Terrorism in Pakistan

State of denial

The culprits behind the latest outrage

See article

Readers' comments


Satyameva Jayate

Sorry to hear that WeeklyBlitz. I am glad to hear that at least some East Pakistani's are not in a state of denial. I would be curious to know who your pro-Islamist media/pundits blame usually. RAW or ISI or both?


State patronized terror is a scenario in most of the Asian nations, especially in those Muslim dominated countries like Pakistan, Iran, and Bangladesh etc. But, the most important factor here, which might be a subject of grave concern of the international community, is, in many of the Muslim nations, anti-Jihadist and anti-Islamist forces are becoming target of the Islamist-Ruling Party alliances.

In Bangladesh, on February 22, 2009, only anti-Jihadist newspaper Blitz office was attacked by a group of armed thugs belonging to the ruling party, which was co-led by an officer from the Forces Intelligence. This is certainly a new development, where anti-Islamist media is being attacked by a trio force of ruling party, Islamists and the military intelligence. Such things also happen in Pakistan as well.

Almost after 1 month of attack on the office of Weekly Blitz newspaper by armed hooligans belong to ruling party in Bangladesh, members of law enforcing agencies are reluctant in taking any action, as some high ups in the government and police administration instructed the investigation officer not to 'harass' any of the accused in this case as they belong to the ruling party.



Weekly Blitz editor and other staffs of the newspaper have made an appeal to the media community in the country and in the world for their kind and immediate help in this regard. Online edition of this newspaper is available on: www.weeklyblitz.net


I agree with what you say Hindu nationalist but your answer to the problem is inhumane and surely you know that too.

I think it is key for India to severe and cut all ties with Pakistan until Pakistan takes concrete steps to curb terrorism from overflowing into Indian borders.

To bomb pakistan as such would reduce Indians to the level of terrorists for attacking unarmed civilians.

Satyameva Jayate

I can confidently assure that most Indians/Hindus will disagree with the conclusion of previous post. What was done during WWII cannot work in today's world. That approach, not only it is simply wrong, it will only create more problems - that's why West has not used that option yet. But I agree that the aid should be cut-off, and also that West should not try to link Kashmir issue into this. That is very foolish of Obama. First he needs to educate himself on the history and politics of this region before saying stupid things like he did.

- Mustafa Kemal Ataturk

A Hindu nationalist

While I agree with what is written in the article, I have to add that Pakistan is a failed State. Worse still 90% of the Islamic terrorist attacks anywhere in the world have either Pakistani origins or there is some Pakistani connection. Further, there is always some link with elements in the establishment. In spite of all the evidence, the world, particularly the West has failed to do anything about it. Many in the West seem to think that if India hands over Kashmir to Pakistan, the terrorist problem will be solved. Far from it, because the awowed aim of most Pakistanis is to establish a Dar ul Islam in India, glories of the Mughal Empire and then gradually extend it to the West. Just a glance at the school text books in Pakistan will prove my case. But the West contiues to turn its blind eye, more military aid has just been promised by Obama, aid for terrorism. The only solution is to punish Pakistan, just as the Allies punished Germany and Japan during World War II, carpet bombing in Germany and the atomic bombs in Japan. The result is that both nations have eschewed war and peace has now lasted for more than 60 years and will continue.


Satyameva Jayate, you are 100% correct. Muslims never take responsibility for what Islam teaches or for what Muslims do (ie, the bad ones are not 'real' Muslims). Of course, this makes sense because Islam is perfect, as everybody knows. Right?

I have had quite a bit of interaction with Muslims and they are incapable of being honest about the Quran, ahadith or even their own history. Words mean nothing to them. You will note this in MPoN's comments. He quotes 'nice' verses from the 'glorious' Quran but forgets the many more that teach hate and violence against non-Muslims. He quotes 5:32 "who shall ever kill a human being whether muslim or non muslim it is as though as if he has killed the whole humanity" except he 'forgets' 2/3s of the verse. What it at actually says is "we have ordained that for the Children of Israel whoever kills a person, except for bla bla bla, it is as if he killed all of humaity". MPoN, like all Muslims, can't quote this verse accurately to save his sole (or soul). Oh yes, the next verse goes on to authorize brutal murder and torture of Islam's enemies. Great. Oh yes, by the way, Allah is plural?

As stated, Muslims are never honest about the role Islam plays in their troubles, so they must blame everything on somebody else (Jews, Israel, India, USA, Bush, Crusaders, Hollywood, TV, poverty, colonialism, etc) - the list is too long for this commentary.

The fact is that in Paki schools they teach hate against the West and India. This is well known and documented. Note that while Muslims have increased in India, the 12% of Hindus that existed in the so-called Land of the Pure in 1947 are almost all gone. Do Muslims take responsibility for this? No.

This problem is much bigger than India and Pakistan. What we see is a religion that offers nothing but hate, conquest and violence. This is a return to the Islam of Mohammad's time. Yes, if you read the hadith and early histories you will find the story of a people that made it their mission to attack, kill, and conquer non-Muslims, for the glory of Allah and for plunder. If anybody thinks this is not true, they have not read the hadith and early histories of Islam (Tabari, Hisham, Kathir, etc...)

Things will only improve if Muslims take a deep look at the soul of Islam and its teachings. They would have to apply the same moral standards to themselves as they want from others. Don't hold your breath. Islam is incapable of change or honesty. Things are going to get worse. Blood will flow. Innocent people will be hurt. And so it is...



Master piece,
Thanks for your thoughts. I can empathize with your feeling outnumbered.
I think you are sincere in trying to present your point of view.
I do think you missed the main thrust of my comment, however.
The problem that I see for Pakistan is in its folding of religion into the process of governance. Faith and politics need to be kept separate in order for a nation to engage productively with modernity (and I would add reality).
Unless Pakistanis are willing to question some of their more cherished beliefs in this regard (which is a painful process), it will not find its way to the original secular vision that Mr. Jinnah had for his country. It will continue to limp along into the future, and likely will eventually stumble and fall.
An objective recognition of Pakistan's problems and an ensuing discussion is not the same as a celebration of its faults (there are some who may do that, but most people understand that is in poor taste as well as bad karma) Those two things also appear to be equated in the minds of many Pakistanis, much to the detriment of the nation. It really is unfortunate if a rational discusssion is equated with "state of DENIAL regarding the very existence of Pakistan" . Confronting a nation with its inherent contradictions doesn't mean that one individual or group hates another individual or group. I know that the "hate" you wrote of does not apply to me and I don't think it applies to the vast majority of posters from either side. I do think there is a lot of understandable frustration on both sides, and that that is often evident in the tone and content of the comments generally (including mine). However, that is not "hate"
So I do think that is nothing but a "straw man" argument.
Regarding Ijtihad, I never asserted that a failure to implement it is responsible for Pakistan's state of ongoing crisis. I do think such a failure in Islamic civilization as a whole partly accounts for its inability to excell in the modern age. However, Pakistan hasn't even reached stability yet, let alone excelling. Personally I think it would be great if Pakistan took the lead among Islamic countries in that regard. I don't think at present it has the confidence in itself as a Muslim nation to allow the freedom of thought and action it would require, however. One hopes that "reopening the gates of Ijtihad" would be seen as a worthy challenge for Pakistans talented people.
I do appreciate and agree with you on your larger point that India and Pakistan need to learn to live together, but it appears first they need to be able to develop a groundwork for talking to one another.
Again, thank you for your comments. I wish you well, take care

Satyameva Jayate

MPoN: Well, well, now you are putting words into others mouths. I can see the game you are trying to play - I am actually quite familiar with this strategy; used frequently by the dogmatic believers of Abrahamic Religions (A-R). Although you are not consciously aware of applying this tactic, it is a well known debate survival technique. You are doing it but you cant recognize it - it is almost like a reflex mechanism.

What I have stated in my postings is plain and simple. But you want to twist it around and build a case for labeling me an enemy of Islam, and I somehow don't want Pakistan to exist. On the contrary whatever I have posted here so far is in the best long-term interests of the well-being of both Islam and Pakistan. People who read it will understand this quite clearly. It seems you want to bail-out after playing the 'victim card', so that you can make me look like the hater/aggressor. Well played, but quite predictable, and I am not falling for it.

Here I try to present step-by-step the strategy A-R believers, like MPoN, typically use in this scenario:

1. Critic presents his arguments (refer my previous posts)

2. Believer responds with apologetic arguments
a) Islam means peace.
b) Selectively quote verse(s) that preach love, compassion, and all the good stuff. (Love thy neighbor, Thou shall not kill, etc.)
c) Hide the verses that will cause inconvenience

3. Now the critic has also read the believers scriptures, and history of the believers actions, and also the current events. So for every verse presented in 2b above, a critic can counter with at least equal number of 2c type verses, if not more, and historical evidence. This can go on for a long time.

-- Now if the believer hasn't beheaded/shot/blown-up the critic yet, we go to step 4.

4. This is the point where the believer cant defend any further. He then cries and blames that the critic is a hater/aggressor/evil bad closed-minded person, and wants to stop the debate. Now the believer is playing what is known as the 'victim-card'.

5. At this point, once the believer claims victim-hood, it is expected that everyone watching the debate should pity the 'poor victim'. Now a normal critic would be baffled and shocked, will have to feel sorry and go easy on the believer.

We can play this game over and over again for many centuries. But the world doesn't have that kind of patience anymore.

Important thing to realize is ALL systems/dogmas/societies have negative/harmful qualities. Nothing is perfect. We should allow improvements to happen. All systems need to evolve and adapt to new environments/circumstances. When they fail/refuse to do so, nature marks them for extinction.

MPoN: You don't have to respond to this. Just print it and keep it with you for contemplation. Or not.

Master Piece of Nature

I dont think I can clarify my position as I am clearly outnumberd but will give it a last try
@ David Sajiv
First of all, blaming dictatorship on Islam I think is not correct. As you would see no martial law had its founding as "Lord wanted it to be this way" and if you see each military rule including Zia ul Haq's reason for imposition was not religion. I really get from you guyz posts that you really are not ready to accept Pakistan as nation wholeheartedly and attacking religion that 165 million people love very much would only bring hate in the hearts of people and I do not believe this is the road India and Pakistan should go to. Also your comment regarding "Ijtahid hasent worked if you were implementing it" I would point out that your point does not hold as it is based on a false premise as religion is not responsible for the all these crisis careful analysis would reveal.
I am forced to say that it is you guyz (i dont know if you guyz represent the majority opinion) who are in a state of DENIAL regarding the very exsistance of Pakistan. Let it be known to you we dont dislike or despise you and rather like you and believe and appreicate that we are very similar and you should ponder on this line DO NOT HATE THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE YOUR NEIGHBOR FOREVER....(i shall not post more comments here)


Pakistan seems heading for another inflection point, and I think even Pakistanis are not in denial about that.
Zardari and Sharief, inserting personal vendettas into the political process, continue to generate negative consequences for the nation. Each man in turn has used a combustible mix of thuggery, incompetence and hypocrisy, thus assaultng whatever shaky foundations of democracy that the country has left. Also, the society has long been unable to separate religion from governance, which its founder had hoped for. And so the Islamic Republic of Pakistan again seems destined for a military takeover.
Perhaps this is the most interesting aspect of the nation's narrative. In a religiously founded country, I wonder how the (reluctant?) generals view their role. For they not only have to protect their country from unfriendly neighbors but also frequently from their own politicians.
In a nation whose reason for existence is its religion, perhaps future generations would be be told the story of the events currently unfolding as if they are divinely sanctioned. After some generations it may come to resemble stories from a more venerated past. Perhaps in rhythym,tone and language, it would sound something like this:

A Cry was heard in Karachi, and a Lamentation in Lahore
and the Lord hearkened unto His peoples suffering
then the Lord said unto Kiyani
"Kiyani, the Land of the Pure has become a land of Tribulation (once again)
for Zardari and Sharief and Mullah are an abominination to my eyes
Get thee out of thy barracks and restore peace unto Peshawar and unto my people
and Kiyani heard the Lord's command and took with him his great host of men,
they left their safe dwelling places with their infantry, and tanks and helicopter gunships (no sheep and cattle in this story)
then Kiyani did smite the Lords enemies and brought righteousness to the parched land
and the Lord said unto His people
"Behold, Kiyani your ruler, in whom I am well pleased"
and the nation knelt as one before the Lord, and before Kiyani, and said "Ameen"

Perhaps a return to military rule is the best thing for Pakistan in this time of crisis, given the "peculiarities" of her civilian rulers. But to have military rule by generals in a religious state seems an odd juxtaposition to me, although that appears to be a recurring theme for Pakistan. I wonder if the Pakistanis see any incongruity in it? So might as well present it as the Lord's will in Pakistan's history books and in Friday sermons - or perhaps they already do.

Regarding "implementing Ijtihad...we as Pakistanis have done that," - like Gandhi said about Western civilization: "I think it would be a good idea"
In other words, if Pakistan has supposedly been implementing it, it hasn't done a very good job. It would be better for all if Pakistan is not in denial about that.

Master Piece of Nature

I as an Economist in Amsterdam often wondered before writing here that will it make a difference by writing here? As it is often perceptions other than facts people give in to but i wrote as readers of economist I think will be inclined towards rationality more than most people i would think.
@Satyameya Jayate
Well if you say that no body is saying that killing terrorists would solve the problem. But when each one of you are screaming at Pakistan to "do more" is implying exactly that and speaking out against dailogues with militants. There are many things you have brought up in your post but i think I ll try to refute the most basic one. Religion....
I having studying world major religions think that I am in a position to address this issue. First just to set the record straight I do not think Saudi Government is following Islam, yes their culture maybe. Also I knowing the ground realities of Pakistan and know that most Pakistanis dont agree to Saudi's brand of Islam. Nor is its Saudi agenda to Imperial agenda to impose Islam on everyone please do not give in to conspiricy theories. But interestingly bringing into question the Abrahamic religion as root cause of terrorism. I for Islam can definately say that in order to be "saved" one do not have to subscribe to one particular religion. And we belive Allah or God is god of everyone. So I ll augment my argument with the verse from the Glorius Quran Chapter 2 Verse 62 which says : "Verily those who believe and those who are christians, jews and Sabians, whoever believes in God and the Last day and does good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear nor shall the grieve in this world and the Hereafter" So pluralism in the Quranic texts is emphasized in many many more places so I would say that believe that Islam says that you should impose this religion on everyone is unfounded. Regarding reform our Prophet (pbuh) has told us to implement "ijtihad" meaning reinterpertation and reconstrution over the ages so we as Pakistanis have done that espcially as we are so much influenced by Allama Muhammad Islam and the crux of this message has already been mentioned in his wonderful book "Reconstruction of Islamic Thought"
You must understand that terrorism doesnt have a religion and citizenshit and the Quran says "who shall ever kill a human being whether muslim or non muslim it is as though as if he has killed the whole humanity and who shall ever save a live of human being is as though as if he has saved the humanity"

Satyameva Jayate

Master Piece of Nature: I don't see anybody on this forum suggesting that killing the terrorists will solve the problem. It is the Islamic terrorists who think that by killing the non-believers, Allah will be pleased with them and using these terror tactics the whole world can be forced to convert to Islam/Sunni/Wahhabism - The Grand Ummah-topia. The point is, even if Allah sent Muhammad back to us today, he will not be able to do what he did back then; its a different world now; even the Saudis royals will reject him today. But this is what Wahhabism has been trying to do. It is just a Saudi political/imperial agenda. But the ignorant Muslims in the poor countries cannot understand this; and the Saudi's and other rich Muslims are exploiting them. The simple fact is there can never be one religion for the whole world. How difficult is it to understand that? The "one-true-god, one-true-religion" one-upperistic attitude encouraged by the Abrahamic Religions is the root cause of terrorism.

The real solution is - reform of Islam, which is long overdue. Wahhabism is not reform; it is just turning back the clock - to the good old Salafi days almost a thousand years ago. Everything evolves over time, including our religions - this is a natural process. Opposing this natural process will only lead to endless conflicts. World needs to see grassroots level organizations that are working to make Islam compatible with the ethics of the modern world. Anytime when reformers showed up they were condemned as infidels/apostates or worse they were killed (Dara Shikoh, Sufi saints etc). It is in the best interest of Islam/Muslims to reform, otherwise it/they will become more and more irrelevant and actually be a nuisance to the larger world.

The rest of the world needs to drastically cut down its oil consumption. It is oil money from the Saudi's that is spreading wahhabism, funding the madrassas/training camps and controlling the academy and media. Today in India 1500 new cars get on the road every single day. Though it sounds great for the economy, it is seriously bad for inter/national security.


Most important need to address terror is the recognition of the problem. Blaming India for Lahore or prevarication on Mumbai do not confirm a recognition but denial.

Conceding territory de facto in Waziristan and even legally in Swat to Taliban is to strengthen Taliban not weaken.

Worlds can support a Pakistan that sincerely fights terror but procrastinations and prevarications can not bring admiration.

The ultimately the issue is if Pakistan can overcome denial and get sincere in fighting terror. Given the Jihadi Army combo security architecture of Pakistan, it appears unlikely.

Master Piece of Nature

State of Denial? We see the threat of terrorism real but killing terrorists will not end terroism as you guyz believes. We sent our forces in the Tribal areas and they had 700 (Fazl ullah men) back then but killing them in large numbers (as the US suggested) only made 10000 of them so the solution is dialogue not armed conflict. I find many contradictions and misreporting in the article. For example the article claim that the famous tv presenters were trained (brainwashed) in Zia ul Haq according to his ideology. If the writer had his facts straight he would find out that all these "tv presenters" were harrased if not brutally tortured at the hands of Zia and almost all Pakistani do not support Zia and if you go on Pakistani streets you would find massive hatred for the Zai even today. Moreover calling Imran Khan a taliban supporter is also false to quote his interview with newsweek he called then "illitrate religious bigots" you can also see his recent CNN interview with Farid Zakira on You tube to know how much he support taliban and ther are manymore such examples... But what really upsetted me was not the article but the comments as I was expecting support in this difficult time not severe critisism for Pakistan but anyway I do not blame you guys I see things transpired in such a way that gave you this impression that we are somehow terrorist sympathizers ect ect..The anti Pakistan sentiment is overwhelming here and each allegation requires a logical reply which I feel is impossible to give at this forum with just the magnitude of things said against.

Satyameva Jayate

Abandoning jihad is abandonment of Islam/Ummah, which will surely break up the country. Hatred/aggression towards non-believer is central to Abrahamic religions, and it is the strongest unifier. Then this unity is exploited by the 'religious' leaders to achieve various socio-economic-political goals. For example, the leader will order the believers to go convert/kill the non-believers.

The fundamental goal is, plain and simple, land-grabbing. Either kill and take-over the land (like in Europe, Americas, Australia, Middle-East etc), or convert and bring the entire population under one centralized church/ummah (like in Europe, Philippines, South Korea, South and South-East Asia etc).

The first option used to work quite well. But not anymore. Islam has not yet passed the reformative phase that Christianity went thru. Development of rational thought, science, free press, secular democracy, independent judiciary etc, are all impediments for performing the Lord's work. From time to time, we still see in the West, the believers will try to undermine the above. Thankfully in the West, these socio-cultural-political developments preceded the development of WMDs (They could have come in very handy in the jihad against the Native Americans, Aborigines etc.) But in the case of Islam, there is lack of such progress, while they have access to WMDs.

Now the real issue is how do you make the believers understand that their belief (and the resulting actions) causes suffering (himsa) to non-believers, when it is the believer's 'religious duty' to actually inflict such suffering? It is rather easier to blame the non-believer and deny all responsibility.


What The Economist did not write about is more interesting! Can Pakistan get out from this deep hole of denial? What we see on this forum is that Pakistan is digging deeper. There are good reasons why:

1) This denial has been systematically promoted in the society through education and propaganda over decades.
2) The denial serves the purpose of the real rulers of Pakistan, who want to maintain the alliance of jihadis and the army against India.
3) The cost of reversing this denial is too high, Pakistan will have to abandon jihad, fight Taliban, other terrorist groups. Too much is at stake here for the army.

I am a pessimist that there is no easy way out of this for Pakistan. Paranoia of conspiracies will remain a hot commodity in Pakistan.

Satyameva Jayate

XPERT: You have referred to several 'indian' websites where 'india's' problems are openly discussed/debated by 'indians'. Of course there are 'indians' who might disagree with some of the content in those reports. Disagreeing and debating is not exactly denial. [Also know that most of the Indian English language media is run by marxist/communist/socialist pseudo-intellectuals who have their own agendas - so their reporting is not always objective or factual.] But still, this is what is called freedom - free press, freedom of expression, freedom of speech etc. Also, most indians will actually agree that bollywood underworld and the hawala money channels have connections with the islamic terror networks. This is a well known problem for the past more than two decades.

Now that you've googled those news reports, which are great examples of open discussion - how about following those examples and applying it to your scenario? Can we see some open and honest discussion about the issues that are plaguing your country [For the moment let says we ignore their impact on other countries.]? And can you do that without unnecessarily dragging India's (real & perceived) problems in to it?


Dear Sirs,

Cricket should never have been hit.I am originally from India but am now living in America for the last ten years.I love cricket,my girlfriend even calls me a Cricket Fanatic....I was deeply hurt and sorry when the Sri Lankan Cricket team was attacked.These guys(The Lankan Lions) are heroes,not just in Sri Lanka but also globally.I will never forget the efforts these guys made to rescue and rebuild their homeland after the Tsunami.Muralitharan,Sangakkara and Mahela drove relief trucks themselves to all affected areas.Sri Lankans are the nicest and most well behaved of all the cricket teams and their cricket board has always supported other boards in trouble.They make watching cricket exciting and thrilling with their splendid variations and unique styles.

I also have many Pakistani friends here in America,who all agree with me on this.Cricket should never have been hit.Its an unspeakable Tragedy.No two words about it.

We Subcontinent guys love our Cricket,whole-heartedly whether its India,Pakistan,Sri Lankan,Bangladesh and now even Afghanistan and Nepal have joined up with us.In a region with so much pain and suffering,cricket was the balm that covered our wounds.We can't let Cricket dissapear.

I will pray for all the souls who have lost their lives in this incident.

John Toradze

The denial is not really in Pakistan so much, since Pakistan was founded as a Muslim state. The real denial is in the West, most of all in the White House.

The entire point of 9-11 was to eventually take over Pakistan to get it's nuclear weapons. Instead of dealing with that, we wasted our precious resources on a war somewhere else. So now it is appearing inevitable.

The price of oil is going to rise again. Depend on it.

AZretired dude

One more example that terrorists have free reign in Pakistan.No one especially foreigners are safe in that country.Unless altitudes change,Pakistan is headed in the wrong direction....


Latest blog posts - All times are GMT
China's trade surplus: Strength from weakness
Free exchange 1 hrs 59 mins ago
Regenerative medicine: Bad science
Banyan 2 hrs 16 mins ago
America's economy: Waiting for inflation
Free exchange 3 hrs 2 mins ago
The European economy: Four is a trend?
Buttonwood's notebook July 10th, 9:10
Graphic detail July 10th, 8:53


Products and events



