Late Benazir Bhutto and her well paid speech writer and supporter, Mark Siegel, a great Ashkenazi mind, convinced Americans that the Talibans would be strengthened if Pakistan stayed with the authoritarian rule of a military general. The neo-conservatives were waiting for such a suggestion that would lead to attack on Afghanistan and Iraq. General Musharraf who was considered as the best possible alternative to any other leadership, all of a sudden became the symbol of despotism, autocracy and repression, supposedly causing extremism. General Musharraf had to make a deal to stay in power- He was willing to jump in river of fire to stay put- He was desperate and confused. General Musharraf did not support Americans wholeheartedly- He was extremely careful how far he wanted to help them. He was also making comments on Israeli and Palestinian conflict to the dislike of Israel. There was a time that Jewish community considered him as the most moderate and reasonable Muslim leader. General Musharraf sometimes comes out as honest and truthful; and in the process he appears to be blunt to a point that it hurts his position. The friends of the president, PML-Q, realized that flirting days with the military general were coming to an end- They were ready to find new love. They were euphoric to fall in love with the democracy, widowed many times and left for more suitable match (military), or divorced before settling down with the groom (Pakistani public). America had enough of that general they loved before and wanted to install Benazir. The neo-conservatives, likes of Dick Cheney, were pleading for democracy in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan- They knew that you could not expect the grass to grow in a desert. These three countries were targeted. In the veil of, “let us teach these people to be civil and peaceful”, they started with the lessons of liberal democracy. They ended up installing Maliki, Karzai, and Zardari; three most corrupt and factional felonious characters. All of a sudden, we heard familiar terms used in the west, such as “Consent of free people” and “rights of people” in Pakistan and its well wishers. The Holy crusaders for democracy were out there to ask for the rights of people to have their freedom. The religious politicians who basically despise the freedom in its true spirit were willing to die for the democracy- They could not see to live in a religious state without democracy. The religious teachings, no matter what they falsely allude to in public, are about piety found in specific instructions or teachings of a specific religion. The religious forces always wish to define the moral codes of a society based on their religious teachings. There is a right way and a wrong way; there is no room to come up with any new ideas. The problem in freedom is that one is given the right to what his heart desires as long as he is not hurting others- He can say what most people may not wish to hear. In a free society where liberal democracy grows like a rose, one can choose to be stupid without being punished by the mob. You cannot have blasphemy laws- If your heart desires, you can call Christians devils and may say bad things and make jokes about Jesus in public. You can ask for your rights as a gay person and find pride gay day on the streets of New York. No matter how repulsive a statement may be or how offensive to ones religious beliefs an action is, as long as it does not incite violence, the free society gives rights to express ones view. The constricted views of these religious politicians put forward an intrinsic asymmetry between religious restrictions and the coordination required for the dispensation of individual liberty and democracy. There is a silent qualm about a proclaimed custodianship of our religion by the religious politicians; some call themselves ulama, who played a sad role in our country. There is no doubt that there is an apprehension in the educated minds regarding the fervor and their growing base through Madrasahas of these religious fanatics.
Some of our phony democrats, including religious zealots, do not really believe in true religious, economic and social freedom of people; they wish everyone to stick to their prescribed brand of sect and practices.
In order to get rid of Musharraf, the religious politicians said, “Let the people vote for the right leaders so that the nation would achieve its greatness”. They thought that the people would vote for the religious parties; and they would bring a new revolution equivalent to that of Iran. The religious politicians find odd partners. As long as they see someone supporting to change the government, any government, democratic or autocratic, they would join hands for a brief period to try their luck. They remind us what E.T. Elliot wrote about Bedouins and Arabs: “Sometimes inconsistent seemed to posses them at once in joint sway; but never compromised: they pursued the logic of several incompatible opinions to absurd ends, without perceiving the incongruity”.
When people voted for PPP, lead by Zardari, they must have hoped for a new dawn for the nation, deprived of freedom and liberty under an autocrat. The ordinary people were told that our nation was suffering due to lack of free will- That the people have been waiting anxiously for eight years for the era of prosperity and peace under democratic governance. General Musharraf was too harsh to the religious extremists in the case of Red Mosque-And he was too close to America. How a proud nation can tolerate such fatal sins? General Musharraf also made a mockery of religious ministry by appointing neither a religious scholar, Amir Liaquat, nor a doctor; that was the extent of Musharraf fondness for religious politicians. Zardari put a reckless religious fanatic, with full length beard, as his tourist minister-what a choice; like a cat is hired as a tourist guide for the mice. Most foreigners are fearful of Pakistan. They ask any Pakistani who is planning to visit Pakistan: Would you be safe over there for few days? A man who called the Talibans the true interpreters who, in his mind, represent the true Islam should be hidden behind seven walls who could not be heard or seen by anyone outside of the country. Maulana Attur Rehman is elected to the senate; he reminds me of Mullah Omar of Afghanistan. The Afghani Taliban came in power by guns; some people in Pakistan voted for the Taliban type leaders. The people of his constituency voted for him. Who am I to contest the democratic choice of the people? We love and wish for democracy; we have it in full force- Nobody could challenge these democrats, not even the chief justice. The country is burning; Karachi and Lahore have experienced the wrath of Pakistani Taliban. They are out there to challenge the writ of the government. They have no empathy for their countrymen and Muslims; they are out there to kill Christians, Shiite and Ahemdis. They are even ready to take upon the Barelvi group. And the federal minister, Attaur Rehman, called Talibans as true representatives of Islam. The unruly, idiotic and superfluous mannerism and mind set is disruptive and divisive, affecting the future of young people and the nation.