Posted on 03/07/2008 7:03:49 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Update: As I mentioned before you cannot take reporting or statements from the lawless regions of Pakistan at face value. But with that said it is interesting to learn about the young, newly elected Member of Parliament who represents one of the probable havens for al-Qaeda. Meet Kamran Kahn, he has interesting views on what is happening right now in Pakistan:
According to Khan, only one percent of the local population supports the militants. [”]The local people are fed up with the violence, the beheadings, and the daily fear. They want to live in peace[”], he said. [”]They want to see an improvement in their lives[”].
But the reality is much more complex. The Northwest Frontier and the tribal areas are polarized. On one side are the new young leaders like Khan, who want to bring an end to the violence, and on the other are the hard line militants who want to establish an orthodox Islamic state inside Pakistan.
…
In Pakistan’s Feb. 18 parliamentary elections, Khan ran as a secular candidate on an independent ticket – and won.
He defeated his opponent – a hard-line religious cleric – in a region where the Islamic militants hold sway, by calling for change. And even more surprising, the Taliban supported Khan.
I have no idea of the man’s sincerity, but he won his position in the parliament based on these positions so I would give him the benefit of the doubt. Sadly, we will know for sure if assassination attempts soon follow. But clearly al-Qaeda and terror are losing the young generation of new leaders in Pakistan, just as they did in Iraq. The fact is more and more Muslims see al-Qaeda as their enemy, not their divine future. - end update
(Excerpt) Read more at strata-sphere.com ...
The fact that Al Qaida suicide bombers have been killing the secularist daily, to me it suggests that the secularists are sincere.
Al Quaida and Islamics : Paybacks are gonna be hall.
Islam at the Ballot Box
By AMIR TAHERI
February 21, 2008; Page A17
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120356153631882007.html
(snip)
The Islamist defeat in Pakistani confirms a trend that’s been under way for years. Conventional wisdom had it that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and the lack of progress in the Israel-Palestine conflict, would provide radical Islamists with a springboard from which to seize power through elections.
Analysts in the West used that prospect to argue against the Bush Doctrine of spreading democracy in the Middle East. These analysts argued that Muslims were not ready for democracy, and that elections would only translate into victory for hard-line Islamists.
The facts tell a different story. So far, no Islamist party has managed to win a majority of the popular vote in any of the Muslim countries where reasonably clean elections are held. If anything, the Islamist share of the vote has been declining across the board.
Take Jordan. In last November’s general election, the Islamic Action Front suffered a rout, as its share of the votes fell to 5% from almost 15% in elections four years ago. The radical fundamentalist group, linked with the Islamic Brotherhood movement, managed to keep only six of its 17 seats in the National Assembly. Its independent allies won no seats.
In Malaysia, the Islamists have never gone beyond 11% of the popular vote. In Indonesia, the various Islamist groups have never collected more than 17%. The Islamists’ share of the popular vote in Bangladesh declined from an all-time high of 11% in the 1980s to around 7% in the late 1990s.
In Gaza and the West Bank, Hamas — the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood — won the 2006 general election with 44% of the votes, far short of the “crushing wave of support” it had promised. Even then, it was clear that at least some of those who run on a Hamas ticket did not share its radical Islamist ideology. Despite years of misrule and corruption, Fatah, Hamas’s secularist rival, won 42% of the popular vote.
(snip)
This is kinda confusing...if the guy’s a secularist, why does the Taliban support him instead of his hardline opponent? And I highly doubt only 1% of the population supports the militants, given that 24% of them sympathize with OBL. Still, I can certainly believe that many of them are tired of living in fear and dealing with the threat of explosions every day. This guy seems committed to bringing an end to the violence, as do most secularists who are AQ targets, so we can only hope someone doesn’t nail him....
I watched the video in the link....again, like Iran and Iraq, it’s the young generation in Pakistan who is tired of the hardline, extremist terror carried out by members of the older one. Khan is a young MP, the Iranian youth are protesting every week it seems, and the Iraqi youth are losing faith in Islam. The future could be very interesting as these people take over jobs and government; we could see more secular societies and crackdowns on terrorists. Reigns of terror by al-Qaida or the Taliban or the Iranian hardliners can only last so long before people get tired of them.
In NA-40 the number of registered voters was 96,448, but Mohammed Kamran Khan was the winner with 6,000 he used Spectacles as a symbol, Aurangzeb Khan (Inkpot with pen) 5,194, Abdullah Shah (Gun) 4,006, Abdul Qayyum (Tower) 3,800, Mohammed Ajmal Khan (Cup & Saucer) 2,106, Ahmed Jan (Teapot) 52 and Dr. Shahid Rauf (Pomegranate) 8 votes. In total 21,166 i.e. 22 %.
This means that the symbols of learning got the majority of the votes Spectacles and Inkpot with pen. But I'm not so sure about the results; 6,000 and 3,800 and the fact that no one voted for the other candidates i.e. the Bridge, Foot ball, Tumbler, Tower, Bus, Crown, Takhti, Bowl, Fan, Jug, Loudspeaker, Torch, Mango or Brick!
http://www.geo.tv/election2008/result/na40.html and
http://www.jang.com.pk/election2008/images/Final_List_Contesting_Candidates/NWFP_NA.pdf
I assuming these symbols are used due to a low literacy rate. Is that correct?
I should have added that the other factor making symbols more important here than elsewhere is the multiplicity of languages.
Lol
Sometimes in the Middle East, you have to look at their actions instead of what is said. It is hard to look at their actions when what is done and said is largely behind closed doors and away from prying eyes. Another important factor is money. What's the money connection for the Taliban? Follow the money, see the support.
This can’t be good. We’d better elect Obama and invade Pakistan. Thanks Ernest.
You are correct. In fact, one of the ways Musharraf rigged the elections in 2002 to enable the mullah parties to win was to simultaneously ban secular parties and allowing “non-party affiliated” mullahs to contest elections under the symbol of a Book. The Book symbol resembled the Quran and allowed the Mullahs to campaign saying that a vote against the book is a vote against the Quran. Musharraf used these types of manipulations to make sure that the Mullahs win enough seats for him to tell the US - “It’s me or the Mullahs - who do you choose”
Thank God for the Bush administration for preventing Musharraf from using dirty tricks and thereby let us see how popular the mullahs really are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.