Everyone's Stupid

Regular readers may have noticed that the three contributors to this blog do not have much patience for ridiculous conspiracy theories. By way of example, here's AKS' latest diatribe, here's an excellent post by NB immediately following Benazir's death, and here's a parasitic post by yours truly that followed the aforementioned NB post. What irks us most, if I can immodestly presume to speak for all three of us for the moment, is not the conspiracy theories themselves per se, but the lazy thinking that allows and engenders the conspiracy theories. Such lazy thinking thinly masks the real reason these conspiracy theories are constructed, which is either (a) the inherent desire to evade responsibility for one's flaws and mistakes ("the Jews were responsible for 9/11, how could good old Muslims ever do such a thing?") or (b) the real and strong hatred of the would-be culprit agreed upon by the conspiracy theorists ("Musharraf is an asshole, ergo he must be responsible for BB's death").

The point of this post is not to rehash any of the stuff which has been said before, but merely to point out that in no way do Pakistanis have a monopoly on excessive stupidity. Here's an email doing the rounds here in the U.S. While any google search - or common sense for that matter - will lead you to conclude that every single assertion in this email is demonstrably false, you also have to wonder how many people actually make the effort to do said google search, especially since the email seems to affirm many of the recipients' most deeply held prejudices. Anyway, enough from me, enjoy this email:

Subject: Who is Barack Obama? Probable Democrat presidential candidate, Barack Hussein Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., a black MUSLIM from Nyangoma-Kogel, Kenya and Ann Dunham, a white ATHIEST from Wichita, Kansas. Obama's parents met at the University of Hawaii. When Obama was two years old, his parents divorced. His father returned to Kenya. His mother then married Lolo Soetoro, a RADICAL Muslim from Indonesia. When Obama was 6 years old, the family relocated to Indonesia. Obama attended a MUSLIM school in Jakarta. He also spent two years in a Catholic school. Obama takes great care to conceal the fact that he is a Muslim. He is quick to point out that, 'He was once a Muslim, but that he also attended Catholic school.' Obama's political handlers are attempting to make it appear that Obama's introduction to Islam came via his father, and that this influence was temporary at best. In reality, the senior Obama returned to Kenya soon after the divorce, and never again had any direct influence over his son's education. Lolo Soetoro, the second husband of Obama's mother, Ann Dunham, introduced his stepson to Islam. Obama was enrolled in a Wahabi school in Jakarta. Wahabism is the RADICAL teaching that is followed by the Muslim terrorists who are now waging Jihad against the western world. Since it is politically expedient to be a CHRISTIAN when seeking Major public office in the United States, Barack Hussein Obama has joined the United Church of Christ in an attempt to downplay his Muslim background. Let us all remain alert concerning Obama's expected presidential candidacy. The Muslims have said they plan on destroying the US from the inside out, what better way to start than at the highest level - through the President of the United States, one of their own!!!! ALSO, keep in mind that when he was sworn into office - he DID NOT use the Holy Bible, but instead the Kuran (Their equevelancy to our Bible, but very different beliefs) Please forward to everyone you know. Would you want this man leading our country?...... NOT ME!!!

A variant of this email, with the subject line reading "Fwd: Be careful, be very careful" can be read here.

Quote Of The Day

Here's Paul Bloom, a professor of psychology at Yale:

The problem is not that economists are unreasonable people, it’s that they’re evil people. They work in a different moral universe.

He actually didn't mean it that way, but it sure as hell is funny when you take it out of context. Anyway, go read the article - it's one that describes another step in the Freakonomicsizing of the field, where economists stop grappling with labor unions, taxes and wages and start dealing with what to call your newborn, what makes people squirm and what the rational thing to do is if your bus isn't on time (answer: you wait and don't start walking, unless you make your decision to walk immediately and don't wait at all).

Daily Times: Cheaters And Plagiarizers

So I posted a story from the Daily Times earlier today for its fairly strange and incomprehensible headline, "Pakistan a ticking time bomb or does it just have any problem?" At first I thought it was funny, which is why I posted it. AKS, however, has alerted us to the fact that the article has been directly lifted from a Forbes magazine story. What's worse is that they've done a terrible job of it, making the headline and some of the story slightly nonsensical. Here's the Daily Times story (dated January 29th) in full:

Pakistan a ticking bomb or does it just have any problem?

Daily Times Monitor

Western investors that have poured billions into Pakistan must be wondering: Is the country a ticking bomb or does it just have any problem.

Pakistan is not only a foreign policy imbroglio for the US, particularly, but also a potential investment agony for Americans if the tumult following Benazir Bhutto’s assassination deteriorates into a decidedly anti-Western and anti commercial rabble.

President Pervez Musharraf’s policies may not be doing much to promote political stability and democracy, but they’ve been pushing growth and investment. “Pakistan has had economic stability for the last seven years,” says Reza Rahim, head of JPMorgan Chase in Karachi. Investment from abroad almost doubled in the year ending June 30. GDP was racing ahead 7% a year, and the stock market has surged 900% since 2000.

But since political opponents of Musharraf took to the streets in March to protest the suspension of the country’s top judge, most arrows have been pointing down. Foreign inflows into the stock market plunged by 88% from July through November last year, the Pakistani central bank said, just as suicide bombings emerged and the political rhetoric got inflamed. Standard & Poor’s put the country on credit watch late last month If further privatizations stall, that will discourage the multinational banks.

But it’s not so easy to pull out of a power plant or move a factory. American companies have poured more than $1 billion into Pakistan and contribute 8% to the country’s exchequer, according to the US Department of Commerce. Pfizer, Abbott, Wyeth and Merck all have plants in Pakistan. These are some of Pakistan’s earliest investors; some have been in the country for decades and have subsidiaries listed on the Karachi Stock Exchange. So does Colgate-Palmolive, which makes and sells toothpaste and detergent with a Pakistani partner. Philip Morris bought out its joint venture partner last year. AIG underwrites property and auto insurance policies there. Coca-Cola bottles and distributes soft drinks through a wholly owned subsidiary.

AES, the Arlington, Virginia power company, has two power plants in Pakistan where increased production was largely responsible for a 23% boost in Asia revenues in the third quarter. The company, one of the largest US investors in the country, says Pakistan is “one of our greatest success stories” and is in discussion to build another coal-burning plant there.

The instability in Pakistan might dent plans of a few other U.S. companies, even the ones that don’t own many Pakistani-based assets. General Electric (GE), for example, sold more than 500 gas turbine generators in the country, but GE does not maintain much of a presence on the ground there. Kentucky Fried Chicken and Caterpillar also sell from a distance, franchising or distributing products through local partners.

But for the heartiest investors, eventual domestic peace could reopen opportunities in a market of 165 million customers. And if Western companies refrain from investing, Chinese and Middle Eastern companies will. They have already bought most of Pakistan’s telecom assets.

Rahim insists things are not as bad as they look overseas. “The extremists are coming in from Afghanistan, far away from the urban centers where most businesses are located.”

“There are no tanks on the streets here in Karachi. But the government is not organized enough to go out and portray the softer side of Pakistan.”, he added.

And here's the Forbes story (dated January 28th) in full:

Caught in the Crossfire
Deborah Orr 01.28.08

Western investors that have poured billions into Pakistan must be wondering: Is the country a ticking bomb or does it just have a p.r. problem?

Pakistan is not only a foreign policy imbroglio for the U.S., particularly, but also a potential investment agony for Americans if the tumult following Benazir Bhutto's assassination deteriorates into a decidedly anti-Western and anticommercial rabble.

President Pervez Musharraf's policies may not be doing much to promote political stability and democracy, but they've been pushing growth and investment. "Pakistan has had economic stability for the last seven years," says Reza Rahim, a member of one of the country's family business dynasties and head of JPMorgan Chase in Karachi, which has helped the government privatize telecom and oil assets. Investment from abroad almost doubled in the year ending June 30. GDP was racing ahead 7% a year, and the stock market has surged 900% since 2000.

But since political opponents of Musharraf took to the streets in March to protest the suspension of the country's top judge, most arrows have been pointing down. Foreign inflows into the stock market plunged by 88% from July through November last year, the Pakistani central bank said, just as suicide bombings emerged and the political rhetoric got inflamed. Standard & Poor's put the country on credit watch late last month.

But it's not so easy to pull out of a power plant or move a factory. American companies have poured more than $1 billion into Pakistan and contribute 8% to the country's exchequer, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce. Pfizer (nyse: PFE - news - people ), Abbott, Wyeth and Merck (nyse: MRK - news - people ) all have plants in Pakistan. These are some of Pakistan's earliest investors; some have been in the country for decades and have subsidiaries listed on the Karachi Stock Exchange. So does Colgate-Palmolive (nyse: CL - news - people ), which makes and sells toothpaste and detergent with a Pakistani partner. Philip Morris bought out its joint venture partner last year. AIG underwrites property and auto insurance policies there. Coca-Cola (nyse: KO - news - people ) bottles and distributes soft drinks through a wholly owned subsidiary.

AES, the Arlington, Virginia power company, has two power plants in Pakistan where increased production was largely responsible for a 23% boost in Asia revenues in the third quarter. The company, one of the largest U.S. investors in the country, says Pakistan is "one of our greatest success stories" and is in discussion to build another coal-burning plant there.

The instability in Pakistan might dent plans of a few other U.S. companies, even the ones that don't own many Pakistani-based assets. General Electric (nyse: GE - news - people ), for example, sold more than 500 gas turbine generators in the country, but ge doesn't maintain much of a presence on the ground there. Kentucky Fried Chicken and Caterpillar (nyse: CAT - news - people ) also sell from a distance, franchising or distributing products through local partners.

If further privatizations stall, that'll discourage the multinational banks.

But for the heartiest investors, eventual domestic peace could reopen opportunities in a market of 165 million customers. And if Western companies don't invest, Chinese and Middle Eastern companies will. They have already bought most of Pakistan's telecom assets--mobile subscribers jumped 79% in the year ending last June--while U.S. firms, for example, took a pass.

Rahim insists things aren't as bad as they look overseas. "The extremists are coming in from Afghanistan, far away from the urban centers where most businesses are located," says Rahim. "There are no tanks on the streets here in Karachi. But the government is not organized enough to go out and portray the softer side of Pakistan."

This is not the first time someone on this blog has caught the Daily Times cheating. Three years ago, at the conclusion of Pakistan's cricket tour of the West Indies, one Mr. Muhammad Ali "wrote" an article titled "Beyond the Boundary: Pakistan conclude West Indies tour on pleasing note". The article was published on June 9, 2005. Here's the fourth paragraph of that article:

The second Test at Kingston gave Pakistan a comprehensive 136-run victory. Inzamam and his charges were at their best and walked all over their opponents. Inzamam and Younis hit centuries to help Pakistan post healthy totals in both innings while Danish Kaneria and Shabbir Ahmad ran through the top order in the second innings to draw the series 1-1. This was Inzamam’s 22nd Test century, and it is worth noting that 17 of these centuries have resulted in Pakistan wins. To take it one step further – two more of his centuries have resulted in draws. When Inzamam scores, and scores big, Pakistan just don’t lose. Pakistan were also lucky as the West Indies’ star batsman Lara, who played a dazzling knock of 153 in the first innings, did not click in the second.

Unfortunately for Mr. Muhammad Ali, I happened to read Anand Vasu's piece on Cricinfo, published two days earlier, on June 7th. Here's the third paragraph from that article:

But from that moment on, Inzamam blunted the West Indian attack. Slowly but surely he began to pile on the runs, unfurling the big shots often enough, even under pressure, to pick up 14 boundaries in an unbeaten innings of 117. This was Inzamam's 22nd Test century, and it is worth noting that 17 of these centuries have resulted in Pakistan wins. To take it one step further - two more of his centuries have resulted in draws. When Inzamam scores, and scores big, Pakistan just don't lose.

Since I don't read the Daily Times cover to cover, every day, I can only guess how many times they've cheated other writers out of their intellectual property. They deserve to be condemned in the strongest possible terms, and I (we) hope to see some action by their editorial staff.

Indecipherable Headline Of The Day

Maybe I'm getting old (I have, after all, recently discovered at least three white hairs just above my ears), but this Daily Times headline makes no sense to me whatsoever. Perhaps you guys can help.

Pakistan a ticking bomb or does it just have any problem?

The first paragraph isn't too much more helpful, simply removing the question mark from the sentence in question.

Western investors that have poured billions into Pakistan must be wondering: Is the country a ticking bomb or does it just have any problem.

My humble suggestion to the Daily Times folk is that they stick to the PPP sycophantism. It's the only time they sound remotely coherent.

U.S. begins Operation Innane: Deports Edhi, Sucks up to Imran Khan.

The Americans seem intent on winning the hearts and minds of the Pakistani people and here is how they plan on doing it. First, they will take away the passport of Maulana Abdul Sattar Edhi, a valid green card holder, and detain him for a month in order to question him on his travel habits. They will release him but only to detain him again at JFK as he's leaving the U.S.. They will interrogate him for eight hours about his fucking appearance, confiscate his passport and green card, and deport him.

Bravo America, you've discovered that the way to enter the hearts of the Pakistani people is through the humiliation of their most respected citizen. Now what is it that you could do to make this even sweeter?

I know, how about you open up your asses to welcome Imran Khan? I know the Bush administration and Imran Khan are hesitant to speak with each other but there's nothing to worry about. This modern day Zeus will find more asses on Capitol Hill willing to listen to his filth, such is their anxiety to appear relevant. Our great leader (he won the friggin world cup, what more do you want!) will so impress the members of Congress with his mullet, that immediately after meeting Imran Khan, the Senate Majority Leader will ask the Bush Administration to suspend aid to Pakistan if the elections are rigged. How wonderful, I'm so delighted to see that Imran Khan has become a trusted Pakistani spokesperson. I've always been certain that Imran's (in)ability to win seats in the upcoming elections is the best indicator of the polls being rigged!

None of this comes as a surprise to me as I know that Imran Khan is the messiah who will save our parched land. For he is the purveyor of freedom who wasn't afraid to oppose action against the benign clerics of Lal Masjid; the bastion of democracy who managed to defy the odds and get elected as MNA from his ancestral town of Mianwali where his family are lowly land lords; the face of a new, enlightened and moderate Pakistan who cozies up to decent, moderate and enlightened forces of the Taliban supporting tribal elders of the N.W.F.P.; the champion of human rights who commands the podium at LUMS and spews much needed racist slur.

Doesn't this all make you a little teary eyed? I'm already welling up. Though the painful experience of pulling all my hair out may have something to do with that, I'm not sure.

And is it just me who thinks that Imran Khan is being groomed as the new Ahmed Challabi? Now that experience went well.

South Park Vs. Family Guy Vs. The Simpsons

So a reader left a perfectly innocuous comment in response to some links from yesterday, saying he thought that I preferred Family Guy to South Park. Not true at all. (As an aside, can I reiterate my request for commenters to leave a name, nickname or pseudonym, any form of identification really, when leaving comments? As I said earlier, we will not enforce any hard and fast rules, so you can continue to be "anonymous" if you so desire, but I do think it serves our small Rs.5 community better if we know who's saying what).

There are a number of reasons I think South Park is easily the best animated show ever produced, and arguably the greatest television show overall. I'm not going to go into all of them at this point but I do think a short-and-sweet comparison is in order.

I think South Park guarantees six or seven laughs every single episode. Not giggles. Not smirks. Not smiles. Not quiet acknowledgments of humor, when you say "Heh...that's hilarious". I'm talking about side-splitting laughter, the kind your neighbors hear if you have thin walls. In that respect, it's probably unlike any other television comedy ever made. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a single comedy show that does that. Not The Simpsons. Not Family Guy. Not both of The Offices. Not the first few years of Friends or the middle years of Seinfeld. Nothing. Think about it: how hard do you laugh when watching South Park? At some points, it's incredibly funny even when there's no joke involved - you simply laugh at Cartman's voice, or his relationship with his mother, or the show's tongue-in-cheek mundane treatment of truly ridiculous events (like a teacher having a sexual relationship with a kindergarten student). To a certain extent, this is only possible because of the show's format and place in the world - an animated show on Comedy Central, where anything goes. But it's not as if there aren't other animated shows, or other shows on Comedy Central, and yet they can't seem to come close to replicating the South Park magic.

I do think, therefore, that the show's consistency is something astounding. Every episode in every season for eleven years has been laugh-out-loud funny. But if you're talking about consistency, you can't really ignore The Simpsons can you? It's been on for almost two decades. And it hasn't been able to work in plot lines available to non-animated shows, where characters grow and develop, both physically and emotionally. Think about how many Sopranos episodes were about Meadow discovering something about herself, or going to Columbia, or going through her bratty phase. Think about AJ and his troubles in school and how his character slowly changed toward the last couple of seasons. Entire episodes revolved around these issues. That's something simply not available to the writers/creators of The Simpsons, who have to make do with the same cast, with the exact same characteristics they had in the late 80s. They've essentially written the same story 400 times, except somehow made it different every time and funny (almost) every time. Isn't that worth something?

Of course, the key difference between The Simpsons and South Park (for me anyway) is that by this point, I'm more respectful of The Simpsons than truly excited by it. I don't download any of the episodes and I don't buy the DVDs. If it's on, I'll make sure to watch it, and I'm guaranteed a good half hour, but I'm not truly upset if I go months at a time without watching it. South Park, on the other hand, has a magnetic quality to it - you simply can't go without watching it. That's why I think it's a better show - The Simpsons may be more intelligent and crafty, but South Park is funnier, and that's the point of a comedy show.

What about Family Guy? Truth be told, when it first came out, I loved it. I was especially enamored with Stewie's character, who I thought was the funniest character on any television show that I'd ever seen, funnier than Cartman, George on Seinfeld, Chandler the first few years of Friends, or anyone else. Slowly though, I began to question Family Guy. Not in a born-again-Christian type of way, but in a "hmmm, is this really that funny?" type of way. I asked myself: what does this show offer? What does it bring to the table?

That may have the beginning of the end of my love affair with Family Guy, but what truly brought it to a close were two separate developments. The first of these was the discovery, through YouTube of course, that Family Guy had many of the same jokes/plots as The Simpsons. Call it in an inconvenient coincidence, or call it plagiarism, but it was there for everyone to see. Here's some evidence:



Pretty damning, yes? But that wasn't the worse of it. No, it's when South Park took on Family Guy in the Cartoon Wars that I completely lost my respect for Family Guy. I'll explain why in a minute, but first let me show you the relevant clips.

This background for this first one is that the South Park guys discover that Family Guy employed the image of Muhammad in an episode (this was around the time of the whole Danish cartoon fiasco). This brings the entire town into a frenzy, because they're afraid they'll be a target of a terrorist attack from angry Muslims upset by the whole deal (this particular episode of South Park, by the way, was the most brilliant interpretation of the entire Danish cartoon affair that you could hope to find. If you're interested, and you haven't seen it before, go to comedycentral.com and you can watch it for free by searching for "Cartoon Wars").

Anyway, Kyle and Cartman decide to go to Hollywood to try and get the Family Guy episode pulled, lest Muslims get offended and blow everything up. On the way to Hollywood, the following exchange takes place:



That was merely the first salvo. Cartman's diatribe got me to like Family Guy a little less, but not give up on it completely. No, that happened in the next episode, when Cartman found out who the writers of Family Guy really were. Check it out:



Tell me that isn't the most incisive and cutting criticism of Family Guy you could ever hope to construct. Go on, tell me it isn't. After I saw this episode, I never saw Family Guy the same way again. It was like seeing the hot girl from your high school become fat and covered with chickenpox-type sores. Family Guy became a strictly only-if-nothing-else-is-on type of show for me.

Why did those two clips have such an effect on me? I suspect it's got something to do with the relationship between humor and debate. This is a theory that I've presented to NB before, and he actually agreed with me, which must make it true (only things that are Truly True are agreed upon by myself and NB). Consider this: when you're in a debate or an argument, your guard is up. You want to win. You want to convince the other person you're right, and they're wrong. Your face is in front of your chest, your shoulders point forward, and everything about your body language suggests combat. This in turn has a cyclical effect on your position, which you consider more right than you did before the debate started. Consequently, because you are so entrenched in your position, you are less likely to budge.

Now, consider how humor works. Whether it's a stand-up show or something on television, you're relaxed. You're not expecting a fight, you're expecting to be entertained. You're not in combat mode at all, and so your guard is down. It as this point where comedy is most deadly - when you've been disarmed of your preconceived notions. It's a lot easier to see a differing point of view when you're not forwarding or guarding your own. So when South Park took apart Family Guy, with humor and not anger, it was easy to see they were right.

Another example of humor being powerful in changing preferences was when I saw a DVD of a Bill Bailey stand-up (just an unbelievably funny guy). I was never a huge U2 fan, but I'd listen to a few songs here and there. That changed when I saw this:

It's funny because it's true.

'Baba Garam'

This guy was being interviewed by Dawn, and became quite emotional. Makes for interesting viewing. I like how the Dawn reporter keeps the mike in front of him through a torrent of abuse, and only gives up when Shaikh Rashid is called a Bhainchod for the second time.

I should add that the name 'Baba Garam' was coined by 'Faris703', who originally posted the video on Youtube. I say this firstly to give credit where it is due, and secondly to avoid becoming a participant in a very stupid but extremely entertaining 'net squabble', regarding the proprietorship of this video. Look for it in the comments below the video. 

"I Guess I Should Have Seen That One Coming, Huh?"

Well, yeah, that and the next thing.

Random Stuff To Read On A Boring Saturday

If you're like me, you'd rather be warm and bored than entertained and freezing (such are the choices one has to make when living in Chicago). Without further ado, here's some random stuff on the internet that has caught my eye in the last 24 hours or so.

The British try to define themselves, to hilarious results.

Detractors spread the rumor that the government was looking not for a considered statement, but for a snappy, pithy “liberté, égalité, fraternité”-style slogan that it could plaster across government buildings in a kind of branding exercise.

Nor did it help when The Times of London cynically sponsored a British motto-writing contest for its readers.

The readers’ suggestions included “Dipso, Fatso, Bingo, Asbo, Tesco” (Asbo stands for “anti-social behavior order,” a law-enforcement tool, while Tesco is a ubiquitous supermarket chain); “Once Mighty Empire, Slightly Used”; “At Least We’re Not French”; and “We Apologize for the Inconvenience.” The winner, favored by 20.9 percent of the readers, was “No Motto Please, We’re British.”

Pakistani troops on the offensive in the tribal areas.

A Guardian writer pronounces The Wire the greatest television show ever. My vote would actually go to The Sopranos, with South Park a close second.

Fox News' John Gibson makes fun of Heath Ledger for dying. Stay classy, guys. Stay classy.

I don't normally agree with the editorial writers of The Economist, but they're spot on here. (It's on the Clintons and Obama).

Jimmy Carter lets people know what he's thinking (without a doubt, the funniest thing I've read in months).

Imran Khan and Sherry Rehman tour Washington (now that's a great title for a movie). Imran talked about judges and the differences between cricket and baseball. Sherry Rehman was "polished," "impressive," and "spoke in perfect cadences". You know what, sometimes I think the Daily Times would like to see the PPP in power. It's just one of those hunches, you know? Anyway, at least I got introduced to a new term: "reptiles of the press".

This Isn't 1989, And It Damn Well Isn't Berlin

So apparently Palestinians in Gaza have had enough with being slowly squeezed to death. A couple of days ago, they used bulldozers to simply break the friggin' wall separating them and what approaches normal, decent, civilized living conditions in Egypt where, you know, there's food and all. Anyway, the only country more pissed off than Egypt is, of course, Israel. Check out this excerpt from the BBC story:

Israel had demanded Egypt take action, as it is worried about arms smuggling.

Egypt may now have to consider talks with Hamas, which it has previously ruled out, our correspondent adds.

Israeli officials said police were on increased alert because of warnings about infiltration and fears that militants will acquire more weapons in Egypt.

Hey, assholes: they're not there to get more weapons. They're there to get petrol and and food and all sorts of other things they need to live which they can't get because, well, I'm pretty sure you know (hint: it rhymes with Shisraeli Trockade). Besides, there's more than enough weapons in Gaza, so you don't really need to be worrying about this.

That's not to say it's all about the bare essentials. Check out what Mr. Muhammad al-Hirakly had to say:

We tried to go there [Cairo], to see the big city and our family there, and also the girls.

I think we can excuse him, yes? The dude is 22 after all.

Map credit: BBC.

Stuff To Help You Procrasinate

Long day at work with no end in sight? Want to get started on a paper but can't bring yourself to do so? Need to run some errands but find that your ass seems glued to your chair? Fret not, I'm here to help.

Armed and Stupid deciphers a weird story about beatings with sticks, fortune-tellers, the Chaudhries, and the former Chief Justice.

The Washington Post has a great story on how the Clintons are destroying the Democratic Party by basically lying about Obama. I'm not even American, and these shenanigans have pissed me off no end. They need to stop, but they won't.

A born-and-raised American who's converted to Islam asked one of the contributors to Karachi Metblogs if they should move to Karachi with two daughters. I would say: sure. Once the effect of the lack of electricity and regular running water, the preponderance of crime and mobile-snatching, the completely insane traffic, the strikes, the political violence, the religious violence, and bombs have worn off, the cheap DVDs are really worth it. Go for it, Mr. American. Go for it.

In the midst of one of Pakistan's gravest political crises, Irfan Hussain finds time to write about, uh, food critics in Europe.

Adrian Wojnarowski says Shaq should retire. I'm actually enjoying Miami's demise way too much for me to agree.

Musharraf says finding Osama is not a real priority for Pakistan's security forces. Perhaps he should have considered how that statement might play out in the West before he made it, especially since he's always so concerned with our image. Make sure to read the comments in response to the article too - they're hilarious.

How can I not link to an article whose headline is "Rijkaard: Ronaldinho's Not Fat, But Ronaldo Was"?

Nasim Ashraf calls the phadda between the team management and the selectors a "healthy debate." Clearly the entire PCB went to the George Orwell School of Euphemisms. In my opinion, our entire team should be remade. Shoaib, Afridi, Malik, Rao, and Akmal should be banished from both forms of the game (20-20 is not a form of the game). Yousuf should be dropped from the ODI team and Dani from the test team. In ODIs, Younis should captain a young, hungry team with the likes of this Jamshed fellow, Sohail Khan, the young keeper Sarfraz, Fawad Alam, and a couple of those U-19 guys who won us that World Cup. In tests, we should see a healthy mix of old and young. Really, what do we have to lose? Our no. 8 ranking?

Here's how you know you're doing well: when your biggest issue seems to be that too much money is coming in to your country. God, what would I do to have India's problems right now?

Quote Of The Day

Here's Sreesanth, who in my opinion is going to have quite a time just getting in the Indian team.

I'm not scared of anyone. On the contrary, I think Australia should be scared of me because I'm back. And I'm back after a rest too.

Hope the rest did him some good, because the last time he played Australia, he went at about 7 an over in four games.

Why is the Hindu-Jewish nexus out to destroy my peace?

"India has successfully launched an Israeli spy satellite into orbit, officials at the Sriharikota space station in southern India say. The Israeli press is reporting that the satellite will improve Israel's ability to monitor Iran's military activities". (BBC)

Excellent, this is exactly what we need. I'm sure someone can talk about the geopolitical significance of this but I'm more concerned about the fact that I've got a family get-together today and this news is going to make my life just fucking groovy!

I can just imagine some dumbass mentioning the Zionist Conspiracy within some innane context (the same Jewish assassin killed Liaquat Ali Khan and Benazir, he lives near the park) and of course once this happens all subsequent conversation will revolve around the Hindu-Jewish-American Axis, and how they all want to destroy Pakistan.

This is of course all quite true. You see the Great Satan has distracted Pakistan with this hootenanny war on terror and is making Pakistan fight its own people whereas the 'real' Al-Qaeda members are all CIA Agents operating out of Colorado, which is incidentally where Osama Bin Laden is stationed. All the while Israel wants to take over our nuclear devices as it feels threatened by the 'Islamic Bomb' and America will aid Israel in taking over / destroying these, our national assets (defunct Chinese nuclear devices made using stolen German centrifuges, placed on dodgy North Korean missiles). And of course India wants to annihilate Pakistan as the Hindus hate Muslims - do you not remember Gujrat?

Oh and to top this all of, Gordon Brown wants to bestow His Majesty Sachin "Visa Power" Tendulkar with a knighthood. Fucking excellent.

What Would You Call This?

Queasy suspicion? Leery mistrust? Quizzical apprehension? Or just "what the fuck are you doing, get your goddamn hands off me"?

Photo credit: Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty. Link via Andrew Sullivan.

Succesful Policing

There are very few instances of successful policing in Pakistan and when it does happen it surprises us all. The entire country had braced itself for a violent and bloody 9th and 10th Muharram, in fact people had convinced themselves that something terrible was bound to happen and when nothing happened they were left quite speechless none more so than for the television channels.

Our intrepid reporters were intensely probed by the majestic and graceful anchors about the events as they unfolded; trouble was nothing much unfolded. And so our imperial anchors went on with serious vigour and continued their important ritual of reading from the auto cue

Anchor: "Mr. Reporter you've been with procession for much of the day what's the situation like"

The galant reporters, with a glazed look in his eyes, answers back

Reporter: "There are thousands of people here and if a bomb was to explode many would die, but a bomb has yet to explode and I've been standing here for 5 hours now so I'm going to help myself to some Sherbet and wait for the bomb to explode so that I can report on how a bomb exploded in the middle of thousands of people and killed many, over to you."

Anchor: "Thank you reporter"

5 minutes later

Anchor: "Mr. Reporter you've been with procession for much of the day what's the situation like"

The galant reporters, with a glazed look in his eyes, answers back...

The banal reporting highlighted the one dimensional state of Pakistani television reporting and of the country's fascination with, and hightened anticipation of, violence. The Muharam procession gathered, they marched and then they all went home to eat some Haleem, no blood or gore of the reporting kind so we had two days of torturous television. But there was plenty of blood and gore of the self inflicted kind (matham), which was carried by most channels as part of their religious, Muharram television and thus made for some wonderful afternoon viewing. Where was the probing report by our imperious journalists on the barbarism of such utterly inhumane acts? I'll leave that for another day.

Coming back to the point, the last two days were a success story for the police who successfully worked with the community and cooperated with Shia Scouts and other volunteers and at the end were extremely effective in preventing violence, hell they even managed to arrest someone before a bombing!

The trouble is, Karachi is an impossible city to police in its entirety and as I highlighted in the earlier post the rules of attacks are changing in Karachi. The Quaidabad bombing occurred at a site that Musharraf had crossed 8 hours earlier. The bombers couldn't carry out an attact at that time so they waited till it was possible to do so by which time the targets became people buying fruits and vegetables from the street market.

A post on Karachi Metroblog, the veracity of which I cannot confirm, depicts the ordeal of a guy whose car was hijacked by a suicide bomber. The bomber, with his hostage in tow, travelled around the city searching for a way to bomb the procession, when he couldn't he ditched the hostage and his car but before leaving he did impart some profound wisom on his victim "you're very unlucky, you lost your chance at shahadat" stated the would be suicide bomber!

We should applaud the law enforecement agencies for their bravery and their success at preventing bloodshed (of the unacceptable kind!)over the past two days but the idea that suicide bombings can be averted in Karachi by effective policing is questionable. These guys are itching for some action and if you prevent them from taking aim at their main target they might just reassess what their targets are, and that's a scary thought indeed.

Highlights From Barcelona-Racing Santander 01/20/08

I have absolutely no idea what Henry's celebration is supposed to mean. The gap remains 7 points, after Real won their derby against Athletico 2-0.

Fear Factor: Karachi

Karachi always slaps you in the face if you dare forget its plight. It's surprising then for me to realize that living in Karachi has made me more forgetful than I had ever conceived possible. ‘The cocooned lifestyle of the rich shelters them from reality…’ and so would begin another diatribe about the gap between the rich and the rest, but that is just too simple an explanation, and more so, much too easy an excuse.

It is easy to feign ignorance but much harder to admit impotence.

The day to day challenges posed by Karachi seem insurmountable at times but the great people of this city keep on persevering, they keep on getting up after they’ve been knocked down; they’re almost nonchalant in the face of great adversity. But then what are they to do. This admirable fortitude masks their greatest fear, the feeling that they are utterly helpless and alone and they hide this fear by marching on, with apparent courage, like the light brigade. (The inability of people from outside Karachi, to comprehend this fear, results in their inability at understanding the popularity of the MQM – it’s all about the security, stupid!)

And so after yet another bombing and an even bloodier carnage the people of Karachi return to work and head back to school and busy themselves in the daily grind. They are decent people but they are scared and the courage that they project hides the fact that they are trying to ignore that they are witness to the quiet degradation of their own moral compass. They are not outraged by blood stains on the street and they have learnt to ignore the sight of six year olds living on the streets and sniffing glue but they are not ignorant.

The evening of Benzir’s murder a secretary at my office, a young, educated and liberal woman from a modest background living on Shahrah-e-Faisal (near Rashid Minhas) was stuck at an office in Clifton. She had no option but to stay till it was safe and so at 5 a.m., when there was relative calm, she got in a van with some other people and headed home.. As the van passed Baloch Colony, on the main Shahrah-e-Faisal they saw an upturned motorcycle, and the body of a man lying next to it. They did not stop; they sped up. These were normal, thoroughly decent people and they did not stop; they could not stop.

It’s incredibly hard to be good and decent in this city.

And so after two weeks away I returned on the 30th of December to a city come to terms with its losses and was summarily slapped. A charred car sat in front of a graffiti’d wall from which the city government had hastily smudged the name of Benazir – lest it cause more grief! The fear of preventing more violence was more important than the memory of a dead leader and gave way to the retarded sight of slogans across the city missing only the name of Benazir “Welcome Home [SMUDGE] Daughter of the East”

Three days after her death the bustling city that I’d left was eerily deserted, the empty main roads gave way to brave cricketers loving their new found freedom and in its own way Karachi breath new life to a dead road.

The events following Benazir’s death only became alive to me as the city went through another bomb blast, this time in Quaidabad. At 9.30 p.m. I traveled on an empty Shahrah-e-Faisal (on the Airport to Metropole route) and passed by an equally deserted Boat Basin. The panic that enveloped the city was unique to me, but then again what the city has gone through in the past few weeks has been quite unique. The people of Karachi are now collectively feeling like targets, which is the reason why a bomb in Quaidabad led to the roads being deserted and Zamzama quickly closing down.

Karachi has been witness to the murders of many native sons and daughters, politicians and leaders; it has witnessed the destruction of various symbols of apparent neo-imperialism – from burnt KFCs to the oft-bombed American Consulate; the city has been home to unimaginable ethnic and religious bloodshed. But the past few weeks saw the target becoming banks, shops, markets and factories which are the very soul of Karachi. Take away commerce from the city and what do you have left? It’s of little surprise then to come across the heightened anxiety and the novelty of the fear that has gripped the city.

The outcome of this latest attack and this new fear is hard to fathom; the stakes though are high. The threat to the collective populace of a city that has been battered and bruised for so long can not persist perpetually and the attacks on its livelihood, its very essence, will result in retaliation

For the time being the city is starting to adapt – and with the elections so near this is a necessity. Today my colleagues and I discussed the events of the past few weeks and after recalling our ordeals everyone revealed their fail safe in case the city stirs up again and they are stuck at work – from safe routes and side streets to charting the way to the nearest relatives house and on how best to hide your car / bike (basement of Bank Al-Habib building on Shahra-e-Faisal).

The resilience and courage of this city is astonishing; its fears unimaginable.

Breaking News: India Invades Pakistan

How else am I supposed to interpret this news?

ISLAMABAD: The Foreign Office has sought a report from officials concerned on how and why an Indian minister crossed into Pakistan territory at the Wagah border on Friday, violating all rules and regulations.

Though the Indian media is reporting it as an ‘inadvertent’ crossing into Pakistan, Indian Union Minister of State for Commerce Jairam Ramesh’s stroll on Pakistani soil is being seen by some diplomatic observers as a show of disrespect for Pakistan’s sovereignty.

Indian media reported that accompanied by some Indian officials, including Deputy Commissioner, Amritsar, KS Pannu and some Border Security Force (BSF) personnel, Ramesh went up to the conference hall of Pakistan Rangers, about 40 yards inside Pakistan.

The government in Islamabad has taken serious view of the incident, as it does not comply with diplomatic norms. The Interior Ministry has also asked the officials concerned to submit their report about the incident.

I say we respond with nuclear weapons.

A Toolkit For Ashura

Kids, here's what you need to kill some Shias:

Six-kilogrammes of C-4 explosive (right), a suicide bomb blast jacket, three home-made bombs, six detonators, 15-metres of detonating wire, 500-grammes of sodium cyanide, frequency generator used for a remote control, two TT pistols, two kilogrammes of ball bearings, one kilogramme of nails and hand grenades were seized from their possession.

I'd like to take this opportunity to commend our much-maligned police and security forces for making this catch when they did. I can only imagine what damage they would have done had they been allowed to succeed. By all accounts, security is tight throughout the country for Ashura, including but not limited to Karachi, Rawalpindi and Quetta. While our thoughts go out to those who lost their lives in the suicide attack in Peshawar a couple of days ago, we have to concede that stopping suicide attacks is nigh-on-impossible. For instance, in the attack two days ago, the suicide bomber was actually stopped by security personnel before he entered the imambaragh (for our Western readers, that's a mosque for Shias). As soon as the attacker realized he couldn't get in, he blew himself up. What this episode reflects is the sheer impossibility of deterring would-be suicide bombers. The way to stop them is before they put their jackets on - in other words, intelligence and investigation has to be good enough to reach them before the plan is put in execution. Just like it was today, which is why the police deserve our heartiest congratulations.

Let's hope tomorrow goes off relatively peacefully.

Ouch

I am not copying and pasting any of the text from this story. All I'll say is, if you're a male, you're probably going to instinctively buckle over when reading it.

What I Would Like To Hear From The Next U.S. President [Concering Pakistan]

Hopefully, it's Obama. Anyway, these measures, in my humble opinion, will benefit both the U.S. and Pakistan.

On Talking And Dealing With The People
We want a relationship with the people of Pakistan, not just its political and military leaders. While we love our late-night conversations with politicians and Presidents, and we love our monthly briefings and frank exchanges of view with the senior military command, we want to open a third front, so to speak. We want to be engaged with the people on the ground. As such, we are taking this opportunity to announce 500 scholarships to U.S. colleges and universities for the best and the brightest of Pakistani students, particularly in science, technology and business. We are also going to abolish any quotas and tariffs on Pakistani textile products. Finally, we are tying military and economic aid to spending targets on health and education in the Pakistan budget - the way the E.U. dictates terms to countries wishing to become members. This will ensure that even when we wield the stick, it is to Pakistani citizens' benefit.

On Afghanistan, The "War On Terror" And Foreign Policy
Read my lips - we will not conduct unilateral military operations in Pakistan. We will continue to share intelligence, and continue to act in consort with our allies. We trust to them to do the best job they can under very trying circumstances and, given our experience in Vietnam and Iraq, understand that defeating guerrilla-type militants isn't exactly easy, least of all in terrain and weather significantly more challenging than either of those theaters of war. To disabuse the notion that elements within the ISI and the Army hold that we will abandon Pakistan the way we did after the Soviet-Afghan war - which is the real reason some are still less than fully committed to fighting the Taliban - we will announce a [largely symbolic] 25-year friendship treaty [that hopefully goes better than other such treaties]. Finally we will lean on our new best friend in the region - India - to make a lasting settlement on Kashmir, which will show our allies in Pakistan that we haven't forgotten about the things that really piss them off.

On Pakistani Domestic Politics And Terrorism
We promise to not buy into Washington lobbyists' bullshit. We will support parties and not personalities; institutions and not kleptocrats. More importantly, while we retain the right - as a massive donor of aid to Pakistan - to politely nudge various actors in different directions [as we did with Musharraf, who wouldn't have shed his uniform and agreed to elections unless we forced him to], we will cease to meddle in the political process, not for any normative reasons, but simply because it doesn't work and is patently counterproductive. We will - gasp! - encourage religious parties like the JI and, especially, the JUI to use their considerable influence with the Taliban to stop doing the crap they're doing. Even though we are perfectly cognizant of the fact that we don't enjoy a particularly sound reputation with those folks, it's worth a shot, especially with the sly-and-always-willing-to-compromise Fazlur Rehman. We understand perfectly well that to defeat militancy within Pakistan's borders, the nation's political stakeholders - political parties, civil society, the common man - have to unite. We will encourage such unity and not accentuate divisions within the polity.

On Expansion Of The NBA
We will encourage David Stern to install a franchise in Karachi, preferably called the Karachi Ahsans. Allen Iverson will be instructed to play for them immediately.

Come On Over, Didier

So Drogba has set of a firestorm of press coverage by saying last week that he'd like to play for Barcelona and form a partnership with Eto'o. Now Chelsea have reacted, saying they'd like Messi in return. Um, sorry, that's not happening. As reports suggest, they can have Ronaldinho and his fat rear end but Messi? Forget it. If you factor in age, talent, ability to win games single-handedly, and attitude, Messi is the world's most valuable player (and I submit, the best too). In other words, in an open market, he would easily command the highest transfer fee of any player in the world, and it wouldn't even be close. No way Barca would give up Messi - a full ten years younger than Drogba, by the way - to Chelsea.

It would be nice, I concede, to see Drogba in Barca colors but a more important acquisition for Barca this summer would be someone like Fabregas, a guy who can control the midfield and funnel balls forward. Against the top teams - and this was woefully apparent in El Clasico - Barca sometimes lack imagination in midfield, especially with Deco struggling (and by most accounts, on his way out because of his various issues). The problem is that the powers-that-be at Arsenal are not as retarded as the ones at Chelsea, where Ronaldinho is likely to attract real interest, even though he couldn't run past a telephone pole at this point.

But yeah, Drogba would nice.

Pakistan, FATA and "Our People": A Lively Debate

Just a quick unsourced post because I'm tired after a very busy day. I feel passionately about this so I had to reply immediately to a comment made by Anon1027 on Ahsan's preceding post titled "If 500 Militants Faced Off Against 500 Pakistani Soldiers, Who Would Win?" I have pasted the full discussion below. The discussion is then followed by my response.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anon 1027 says:

what a stupid question. you ask it as if in a stand off between our people and our people, there can actually be a winner.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ahsan replies:

our people? i'm wondering how uzbeks, al-Qaeda operatives drawn from the broader arab and islamic world, afghan and pakistani pasthuns who don't believe in the pakistan state, and others who (a) attack and kill pakistani soldiers, (b) attack and kill pakistani civilians, (c) attack and kill foreigners (chinese, americans) on pakistani soil, and (d) aim to establish their writ on the territory of the state of pakistan can be described as "our people". they may be your people, but they are certainly not mine.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anon 1027 replies:

heh. dude, save the jingoistic polemic for another day...

'your' soil is defined by where some english gentleman drew the line on a map. if his hand had slipped, you'd be blogging about india's amazing cricket feats and the bjp/congress tussle all day...

and your point (d) 'aim to establish their writ on the territory of the state of pakistan' - what state? what border? that same one the englishman drew that nobody west of islamabad, multan, shikarpur and karachi (if you draw lines between them) EVER recognized. you cant just create states and say 'ok, now you are under our rule.'

i'd reverse your point (d) and say that pakistan is trying, for the first time, to extend ITS writ to the ALWAYS independent FATA.

why after all these years do they do this now? does it really have anything to do with shariah law? hah, no - shariah has been there for many many years.

why then? because they're killing pakistani soldiers and we can't let this go on? - hah again. no pakistani soldier was being killed three years ago.

really, honestly. why now? as cliched as it is, its true that the only reason we're there now is because america told us to be there.

i consider both sides 'our' people and its sad to see either side die (hardly any foreign fighters at ALL have been involved in this fighting - even the army admits that much).

and i guarantee that any of your beloved political leaders (any bhutto, altaf hussain, sharif, anyone!) are responsible for more pakistani deaths, pakistani crime, pakistani murders and the general looting of the pakistani nation than some guy trying to run a valley in NWFP.

(anon 1027)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It should be noted that to his credit, Anon 1027 apologized for his tone in the post. As I wrote my post before he posted his apology (because i wrote it in the comment box and it took some time), my tone is equally abrasive. For this I would like to apologise, and I share Anon 1027's hope that future discussions are carried out amicably. Even though this is a touchy subject, Pakistan really needs people to retain its civility, so we should try. Anyway, Ill get off my high horse now; below, is my response to Anon 1027:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

It is agreed that the remaining 7 agencies that comprise FATA have historically had high levels of autonomy, but how exactly did FATA become an independent country at partition? And as for that autonomy, it was stripped from Dir, Swat, Chitral, Malakand in 1970 when those agencies were incorporated into the province of NWFP and were given adult franchise. The independent entity of 'the Tribal Areas' didn’t object to (what according to Anon 1027 would be) the appropriation of their territory by a foreign state.

I don’t recall Indian or Afghan state political agents operating in FATA. Or Uzbek or Tajiks for that matter. I do recall that the Federal government of Pakistan having its agents on the ground, that too in an administrative and executive capacity. Please tell me what the source of their authority is. Because it seems to me that their mere presence (if not their authority) is a tacit admission of an obvious fact, namely that FATA is part of Pakistan.

A very good friend of mine in Karachi is from Malakand and he considers himself a Pakistani, as does his extended family. Frankly your idea of FATA as some kind of independent state is alien to them.

The fact is that there is no independent country of FATA, with its own budget or currency or foreign policy. They claim to have an independent judicial system, but really its a series of unrelated mediations which may occur under a standard template, but which lack any unifying structure. Pakistan’s judicial system is probably just as half baked, but what is relevant here is not efficacy but rather any sign of central authority and statehood. Jirgas are sporadic, ad-hoc and not administered or regulated by any overlying authority, and don’t meet any modern or historical standard of structure. And before I have to address any arguments as to western standards etc, that includes the standards of any pre-colonial Muslim society, wherein the Qadis were appointed by the Governors of the respective provinces and the writ of the court was binding law enforced by a unified police force. It was not a privately mediated settlement.

That said, the tribes in FATA are quite keen on retaining their own potent military capacities. Particularly as this enables them to slaughter each other senselessly and in large numbers, whenever the mood possesses them. However there is no unified military command or army in FATA.

So if Anon 1027 is suggesting that FATA is part of some other country that no one in Pakistan recognizes or is even aware of, then where is the proof? Perhaps this is one of those occasions where the feeling is more important than the facts, in which case I’ll understand.

The remaining bit of FATA (post 1970) is what it looks like. A collection of tribes and families within Pakistan, each with their own stockpile of weapons, who have been left to their own anachronistic and destructive devices for far longer than they should have been, and that too for ALL the wrong reasons.

America’s insistence is not the reason Pakistan ended up going into FATA, it is the catalyst. It was always in our interest to establish the Federal Government's writ. That interest became both apparent and immediate when America went and parked in Afghanistan, and when parts of FATA rose in armed opposition to Federal policy.

If a part of the country has been without governance for some time, the solution is not to leave in that state, but to govern it. Particularly as the tribes of FATA have only wrought destruction with their autonomy. There is a reason why Chitral and Malakand, both ex-FATA, contrast so much with Bajaur and Wana. And that contrast was there well before America came to Pakistan. 'America-is-to-blame' is not a cliche in this instance, it is a blindfold, or alternatively the pile of sand that one might stick one's head in.

Finally a question poses itself. Why do you, Anon 1027, consider the People of FATA to be ‘our’ people, if they were never part of Pakistan? What is the basis of the kinship? it a shared faith or a shared homeland or a shared culture?

If either is the case, I will simply point out to you that the Militants in FATA do not stop to ask the religious persuasions and birthplaces of their civilian victims before they bomb them. The boundaries of their community, as they choose to define them, are laid along ethnic, tribal and ideological lines, and include the implementation of a bastardized version of the Shariah and dogmatic, blanket Anti-‘Westernism’. Consequently, regardless of what you may think, the militants in FATA have decided that you are not one of them. I hope that they are correct.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ahsan adds: I don't know what it says about me, but I actually found the tone of both Anon1027's original comment and NB's retort perfectly amicable and not at all catty/pissy/abrasive. Actually, I know precisely what it says about me, but I'd rather not say here. Be that as it may, I think both Anon1027's and NB's apologies are unnecessary - I think this debate was conducted in a perfectly courteous and friendly manner.

Anyway, NB has covered most of the ground here. Maybe I'm biased, but I think this debate was fairly one-sided and there's not much left for me to add after NB's impressive debunking of Anon1027's thesis. I do have one thought, however.

Your point about the arbitrary nature of decolonization is a bit of a red herring. Saying if an Englishman's hand had slipped, I would be blogging about the BJP and the Indian cricket team is a little like saying that if I hadn't been born to my parents but some other random couple, then their lives would be of little concern to me: it is a tautological statement that happens to be true, but that has little informative, analytical or normative content. The point is that an Englishman did draw the borders the way he did, and if nationalism is to mean anything in this world, then I must identify with those within the same borders that I happen to have been born within.

Is it arbitrary? Absolutely, which is why I feel patriotism is a bit of wasted emotion. But patriotism and nationalism are two distinct forms of identity politics, and one makes a helluva lot more sense (to me anyway). In other words, I refuse to put a Pakistani flag on my car or house just because it's August 14, but when people ask me where I'm from, I say "Pakistan" and not "An amorphous entity that has no ontological basis to it but exists solely as a result of the contingent nature of decolonization." Now you are perfectly well within your rights to subscribe to a separate set of identity politics - you may choose to see yourself as a Sindhi, or a Muslim, or whatever - but to impute those same preferences to others is taking an ill-advised leap of logical faith. I, and many others, choose - or have imposed on us, depending on your epistemological view of the agent-structure relationship - the identity of a Pakistani. That means other Pakistanis are Like Me in a somewhat indecipherable way and non-Pakistanis Are Not. What this means in concrete terms is that those who choose to identify themselves not just as opponents of the Pakistani state, but that refuse to recognize its authority over territory that it purports to possess simply cannot be "my people". It is an interesting question, however, why I think of Balochi nationalists as my people. That's a puzzle I should perhaps spend some more time thinking about.