Trojan horses entering Pakistan:
A few years ago, some liberals posted online videos about the plight of what they call the "transgender community" in Pakistan (a community who are a mixture of intersex eunuchs/hejra and "transgender" people who are mostly biologically male but identify and behave like females). The video resonated with much of Pakistani society, because it was true that the hejra community in particular did face a lot of discrimination and mistreatment in society, so proposing that they should be given more rights makes sense and wont seem objectionable to most- but there's more to this story than meets the eye.
The real purpose of those videos by liberals was not to solely improve the situation of the hejra community- it was to use a relatable topic to bring public opinion on to their side and then, under the guise of "rights for transgenders", use it as a trojan horse to shoehorn in new laws that include other things such as greater acceptance of homosexuality and the wider LGBTQ+ community in general, knowing full well that LGBTQ+ are not accepted in mainstream Pakistani society outside a few liberal elite and aggressively secular circles.
Why am I mentioning this now? Because the same thing seems to be happening again in a different context after the lynching of a Sri Lankan man in Sialkot.
Whilst early news reports are suggesting that he was an innocent man who was falsely accused of blasphemy, unfairly targeted and savagely beaten to death by a mob- large swathes of Pakistanis would quite rightly object to such a heinous crime and call for the perpetrators to be punished. Even the radical controversial group TLP appear to have distanced themselves from this incident. So if media reports are anything to go by, public opinion is largely in support of the victim and in support of punishing the culprits involved- but there's more to this story than meets the eye.
Is the real purpose of such news reports simply to seek justice through the courts to punish the perpetrators? Or is the real purpose an attempt to sway public opinion against Pakistan's blasphemy laws and in favour of increasing secularisation in schools as well as further crackdowns on religous institutions and organisations? Circling secular vultures such as Hasan Nisar would certainly hope for the latter.
As I've mentioned elsewhere: Islamic upbringing and the proper Islamic education would have prevented persecution and injustice towards religious minorities in Pakistan, such as the saying of the Prophet (saw) "he who hurts a dhimmi (non Muslim citizen living under Islamic rule), hurts me". This is why when you look at the lives of the Prophet (saw) and the rightly guided Khulafaa (ra), you don't see these sorts of atrocities and even if there was a rare case of a non Muslim saying disparaging things regarding Islam: in many cases, people were forgiven by the Prophet (saw) and other cases were addressed through the courts and state apparatus to ensure people got a fair hearing and vigilantism wasn't a thing. So whilst we'll hear a lot of hysteria implying that overzealous implementation of Islam is at fault for this act of cruelty- in many ways, the opposite is true and it's the lack of Islamic knowledge and the lack of implementation of Islam in Pakistan (especially in a broader political context) that contributed to this outcome.
The point here is not to suggest that the hejra community shouldn't have rights, or that the mob killing in Sialkot was justified- far from it. The point is that jaise haathi ke daanth khanay ke aur dikhane ke aur (according to the well known Urdu phrase "the elephant has one set of 'teeth' for eating and a different set of 'teeth' for show"), likewise a similar point can be made about news reports "khabaren dikhaate kuch aur, khabar ke peeche ka maqsad kuch aur" (news reports show one thing but the agenda behind it is something else).
