failures?

Compared to Amin, Najib was a little toddler in Machiavellian school of political thought. Amin, the Afghan Machiavellian giant was disposed off like an autumns leaf with all his skill and might - a complete failure!

Do you know why Machiavellian approach doesn't work in Afghanistan? Because the ranks of resistance idealize, study and practice Omar Farooq's politics. Omar Farooq's approach combined with Islamic ethos forms a formidable method, a method that has been tried, tested and yielded success on many fronts in our history.

So with the exception of Amir Abdur Rahman Khan, who was not a Machiavellian as he had his own distinctly fermented way, tell us which Machiavellian political leader was a success?

Dr Najib wasnt a good Machiavellian. Just because a particular Machiavellian approach fails, doesnt mean the whole thing is a write off

Dr Najib was KHAD chief for 6 years under a Soviet Occupation, nothing he did couldve saved his azz and me and you both know this. People saw through the facade.

Amin? Now I know youre just name dropping randomly. Amin was a failure. Pushed Pashtunism against the minorities and kept his inner circle all family and close ones. He was a deranged lunatic. He used to boast that all he needed was One million people to make the revolution a success. A failed graduate student who killed his mentor, killed tens of thousands in a stupid attempt to marxify a 3rd world rural society with no covert or subtle means. What was Machiavellian about the man lol?

Machiavellian is the Taliban rising to power with a Quran in one hand, and a vow to leave politics alone and turn power over to Zahir Shah as soon as they hit Kabul, and then all of a sudden start checking for white socks and beard lengths.

Like I said to Sangar, if the Dr Najib of 1986 led the coup against Daud Khan in 78, would the Saur Revolution have had a different outcome? If there was no action taking regarding collectivazation of farm land, forced co education, targetting of ulema etc If Dr Najib left the flag alone, recited his suras and kalimas and pursued a progressive/developmental policy for Afghanistan in more covert means?

We both know the answer

[BehavedMaseed]

Amir

You could also mention how Mullah Burjen was very sympathic towards Dr Najibullah but all of a sudden he was murdered by I wonder who (ISI).

Can the Taliban supporters who are sat in West produce to us all what the Taliban did that was good besides working as a Proxy?

Kind Regards

[Amir al Ghaznavi]

Amir

You could also mention how Mullah Burjen was very sympathic towards Dr Najibullah but all of a sudden he was murdered by I wonder who (ISI).

Can the Taliban supporters who are sat in West produce to us all what the Taliban did that was good besides working as a Proxy?

Kind Regards

Mullah Borjan who like many others were former communists turned Mullahs?

[Baygham]

explain how they are tried, tested and failed?

Amir saab, I have not been exposed to the afghan communist, but I have seen the pakhtunkhwa ones. They are mostly poorly educated disillusioned peaple that have not done much to advance pashtoo or pashtoon. A free bottle of the cheapest whiskey is usually enough to get their services for the day. Not one has ever worked an honest hour.

This is not modernity, or progress. This is defaming both.

I met a few years ago a 85 year old american colonel, his wife of 65 years having died the year before. A second world war vet. A gentlemen, proud, honest, loving, caring and a gem of a men. Still talking of her with love and proud sentiment.

reminded me of an old uncle in pakhtunkwha, same age same mannerism, same world view, same love of his wife and of humanity, same side in second world war.

When I talk of secularism, i see the two, I want all pashtoons to grow and know one such role model in their lives.

Not the dalal, pimp, free alcohol degenerate illitrates some confuse with secularism.

Our pakhtu teaches us honor, respect, when I talk to a poor farmer in my village with the same respect I talked to my father, he can tell. If I go to the mosque or not, he does not give a holy cr ap. When I respect his women and children like I respect mine, he knows. And their is one thing I have amply witnessed. Give a respectful pashtoon respect and you have earned him over for the rest of his life.