Extremism thrives and festers in imagined victimhood which is why post-colonial rhetoric has become a fertile ground for depravity. The fanatic must believe that he can do no wrong and that the world owes him everything that makes post-colonial lore ideal. Under that mindset all evil flows from the democratic world and any atrocity can be justified as resistance to 'imperialism.' Post-colonial fanaticism is similar to fascist Japanese ideology which justified atrocities as heroic resistance to colonialism and hatred of all things western.
Assed Baig's imbecilic article about Malala is a product of that mindset,which has already provoked excellent rebuttals like this one. Now he gets to work picking on a child who survive a taliban bullet to the head, because it all has to be about him and he also gets to pretend its a real girl he's beating up. He belongs to the SWP rape cult, Galloway's Respect party and UAF which should actually be named 'unite with fascism' since the Woolrich beheader was a member. He is a Pakistani Islamist chauvnist who pollutes outlets with his semi-literate self pitying ravings about how oppressed he is.
Assed insists that there is "no justifying the brutal actions of the Taliban or the denial of the universal right to education" the entire article is designed to divert attention away from taliban atrocities which affirms sympathy for them. Imagine if an Indian soldier shot a Kashmiri schoolgirl in the head, would Baig take to the Huffington post to ask us to consider Indian suicide bombing victims? Would he write an article asking why various Muslims recently started supporting Burmese Muslims after ignoring junta persecution of Buddhists? Of course not.
Baig decries "a story of a native girl being saved by the white man.....The story of an innocent brown child that was shot by savages for demanding an education and along comes the knight in shining armour to save her." The chief reason why Malala was 'saved' by the UK was that her own government refused to support her. Pro-taliban Imran Khan couldn't even bring himself to condemn the shooting, instead of mentioning that Baig whines that the UK treating a non-White foreign as being equal to a White British citizen is somehow "racist."
What would Baig have preferred? The only conclusion is that he would like it if she had been left for dead. He has more objection to the skin color of her doctors than her shooting; the man's found a way to eclipse Frantz Fanon's amorality.
He argues that the "actions of the West, the bombings, the occupations the wars" are being "justified" by Malala but offers no evidence and therefore his non-argument can and should be dismissed. Similar rants were advanced by wikileaks and other assorted cretins dismissing Malala by arguing that she is being 'exploited' to 'justify' war. Can anyone name a single NATO officer who has even mentioned her? I can't. Anyone trying to justify NATO actions in the region already has an almost endless series of taliban bloodbaths to work with.
He potrays her as a tool, an agent being used by shadowy plotters in smoke choked rooms. The very mindset behind Malala conspiracy theories which have become excessively popular in Pakistan. Such paranoia also suggests that he believes that females are incapable of thinking for themselves.
Post-colonial rhetoric is amusing since it reduces the world into an all powerful west and vulnerable non-westerners who have no agency or ability. The exact same world view colonial empires wanted to created is promoted as fact by those who aspire to Fannon's level. The viewpoint that Beig promotes is a replication of colonial ideology just as regimes like Zimbabwe have replicated colonial conditions like forced labor regimes.
He complains about "the west" but ignores Pakistani actions; the ISI created the taliban in 1994. Through the taliban Pakistan colonized Afghanistan enslaving Afghans and committing genocide against the Hazaras. Baig bemoans bombing but does not mention Pakistani carpet bombing in FATA which shares responsibility with the taliban for the most civilian deaths. Even Pakistan's own chief air marshal has admitted to dropping thousands which dwarf drones strikes, the Pakistani regime is now more honest than its apologists.
Baig writes that "the truth is that there are hundreds and thousands of other Malalas" a complete strawman since no one said that she was unique. He continues: "they come from Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan" that is true but not in a way complimentary to his agenda as the vast majority of civilians have been killed by NATO's enemies. Imagine how many promising students died in the Yazidi car bombings or in massacres of Quetta Hazaras (a people who place great importance on education) with tacit Pakistani approval. The Pakistani army had a tactic of setting fire to womens' schools and then machine gunning the students as they fled flames. Perhaps we can expect another HP article praising the Pakistani army for giving those native informants what they deserved.
He complains that people have forgotten "about" victims yet Assed has conveniently forgotten Bengladesh, Afghanistan and Balochistan. To be sure though victims of the west's enemies have been ignored; footage of GI relieving himself on taliban carrion sparked outrage while an incident where a taliban fighter cut off a woman's breast and forced another woman received little cover. Baig complains that "those as Western journalists and politicians fall over themselves to appease their white-middle class guilt also known as the white man's burden." Blanket statements about 'guilt' and general psychology of millions proves nothing though Baig could profit greatly from therapy.
The 'white man's burden' was a sarcastic term coined by Kipling, in reality colonialism is and was about profit not race. Most Italian colonies were in Europe, the Tsars shared skin pigment with their colonial subjects. Begg's native land confirms that colonialism is colorblind; Pakistan has raped and subjugated most of its neighboring peoples. Nial Fergusson's British rajj apologetics become easier everyday thanks to Pakistan.
Assed blames the "destabalisation (sic) of the region" on the "Western occupation of Afghanistan" in reality NATO only entered Afghanistan with permission from its UN recognized leadership. The only entity to blame for Afghanistan's ills than the taliban would be Pakistan, Benazir Bhutto became known as the "mother of the taliban" Malala decided to hear Bhutto's hijab; a hideous irony. The destabilization of the region are a product of Pakistan's actions and imperial lust for Kashmir; the country is literally tearing itself apart with dreams of empire.
He reveals what really angers him the "current narrative continues the demonization of the non-white Muslim man" meaning that his real gripe is that his fellow Islamists now look even worse, no wonder why he's mad that the UK saved her life. Apparently people have painted the non-White Muslim man "as a savage, someone beyond negotiating with, beyond engaging with, the only way to deal with this kind of savage is to wage war, occupy and use drones against them." Clearly he's referring to the taliban which again confirms his sympathy for them, by making the "Muslim man" synonymous with the taliban it is Begg who is the genuine bigot. He repeats the argument that NATO is using Malala as a justification which has no supporting evidence.
The article becomes more depraved as it mercifully comes to an end. Assed argues that westerners are congratulating "themselves for something that they have caused." As I already established the only cause other than the taliban is its mother Pakistan. He opened with claims that taliban actions cannot be "justified" yet his sentence about "something they have caused" does just that. Justification isn't simply saying that "she or he deserved it" the goal is to absolve ethical responsibility for an action. The word justify derives from a religious term "to free (a human) of the guilt and penalty attached to grievous sin" its also defined as "to declare free of blame; absolve."
If the west "caused" Malala's shooting instead of the taliban as Baig despicably argues then the taliban are justified.
Assed continues to defend and attempt to justify the taliban. He argues that "the West has killed more girls than the Taliban have. The West has denied more girls an education via their missiles than the Taliban has by their bullets." Easily accessible civilian casualty figures proves that Baig is lying, the the taliban have killed the greatest sum of innocents from both genders.
After revealing that his article was written in defense of the taliban Baig grandoisely claims that the "West has done more against education around the world than extremists could ever dream of." The thought that Pakistan's crumbling education system is all the fault of Switzerland or Sweden is a hilarious sweeping claim without evidence which again must dismissed especially since India's successful education system is a product of British rule. As proven by Assed himself a lack of education can often be blamed on considerable personal ignorance not an entire civilization.
To further dismiss diabolization of the west we need to only compare Baig to Asia Bibi. Assed leaves a very comfortable life in the UK where he is free to vilify Britain. Asia Bibi as a member of Pakistan's christian minority lead degrading life and faces lynching for something she might have said about Islam. The conclusion is obvious.
Extremism and identity politics exist for the purpose self-glorification. As a Treme character said about identity studies "lets all bask in the glory of me!" Assed Baig attempted to transform a story about a girl shot by the taliban into a story all about him and his group. By publishing bestial misogyny as progressive commentary the Huffington Post was proven that it is an dumping ground for fringe fanaticism and inane celebrity gossip.