When I Return to Pakistan

[excerpt from Washington Post Op-Ed, dated Thursday, September 20, 2007]

* * *

When I Return to Pakistan
By Benazir Bhutto

I am returning to Pakistan on Oct. 18 to bring change to my country. Pakistan's future viability, stability and security lie in empowering its people and building political institutions. My goal is to prove that the fundamental battle for the hearts and minds of a generation can be accomplished only under democracy.

The central issue facing Pakistan is moderation vs. extremism. The resolution of this issue will affect the world, particularly South and Central Asia and all Muslim nations. Extremism can flourish only in an environment where basic governmental social responsibility for the welfare of the people is neglected. Political dictatorship and social hopelessness create the desperation that fuels religious extremism.

Throughout Pakistan's 60-year history, weaving between dictatorship and democracy, from free elections to rigged elections to no elections, religious fundamentalists have never been a significant part of our political consciousness. We are inherently a centrist, moderate nation. Historically, the religious parties have not received more than 11 percent of the vote in national elections. The largest political party is mine, the Pakistan People's Party (PPP). Pakistan's political landscape has been molded primarily by the moderate PPP, which has demonstrated strong and continuous support from the rural masses and the urban elite.

Extremism looms as a threat, but it will be contained as it has been in the past if the moderate middle can be mobilized to stand up to fanaticism. I return to lead that battle.

I have led an unusual life. I have buried a father killed at age 50 and two brothers killed in the prime of their lives. I raised my children as a single mother when my husband was arrested and held for eight years without a conviction -- a hostage to my political career. I made my choice when the mantle of political leadership was thrust upon my shoulders after my father's murder. I did not shrink from responsibility then, and I will not shrink from it now.

I am aware that some in Pakistan have questioned the dialogue I have engaged in with Gen. Pervez Musharraf over the past several months. I held those discussions hoping that Musharraf would resign from the army and restore democracy.

My goal in that dialogue has never been personal but was always to ensure that there be fair and free elections in Pakistan, to save democracy. The fight against extremism requires a national effort that can flow only from legitimate elections. Within our intelligence and military are elements who sympathize with religious extremists. If these elements are not answerable to Parliament and the elected government, the battle against religious militancy, a battle for the survival and future of Pakistan, could be lost. The military must be part of the battle against extremism, but as the six years since Sept. 11, 2001, have shown, the military cannot do it on its own.

Many issues remain unresolved in our political structure. Musharraf is precluded from seeking reelection in or out of uniform. Pakistani law requires a two-year wait before a member of the military can run for the presidency. The general can respond to the people's desire for legitimate presidential, parliamentary and ministerial elections, or he can tamper with the constitution. The latter choice would risk a fresh confrontation with the judiciary, the legal community and the political parties. Such a confrontation could lead to another declaration of martial law, civil unrest, or both.

Civil unrest is what the extremists want. Anarchy and chaos suit them.

The political element in Musharraf's party that presided over the rise of extremism has worked with every Pakistani administration since my government was destabilized in 1996. Its members are blocking the democratic change I have tried to achieve with Musharraf. They fear that democracy will be difficult to manipulate to the benefit of extremists and militants.

My dialogue with Musharraf aims to move the country forward from a dictatorship that has failed to stop the tribal areas from becoming havens for terrorists. The extremists are even spreading their tentacles into Pakistan's cities.

Last week brought a fresh challenge. Just days ago, Pakistan's election commission arbitrarily amended the constitutional provision regarding the eligibility of a person competent to contest for the office of president. As the constitution can be amended only through a two-thirds majority in Parliament, a judicial hornet's nest has been stirred.

My party and I seek fair, free and impartial elections to be held by an independent election commission under an interim government of national consensus. We want a level playing field for all candidates and parties.

In words commonly attributed to Joseph Stalin, "Those who cast the vote decide nothing. Those who count the vote decide everything." That's why we have stressed electoral reforms -- although our efforts have so far been in vain.

President Bush has rightly noted, "The most powerful weapon in the struggle against extremism is not bullets or bombs -- it is the universal appeal of freedom. Freedom is the design of our maker, and the longing of every soul."

When my flight lands in Pakistan next month, I know I will be greeted with joy by the people. I do not know what awaits me, personally or politically, once I leave the airport. I pray for the best and prepare for the worst. But in any case, I am going home to fight for the restoration of Pakistan's place in the community of democratic nations.

The writer is chairwoman of the Pakistan People's Party and served as prime minister of Pakistan from 1988 to 1990 and from 1993 to 1996. She lives in exile in Dubai.

12/27/2007

Photo Art Gallery

=//Turnquest

Happy Holidays from SAAQ

This was on the official government of Quebec website. Eid Mubarak, Merry Christmas, Kwanzaa, Chanukah, all that stuff.

=//Turnquest

Explain.

Teen dead after alleged attack by father
Last Updated: Tuesday, December 11, 2007 9:58 AM ET
CBC News

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2007/12/11/teen-attacked.html

Aqsa Parvez in a photo from her Facebook account.

Peel Regional Police on Tuesday released the name of a 16-year-old Mississauga teen who died after allegedly being attacked by her father.

Aqsa Parvez was found in her Longhorn Trail home on Monday morning without any vital signs.
Paramedics revived her and took her to Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children, where she died late Monday night.

Police said they received a call from a man who said he'd just killed his daughter.

The victim's father, Muhammad Parvez, 57, was arrested at the scene. He will appear in court on Tuesday and face murder charges.

Aqsa Parvez's friends told CBC News that the teen had been having arguments with her father because he allegedly wanted her to wear a traditional hijab.

"She kinda wanted to go a different way from the way her family wanted her to go," said one friend.

They also said that she wanted to escape the family conflict by running away.

On the family's quiet street, neighbours were dismayed, calling the events "a tragedy."
One neighbour said she was "praying for the family."

At the teen's school, Applewood Heights Secondary School, grief counsellors have been called in and tributes are being arranged.

"Aqsa was well-known at the school," said Sylvia Link, communications manager for the Peel District School Board.

"She had a wide circle of friends and … those closest to her really are [the] most affected. But anyone at the school, you know our school is like a family, you know anyone at the school is really going to be shocked and saddened by this tragic news."

Waqas Parvez, the victim's 26-year-old brother, has also been arrested and charged with obstructing police.

* * *

Somebody, somewhere explain this to me. Because I can't understand.

I saw the video for that M.I.A. song "Jimmy" and thought, while the video is sort of nice, the song is not that strong. However, the strings on the hook got me sort of horny, and alas, I dug up the original 80s Bollywood song where she jacked it from.

En Guarde!:

Meeting People is [Unlikely]

Continuing on the freeform stream of thought from last time, I've decided to illustrate my overarching point about the decline of human relations and society in general by elaborating on a single topic: relationships.

Ask your average young, nondescript, non-Gino/black male today about meeting girls today and their personality shifts. They get a steely look in their eyes, hinting at past embarrassments and failed attempts. Their voice and temperament changes. The tonal impression of their words becomes steady, direct, hard. They begin to talk seriously, as if discussing how to kick a drug habit or a personal tragedy. And unless they have a girl at the time, they'll invariably express vehement disdain, personal anguish and outright disgust at the state of the relationship marketplace and even at women in general.

What is happening to the young people of today and why has it become so complicated, if you'll allow me to talk street for a moment, to get some pussy? Preemptively, I approach this touchy subject by eliminating my own personal experiences and beliefs from the discussion. Instead, I'll discuss the way others see the marketplace, or 'dating scene' if you prefer, as well as some current phenomena that are taking place amongst my generation.

The way things work nowadays is like this: if your average guy wants to get laid, he grabs his buddies and heads out to the local watering hole or nightclub, stands around for a while getting drunk, spots an attractive girl who doesn't seem to be fat or out of his league, builds up the courage to talk to her, and then makes the approach.

After that, all bets are off. It's up to the guy's delivery, the girl's mood and the mutual level of intoxication and "vibe" to determine what happens next. Possibilities are numerous. She could smile at some of his jokes and stories, they'll dance for a while, engage in some playful touching, share a kiss, exchange numbers and begin a long-lasting and fulfilling relationship.

Or they could really hit it off. It just could so happen that both could be mutually interested and willing that night. The attractive girl sees our average guy as exactly her type. She returns his attention with long gazes, tossing of her hair, suggestive humour and well-timed laughter. Then he leads her to the dancefloor where the right song comes on, preferably one with a strong, pulsing bassline. They establish an immediate physical chemistry, both enjoying one another's natural rhythms and pheromones. The dance is cut short. She takes him to a secluded corner and they further their physical relationship. It's been no more than half an hour since first meeting, the girl can't even remember what this dude who's got his hands in her jeans' name is. Alas, this makeout session is also cut short and the delirious couple fumbles their way into a taxi and back to his place to consummate their primal, surging desires.

But fuck all that. That shit doesn't happen, and you and I know it.

The way things happen in those dens of mookism and sleaze referred to as clubs is that our average guy waits in line for 15 minutes, pays 10$ for cover then proceeds to get bad looks from everyone: the bouncers, the coat check people, the guys who actually like to hang out there, looking like they were born and bred in cheap Parasuco distressed denim and Gucci sunglasses. He drops anywhere between 20-500$ on alcohol he could've bought from the SAQ for a 1/10th of the price. He endures listening to music that is mainly marketed to crunked-out Southern black men who drive trucks with 22inch rims and pre-pubescent 12-year olds who trick themselves into thinking they are hot, horny and ready for "it," even though if they ever saw a real cock, they'd probably be so traumatized they'd never look at their dad the same way again.

Half the time, the guy has to go smoke a cigarette on the overcrowded and freezing terrace, dodging people spilling beer all over the place and giant 7 foot tall white guys from Vermont who have trouble looking down because their neck is too thick. After about three hours of standing around, wobbling awkwardly to songs that have z-e-r-o rhythm, enduring continuous bad looks and vainly yelling into girls' ears, he goes home.

Is this how it is? Is this how we're supposed to function? This is how average guys are supposed to find their girlfriends who will cook them brownies on a Sunday afternoon while wearing boyshorts and an apron and watch old Ninja Turtles cartoons with them?

Yes, society tells us. Yes, advertising tells us. Yes, Jay-Z and every rapper and R&B singer says. This is how it is and always was.

Can't get any? They say 'don't be a hater." "Get rich or die tryin.' " If you'd only drop a few thousand on Grey Goose bottle service, rented Cayenne SUVs, coke and Versace sunglasses, all those women will come dancing into your lap.

Oh, and while you're at it, why not a couple thousand more on surgery for a bigger dick?

No folks, sorry. Mankind hasn't spent 10000 years mating and procreating to get to this point. I refuse to believe that we have to buy into this fucked-up, hedonistic, self-destructive, misogynistic, over-priced game of dress-up and pretend-to-be-a-celebrity to find a girl.

What other options are young men left with these days? The Internet? What are we, 42 year-old virgins who wear Star Trek t-shirts, eat Doritos for breakfast and stay up till 4AM watching Family Matters reruns? No. The Internet scene is a joke, and shouldn't even be necessary for young males.

School? Where every girl is "too busy studying" or so tightly wound-up and sexless that if you took her to the beach, she'd melt like an icicle? No. Girls at school are incredibly gorgeous, well-dressed and a lot of them are even quite smart. Unfortunately, once you go down that road, you will inevitably run into what is the biggest obstacle to normal social courtship: the Game.

If you don't know about the Game, or how to play, you are and will remain a virgin. It's just that strict.

Basically, the Game is just a way of communicating that's designed to make hooking up as least embarrassing and nice as possible for the two people flirting with each other. It has no purpose in and of itself. For girls, it ensures that the socially inept, the empty nice-guys and the total freaks and zeros are filtered out. For guys, it helps to build dependence and submissiveness in your partner.

But what it really ends up doing is complicating things to a point that most normal guys (yes, most), the ones that girls always find themselves complaining about how they can't find any, are left totally clueless.

It doesn't matter if both of you listen to Nirvana and like watching Aladdin and Revenge of the Nerds or playing Mario Kart 64 on multiplayer in Extra mode. Inevitably, one of you will react to the other's direct and sincere attempt to communicate with tactics culled from the Game.

The reasonable guy thinks this how hooking up with a girl goes:

Guy: "Hey."
Girl: "Hey."
Guy: "You know, that outfit is pretty cute."
Girl: "Oh, this? Wow, thanks, that's really sweet of you."
Guy: "What are you doing tonight?"
Girl: "Umm, nothing really."
Guy: "You wanna come over to my place to bang?"

OKOK, maybe not "come over so we can bang." But you know what I mean, more like "Can I take you out for dinner or a coffee?"

And then she says "yeah, why not" and we're on our way.

Of course, that's never how it goes, because the Game demands that both parties disguise their overt feelings towards each other. Expressing this already apparent feeling that "oh wow, you actually LIKE A GIRL!?!??" is considered within the context of the Game 1. gay (as in weak) 2. sleazy 3. creepy 4. awkward 5. inherently loser-like and desperate.

Who thinks like this? No-one that I know really. It's the Game that made this rule. For what purpose? I don't know.

The direct result of this and other rules is that both sides, girls and guys, must begin their relationship on false or dishonest terms. And that's considering that both parties can survive this phase of the Game and begin the actual relationship. Of course, there are all too many relationships that already operate within the Game's rules and both sides just continue to lie and put on fake personalities and characters for each other. Heck, I know of some marriages that function like this.

But people, this is not how it's supposed to be. Evolution cannot function like this. Human beings weren't meant to hide their honest, biological emotions under blankets of fake smiles, expensive gifts and public displays of chauvinism and "attitude". The possibility of love only ends up being distorted, corrupted, obliterated before it can even begin to take root.

In the past, things were different. They were simpler, people were more honest with themselves, and with each other, and everyone was better off for it. Though certainly mating rituals and some form of the "Game" have always existed, my point is that things have gone too far and that the basic way of life and human interaction is being encroached upon and destroyed by evil forces. Things must change, and fast, or this ship is gonna sink.

And that's all I have to say about that.

=//Turnquest

p.s. - please go out with me.

Yesterday's Men

This still isn't a political post, but I am well aware of the many burgeoning developments across all spectra that I have yet to write about (Pakistan, Palestine, Iran, Lebanon, Iowa/New Hampshire, reasonable accommodation, the Hajj, and dearest Iraq, amongst others). But this one I am absolutely compelled to get out.

I begin thusly.

Where are we? Marvin Gaye asked it so: "What's Goin' On?" Cristobal Huet, is this what modern life has come down to? Four thousand years of documented civilization and Abrahamic religions, and we in North America, Europe and the modern West have gotten to the point where we're fixated on celebrities? On T-Pain, Sean Kingston, Pirates of the Caribbean and Saw 4? Art? Know any modern artists? Nah. Music besides the sonic torture they feed you down at the discotheques and over the airwaves? Television that is there to sell you things and give you migraines? The liberation of women corrupted and rebranded as makeup ads and sexual promiscuity?

My overarching point, dear friends, is that the angry young men have departed. Casting off misinterpretations of sexism, the current generation is done for. In the past, angry young men and women reformed and changed a world they saw as unjust, immoral or adrift. The culture we as twentysomethings (born 1980-1987) so casually soak in every day has seeped in through our skins and skulls. More so than any political or social idea, more so than the multiple wars overseas or any election or spiritual movement, the modern culture has had a profound effect on our personalities and mindsets.

Everything wrong now with people and public affairs is because of it. When I say people, I don't mean society. The term 'society' itself means nothing. You'll have a hard time finding sociologists agreeing on a common definition of it. By people, I mean individuals: the average Joe or Jane.

People act and think differently than they did in the past. Basic one-to-one relationships have changed in the way they function. Families are both dissolving, and simultaneously being rendered irrelevant in a way unprecedented in normal human history. Neighborhoods are not places where you feel comfortable letting your younger siblings hang out. Suspicion drives your feelings on your neighbors. Schools, pfff, forget about 'em. Cities are hives of villainy, out of control, where the rich make their fortunes and the poor slave away, hanging on a thread. Where noise and a perpetual sense of being late drives people to sin and hopelessness.

Beyond the effect on human beings, the forces that pushed human development forward throughout history have been co-opted. Religion, one of the key social forces for countless centuries, has been declared a threat; its overtly spiritual practitioners considered positively nuts. Art, another crucial force, has been utterly castrated and relegated to weekly box-office grosses, personality cults and Sotheby's auctions.

Media and information are lies, half-truths and statistics. Or merely opinion, speculation and entirely useless "debates" between two equally daft people who supposedly represent the two sides to political issues. Because obviously every possible political viewpoint can be narrowed down to exactly two all-encompassing sides. And advertising rules all.

I'm speaking in generalities, yes. And I make a lot of mentions of "history," as well as you may have noticed. This is not for self-aggrandizing purposes. I am pointing out one very fundamental fact of modern life.

Things are fucked.

Sure, you could say that things were always bad, and there are good and bad points. Alas, I point again towards history. People all too often forget the context in what we are living. Six years ago, there was no 9/11. Ten years ago, there was practically no Internet. Twenty years ago, the U.S.S.R. was still the Evil Empire and always ready to annihilate Western civilization, and rap hadn't hit. Fifty years, blacks went to separate schools and had separate restaurants, and rock n' roll was still a regional fad. Sixty-five years, and we were in the biggest war humanity had and has ever seen. Eighty years: women weren't citizens and couldn't vote. Go beyond that, and you'll really start tripping out.

Can you imagine such things? Eighty years is a lifetime yes, but there are still plenty of people around who were alive during such times. In the scheme of modern history, even a century is a fraction of how far we've come. Try to realize that the way life was around the year 1900, or 100 years ago, was how life had pretty much been for the five hundred years prior to that.

Farms, small towns, horses and carriages, top hats, all that Charles Dickens stuff.

Now look at today.

Something happened in the last 60 years particularly that caused a total explosion in development and technological progress that has never been seen. We went, in one lifetime, from records to iPods, cars to MAGLEV trains and Predator drones, snail mail to cellphones, radio to the Internet. Cameras watch our every move, companies and people we'll never meet know and share our medical records, our Internet and spending habits, our employment history, our most private secrets.

Technology has changed daily life irrevocably. Economics and the international credit/banking/currency system has gotten unimaginably complex and dominating. World politics just went through two massive reorganizations (the fall of the Soviet Union, and the War on Terror). History is moving forward incredibly fast.

The thing that frightens me though is that, despite everything, only us people haven't caught up.

=//Turnquest

* I'll continue this line of reasoning by examining the modern dating environment, next post.