6 ms·
I mean, these are some of the most hard-line extremists alive. Of course they aren't going to reform their blasphemy laws. Pakistan is a backwards theocracy, w
by Fej 9y ago
I mean, these are some of the most hard-line extremists alive. Of course they aren't going to reform their blasphemy laws.
Pakistan is a backwards theocracy, which created the Taliban and has been attempting to spread their awful model of governance ever since. I imagine they wish to set an example.
- zodiakzz 9y ago> which created the Taliban That's rich (and lying by omission) coming from an (presumably) American.
- sremani 9y agoYou make too many assumptions, but Taliban is by-product of Pakistani obsession with India and Strategic depth.
- meric 9y agoHow can you talk about the formation of Taliban without mentioning the CIA?
- krakensden 9y agoIt is true that the CIA sponsored the mujahideen in their war against Russia, but the Taliban postdate that. The ISI is also very scary and very much its own organization.
- sremani 9y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Taliban_Emirate_against_United_Front https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Taliban_Emirate_agains... Taliban is not mujaheddin, they are different entities. Taliban rose in the 90s and swiftly took over Afghanistan with a lot of support from ISI. Mujaheddin, sure CIA was involved but Taliban is a brainchild of Rawalpindi not Langley.
- dragonwriter 9y ago> You make too many assumptions, but Taliban is by-product of Pakistani obsession with India and Strategic depth. No more thab the Taliban is a byproduct of the US obsession with the USSR and the US preference for indirect action in the wake of Vietnam, and it's acting without much concern for non-immediate consequences.
- sremani 9y agoTaliban is not Mujahideen. Taliban deposed many promiment mujahideen warlords on its way to power.
- dragonwriter 9y agoYes, it was a byproduct of US policy (including the forces the US selectively promoted within Pakistan), not the actual local actors of US policy.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- littletimmy 9y agoThis is absolutely false. Pakistan has a system of laws that is based on the British system - it is very obviously not a theocracy. Pakistan created the Taliban out of political necessity, and the United States is to blame for it. When the USA and Russia fought a proxy war in Afghanistan, it left the country in tatters. Pakistan got millions of refugees (1/5 of the population of Afghanistan was living in Pakistan at one time). Think of how Americans start to hyperventilate even at the thought of accepting a few thousand refugees. Pakistan took in millions - and it had to stabilize Afghanistan to restore order and stop the flow. At that time, Pakistan supported the Taliban so that the mess that the United States and Russia made could be controlled. Blame the Cold War, not Pakistan.
- int_19h 9y ago> Pakistan has a system of laws that is based on the British system It also has a different set of laws, added later, that is based on Sharia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudood_Ordinances https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hudood_Ordinances
- littletimmy 9y agoAn addition to a system of constitutional law does not make a country a theocracy.
- int_19h 9y agoI didn't say that it does. But it seems to be an important addition to the claim that "Pakistan has a system of laws that is based on the British system". Hudood Ordinances are certainly not based on the British system. And they're a big part of the problem being discussed here.
- selimthegrim 9y agoNevertheless, the question of whether any given act of blasphemy is automatically deserving of a hadd punishment is by no means an open and shut case.