Mullah Fadhlullah new Ameer of TTP

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Do you think this popularity of Fazlullah is all engineered by ISI. The local Pashtuns of Swat have nothing to do with making him popular and supporting him.

Maulana Fazalullah, a thirty three years old resident of Mamderai, Swat is the most talked about personality in the region. He has a large number of followers many of whom are ready to sacrifice their lives and every thing for his cause. He was born in the house of Biladar Khan; a Pukhtun of Babukarkhel clan of the Yusufzai tribe of Swat. Biladar Khan was highly inspired by the TNSM movement (Movement for the enforcement of Shariah laws) patroned by Maulana Sufi Muhammad became one of the right-hand men of the Maulana.


Finding himself even more devoted for the said cause, he sent his son, the then Fazal Hayat, now naming Fazalullah to his Madrassa (seminary) at Kumbar, Dir. This close and long association between the two ultimately got shaped into matrimonial relationship.


Biladar Khan is no more, Sufi Muhammad is in Prison but the son and son in law, Maulana Fazallulah, is leading the same movement, thus fulfilling the great wish of his father and father in law.


Fazalullah has made his native village Mamderai as headquarter of the TNSM, thus got it shifted from Kumbar, Dir to Mamderai, Swat.
Maulana has started his own F M radio channel for his preachings and having a big circle of listeners. Strange to say most of his listeners are the women folk.


Six months ago when he expressed about his own wish of establishing a Madrassa, Mosque and offices, the people responded even more beyond his expectations. They generously donated in cash and kinds. Hundreds and thousands of people voluntarily take part in the construction process turn by turn daily. They work full day on their own expenses including food and equipment. Thus this huge complex is expediting towering.


For Jumma (Friday) prayers a vast tract of land is levelled to accommodate a huge gathering of people from nearly all villages of Swat, praise worthy to see.


The Maulana makes a riding show (with himself on a black horse) after the Jumma Prayers in the same ground, so that the people can have a glimpse of him.
Exclusive: An interview with Maulana Fazalullah, VALLEY SWAT

I appreciate your honest assessment here.

What are your thoughts though on why the common nationalist narrative hinges on making it seem as if these guys are "secretly robots and automatons and panjabees dressed up as Pashtuns etc etc."?

My assumption is that both sides rely on dehumanizing propaganda that find its basis in taking an extreme element found in both camps and then imposing that view on the rest of the masses in both camps.

For instance, there are some known links between various fighters and various intelligence agencies for the reasons you stated before - with the fighters generally being true believers in their cause. Some of these higher ups have had meetings with agencies and military groups to further drive their own goals. But the average foot soldier and even middle to upper ranking person does not view themselves as a puppet taking orders from either Kabul (TTP) or Panjab (Quetta Shura). Yet this narrative and conspiratorial thinking is imposed by certain groups, in my estimation, to allow the adversary to be dehumanized and to attract the public to their argument.

In the same vein, there are many nationalists who are educated and bright, they still view themselves as hanafi religious devout sunnis and members of a civilized society. Yet there are a few known Maoists and Leninists in the past affiliated with these movements. The religionists take these few and tell their followers that all of the party/grouping is a rigidly atheist and in bed with outside powers... permitting the concept of cognitive dissonance to prevail so that the foot soldier and potentially the public has no issue with their operations and assassinations of various members of said parties.

In my estimation this set of dueling narratives exists across the Muslim and developing world (Latin America, East Europe, Former Soveit republics, Middle East, Central Asia, Africa) and became cemented in the last century due to the fighting of the two major colonial camps in these areas of the globe.

The key to peace must be that the common humanity of both groups needs to be addressed.

I thought about this a lot when I put my child to sleep. I know that there are those amongst even the extreme secularists who love their children and whose children love them. I think if these humanizing commonalities are stressed, people may be less trigger happy to destroy each other. For instance, it must have been heart wrenching for the rural religious Afghan to lose his child or his parent in front of his eyes with dehumanizing brutality. In the same way, snuffing out the life of a secular nationalist means severing a living being from his children and taking him away from his wife etc. This means that this family member will never be seen again, never get to guide his child, never get to comfort his loved ones in their hard times.

There has to be a middle way where each side recognizes the concerns of the other, or at least some scientific manner in which data can be gained to truly understand the range of views amongst the populace so that local customs, ways of life, etc and urban development do not lend themselves to such destructive friction.

[Badlun]

I appreciate your honest assessment here.

What are your thoughts though on why the common nationalist narrative hinges on making it seem as if these guys are "secretly robots and automatons and panjabees dressed up as Pashtuns etc etc."?

There has to be a middle way where each side recognizes the concerns of the other, or at least some scientific manner in which data can be gained to truly understand the range of views amongst the populace so that local customs, ways of life, etc and urban development do not lend themselves to such destructive friction.

I really appreciate your thoughts. I wish you instead of a doctor were a politician in Afghanistan or Pakistan to give a right direction to Afghans and Pashtuns.

You are 100% right that nationalsits are dubbed as atheists, infidels, kaafirs, communists even if they offer five times prayers and observe all religious injunctions. The same is true for the Islamists that all of them without discrimination are dehumanized and are being portrayed as savages and barbarians.

The same happened with secularism that it was made a word of kufar by Islamists mainly Jamatis, Jamiatis and Hizbis.

Do not you think that Secularism is the middle path which you recommended.

Faith, worship and morality have no problem in a secular system while culture is promoted as per the country or region, politics is practiced by professional politicians not Mullahs and economics by economists not by religious scholars. Science by scientists, and education by educationists not by religious pundits.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I really appreciate your thoughts. I wish you instead of a doctor were a politician in Afghanistan or Pakistan to give a right direction to Afghans and Pashtuns.

You are 100% right that nationalsits are dubbed as atheists, infidels, kaafirs, communists even if they offer five times prayers and observe all religious injunctions. The same is true for the Islamists that all of them without discrimination are dehumanized and are being portrayed as savages and barbarians.

The same happened with secularism that it was made a word of kufar by Islamists mainly Jamatis, Jamiatis and Hizbis.

Do not you think that Secularism is the middle path which you recommended.

Faith, worship and morality have no problem in a secular system while culture is promoted as per the country or region, politics is practiced by professional politicians not Mullahs and economics by economists not by religious scholars. Science by scientists, and education by educationists not by religious pundits.

Wrorraka, I hate politicians with a vigor. Like you I have had the chance to meet a few of few them from various parts of the world and the commonality of these folks save a few is that they often have no utilizable skill except perhaps grounded in excessive business interests or legalities. This often translates to a sort of elitism that I find repugnant. One Harvard Business School Professor was recently being interviewed on NPR about various law infractions done by Obama administration officials for instance or serious mistakes for which anyone else of the public would be fired summarily. She noted how disconnected these governing elites are from their masses. One of the exceptions I find is Ron Paul who remained a practicing physician to the end of his tenure, allowing him to not depend on elected politics for his livelihood.

So now, your question about secularism being the middle way... I think we have to be careful and even define secularism. For instance, are we talking about France's secularism where politicization of Islam as an anathema is used and abused by ruling elites?:
http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/...-ruling-party/

Or the secularism of America which to some degree is tempered by its Puritanical roots?

Are we talking about Ataturkism or are we talking about Jeffersonianism?

I think we do secular thought a disservice when we discuss it so nonchalantly as if it is lacking in nuances and not grounded in deep philosophical disagreements even within its own paradigms.

As another nuanced example take a look at how the Guardian News Paper of London views its freedom of speech under British law (as being threatened) versus the first amendment of the Constitution during the recent Snowden revelations.

Or when we discuss Islamic secularism are we talking about this Sahih hadith?

Abdullah used to give a religious talk to the people on every Thursday. Once a man said, "O Aba `Abdur-Rahman! (By Allah) I wish if you could preach us daily." He replied, "The only thing which prevents me from doing so, is that I hate to bore you, and no doubt I take care of you in preaching by selecting a suitable time just as the Prophet () used to do with us, for fear of making us bored."

Where the Prophet delineates a sort of reasonable attitude toward how often religion is injected into even daily dialogue.

What I mean is that perhaps terming something as "secular" is a misnomer and should be carefully done because it may elicit a knee jerk response in the modern conflict ridden context we all live in.

In that same vein, I do strongly feel that there are injunctions in the Quran, understood for centuries going back to the Prophet, his companions, and his successors - that are understood as divine law.

I decided (or perhaps better to say God decided for me) that I accepted the Muhammad (S)'s mission and view the Quran as the verbatim divine word of The Sole Diety (Al-Lah).

I also, based on my review of the evidence feel that certain prescriptions have been promulgated, and these prescriptions were executed by the Prophet, his companions, and his successors about how to institute societal rights, laws, and limitations.

I have formulated some of my thoughts regarding adjunctive literature according to how I view American Law. For instance, there is the constitution and then there are the adjunctive writings of the founding fathers and supreme court rulings etc. I know you disagree with the Quran being called a constitution, but I am merely stating my viewpoint. So in this way I personally view early literature by scholars and the actions of the Prophet/Companions as shedding light on the interpretation and execution of divine law and rights.

Yet, I also feel that wisdom is a part of any sort of governance. For instance, Mr. Paul understands the first amendment differently than Mr. Obama and Mr. Bush. The former hearkens back to the founders and their documentation for a purist view ala the 18th century and wants to apply that understanding in the modern context.

In this way, we can see how wisdom applies even in the Islamic context:

"Ibn az-Zubayr wanted to make the Kaaba how the Prophet Mohammad wanted it, on the foundation of the Prophet Ibrahim. Ibn az-Zubayr said, "I heard Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) say, 'The Prophet said: "If your people had not quite recently abandoned the Ignorance (Unbelief), and if I had sufficient provisions to rebuild it [the Kaaba], I would have added five cubits to it from the Hijr. Also, I would make two doors; one for people to enter therein and the other to exit" (Bukhari)"

This means that the bringer of the divine law even limited his own religious authority to some degree and understood humanity and its limitations as well as forgiveness and how priorities ought to be laid out in a society.

So that was a long but necessary set of references to answer your question about why secularism as you and I discussed it in the past is not my view of a middle way - mainly because the definition of secularism and whether to use that word at all in the charged environment is paramount.

Some of these answers may rely on innovative thought processes that bring the two worlds together.

For instance, let us take a case study suiting your demands.

So Mullah Fazlullah decides to ban education for females - but the data and preponderance of evidence, historically, economically, and even religiously do not agree with the statements posted around the web.

So how does one deal with this and bring the educationalist (Zia Yusufzai) and the religionist/freedom fighter (Fazl) together?

Well even the Brits have moved towards ending mixed sex wards in hospitals per the Garling report:
http://www.theherald.com.au/story/45...d-segregation/

I would think its plausible to sit Ziauddin and Fazl down in a room, remind them that they are human, that they both bleed, that their children both get sick, etc and then to ask them to state their specific evidence based issues. I would expect that they say the following:

Zia:
I want my daughter to be all she can be and to be educated and have the chance to maximize her independence and earning potential. Why should she be subject to an abusive situation that she cannot escape or should her husband die what then?

Fazl: Society needs to have ways to handle widows and the abused and there are ways in an Islamic set up

Zia:
That set up does not exist and has not existed for centuries. The set up in our society is that the next brother in line marries her!

Fazl:
Time, patients, fortitude, and effort need to be put into this, but divine injunction should not be superceded by personal whims.

Third party: So to summarize both of you want society to be taken care of, neither of you has said you want to erase what is good in Pashtun society but that you want to make it better. What about a compromise?
Hospital Wards earlier in the last century used to be segregated and the though there are slight physiological variations between the sexes, the general aspects of their medical care are similar. Just as the Brits have decided to separate wards out, why should there not be womens divisions, womens schools, and womens hospitals with divisions, chairwomen, etc? So Fazl, unless your main focus is just to be obstructionist and Zia unless your main focus is to force foreign ideologies, is this not a compromise? Fazl, your daughter can be educated but wont be around men, she can even remotely view lectures by male experts instead of attending those lectures with modern technology and Zia, your daughter can become that doctor - and we preserve the fabric of our society in a way that is not radical and does not cause discord.

Finally, Badlun wrorre, though I mentioned my belief in these divine injunctions, I think over the next 50 years or so there needs to be a dialogue within Islamic jurisprudence and scholarship. All reasonable and recognized scholars need to start writing and discussing the historicity, basis, and understanding of injunctions and informing the public about this. Secular scholars educated in theological seminaries should be a part of this dialogue and should inject their own evidence based assessments into the discussion. Data and evidence should guide the assessment though and not vice versa.

So for instance, one of your exceptions that you and RTR have discussed is the issue of male and female witnesses. I personally do not feel comfortable imposing a personal understanding over this verse to make my own life more comfortable because I very much hesitate to tamper with the divine instead of finding creative and acceptable solutions that are based on early interpretation going back to the root source. But that being said, secular Muslim scholars, religionists, etc should all do hefty research on this matter, read the ancient scriptures, primary source theological opinions, evolved understandings etc, and just as cardiologists come to consensus statements and issue them when the evidence is lacking or conflicting - so too should the next century be about these folks promulgating consensus statements and providing as much evidence as they can.

So to summarize its not the concept of secularism I am debunking or saying is the middle way... its what we define as secular or whether such a word needs be used at all to describe something already present.

[Toramana]

Barakzai, da ghatai ghatai siparai ma lika, pa ikhtisar khabara kawa pa ikhtisar, mung sara dumra taim nishtha, daa gadunwaal kho ozgar khel dai dai taim wisthai shi, mung kho dair karuna laro.

[jankhan]

Barakzai wror,
It is very easy to say and talk about the middle path but it is extremely difficult. Because there are some hidden hands who don't want peace and want it be continued.
So even if they want peace at some point in time and want to sit together so there is some drone attack or bomb blast in public places or something like that and thus the whole idea or peace is sabotaged just this way then there is another reason which revenge this element has dragged this whole issue to this extreme point.

And Badlun, he is talking about the middle path between the two sides and he is not talking about the the middle path in islam or secularism.
Thank you

[Badlun]

Barakzai wror
Once again thanks for your detailed description of what you think and what should be done.

If you hate politics or politicians then who will run the state and the government? Doctors are for hospitals and professors for class rooms. Whatever you think, I think , Zia think, Fazlullah think or Obama think, for its implementation we need politics. There is no other way out.

Mullah when wanted changes in society, left mehrab and joined hujra and started public speaking like a politician and wanted Islamic government. Same is done by politicians for the last many centuries, since the Greek city states era.

In Pashtun society hujra and jumat were separate and that is my ideal. If you call it secularism or Pashtunwali but that was the perfect state of affairs. Now jumat and hujra both are in shambles. Mullah is for mosque and politician for state and when these roles are altered the result will be chaos.

The issue is that only Pashtuns are suffering from this non balance after 1979. Rest of the world Muslim or non Muslim does not have such issues as everywhere Mullah is in mosque not in the office of prime minister or president. Except Iran where Mullah has some political powers, in rest of the world you will not see Mullah with political power. Then why we Pashtuns have this scourge of Mullah in power in the shape of Taliban and Mujahideen?

Even Punjabis and Tajiks have this separation of religion and politics but Pashtuns are adament to have a Mullah as their political leader.

In your parable of Zia and Fazlullah, you missed the point that education and career of Malala will be decided by her or her family. A mullah has no role in such decisions. Mullah should decide at what time the prayers will be offered or when Ramadan will start or how hajj is performed but in mundane day to day affairs Mullah has no role.

Dividing the women and men in all spheres of life like having separate toilets , is an utopia as husband and wife, brother and sister, mother and son, father and daughter, boy friend and girl friend, customer and supplier, doctor and patient , driver and passenger all cannot be separated everywhere as all these move around together. You being a doctor cannot say that you will attend only male patients.

Women is not a bomb that it will explode the society if mixed with men. If Ayesha can be commander in chief in a battle fought by men, men and women can be mixed everywhere as what matter is law and respect.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Barakzai, da ghatai ghatai siparai ma lika, pa ikhtisar khabara kawa pa ikhtisar, mung sara dumra taim nishtha, daa gadunwaal kho ozgar khel dai dai taim wisthai shi, mung kho dair karuna laro.

Yawa khabara da che pa zindagee ke musalahatoona dhee - ya ba Khodaay wageraay la garandaay magza aw warsaraa adzhulana/zar zar leekawaal kudrat warkaee - de tha ziraki walaay sho... Au Barakzo Pushtana aulaso par nassl key dha Zirak Neka aulad ke taksim yoo....

ya ba wageraay magza lazh kamquwat hasil kro, awa pa waroo waroo khath leekee.

Dwaym insaan che dartha khaaym zaan taklaas kawlaashee ka zaan e tez ye kro.

[Pakwatan]

Barakzai wror
Once again thanks for your detailed description of what you think and what should be done.

If you hate politics or politicians then who will run the state and the government? Doctors are for hospitals and professors for class rooms. Whatever you think, I think think, Zia think, Fazlullah think or Obama think, for its implementation we need politics. There is no other way out.

Mullah when wanted changes in society, left mehrab and joined hujra and started public speaking like a politician and wanted Islamic government. Same is done by politicians for the last many centuries, since the Greek city states era.

In Pashtun society hujra and jumat were separate and that is my ideal. If you call it secularism or Pashtunwali but that was the perfect state of affairs. Now jumat and hujra both are in shambles. Mullah is for mosque and politician for mosque and when these roles are altered the result will be chaos.

The issue is that only Pashtuns are suffering from this non balance after 1979. Rest of the world Muslim or non Muslim does not have such issues as everywhere Mullah is in mosque not in the office of prime minister or president. Except Iran where Mullah has some political powers, in rest of the world you will not see Mullah with political power. then why we Pashtuns have this scourge of Mullah in power in the shape of Taliban and Mujahideen?

Even Punjabis and Tajiks have this separation of religion and politics but Pashtuns are adament to have a Mullah as their political leader.

In your parable of Zia and Fazlullah, you missed the point that education and career of Malala will be decided by her or her family. A mullah has no role in such decisions. Mullah should decide at what time the prayers will be offered or when Ramadan will start or how hajj is performed but in mundane day to day affairs Mullah has no role.

Dividing the women and men in all spheres of life like having separate toiletts , is an utopia as husband and wife, brother and sister, mother and son, father and daughter, boy friend and girl friend, customer and supplier, doctor and patient , driver and passenger all cannot be separated everywhere as all these move around together. You being a doctor cannot say that you will attend only male patients.

Women is not a bomb that it will explode the society if mixed with men. If Ayesha can be commander in chief in a battle fought by men, men and women can be mixed everywhere as what matter sis law and respect.

Picking up a gun to go fight is not a hard thing to do.

But thankfully, many Pashtun in Pakistan, and many Pashtun Afghan expatriates are starting to value education overall.

Pashtun people are very smart people. I think with education, in the next coming decade or two this Mullah phenomenon can be wiped out.

But at the same time, I am discouraged.

While I am not a Pashtun, I can certainly relate with how religion is given more importance to anything else, coming from a family of two Maulvi grandfathers. Both of them being hafez of Quran Shareef.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Barakzai wror
Once again thanks for your detailed description of what you think and what should be done.

If you hate politics or politicians then who will run the state and the government? Doctors are for hospitals and professors for class rooms. Whatever you think, I think think, Zia think, Fazlullah think or Obama think, for its implementation we need politics. There is no other way out.

I think the American example where skilled servants, like for instance, Rand Paul the son who is also a physician, or even a mechanic etc can participate shows that artificial divisions are hard to justify. Take Obama's utilization of appointing that famous physicist into his cabinet.

That would then mean that we have to adhere to a lack of meritocracy where the Khan runs the politics of the hujra. I fail to see where that approach relieved us of 300 years of war... instead it fed internal divisions and had many many drawbacks as well.

We have to think out of the box and get back to our basic humanity. We must ask ourselves why in so many Pashtun families there are secular minded people, religious zealots etc and these can usually coexist even if they argue vehementally, but that basic humanity is forgotten outside of the home.

Mullah when wanted changes in society, left mehrab and joined hujra and started public speaking like a politician and wanted Islamic government.

Where I disagree is that circumstance time and time again appears to drive the Mullah out of the mehrab. When we study history, even in Churchill's time we see the Mullah as the sort of physiological fail safe of the body politic in extremis and exigency. Is this fail safe proper? In the human body we often see exaggerated responses leading to pathology... eg. septic shock is a combination of the invading bacteria's pathogenic ability but the body itself responds in a way that is initially appropriate and then inappropriate.

We see this same phenomena in most rural communities. When Khanaan don't act like leaders and don't lead their people, the fail safe mechanism is going to kick in. Most often in our history these Khanaan throw their lot in with whatever is beneficial to them in the immediate sense but not to the people or autonomy in the general sense. A few examples would be Khushaal Khan's son making deals with Mughals, Sultan Telai making deals with Sikhs, and various Kandahari Khans making deals Gurgin.

Now and then a brave Khan arises, and in the history time and time again the brave Khan knows his people and their aspirations, and he assumes his role appropriately. We see this when Mir Wais secured a fatwa and used his Khan status and religious sanctification to throw out Gurgin and take the fight to even Persia.

This same thing would happen and does happen here. Tomorrow you and I know if China or Russia invaded America the elites would run to some safe haven and the rural and simple people would be left to fight. What often unifies these people and would give them a sense of unity and urgency? Likely it would be their Baptist ministers etc.

Same is done by politicians for the last many centuries, since the Greek city states era.

In the Greek city states though they still paid homage to Zeuss and the pantheon... meaning that it was not so simple for a denier of their pantheon to rise to power. Take for instance Socrates's end when he challenged the oligarchy... Hemlock was his final solution.

In Pashtun society hujra and jumat were separate and that is my ideal.

In the context of peace and prosperity this set up of division of powers is observed across the world. As I noted above, the divisions start to blurr in the context of devastating war and invasion. We Pashtuns have been on the receiving end of not just 30 years of war... don't let the brief period during Zahir Shah's reign fool you... we have been continuously in a state of war in our collective history as a people, in the modern sense, since Safavid yoke was put on us.

If you call it secularism or Pashtunwali but that was the perfect state of affairs. Now jumat and hujra both are in shambles. Mullah is for mosque and politician for mosque and when these roles are altered the result will be chaos.

Gradual change, in which an informed populace beings to pick up the pieces is the solution.

The issue is that only Pashtuns are suffering from this non balance after 1979.

Refer to above

Rest of the world Muslim or non Muslim does not have such issues as everywhere Mullah is in mosque not in the office of prime minister or president.

Often because the score is settled with outside power. These nations often have an unspoken and unwritten system in which the top crust rake off wealth and prosperity and hoard it and they let the religious zealots subsist and provide for the masses in a sort of symbiosis but strained relationship.

Except Iran where Mullah has some political powers, in rest of the world you will not see Mullah with political power. then why we Pashtuns have this scourge of Mullah in power in the shape of Taliban and Mujahideen?

The Iran example you give should be talked about. Originally that revolution started out in a very Robespierre like fashion... it was almost a bit of class warfare. Note that the Shah and his elites brutalized the masses with SAVAK for some time. And many of these same elites actually supported Ajax and helped the outside powers remove Mossadegh, and plunged their nation into turmoil. THis was even after relatively secular Mossadegh was elected by his people and did what they wanted.

Note that this violent revolution became even more charged when outsiders like Hussain started needling and enforcing Iran's sense of urgency. The theocracy gained more traction and Iranians fostered their sense of nationhood around this, even in Tehran.

Then the 90s came and for sometime the West made their needling a bit less obvious and Hussain was contained. So they elected Khatami... a liberal of sorts. When the needling began again they turned to Ahmadinjaad.

So I guess my answer is not that we have to endure "the scourge" but rather what you are seeing as the cause I am seeing as the effect and vice versa.

So the real question is... how do we reestablish homeostasis and turn off this immunological response of the body?

Even Punjabis and Tajiks have this separation of religion and politics but Pashtuns are adament to have a Mullah as their political leader.

Refer to my discussion above regarding the factors that predispose us to such turmoil. In my estimation our discussion is like this:

Barakzai: The body (Pashtuns) is infected and responding with fever and sepsis response (Mullah and war).
Badlun: Blood vessel dilation (Mullah) is dropping the body's blood pressure and we need to treat the body with Tylenol due to the fever.
Barakzai: But that is not the underlying illness... its bacterial invasion eliciting that response... we have to get antibiotics in quickly to remove the offending instigator.

In your parable of Zia and Fazlullah, you missed the point that education and career of Malala will be decided by her or her family. A mullah has no role in such decisions.

Yes, but the Mullah also has decisions and views for his own daughters and family according to his religious ideology and I think you miss the point that he too has that inherent right regarding his own family.

Mullah should decide at what time the prayers will be offered or when Ramadan will start or how hajj is performed but in mundane day to day affairs Mullah has no role.

Dividing the women and men in all spheres of life like having separate toiletts , is an utopia as husband and wife, brother and sister, mother and son, father and daughter, boy friend and girl friend, customer and supplier, doctor and patient , driver and passenger all cannot be separated everywhere as all these move around together. You being a doctor cannot say that you will attend only male patients.

Well that depends once again on where one places their limitations. When discussing a society where we see remnants of such an approach (e.g. separate toilets do exist in most parts of America still).

And I referred to the Garling report which affected Britian and even Australia.

Garling's report was based on the needs and wants of patients to some degree but also on the data and he recommended war separation and separate rooms.

"Mixed-gender wards will be wiped out where possible, with men and women returning to single-sex rooms or separate ward bays. - See more at: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news....oD0WuEcW.dpuf"

So now these recommendations will affect the British Kingdom... yet you are telling me that when starting from scratch in a relatively segregated society (Pashtun Society) already that such an approach to at least move things forward is a nonstarter?

Women is not a bomb that it will explode the society if mixed with men. If Ayesha can be commander in chief in a battle fought by men, men and women can be mixed everywhere as what matter sis law and respect.

I never said I disagree with this view. I refer you to the statement of the Holy of Holies when discussing the Kabah and his people. The Apostle said that he understood his people's temperament and even though he thought he could make some changes that would make the center of city life in Mecca more stable and safe and even provide more religious accommodation, he stepped back because he saw that his people had taboos of some sort and decided to use wisdom and gradual change.

In this same way, we have to at least get started somewhere. What you are telling me is that the parameters are set... the confines of the problem are cemented... the workables are unworkable and that we are in the box and cannot think out of it. So this is one approach but that approach involves a lot of blood, a lot of force, a lot of society control in a way that violates self determination (i.e. propagandizing a view).

Wisdom would say it is purely theoretics that the Mullah has no say in Zia's life and vice versa... they are inextricably linked in this phase of conflict. Zia and the Mullah have been performing the same dance and affecting eachother now for decades in the least. That means each has to give a little to get a little or accept that this is a conflict to the death and destruction and loss of some liberties one way or another.

So Badlun wrorre there is an interesting debate in Biblical matters I was pondering over and about on my review of the Bible the other day. Specifically, regarding this verse:
Isaiah: "Come now, Let us reason together..." (Isaiah 1:18)

Translators argued over the meaning of the word and another group of translators say the text ought to read:

Isaiah: "Come now, let us settle the matter..."

Still a third group makes the translation even more harsh to say:
"Come now, lets consider your options..."

We both, speakers and readers of English can see the dramatic difference a word can make.

The first translation means that two cordial parties sit down and reason out a solution

The second means to "settle the matter" absolutely and is more stark and ominous and devoid of the method of rational discussion.

The third translation simply offers one party a term of surrender.

Zia and Fazl will have to determine if they "want to reason together" or "settle the matter" or force the other to surrender.

I far prefer the first.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

I am going to go run do some badani warzish since I have a vacation period that allows me to catch up on some fitness... but will answer you tomorrow should we continue this discussion. shpaa mo pa khaayr.

[gadoonwal]

Do you think this popularity of Fazlullah is all engineered by ISI. The local Pashtuns of Swat have nothing to do with making him popular and supporting him.

Maulana Fazalullah, a thirty three years old resident of Mamderai, Swat is the most talked about personality in the region. He has a large number of followers many of whom are ready to sacrifice their lives and every thing for his cause. He was born in the house of Biladar Khan; a Pukhtun of Babukarkhel clan of the Yusufzai tribe of Swat. Biladar Khan was highly inspired by the TNSM movement (Movement for the enforcement of Shariah laws) patroned by Maulana Sufi Muhammad became one of the right-hand men of the Maulana.


Finding himself even more devoted for the said cause, he sent his son, the then Fazal Hayat, now naming Fazalullah to his Madrassa (seminary) at Kumbar, Dir. This close and long association between the two ultimately got shaped into matrimonial relationship.


Biladar Khan is no more, Sufi Muhammad is in Prison but the son and son in law, Maulana Fazallulah, is leading the same movement, thus fulfilling the great wish of his father and father in law.


Fazalullah has made his native village Mamderai as headquarter of the TNSM, thus got it shifted from Kumbar, Dir to Mamderai, Swat.
Maulana has started his own F M radio channel for his preachings and having a big circle of listeners. Strange to say most of his listeners are the women folk.


Six months ago when he expressed about his own wish of establishing a Madrassa, Mosque and offices, the people responded even more beyond his expectations. They generously donated in cash and kinds. Hundreds and thousands of people voluntarily take part in the construction process turn by turn daily. They work full day on their own expenses including food and equipment. Thus this huge complex is expediting towering.


For Jumma (Friday) prayers a vast tract of land is levelled to accommodate a huge gathering of people from nearly all villages of Swat, praise worthy to see.


The Maulana makes a riding show (with himself on a black horse) after the Jumma Prayers in the same ground, so that the people can have a glimpse of him.
Exclusive: An interview with Maulana Fazalullah, VALLEY SWAT

The local people did supported him cus of his FM radio and emotional speeches.
But he become more papular with help of gev news and pakistani media owned by isi.
The pakistani army supplied him weapons,trainers etc.
The pak army majors and officers were some of the top commanders of ttp in swat.It is fact ask someone from swat.
I have been to swat after the war and i found swatains too scared to talk about talibs but they know very well that it was done by pakistani govt.
Some of them told that it was paki army .
Did,nt you watch that interview of afzal khan lala where he clearly said talibs were sponsered by army.
as far as fazlullah so he is gujar not pashtun.

[jankhan]

There is a huge confusion in Pakistan about this confused issue. Originally it is not so complicated but it has been made so sophisticated and complicated by those hidden forces who want it to be continued for their vested interests. They want to keep the nation in this confused state so that no movement arise from within the masses and thus they could achieve their goals.
The Pakistani intelligence agency in incompetent in coping with to control and cut and exposed all those foreign hidden hands. But at the other hand they are themselves involved in this brutal game. But the question is who is being hit with this brutal game. the answer is the common people and our society. Especially our Pashtun society was badly hit by all this. Our culture, unity, traditions, social norms ghairat, naamoos and many other on which we used to be proud are being dispersed and disappearing.
We had high hopes with ANP but ANP itself went and sit in ISI and Armys lap. They should have exposed this bloody game of the secret agency being played with innocent people and with our society because that was their last chance, they are not to come again in power.

[Khorosani]

You guys sometimes look into issues too deeply

Mullah Fadhulullah is the new ameer, he has certain policies and certain qualities. He has taken a stance against the army and that's it. Whether he is right or wrong is for the Ulema to judge.

It isn't rocket science and not everything is controlled by the government, get out of your conspiracy thinking heads.

[afghan]

this fazllulah guy used to be camera shy, after he went into hiding started to appear on cameras.

[Badlun]

Mullah Fazlullah, the new leader of the Pakistani Taliban, has a reputation as a ruthless commander prepared to do anything to enforce his uncompromising interpretation of Islamic law.


He has succeeded Hakimullah Mehsud, who was killed in a US drone strike in North Waziristan last week.
He led the Taliban's brutal two-year rule in Pakistan's northwest valley of Swat, which saw supposed wrongdoers flogged and beheaded in public and hundreds of schools burned down.


Under Fazlullah's rule, Green Square in Mingora, the main town of Swat, became known as “Bloody Square” for the slaughtered, bullet-ridden bodies that were hung in it almost every day.


Fazlullah, believed to be aged 39, was born Fazal Hayat in Swat. He studied at an Islamic religious school and worked as a chairlift operator and sold firewood, before joining his father-in-law's Tehrik Nifaz-i-Shariat-i-Muhammadi (TNSM), or Movement for the Enforcement of the Sharia of Muhammad (pbuh).


After US-led forces entered Afghanistan to oust the Afghan Taliban from power in 2001, Fazlullah joined thousands of Pakistanis who crossed the border to fight what they saw as a “holy war” against the invaders.
He was arrested on his way back to Pakistan but was later released on bail and became the head of the Sharia movement in Swat after his father-in-law was jailed.


In 2006 he began delivering fiery sermons on his own FM station, earning the nickname “Mullah Radio,” railing against polio vaccination programmes and girls' education.


After a deadly army operation to clear the radical Lal Masjid (Red Mosque) in Islamabad, Fazlullah merged his TNSM with the newly formed Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP).


As his control of Swat, once a popular tourist destination known as the “Switzerland of Pakistan,” grew from 2007 onwards, Fazlullah set up Sharia courts that handed out savage punishments.
In 2009 Malala Yousafzai, aged just 11, began a blog on the BBC Urdu website chronicling the horrors of life under the Taliban.


The TTP made an unsuccessful attempt to kill her in Swat in October last year, saying she had campaigned against them. She survived being shot in the head and has gone on to become a global icon of the struggle against extremism.


An army offensive ended Fazlullah's rule in Swat in 2009 and he escaped with a band of loyalists into the mountains of eastern Afghanistan, from where they have continued to orchestrate attacks in Pakistan.
Fazlullah, who has a $500,000 government bounty on his head, has mounted some brutal and humiliating attacks on Pakistan's military, including the beheading of 17 soldiers after an attack in June 2012.


In September, soon after Pakistan's political parties had backed a government plan for peace talks with the Taliban, Fazlullah's men responded with violence.


A bomb attack killed two senior army officers, including a major general, in the country's northwest, a galling blow for the military.
Fazlullah claimed the attack in a video message in which he spelled out his hardline position.
“We will remove any hurdle to enforcing Islamic Sharia. Our goal is very clear – we want the law of Allah in Allah's land,” he said.
TTP?s ruthless new commander Fazlullah - DAWN.COM