This photo is from today’s Dawn. It shows protesting lawyers damaging public property in Multan.
The ability to protest against that which they consider unjust is everybody’s right. But there is a fine line between peaceful protest and anarchy. Damaging property is definitely wrong and serves no one’s interest. It certainly does not serve the interest of the lawyers movement for democracy.
Violence is clearly wrong. It becomes no less or no more wrong when it is committed by protesting lawyers than when it is done by government against the same protesting lawyers. Just as we have called out against violence committed against protesters by government agencies, we must also call out aginst violence committed by them.
Anger is neither a strategy nor an excuse. The principle is a clear one: Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it and no matter why.
I will disagree with you mistri for i think you are taking Owais out of context. He never said that the whole struggle is wrong or that protesting against Mr Musharaff is wrong. The only point he made was that violence is not justified in what ever form it is.
This is one school of thouught and may be i personally dont agree with him but i should not bias my judgement based on my personal thinking. You all hate Musharaff and speak on different blogs and different platforms against the violence that the regime is committing but now you says that if the group of lawyers have the power to response, they should do that. If you are justifying violence for the mere fact that they have the ability then it means all the brutual acts of government are also justified as they also have the means to do this. Moreover, you are also justifying what the Talibans or Fazlullah are doing in Swat and FATA for they also have the ability to respond to government acts.
I think thats not how you respond to things and i think that was the only reason our sympathies were with the lawyers for they were on the right side and using right means for it. If they also start acting like the forces in power, then whats the difference between them.
No hard feeling here for its just my opinion and i am also against the current government but i dont agree on the means to reach our common objective.
Regards,
M J K
http://thelandofpure.blogspot.com/
pS: I know people dont like being diagreed with and thats why the previous two comments came down so harsh on Mistri and discredited all his previous stances. Its pretty disappointing that we all act the same when we have the ability and power to do same. We dont tolerate opinions that dont agree with us and star insulting so how come you expect the people in power to tolerate it. Seems there is no much difference in those passing personal remarks on Owais to that of the person who is in power these days and doing the same with everyone of us.
yup i agree tooo….we always say dont break rukes and then the ppl who were saying that were in front to break it all……
Umar Shah, while I don’t mind disturbing you, where did I suggest that you know nothing? Moreover, I have not stopped anyone from saying whatever they like. Let’s not make this personal. Thank you.
Lahori may be as long intentions are in the interest of Pakistan.And he is not going to take money out of country.
The action of some individuals shouldnt be representative of the overall struggle. The ‘I know it all and you people dont know anything’ type of comments from contributors like Social Mistri are also disturbing. Everyone has the right to say what they want and feel about the subject under discussion.