Connect with us

Pakistan

The repetition of history and the hidden sciences!

Written

on

History repeats itself is common concept, but in Pakistan the example of such notion is hardly found in any other country in the world.

Imran Yaqub Khan Profile Imran Yaqub Khan

In November 2017, Tehreek-e-Libek staged a sit-in in Faizabad. The background of this sit-in was known to all. The PML-N government, which was already under pressure, was under siege. When the party was mobilized against the PML-N government, today's ruling party, the PTI, supported their sit-in. In his judgment, Justice Qazi Faiz Issa also mentioned the local leadership of Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) besides Sheikh Rashid and Ejaz-ul-Haq, who continued to support the sit-in, according to intelligence reports.

A conference was held in Golra Sharif in the name of Khatam-e-Nubuwat (SAW) in which Imran Khan participated and tried his best to win the sympathy of Tehreek-e-Libek. Today, it is the responsibility of Interior Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed to stop the protest march and possible sit-in. The minister got mentioned Mujahid Khatam-e-Nubawat on posters and used religion for his political campaign.

After this protest against the PML-N government and its support from the PTI, the 'revolutionary anchors' also disguised them as Mujahideen Khatam-e-Nabuwat and walled off the PML-N and its leadership. As a result of this movement, resignations were announced from some members of the PML-N in the National Assembly and an electoral atmosphere was created against the PML-N. Now the Tehreek-e-Libek is once again on strike and the next scenario seems to be peeking out of the pages of the past.

The atmosphere against the PML-N began after the report of a high-level meeting was published in an English newspaper and it was named Dwan Leaks. Now the atmosphere is being created again and the impression of "One Page" has been shattered by the ruling circles. An appointment to a key post was announced on October 6 and the tug-of-war began. The 20-day tug-of-war played a central role in dispelling the one-page impression.

Now the matter seems to have been resolved and the long awaited notification has come to light but the impression of tension remains as no attempt is being made to remove it but a conscious effort is being made by the government to prevail the tension.

Prior to the notification, there was talk of secret science and statistics. Even after the notification came, the machinations of the occult sciences are still rampant and this notification is being viewed in conjunction with the dates of next month's partial lunar eclipse. I have no interest in cognition or numerology, but apart from such factors, it seems that matters are now heading towards confrontation and such confrontations don't last long, only a few weeks are decisive.

When it comes to linking this analysis to another mysterious process, the date of December 4 seems to be important when there will be a total solar eclipse in the world. Eclipses have been associated with solar and lunar eclipses for centuries. A large number of people believe in such superstitions and are convinced to the extent that eclipses bring about great changes. The then government in Pakistan was overthrown within two months after the 1999 eclipse.

Whether the eclipse will do anything or not, but if the situation continues like this, then of course the blame will fall on the December 4 eclipse. Assuming that the December 4 eclipse could be disastrous for the government, the next elections could be in April or May. There will be partial eclipses in these months as well. The partial eclipse of April 30, 2022 will not be visible in or around Pakistan and will be visible in the western, southwestern United States, Pacific, Atlantic and Antarctic regions.

The 2022 partial lunar eclipse will be seen in most parts of the world including Europe, Asia, Africa and this partial lunar eclipse will probably be seen in Pakistan as well. If those who believe in the mysterious sciences are to be believed, then according to this calculation, if the total solar eclipse of December 4 played any role in the overthrow of the government, then April and May will be election months and partial eclipses will also show color in these elections. ۔

Political figures seeking the help of occultists should now worry about December. Thoughts will be of two kinds. Those who believe in the mysterious sciences in the government will hire experts to save the government and the opposition will turn to the 'babus' to drown the government in the crisis. If December is decisive, then the worries of April and May will bother everyone and a new round of operations will be launched to remove the possible misfortunes in their horoscopes and this time, since everyone is worried about power, they will get rid of the misfortunes. Will become the need of all.

Those who believe in the mysterious sciences think that the eclipse is a plague that comes from the sky to destroy human beings and they have no means to stop it but the moon and the sun have blocked its path and sacrificed their lives. Weak believers believe that because it is powerful and has taken the sun and the moon in its mouth, it is necessary to help them.

In the old days, the hill tribes, to whom the light of knowledge had not reached, used to gather in a field at the time of eclipse, dance to the beat of drums, make loud drunken utensils, play tin, etc., in order to somehow get rid of this evil. Some of them used to throw stones so that if they didn't retreat from the noise, they would move away from the fear of these stones. Such scenes are seldom seen now, but the claimants of expertise in the hidden sciences go astray, perform strange acts that frighten the common man, and play with their weakness.

Since I don't believe in these hidden and mysterious sciences, I am only worried about how long our politicians will continue to blackmail or to be blackmailed for the sake of power. How long will history be repeated? Why is democracy in danger after every 10 years?

The ruling party is trying to use the recent controversy to its advantage by hiding behind the slogans of "stand firm, captain". but linking an attempt to keep a person close because of personal friendship to the battle of principles is nothing but mutual deceiving. The same party used to humiliate everyone else by giving the impression of being the enemy of a strong institution of the country.

Until the conflict of interests, the good relations with the institution were displayed like a medal on the chest. Isn't it senselessness and selfishness to confont the same institution for ulterior motives now?

Continue Reading

Regional

Why the most powerful men in America are the worst dressed

Americans may be paying less attention to political news ahead of the 2024 election, but when they do tune in, they’ll be greeted by a sartorial landscape that’s different from the one they remember four years ago. Legions of Republicans are copying Trump’s s…

Published by Web Desk

Published

on

Americans may be paying less attention to political news ahead of the 2024 election, but when they do tune in, they’ll be greeted by a sartorial landscape that’s different from the one they remember four years ago. Legions of Republicans are copying Trump’s shiny red ties in a bid to win his (and his base’s) favor. Suits, at least on younger politicians, have gotten significantly tighter. And we’re officially in the unfortunate era of the “dress sneaker.” DC fashion has always been notoriously bleak, steeped in the regressive gender and respectability politics that govern the nation’s oldest bureaucracies. Here to explain what’s going on in this particular election cycle is Derek Guy, the San Francisco-based founder of the blog Die, Workwear!, who’s perhaps better known as X’s “menswear guy,” having exploded on the platform in 2022 for his informative threads and quippy comebacks. In our conversation, Guy analyzes how the casualization of clothing generally has resulted in a laissez-faire attitude among politicians, why Cary Grant looks more put together than today’s young “alpha males,” and whether we’ll ever elect a hypebeast president (spoiler: probably not in our lifetimes). Over the past 50 or so years, menswear has become much more casual. Can you explain how that happened? Many people think of the casualization of menswear as a postwar phenomenon, but the casualization of menswear goes back a very long time. The suit itself was a more casual alternative to the frock coat. Then by the 1920s and 30s, more men became interested in sportswear and sportcoats became a thing. By the postwar period, tailoring started to decline, and by the 1960s and ’70s, the civil rights movements, antiwar protests, and countercultural youth movements all essentially made the suit a symbol of the establishment. Things like leather jackets and jeans symbolized rugged working-class authenticity. [Media: https://twitter.com/dieworkwear/status/1756212567343800816] Suits had a brief revival in the ’80s but eventually died by the 1990s with casual Fridays. When Mark Zuckerberg founded Facebook and new kinds of tech billionaires were minted in the early 2000s, hoodies and jeans became a new status symbol. It symbolized meritocracy, this whiz-kid tech billionaire meritocracy in the new economy, which stood opposed to the traditional coat-and-tie industries back East. It's not just the casualization of dress, it’s that wearing a hoodie and jeans symbolizes a new kind of nobility. We see elements of that super-casual vibe filtering into politics. You’ve written about how many politicians are pairing sneakers with suits or wearing “dress sneakers.” Why doesn’t that work? I just happen to think it’s ugly. There’s no logical basis for beauty. I feel that the way that men wore tailored clothing in the midcentury looks better than the way many men wear it today. If someone agrees with that premise, I can give them some ideas on how to hold on to the contours of the look of the midcentury while still making it look modern. But there are certain moves that, once you leave those contours, you’re now in the realm of like, Ron DeSantis wearing a suit jacket with jeans, and I just think it looks ugly. But again, my ideas only work if you agree that Cary Grant looks better than Ron DeSantis or Andrew Tate. Many people think Andrew Tate looks cooler than Cary Grant. If we start with different premises, then my dos and don’ts don’t apply. [Media: https://twitter.com/dieworkwear/status/1664421702292635648] I think the average person would probably agree with you there, but then we have these communities of “alpha male” buff guys like Tate in these extremely tight, stretchy suits. Where did we start seeing those, and why do you think they are so popular among the right-leaning demographic? Amanda Mull wrote a brilliant article in the Atlantic a couple of years ago on how stretch fabrics became acceptable to men, because for a long time stretch fabrics were the purview of women’s clothing. Many men felt it was too feminine to wear stretch fabrics, and it’s very weird how now stretch fabrics are okay for men to wear. Anyone who was interested in clothing in the early 2000s will remember that the skinny tight suit was considered a metrosexual look, and there was much hand-wringing over the idea of Western men becoming more effete and whether this was like the death of Western masculinity. That moment was 20 years ago now, and it’s so far removed from many people’s memory. This is the normal progression of trends: What starts as the bleeding edge, hipster, urban style becomes continually more mainstream. Now it’s just the default look. Many gym bros or “alpha males” say they prefer it because they get to show off their body. This is just an ad hoc kind of explanation, because, again, in the early 2000s, this was considered a very metrosexual look. Now this is basically what you wear if you only have minimal interest in clothing and you go into a store. If you were just to blindly reach into a clothing rack and grab something, that’s what’s available to you. Meanwhile, the conservative establishment is parroting Donald Trump, who famously wears suits that pool at the ankles and look way too big. What fashion lineage does Trump’s style borrow from? Many politicians wear trousers that pool around their ankles, at least the older ones. The younger ones all wear really tight pants, so it’s like these two extremes. Trump is a portly guy. His suits are built to hide his stomach. When you are a portly man, you have to get coats large enough to fasten over your stomach, and he does that. [Image: Trump leaving New York's Trump Tower in early May. https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/06/GettyImages-2151283321.jpg?quality=90&strip=all] The unique thing about his silhouette is that he wears a very extended shoulder, because if he were to wear a narrow shoulder, then you essentially wind up with a pear-shaped silhouette. He doesn’t want that, he wants a V-shaped silhouette. When you extend the shoulder that much, that means you have to lengthen the coat to keep the same proportions. Then when you wear a large jacket, you'll have to wear larger trousers. He wears a very long tie because he feels that’s slimming. He mentioned that to Chris Christie, who wrote about it in his book. I think he wants to avoid the look of that cartoon figure of a portly man who’s always eating hamburgers. That's how you end up with Trump’s oversized suit. What do you think about all the Republican men copying Trump’s ties? I think Republicans are wearing the bright red tie to signal that they’re a Trump Republican as opposed to a Romney Republican. It’s not just the bright red tie, it’s that they’re often wearing satin red ties, a very shiny material that Trump wears. Historically for men, it’s usually the tie you’d wear in the evening. But Trump wears a satin red tie even in afternoons and mornings, because it’s the strongest, punchiest way to wear a red tie. Other Republicans have picked up on that and bought essentially the same tie when you see them coming out in support of Trump. [Image: Republican presidential candidates Mike Pence, Ron DeSantis, and Ramaswamy at last year’s GOP primary debate. https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/06/GettyImages-1634881727.jpg?quality=90&strip=all] The first time I really noticed that was the very first Republican primary debate for this presidential campaign. So many came out in bright red ties, and the only men that didn’t were Chris Christie and Asa Hutchinson, both of whom said they wouldn’t support Trump if he were the party’s nominee. They were totally scorched by Republicans for that. As everyone has noted, Trump has taken over the party. It’s this kind of careful thing where candidates want to stand up to him and say that you’re an alternative, but then you also have to court his base of diehards. Do you find that Democratic politicians are taking a different approach to fashion than their Republican counterparts? I don't know if there’s a significant difference between how Democratic and Republican politicians dress. The contrast is more evident across generations. Men in their 30s and 40s tend to favor slim-fit clothing, whereas men in their 50s and 60s favor fuller-fitting clothes. Some of this comes out of experience. I can’t imagine President Biden or Trump wearing the kind of clothes we see on Rep. Gaetz because they would instinctively know that suits shouldn’t fit like that. I think this comes out of the fact that they grew up in a generation where tailored clothing was more common, and so they’re more familiar with it, whereas I suspect Rep. Gaetz only started wearing suits with any regularity after he was elected into office in 2017. [Image: Rep. Matt Gaetz at Trump’s criminal trial in May. https://platform.vox.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2024/06/GettyImages-2152711008.jpg?quality=90&strip=all] There are noticeably bad dressers on both sides of the aisle, but in slightly different ways. I can’t imagine a Republican opting to dress like Sen. Fetterman because I think there are more pressures on that side of the aisle to conform to notions of respectability in dress. But ill-fitting attire is hardly a partisan issue. There are some members of Gen Z who are getting back into fuller-fitting silhouettes, which is great. But they’ve yet to get into elected offices in a way that makes their dress sense noticeable in political life. We’re now seeing Mark Zuckerberg start to wear a chain and grow out his curls. Do you think there’s a world in which, in a couple election cycles, there will be streetwear-influenced political dressing? No, not streetwear. The thing about clothing is that it’s so tied to signaling issues dealing with class, race, and often coded as respectability. What we term “respectability” is often middle-class whiteness. Streetwear does not convey that. Mark Zuckerberg can get away with it because he’s a billionaire. But politicians and people who work in offices often have to affect this uniform of middle-class whiteness, and I think it’s going to be the default uniform, at least for the rest of my lifetime. I think they’re still going to do button-up shirts and sometimes jeans. [Media: https://www.instagram.com/p/C69aOWwO4nM/?hl=en&img_index=1] How do you think male politicians and other powerful guys can dress better? And why aren’t they doing that already? US politicians have dressed more casually since at least the 1970s. Politicians are people too, and they exist in the same world as we do. They’re influenced by the same casualization trends. John F. Kennedy is often credited with having killed the hat for not wearing the hat at certain parts of his inauguration, and in the ’80s, when you see some politicians campaigning, you'll notice that they lose their jackets. In the late ’90s to the early 2000s, you start to see men lose the tie, so they’re only campaigning in a dress shirt. When Jeb Bush announced his candidacy for the presidency, he wore a quarter-zip sweater. Some of it is a desire to not look too stuffy. When you're walking into a town hall with everyone dressed casually, you don’t want to be seen as the suit. Personally, I think they would look better if they put on a tailored jacket and found ways to dress down a jacket that was not an orphan suit jacket with jeans. That’s the one unique thing about Donald Trump: He’s the only modern president who refuses to dress down outside of, like, golf courses. He always wears a suit. You rarely see him without a tie. We all know that these people are very powerful. Most come from privileged, wealthy backgrounds. I think they should just wear a tailored jacket and we should all just give up the charade that just because you’re dressed casually, you’re somehow one of us. As an electoral matter, I don’t think that’s changing. Politicians are still going to want to dress down to seem more relatable to voters. A version of this story appeared in Today, Explained, Vox’s flagship daily newsletter. Sign up here for future editions.
Continue Reading

Regional

Siblings killed as laptop battery explodes in Faisalabad

The fire in the house erupted due to the explosion of the laptop battery during charging

Published by Noor Fatima

Published

on

Faisalabad: In a tragic incident, Two siblings died and seven people were injured due to a house fire in Faisalabad.

According to rescue officials, nine people were burnt due to a fire in a house on Satyana Road in Mohalla Sharifpura, who were shifted to the hospital for treatment, where two siblings died of their injuries.

The rescue officials stated that the injured include five children and two women who are undergoing treatment in the hospital.

According to the rescue authorities, the fire in the house erupted due to the explosion of the laptop battery during charging. The fire has been brought under control.

According to the police, the fire incident is being further investigated.

On the other hand, Chief Minister Punjab Maryam Nawaz expressed regret over the death of children due to burns in Faisalabad and ordered the hospital administration to provide the best medical facilities to the injured.

Continue Reading

Crime

Journalist Khalil Jibran killed in Landi Kotal

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Governor Faisal Karim Kundi also condemned the killing of journalist Khalil Jibran

Published by Noor Fatima

Published

on

Landi Kotal: Journalist Khalil Jibran was killed while his colleague Sajjad Advocate was injured in the firing in Mazrina area of ​​Landi Kotal Tehsil of Khyber.

According to District Police Officer (DPO) Saleem Abbas, Khalil Jibran and Sajjad Advocate were going home when the accused took them out of the car and opened fire.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Chief Minister Ali Amin Gandapur took notice of the journalist’s murder and directed that the elements involved in the shooting should be immediately arrested.

Meanwhile, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Governor Faisal Karim Kundi also condemned the killing of journalist Khalil Jibran.

The Association of Electronic Media Editors and News Directors (AEMEND) has strongly condemned the brutal murder of journalist Khalil associated with Khyber News.

Expressing deep sorrow and regret over the incident in his statement, AEMEND stated that attacks on journalists are continuing in Pakistan. The torture, kidnapping, and threats have become routine.

AEMEND added that federal and provincial governments and state institutions seem unable to prevent such incidents despite all claims.

AEMEND demanded from the Chief Minister of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and the Federal Interior Minister that those involved in the murder of journalist Khalil Jibran should be arrested as soon as possible and punished.

Continue Reading

Trending