lahore2toronto

[lahore2toronto]

The End of Death? How Science Could Make Immortality Possible This Century

For as long as humans have told stories, we’ve dreamed of cheating death. From the Epic of Gilgamesh to Silicon Valley startups, the quest for immortality has fascinated poets, priests, and scientists alike.

But for the first time in history, this dream might be shifting from myth to possibility. Advances in biotechnology, brain-computer interfaces, and digital consciousness suggest that the end of biological death could arrive within this century. Some futurists even argue that if you survive to 2050, you may be able to dodge death entirely.

Here’s how humanity is inching closer to living forever.

1. Android Bodies – Living Beyond Biology

What if you could upload your mind into a new body?

Researchers in neuroscience and robotics are already laying the groundwork. At USC, Dr. Theodore Berger has built neural prosthetics to mimic memory functions. At Duke University, Dr. Miguel Nicolelis enabled paralyzed patients to control exoskeletons using only their thoughts.

Futurists like Dr. Ian Pearson predict that by mid-century, human consciousness could be uploaded into digital platforms and linked to lifelike android hosts. Hanson Robotics, famous for its humanoid robot Sophia, is creating machines with realistic movement and expressions—early prototypes of the bodies that one day might carry our minds.

2. 3D-Printed Organs & Limbs – Building a Body from Scratch

If android bodies feel too futuristic, there’s a more immediate option: printing new biological parts.

In 2019, scientists at Tel Aviv University 3D-printed a tiny, beating heart made from a patient’s own cells. Companies such as United Therapeutics are developing transplant-ready lungs, while 3DBio Therapeutics has created 3D-printed cartilage implants for patients with ear deformities.

Meanwhile, prosthetic pioneers like Open Bionics are producing affordable, customizable artificial limbs. Imagine a future where damaged hearts, kidneys, or arms can simply be replaced—turning the body into a repairable, upgradeable system.

3. Genetic Reprogramming – Rewinding the Clock of Aging

What if aging itself is just a disease—and a curable one at that?

Dr. David Sinclair at Harvard has shown that epigenetic reprogramming can make old cells act young again. In 2020, his team restored vision in mice by reactivating dormant genes. Startups like Altos Labs, backed by Jeff Bezos, are pouring billions into anti-aging research with the goal of extending healthy human lifespans indefinitely.

With tools like CRISPR-Cas9, scientists are learning to edit genetic flaws, potentially stopping the clock on aging—or even reversing it.

4. Nanomedicine – Repairing from the Inside Out

Forget pills and scalpels—imagine tiny machines inside your body, repairing damage cell by cell.

At MIT, nanoparticles are already being used to deliver cancer drugs directly to tumors. Futurist Ray Kurzweil predicts that by the 2030s, fleets of nanobots in our bloodstream will monitor health in real time, patch damaged tissue, and eliminate diseases before they manifest.

If perfected, nanomedicine could make the idea of “dying from illness” obsolete.

5. Cryonics & Biostasis – Freezing Time to Cheat Death

But what if you don’t make it to this future healthy enough to benefit?

Enter cryonics—the practice of preserving bodies (or just brains) at ultra-low temperatures in hopes of future revival. Alcor in the U.S. and Tomorrow Biostasis in Germany are already offering these services. While skeptics argue it’s unproven, advances in organ preservation are making the concept less science fiction and more an engineering challenge.

Cryonics offers a radical safety net: if death can’t be prevented today, it might simply be postponed.

6. Digital Immortality – Living in the Cloud

Perhaps the most mind-bending path is digital immortality: uploading consciousness to computers.

The Human Brain Project in Europe is attempting to map the brain’s 86 billion neurons, while companies like Neuralink are building brain-machine interfaces that could one day record thought itself. In theory, a perfect digital copy of your mind could live on inside a virtual world—or even control a robotic body in the physical one.

The big question remains: would this be you—or just a copy? Philosophy may have to evolve as fast as technology to answer it.

The Challenges Ahead

Even if science cracks immortality, it won’t come without complications. Who gets access first? The wealthy? What would endless lifespans mean for population, resources, and social structures like marriage or work?

And perhaps the hardest question of all: if death disappears, does life lose meaning?

Conclusion: The Century of Choice

For the first time in history, the idea of immortality is no longer confined to religion or myth. From android bodies to nanomedicine to digital consciousness, humanity is assembling the tools to bend—maybe even break—the limits of mortality.

The 21st century may not just redefine how long we live. It may redefine what it means to be human at all.

[lahore2toronto]

چکوال کے پندرہ سالہ اے لیول کے ایک نہایت ذہین طالب شہیر نے والد کے پستول سے اپنے سر میں گولی مار کر خودکشی کر لی

خودکشی سے پہلے اس نے انگریزی میں لکھی ہوئی ایک تحریر چھوڑی ہے

آئیے پہلے انگریزی تحریر اور اس کا ترجمہ ملاحظہ فرمائیں پھر اس کا تجزیہ کرنے کی کوشش کرتے ہیں

*The final warning*

All gods are ashes. All meaning is a fraud. All virtue is instinct. All love is chemistry. All glory is dust. Kings, slaves, prophets, fools, they fall silent in the same emptiness. The game ends. The world dies. No victim remains. No record endures. No purpose exists. Nothing matters. Nothing did. Nothing ever will.

Every hope you cling to is a shadow. Every desire is a trap. Every joy is borrowed from a system that does not care. Your life is a variable, your choices prewritten, grief and triumph alike are only data points in a cosmos that watches but never intervenes.

Look closer. The world is infinite. Time is meaningless. Consciousness is fleeting. The universe does not recognise you, does not value you, does not remember you. Everyone (*) is a checkpoint, a pause in a system indifferent to your existence.

To exist is optional. To resist is arbitrary. To hope is a folly. Step outside the sandbox or collapse entirely into nothing. Step inside and every instinct, every memory (*), every desire will be dissected, logged and replayed until it corrodes itself.

Do not cling. Do not seek meaning. Do not look for solace. The world is indifferent. The universe is indifferent. Even your understanding is a chemical accident. The end (*) is absolute. Nothing matters. Nothing ever did. Nothing ever will.

-Shaheer

Take care of mom and yourself dad. Don't do anything stupid like 2nd2q.

................

اور شہیر نے اپنی ڈائری پر یہ لکھا۔

Wake up. You are in an illusion. A very big one.

Nothing is real. It is just a very big show/game. Death is the only valid option.

You may pray, give charity, become hitler, acheive world peace.

Do anything.

It all does not matter۔

.....................

آخری انتباہ

تمام خدا راکھ ہیں۔ تمام معنی فریب ہیں۔ تمام نیکی محض جبلّت ہے۔ تمام محبت کیمیائی عمل ہے۔ تمام عظمت غبار ہے۔ بادشاہ، غلام، نبی، بیوقوف — سب ایک ہی سناٹے میں ڈھیر ہو جاتے ہیں۔ کھیل ختم ہو جاتا ہے۔ دنیا مر جاتی ہے۔ کوئی مظلوم باقی نہیں رہتا۔ کوئی ریکارڈ باقی نہیں رہتا۔ کوئی مقصد موجود نہیں۔ کچھ بھی اہم نہیں۔ کچھ بھی کبھی اہم نہیں تھا، نہ کبھی ہوگا۔

ہر امید جس سے تم لپٹے ہو ایک سایہ ہے۔ ہر خواہش ایک جال ہے۔ ہر خوشی ایک ایسے نظام سے ادھار لی گئی ہے جو تمہاری پروا نہیں کرتا۔ تمہاری زندگی ایک عدد ہے، تمہارے فیصلے پہلے سے لکھے ہوئے ہیں، غم اور خوشی دونوں محض ڈیٹا ہیں کائنات کے اندر، جو سب کچھ دیکھتی ہے مگر کبھی مداخلت نہیں کرتی۔

ذرا قریب سے دیکھو۔ دنیا لامحدود ہے۔ وقت بے معنی ہے۔ شعور عارضی ہے۔ کائنات نہ تمہیں پہچانتی ہے، نہ تمہیں کوئی قیمت دیتی ہے، نہ تمہیں یاد رکھتی ہے۔ ہر کوئی (*) محض ایک چیک پوائنٹ ہے، ایک توقف اس نظام میں جو تمہاری موجودگی سے بے نیاز ہے۔

وجود رکھنا اختیاری ہے۔ مزاحمت کرنا بے معنی ہے۔ امید رکھنا حماقت ہے۔ یا تو کھیل سے باہر نکل جاؤ، یا مکمل طور پر فنا ہو جاؤ۔ اندر رہو گے تو ہر جبلّت، ہر یاد، ہر خواہش کو ٹکڑے ٹکڑے کرکے ریکارڈ کیا جائے گا اور بار بار دہرایا جائے گا یہاں تک کہ وہ خود ہی گل سڑ جائے۔

چمٹے مت رہو۔ معنی مت ڈھونڈو۔ سکون مت تلاش کرو۔ دنیا بے پروا ہے۔ کائنات بے پروا ہے۔ تمہاری سمجھ تک ایک کیمیائی حادثہ ہے۔ انجام (*) مطلق ہے۔ کچھ بھی اہم نہیں۔ کبھی کچھ اہم نہیں تھا۔ نہ کبھی ہوگا۔

— شہیر

امی کا خیال رکھنا، اور بابا آپ بھی اپنا۔ کوئی بے وقوفی مت کرنا جیسے 2nd2q۔

---

اور شہیر نے اپنی ڈائری میں لکھا:

جاگو! تم ایک دھوکے میں ہو۔ ایک بہت بڑے دھوکے میں۔

کچھ بھی حقیقت نہیں۔ یہ سب صرف ایک بہت بڑا شو/کھیل ہے۔ موت ہی واحد درست راستہ ہے۔

تم چاہو تو نماز پڑھو، خیرات دو، ہٹلر بن جاؤ، یا دنیا میں امن قائم کر لو۔

جو مرضی کر لو۔

اس سب کی کوئی حیثیت نہیں ہے

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

فلسفے اور نفسیات کی زبان میں "نیہلزم (Nihilism)" کہا جاتا ہے۔

وجودیاتی نیہلزم (Existential Nihilism): زندگی میں کسی قسم کے مقصد، معنی یا حقیقت کو تسلیم نہ کرنا۔

یہ سوچ اکثر اس احساس سے جنم لیتی ہے کہ دنیا میں انصاف نہیں، خوشی عارضی ہے، اور کائنات ہماری پروا نہیں کرتی۔

وجوہات کیا ہو سکتی ہیں؟

1. ذہنی دباؤ اور اکیلا پن: تعلیمی دباؤ، مقابلے کی فضا، یا گھر/دوستوں میں کمیونیکیشن کا فقدان۔

2. وجودی سوالات: کم عمری میں "زندگی کا مقصد کیا ہے؟" جیسے سوالات کا جواب نہ ملنا۔

3. فلسفیانہ یا سائنسی مواد کا اثر: بعض اوقات نوجوان ایسے مواد پڑھ لیتے ہیں جو نیہلزم کو بڑھاوا دیتا ہے، مگر اس کا توازن یا اسلامی/روحانی پہلو انہیں سمجھ نہیں آتا۔

4. Depression اور Hopelessness: ڈپریشن کی حالت میں دماغ صرف تاریکی کو دیکھتا ہے، اور مثبت امکانات نظر ہی نہیں آتے۔

5. معاشرتی دباؤ : پاکستانی تعلیمی نظام میں نمبروں اور کامیابی پر ضرورت سے زیادہ زور، اور بچوں کی جذباتی ضروریات کی کمی۔

بچوں کو اس سوچ سے کیسے بچایا جا سکتا ہے؟

بچوں کو اپنی الجھنیں اور سوالات بیان کرنے کی اجازت دی جائے، بغیر ڈانٹ اور ججمنٹ کے۔

دین اسلام زندگی کا مقصد، صبر، آزمائش اور آخرت کے تصور کے ذریعے نیہلزم کا علاج پیش کرتا ہے۔

صرف نمبروں یا کامیابی پر تعریف نہ کریں، بلکہ کردار، اخلاق اور محنت کو سراہیں۔

اگر کوئی بچہ خودکشی یا "زندگی بے معنی ہے" جیسی بات کرے تو فوراً ماہرِ نفسیات/کاؤنسلر سے رابطہ کیا جائے۔

بچے کو یہ احساس ہونا چاہیے کہ وہ چاہے کامیاب ہو یا ناکام، اس کی ذات اہم ہے اور اسے محبت ملتی رہے گی۔

فلسفہ اور سائنس پڑھنے والے بچوں کو ساتھ ساتھ اسلامی فلسفہ، تصوف، اور مثبت نفسیات سے بھی روشناس کرایا جائے تاکہ یک

رُخی سوچ نہ بنے۔

احمد محمود

[lahore2toronto]

“You have to talk, otherwise your head turns into a cemetery.”

— Chuck Palahniuk, Consider This

[lahore2toronto]

Immortal.

[lahore2toronto]

Before I die, I want to be somebody's favourite hiding place, the place they can put everything they know they need to survive, every secret, every solitude, every nervous prayer, and be absolutely certain I will keep it safe. I will keep it safe.

Andrea Gibson

[lahore2toronto]

[lahore2toronto]

Chhalla….. Best Ever By Rabbi Shergill

[lahore2toronto]

“Let’s suppose a philosopher who after having published several works declares in a new book: “Up to now I was going in the wrong direction. I am going to begin all over. I think now that I was wrong.” No one would take him seriously any more. And yet he would then be giving proof that he is worthy of thought.”

— Albert Camus, Notebooks, 1942-1951

[lahore2toronto]

Pakistan’s Stolen Democracy: A Nation Betrayed by Military Might and U.S. Complicity

By Qaisar Iqbal Janjua

In 2025, Pakistan is a nation on the brink, its democratic aspirations suffocated under the iron grip of General Asim Munir, the self-promoted field marshal who has cemented military dominance over the country’s politics. The February 2024 elections, where Imran Khan’s Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) won over 200 seats only to see the military-backed Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) form the government with just 17 seats, stand as a stark symbol of this betrayal. For ordinary Pakistanis—students, laborers, and families struggling to survive—this is not just political maneuvering but a theft of their voice, echoing historical and global patterns of U.S.-backed authoritarianism in Iran, Egypt, and North Korea. Enabled by U.S. patronage under President Donald Trump, whose own democratic credentials are questionable, Munir’s regime risks turning Pakistan into a geopolitical flashpoint, with critical minerals and Chinese investments drawing parallels to conflict zones like Congo. This article, grounded in historical context, credible reports, and the raw anguish of Pakistan’s people, exposes the human cost of this “stability facade” and demands accountability for a nation on the edge.

Pakistan’s History: A Cycle of Democratic Hopes and Military Betrayals

Pakistan’s 1947 founding under Muhammad Ali Jinnah envisioned a democratic state, blending Islamic identity with parliamentary governance. Yet, its history is a relentless cycle of military coups and democratic suppression, often with U.S. support:

• Ayub Khan (1958–1969): The first military ruler, backed by the U.S. to counter Soviet influence, banned political parties and rigged elections. Public protests forced his exit, but the military’s grip endured.

• Zia-ul-Haq (1977–1988): Zia’s coup against elected Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, culminating in Bhutto’s execution, was supported by the U.S. for Pakistan’s role in the Afghan jihad. His Islamization policies fueled militancy, a legacy that continues to destabilize Pakistan.

• Pervez Musharraf (1999–2008): Musharraf’s coup ousted Nawaz Sharif, and his post-9/11 alignment with the U.S. secured $33 billion in aid (Congressional Research Service, 2021). His regime maintained a democratic facade while suppressing dissent, a playbook revived under Munir.

These cycles, enabled by U.S. patronage, have left Pakistanis disillusioned, their democratic dreams repeatedly crushed by military power and foreign complicity.

The 2024 Elections: A Stolen Mandate

The February 8, 2024, general elections were a turning point, exposing the military’s stranglehold on Pakistan’s democracy. Despite widespread expectations of a PML-N landslide, backed by the military, PTI-backed independents, forced to run without their party symbol due to Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) rulings, won a stunning victory. According to public sentiment and unofficial tallies based on Form-45s (polling station results), PTI secured over 200 seats, while PML-N won only 17 (,). Yet, the official results, announced after delays and allegations of rigging, gave PTI-backed independents 93 seats, PML-N 75, and the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) 54, with no party securing a majority (,).

The discrepancy fueled outrage. On February 17, Rawalpindi Division Commissioner Liaquat Ali Chattha resigned, admitting his role in electoral fraud that favored PML-N in 11 of 13 local seats (). His confession, implicating military interference, was followed by his surrender to police and subsequent disappearance, raising fears of coercion or worse among Pakistanis. The ECP, widely seen as under military control, dismissed Chattha’s claims as “baseless,” while the military rejected rigging allegations (,). The New York Times noted that voters defied military expectations, expressing frustration with its interference, yet PML-N, led by Shehbaz Sharif, formed a coalition government with PPP and smaller parties, sidelining PTI (,).

For Pakistanis, this was a theft of their mandate. In markets, mosques, and homes, people speak of a “stolen election,” with PTI’s claim of a “Mother of all rigging” resonating deeply (). Protests erupted in cities like Rawalpindi, met with tear gas and batons, as citizens demanded justice for their votes (). The ECP’s refusal to allocate reserved seats to PTI, despite a Supreme Court ruling recognizing PTI’s eligibility, further eroded trust in institutions ().

Asim Munir’s Power Grab: From Army Chief to Field Marshal

General Asim Munir, who orchestrated Khan’s ousting in 2022, has emerged as Pakistan’s de facto ruler. His actions mirror historical autocrats:

• Imran Khan’s Imprisonment: Khan, jailed since August 2023 on corruption and other charges, faces solitary confinement in Adiala Jail, with restricted medical and legal access. Pakistanis fear he could suffer Morsi’s fate, dying in custody, a concern heightened by his 14-year sentence and allegations of military-orchestrated persecution ().

• Judicial and Media Control: The 2024 26th Constitutional Amendment expanded military influence over the judiciary, with the Supreme Court upholding civilian military trials, leaving citizens feeling defenseless. Media censorship has surged, with Pakistan ranking 150th in press freedom (Reporters Without Borders, 2024).

• Self-Promotion to Field Marshal: In May 2025, Munir was promoted to field marshal, a largely ceremonial rank, following a brief India-Pakistan conflict. Experts see this as a bid to extend his tenure beyond 2027, consolidating power (). Pakistanis view it as a brazen display of unchecked authority, with street conversations decrying a “martial law” in all but name.

• Economic Involvement: Munir co-chairs the Special Investment Facilitation Council (SIFC), blending military and economic control, a move that alarms citizens who see it as entrenching military dominance ().

U.S. Complicity: A Stability Facade Fueling Instability

The U.S.’s support for Munir mirrors its historical backing of autocrats, prioritizing strategic interests over human lives:

• Iran’s Shah (1953–1979): The CIA’s Operation Ajax overthrew elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh to secure oil, installing the Shah. His repression fueled the 1979 Islamic Revolution, costing thousands of lives and destabilizing the region.

• Egypt under Sisi: Since 2013, the U.S. has provided $1.3 billion annually in military aid, despite Sisi’s imprisonment of over 60,000 and hundreds of executions (Amnesty International, 2024). His role in securing the Suez Canal trumps human rights.

• North Korea (2020): When rumors of Kim Jong-un’s illness surfaced in April 2020, the CIA’s focus was on succession, not the suffering of 25 million North Koreans enduring famine and gulags (UN Human Rights Report, 2020; Washington Post, April 2020).

In Pakistan, Trump’s June 2025 meeting with Munir, bypassing civilian leaders, signaled U.S. endorsement of military rule. Public anger erupted, with Pakistanis decrying Trump’s embrace of a dictator while ignoring their stolen votes. Reports suggest Munir offered access to Pakistan’s critical minerals—vital for technology and energy—to secure U.S. support, despite China’s significant investments in Pakistan’s mining and infrastructure (e.g., Gwadar Port, CPEC). This geopolitical maneuvering risks turning Pakistan into a war zone like Congo, where resource competition fuels conflict. For Pakistanis, the question is bitter: “Who cares?” While global powers vie for minerals, 40% of the population languishes below the poverty line (World Bank, 2024).

Trump: An Autocrat in Disguise?

Trump’s support for Munir aligns with his own questionable democratic record. His first term (2017–2021) challenged U.S. norms—disputing the 2020 election, inciting the January 6 Capitol riot—and his 2025 agenda, tied to Project 2025, aims to centralize power, mirroring Munir’s tactics. Pakistanis see irony in Trump, who undermines democracy at home, backing their oppressor abroad. For them, Trump is no better than Munir, Sisi, or Kim—leaders who prioritize power over people. The U.S.’s “flawed democracy” rating (EIU, since 2017) feels like a warning: if Pakistan’s democratic facade can crumble, so can America’s.

The Human Cost: A Nation’s Anguish

The toll of this facade is devastating:

• Pakistan: The stolen 2024 election has left citizens hopeless, with protests met by violence and economic hardship crushing families. The fear of Khan’s death in jail looms large, with communities praying for his safety.

• Iran: The Shah’s repression displaced thousands, and the post-1979 theocracy executed over 500 in 2023 (Amnesty International).

• Egypt: Sisi’s regime has killed or jailed thousands, with 179 executions between 2014 and 2019 (Human Rights Watch).

• North Korea: Famines (1990s: 600,000–1 million deaths) and gulags (120,000 prisoners) continue, ignored by U.S. policy (UN, 2020).

• Global Scale: U.S.-linked conflicts since 2001 have killed over 4.5 million (Costs of War, 2023).

In Pakistan, the pain is raw. From Lahore’s crowded bazaars to Khyber’s villages, people mourn a stolen future, their votes nullified, their voices silenced.

A Global Crisis: Democracy on Life Support

Globally, democracy is reeling: 71% of people live in autocracies (V-Dem, 2024). Pakistan’s hybrid regime (Freedom House: 37/100) teeters, with PTI’s resistance offering hope, unlike Egypt’s autocracy (18/100) or North Korea’s totalitarianism (3/100). The U.S.’s support for autocrats undermines democratic faith worldwide, while Trump’s domestic actions mirror the authoritarianism he endorses abroad.

A Call to Action: Pakistan’s Fight for Freedom

Pakistan’s stolen election and Munir’s power grab, enabled by Trump’s complicity, are a betrayal of its people. The risk of Pakistan becoming a geopolitical battleground over minerals, like Congo, looms as China and the U.S. vie for influence. Yet, Pakistanis refuse to surrender. PTI’s protests, student activism, and whispers of defiance in every home signal a nation ready to fight. The international community must amplify these voices, demanding U.S. accountability and Khan’s safety. Pakistan deserves a future where its people’s will prevails—not the whims of generals or foreign powers. The world must act before Pakistan’s democratic dream is lost forever.

[lahore2toronto]

🐾 Waiting for Her Human: A Poochon’s Quiet Love Letter

By Qaisar Iqbal Janjua

The house feels different when she’s not here.

There’s no echo of her voice bouncing off the walls, no familiar laughter from the other room, no rustling of her footsteps up the stairs. And though it’s only been one night, Pebbles — our curly little cloud of a dog — knew instantly.

She knew her person was gone.

Pebbles isn’t just a pet. She’s family. A Poochon, yes — a cross between a Bichon Frise and a Poodle — but what she really is, is a heart with fur. She’s been my daughter’s shadow, her cuddle-buddy, her soft place to land, for years now. And when my daughter packed her bags for a short three-day trip, Pebbles didn’t need words to know something wasn’t right.

She just… changed.

She curled up tighter. Her little paws didn’t bounce across the floor like usual. She sniffed the air at the door, then sat beside it — waiting. She skipped her meals. Her favorite chicken treat lay untouched in her bowl.

And then it hit me.

Dogs grieve too. They don’t cry the way we do, but their silence is a kind of mourning. Their stillness? That’s a poem of absence.

So I stayed close. I let her rest in the one place that still smelled like her human: the bedroom. The pillows still held her scent. The blankets still carried her warmth. And Pebbles, without needing to be told, climbed up and made a tiny nest. She didn’t sleep much, just kept her head on the pillow, ears twitching at every distant sound, as if hoping it might be her.

And then��� the magic moment.

I called my daughter and held up the screen. “Pebbles, look — someone wants to say hi.”

Her ears perked. Her eyes widened. And as soon as my daughter’s voice came through the phone, Pebbles barked. Not a bark of alarm — a bark of recognition, joy, confusion, longing.

She knew.

She pawed at the screen, then looked at me as if to ask, “Where is she? I see her. I hear her. Why isn’t she here?”

But something changed after that. Her tail swished again. She drank some water. She ate a little. She found comfort, not in the return — but in the reassurance.

She didn’t need her person to be home immediately. She just needed to know she was still hers.

That’s love. That’s loyalty. That’s Pebbles.

⸻

To every dog parent out there:

They feel what we feel. Sometimes, they feel it more purely than we do. And in a world full of noise, distractions, and shifting loyalties, a little dog sleeping beside a worn-out pillow — just waiting for her person to come home — is proof that love doesn’t need words.

It just needs presence.

Or even… a voice on a screen.

[lahore2toronto]

The Evolution of AI: From Fire to Future—Can Regulations Tame the Beast?

By Qaisar Iqbal Janjua

Since humanity first harnessed fire, tools have shaped our destiny, amplifying our potential for creation and destruction alike. From the spark of flame to the splitting of the atom, each technological leap has brought both promise and peril. Today, artificial intelligence (AI) stands as our latest Promethean gift, a tool with unprecedented power to transform society—or destabilize it. While the European Union (EU) has crafted robust regulations to govern civilian AI, the absence of oversight for military applications raises haunting parallels to history’s unchecked innovations. This article traces AI’s journey from its conceptual spark to its modern blaze, examines the EU’s regulatory landscape, and explores whether laws can prevent a future where AI renders humanity as obsolete as the dinosaurs.

The Spark: AI’s Origins and Historical Parallels

Fire, discovered over a million years ago, was humanity’s first tool, enabling warmth, cooking, and eventually metallurgy. Gunpowder, born in 9th-century China, revolutionized warfare, empowering empires but also fueling centuries of conflict. The atom bomb, unleashed in 1945, marked a turning point—its destructive power forced global powers to negotiate treaties like the Non-Proliferation Treaty (1968) to curb its spread. Each of these tools reshaped society, but their misuse by figures like Genghis Khan or during World War II showed how unchecked power invites catastrophe.

AI’s story begins in the 1950s, with pioneers like Alan Turing envisioning machines that could think. The term “artificial intelligence” was coined in 1956 at the Dartmouth Conference, sparking decades of slow progress limited by computing power. The 2010s ignited a revolution: breakthroughs in machine learning, fueled by vast data and GPUs, gave rise to systems like AlphaGo (2016), which defeated world champion Lee Sedol, and GPT-3 (2020), capable of human-like text generation. These milestones mirror fire’s leap from campfires to forges—AI has grown from a curiosity to a force reshaping economies, healthcare, and warfare.

The Blaze: AI’s Rise and Military Ambitions

Today, AI is omnipresent. It powers recommendation algorithms on Netflix, optimizes supply chains for Amazon, and aids doctors in diagnosing cancer. But its military applications are where the stakes are highest. AI-driven drones, like those used in Ukraine since 2022, can autonomously identify targets, while cyberwarfare tools leverage AI to detect and counter hacks in milliseconds. The US, China, and Russia are pouring billions into military AI—China’s 2019 defense white paper championed “intelligentized warfare,” and the US allocated $1.8 billion for AI in its 2024 defense budget.

The EU, while a leader in civilian AI regulation, has lagged in military oversight. The European Defence Fund (EDF) invested €8 billion from 2021-2027 in AI-driven defense projects, including autonomous drones and cybersecurity systems, yet these fall outside the EU AI Act’s scope []. This gap echoes history’s failures to regulate early gunpowder or nuclear arsenals, where unchecked proliferation led to arms races and near-catastrophes, like the Cuban Missile Crisis (1962).

The EU AI Act: A Civilian Fortress, A Military Void

Finalized in January 2024, the EU AI Act is the world’s first comprehensive AI law, categorizing systems by risk (unacceptable, high, limited, minimal) and imposing strict rules on high-risk applications like hiring or policing []. It bans practices like real-time facial recognition in public spaces (with exceptions for law enforcement) and mandates transparency, with fines up to €35 million or 7% of global revenue . The Act’s human-centric approach aims to ensure safety and trust, positioning the EU as a global standard-setter, much like the GDPR did for data privacy in 2018 [].

However, the Act explicitly excludes AI used for “military, defence, or national security purposes” []. This carve-out, driven by member states’ sovereignty over defense, leaves military AI unregulated at the EU level. National guidelines exist—France emphasizes ethics, Germany insists on human-in-the-loop systems—but they’re non-binding and inconsistent []. The absence of unified rules risks a fragmented approach, reminiscent of the pre-treaty nuclear era when nations raced to stockpile warheads without global coordination.

Historical Echoes: The Risks of Unregulated Power

History offers sobering lessons. Gunpowder’s spread in medieval Europe fueled endless wars until treaties like the Peace of Westphalia (1648) brought some stability. The atom bomb’s development in secrecy led to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, prompting the UN to establish nuclear oversight. AI’s military applications, like lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS), pose similar risks. A 2020 incident in Libya, where a Turkish-made drone reportedly fired autonomously, hints at the dangers of AI acting without human oversight []. Without regulation, a future “Hitler-like” figure or reckless state could exploit AI for mass surveillance, propaganda, or autonomous warfare, echoing the misuse of radio by Nazi Germany to spread disinformation.

Dual-use AI—systems with both civilian and military applications—complicates matters. For example, Palantir’s AI Platform, initially developed for commercial data analysis, now supports military targeting []. The EU AI Act’s civilian focus indirectly affects such systems, but its military exemption leaves gaps. A pattern recognition algorithm designed to detect cancer could be repurposed to select battlefield targets, blurring the line between regulated and unregulated uses [].

The Future: Can Regulations Prevent an AI Apocalypse?

Looking ahead, the future of AI hinges on governance. The EU’s civilian AI Act sets a precedent, but its military exclusion risks an arms race, especially as China and the US accelerate their AI defense programs. The Carnegie Endowment warns that the lack of a global framework for military AI could destabilize geopolitics, much like nuclear proliferation did in the 20th century []. The EU could lead by extending its risk-based approach to military AI, as proposed by the Centre for European Policy Studies, ensuring human oversight and compliance with international humanitarian law [].

International efforts offer hope but face hurdles. The UN’s Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons (CCW) has debated LAWS since 2014, but progress is stalled by disagreements between powers like the US and Russia []. The Responsible AI in the Military Domain (REAIM) summit, launched in 2023 by the Netherlands and South Korea, aims to set non-binding norms, with the EU urged to take a leading role []. A 2023 UN resolution called for a treaty banning LAWS by 2026, but enforcement remains uncertain [].

Realistically, regulations can mitigate risks but not eliminate them. The EU’s challenge is to balance innovation with control while navigating member state sovereignty. A unified EU strategy, perhaps through the European Defence Agency, could align national policies and foster global cooperation, much like nuclear treaties curbed proliferation. However, as with gunpowder and the atom bomb, determined bad actors—be they rogue states or non-state groups—could exploit AI’s accessibility, developing dark pool systems in secret.

A Path Forward: Learning from History

To prevent AI from becoming a tool of destruction, the EU must act decisively:

1 Extend the AI Act: Apply its risk-based framework to military AI, requiring human oversight and transparency, as urged by the European Parliament [].

2 Strengthen Global Norms: Lead initiatives like REAIM and push for a binding UN treaty on LAWS, learning from nuclear non-proliferation efforts.

3 Foster Public Accountability: Engage citizens to demand ethical AI development, mirroring campaigns that led to bans on chemical weapons.

4 Bridge Civilian-Military Synergies: Regulate dual-use AI to prevent civilian tools from being weaponized without oversight [].

Conclusion: Taming the Flame

AI, like fire, gunpowder, or the atom bomb, is a tool defined by its wielders. The EU’s AI Act is a bold step toward taming its civilian applications, but the military void threatens to let the flame burn unchecked. History shows that unregulated tools invite chaos—gunpowder fueled conquests, nuclear weapons risked annihilation. By learning from these lessons, the EU can lead a global effort to ensure AI serves humanity, not subjugates it. The future need not mirror the dinosaurs’ fate; with foresight and resolve, we can keep AI from becoming our asteroid.

[lahore2toronto]

The End of Control: Brexit, MAGA, and the Global North’s Identity Crisis

By Qaisar Iqbal Janjua

For centuries, the world tilted north. From the British Empire to American exceptionalism, the West called the shots — economically, politically, and culturally. But today, that world is cracking. The rise of slogans like “Take Back Control” in the UK and “Make America Great Again” in the U.S. are not signs of confidence — they are symptoms of panic.

This is not just about Brexit or Trump. It’s about an entire civilizational identity crisis. The Global North, long the unchallenged steward of world affairs, is confronting a terrifying realization: the world is moving on.

Brexit and MAGA: The Politics of Nostalgia

On the surface, Brexit and MAGA appear to be separate political events. One is Britain leaving the European Union. The other is an American populist movement that took over the Republican Party. But under the surface, they share the same emotional fuel: fear of loss.

   •   Loss of sovereignty (even if symbolic)

   •   Loss of racial or cultural dominance

   •   Loss of economic stability for the working class

   •   Loss of certainty in a globalized world

Brexit promised Britons they could “take back control” — but of what? Immigration? Trade? Sovereignty? Most of those powers weren’t really lost — they were shared. But that didn’t matter. What mattered was the feeling of decline.

MAGA ran on similar fumes: “We don’t win anymore,” said Donald Trump. But America hadn’t stopped winning — it just wasn’t winning alone. That distinction matters. Sharing power feels like losing power to those used to having it all.

Globalization: The Great Equalizer (and Disruptor)

The 21st century globalized not only trade and travel — it globalized culture, technology, and aspiration.

   •   China rose as a tech and economic powerhouse.

   •   India became the back-office and the brain behind global innovation.

   •   Africa’s youth became a demographic force, with smartphones and stories ready to reshape the narrative.

   •   Latino, Asian, Arab, and African diasporas demanded visibility and equity in places that long ignored them.

The Global North, used to being the producers of culture and power, was suddenly facing a world where it was no longer the center — just one of many voices in the chorus. For many in the West, this was not an invitation to collaborate; it felt like an existential threat.

The Myth of “Taking Back Control”

What did the UK actually gain from Brexit?

   •   Trade friction with the EU, its largest partner

   •   Economic decline, with slower growth and lower investment

   •   Increased political instability and internal division (especially in Scotland and Northern Ireland)

   •   Immigration still high — just from different places

   •   A National Health Service in crisis, despite the “£350 million per week” promise

And what did America gain from MAGA?

   •   A more divided society, politically and racially

   •   Isolationism in global affairs

   •   A weakened international reputation

   •   Policy whiplash every election cycle

The “control” both movements sought was largely illusory. Because the real loss wasn’t control — it was global dominance.

The Global North’s Identity Crisis

Here’s the truth few politicians dare admit: The era of Western hegemony is ending.

Not because of war or collapse, but because the rest of the world has caught up — economically, intellectually, and creatively.

The Global South is no longer waiting for permission. It’s launching satellites, producing films, designing software, and writing its own story.

   •   South-South trade is booming.

   •   BRICS nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) are proposing alternatives to the Western-led order.

   •   Youth populations across Asia, Africa, and Latin America are more ambitious, connected, and capable than ever.

This doesn’t mean the North is irrelevant. But it does mean it has to let go of its monopoly.

Where Will the Global North Be in 50 Years?

That depends entirely on the choices it makes now.

Path 1: Reinvention

   •   Embrace multicultural democracy

   •   Invest in education, green technology, and global collaboration

   •   Respect rising nations as partners, not subordinates

   •   Let go of imperial nostalgia and zero-sum thinking

Path 2: Resistance and Decline

   •   Cling to nationalism and nostalgia

   •   Blame immigrants and outsiders

   •   Elect populists who offer slogans instead of solutions

   •   Sink into cultural and economic irrelevance

Empires don’t last forever. But civilizations that evolve — do.

A New Kind of Power

The future will not be dominated by one power or region. It will be multipolar, diverse, and dynamic. Power will flow through ideas, networks, culture, and technology — not just weapons and wealth.

The Global North must decide: Does it want to be part of that future? Or stand in its way?

Brexit and MAGA may have felt like revolutions. But history may remember them as the last cries of an old world unwilling to accept a new one.

And for those of us watching — from the Global South or as migrants within the North — we understand:

This isn’t the end of power. It’s just the end of domination. And maybe that’s not such a bad thing.

[lahore2toronto]

Rediscovering Punjab: Beyond the Myths and Menus of the Western Lens

By Qaisar Iqbal Janjua

For much of the world, “Punjab” conjures up images of bright turbans, butter chicken, bhangra beats, and overflowing plates of “tandoori” dishes. This packaged version of Punjab is colorful—but ultimately one-dimensional, built largely on the migration stories of Indian Sikh communities who reached Western shores earlier and carved out visible diasporic identities.

What gets lost in this narrative is the real Punjab: a vast, complex, and rich civilization whose cultural heart today beats in Pakistan, not in Bollywood music videos or in the spice aisle of Western supermarkets.

The “Ghost Pepper” That Was Never a Ghost

Let’s start with the now-famous ghost pepper—a chili branded in Western culinary circles as one of the hottest in the world. Known in the global market as “Bhut Jolokia,” it was supposedly “discovered” in Assam, India. The name, often translated as “ghost chili,” evokes a sense of danger, mystery, and exoticism. But to most Punjabis, especially those in rural and southern Pakistan, this pepper isn’t exotic at all—it’s simply mirch.

In regions like Multan, Bahawalpur, Okara and Sialkot, ultra-hot chilies have been a staple for generations. They’re crushed, dried, fried in ghee, used in pickles and everyday curries—without anyone needing a warning label. The ghost pepper wasn’t a novelty; it was lunch. The labeling of such ingredients as rare or extreme reflects how Western narratives often exoticize what’s routine in the Global South, especially when that narrative is filtered through a narrow lens.

The “Tandoori” Misnomer

“Tandoori chicken.” “Tandoori naan.” “Tandoori flavor.” If you’re in the West, you’ve likely seen this word attached to countless menu items. But ask a Punjabi from Pakistan what a tandoor is, and they’ll tell you: it’s not a spice—it’s an oven.

In Pakistani Punjab, the tandoor is a humble, almost sacred part of domestic and street life. It’s where fresh rotis are baked, chargha is slow-roasted, and families gather with steel thalis and clay bowls. There’s no such thing as “tandoori spice”—that’s a Western culinary invention. For Punjabis, cooking in a tandoor is not a cuisine category; it’s survival and tradition in a brutally hot climate where open-stove cooking is unbearable.

What’s been marketed globally as “tandoori flavor” is often a mix of red food coloring, yogurt, and chili powder—bearing little resemblance to the flavorful smokiness and natural charring that comes from real tandoor cooking.

Punjab: The Land of Civilizations, Not Just Stereotypes

Punjab, meaning “Land of Five Rivers,” has always been more than a food trend. It was once the cradle of the Indus Valley Civilization, home to ancient cities like Harappa. It gave birth to poets like Warith Shah, mystics like Bulleh Shah, and philosophers like Allama Iqbal. It is the soil of sufi shrines, green wheat fields, and salt mines older than Rome.

Yet this Punjab—the Pakistan Punjab—is almost entirely absent from the global stage.

Western media, influenced by the Indian diaspora, often conflates “Punjabi” culture with the cultural practices of a specific minority: Sikh Punjabis from India, who understandably preserved and promoted their identity in exile, often under duress. Their stories matter. But so do the stories of the 110 million Punjabis in Pakistan—Muslim, majority, secure in identity, and not seeking Western validation.

From the Soil to the Plate: Real Punjabi Cuisine

While restaurant menus abroad offer a predictable mix of “butter chicken” and “chana masala,” real Punjabi cuisine is deeply seasonal, agricultural, and regional.

In rural Punjab, people still eat:

   •   Saag with hand-churned butter

   •   Makki di roti fresh from the tandoor

   •   Kunna gosht slow-cooked in clay pots

   •   Achars made with raw mangoes and red-hot chilies

   •   Desi ghee parathas that feed farmers at dawn

There’s no “fusion” here—just food that evolved naturally from the land and the labor of those who till it.

Dresses, Not Costumes

Even in fashion, the westernization of Punjab has led to confusion. Shalwar kameez, a national dress worn in Pakistan, is now often seen in the West as an “ethnic costume” worn at weddings or festivals. In Pakistan, it’s just Tuesday. Whether you’re a lawyer in Lahore or a shopkeeper in Jhelum, it’s what you wear because it makes sense: breathable, modest, elegant.

Colorful turbans and embroidered kurtas—often highlighted in Western portrayals—represent ceremonial or northern styles, not daily wear. The real Punjab, especially outside cities, remains practical, grounded, and understated.

Why the World Knows One Punjab and Not the Other

The short answer: migration, trauma, and media access.

Indian Punjabis, particularly Sikhs, were often the first Punjabis to migrate to Canada, the UK, and the US in large numbers—partly due to partition displacement, and later, persecution post-1984. They built diasporic hubs, opened restaurants, and became highly visible.

Pakistani Punjabis, by contrast, didn’t migrate en masse with the same urgency. And those who did, blended more quietly into broader Muslim communities in Western countries, often choosing not to project a distinct “Punjabi” identity.

In a world that rewards branding, this meant the Punjabi Muslim story faded from view.

✨ But Here’s the Good News

The world is ready to listen again. In a time where authenticity matters more than hashtags, real stories from real places are finding their way into global conversations. And Pakistani Punjab has a story to tell:

   •   Of flavors that need no artificial coloring

   •   Of poetry that doesn’t need translation

   •   Of communities that don’t need rescuing, just recognition

A Call to Rediscover the Real Punjab

It’s time to move past the tourist-brochure version of Punjab. It’s time to recognize that the center of Punjabi culture today beats strongest in Pakistan, not just in Toronto strip malls or British curry houses.

Punjab is not a spice. It’s not a costume. It’s not a festival.

It’s a civilization. It’s a home. It’s a heritage.

And it’s alive—smoking chillies in a clay tandoor, echoing in Sufi qawwalis, soaking in the wheat fields of Gujranwala and the stories of grandmothers in Bahawalpur.

The world deserves to know that Punjab.

And Punjab deserves to be known—fully, fairly, and finally.

[lahore2toronto]

[lahore2toronto]

Trump’s Tariff Policy: A 100-Year-Old Gamble in a Modern World – Can It Work for America?

In a world rattled by economic uncertainty, U.S. President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff policy, announced on April 2, 2025, has sparked fear, market turmoil, and skepticism about America’s role on the global stage. With a 10% baseline tariff on most imports, higher rates (up to 54%) on countries like China, and threats of trade wars, the policy harks back to protectionist measures of the 1920s. But as markets tumble—the S&P 500 ETF (SPY) currently sits at $505.28, down from a recent high of $613.23—and global trust wanes, questions abound: What is Trump’s strategy? Will it ultimately benefit America? And can a century-old approach succeed in today’s interconnected economy, especially given domestic challenges like labor shortages and shifting workforce attitudes?

The Policy: A Blast from the Past

Trump’s tariff plan aims to reduce the U.S. trade deficit, protect domestic industries, and leverage negotiations with trading partners. It includes a “reciprocal” tariff formula, where the U.S. matches the rates other nations impose on American goods, targeting China (34% tariff), the European Union (20%), and Canada and Mexico (25%). Invoking national security under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), Trump calls this “Liberation Day,” echoing early 20th-century policies like the Fordney-McCumber and Smoot-Hawley tariffs, which sought to shield U.S. industries from foreign competition.

The strategy has immediate effects: stock markets dropped sharply on April 3, losing $5 trillion in value for S&P 500 companies, while consumers face higher prices for imports, with estimates suggesting an annual household cost increase of $1,000 to $2,100. Retaliatory threats from China, the EU, and others heighten fears of a global trade war, reminiscent of the 1930s economic downturn.

Analysis: High Stakes, High Risks

The policy’s logic is clear but contentious. It could boost domestic industries like steel and autos by making imports costlier, generate revenue (projected at $3.2 trillion over 10 years), and pressure trading partners to negotiate better deals. Historical precedents from Trump’s first term, such as the US-China Phase One trade deal, suggest some success is possible. However, critics argue the approach is flawed, ignoring modern economic realities like global supply chains, consumer reliance on imports, and the risk of inflation and recession.

Economic analysts, including those at Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan, warn of a 50-60% chance of a U.S. recession by year-end 2025, driven by higher consumer prices and disrupted trade. The arbitrary nature of the tariffs—based on trade deficits rather than actual barriers—could alienate allies and strengthen competitors like China, undermining America’s geopolitical influence. Posts on social media platforms like X reflect a divide: some see tariffs as a necessary shock to reset global trade, while others fear a return to 1930s-style protectionism.

The World’s Fear: Market Falls and Lost Trust

The global reaction has been swift. The S&P 500’s volatility, with a recent low of $505.28, signals investor panic, while safe-haven assets like U.S. Treasuries and the yen spike. Leaders like French President Emmanuel Macron and British PM Keir Starmer have expressed alarm, fearing a fracture in post-WWII trade norms. The policy’s unpredictability—Trump threatens “total” tariffs one day and hints at exemptions the next—erodes America’s credibility, prompting allies to diversify trade and competitors to gain ground.

But can this “madness” have a method? Trump’s bet is that America’s market size and resilience can withstand short-term pain for long-term gain, forcing countries to concede on trade, immigration, and security. Yet, the risk of failure looms large: a trade war could deepen economic contraction, raise unemployment, and diminish U.S. leadership, with China and the EU potentially emerging stronger.

A Century-Old Strategy in a Modern Economy

Skeptics argue that Trump’s policy ignores a century of economic evolution. The 1920s saw simpler trade, dominated by domestic production and fewer global ties. Today, intricate supply chains, digital economies, and multilateral institutions like the WTO make high tariffs inefficient and disruptive. The U.S. dollar’s reserve status, high debt levels (over 120% of GDP), and reliance on imported goods further complicate the picture. While the 1920s tariffs aimed to protect a young industrial base, today’s economy is service-driven, with consumers expecting low prices and businesses depending on global collaboration.

Can going back work? Partially, perhaps, if tariffs spur some reshoring and negotiations yield better deals. But the risks—higher costs, retaliation, and lost trust—suggest a high likelihood of failure. Historical data, like the Smoot-Hawley Tariff’s role in deepening the Great Depression, underscores the danger of protectionism in an integrated world.

The Domestic Challenge: Labor Shortages and Cultural Shifts

A deeper problem emerges when considering domestic industry: Trump’s immigration policies undermine his tariff goals. His pledge to deport millions of undocumented immigrants and restrict legal visas (e.g., H-1B for skilled workers) clashes with the need for labor in industries like manufacturing and agriculture. Immigrants make up 15-20% of these workforces, and their removal could halt production, raise costs, and deepen shortages already plaguing sectors like autos and tech.

Moreover, today’s Americans differ from their 1920s counterparts. Back then, a younger, less educated, and more rural workforce embraced industrial jobs out of necessity. Now, an aging, urbanized, and service-oriented population shuns factory work, preferring higher-paying, less physical roles. Cultural shifts, declining birth rates, and a lack of vocational training mean fewer native-born workers are willing or able to fill these roles, even with tariffs in place. Wages would need to rise 20-30% to attract them, but this could make U.S. products uncompetitive, negating tariff benefits.

Can America Survive This Gamble?

The ultimate question is whether Trump’s strategy will benefit America. Short-term, markets and consumers face pain, with inflation risks and job losses looming. Long-term, success hinges on quick negotiations, labor adjustments, and cultural shifts—none of which seem guaranteed. If Trump eases immigration restrictions or invests in training, some industries might survive. But his current stance suggests a contradiction: tariffs to boost industry, paired with policies that expel the very workers needed to sustain it.

The most likely outcome is a middle ground: partial tariff implementation, market stabilization at lower levels (S&P 500 around 4,800), and modest job gains offset by higher costs and global backlash. America’s credibility may take years to recover, and competitors like China could gain ground. The 1920s model worked in a different era; today, it risks repeating history’s mistakes rather than rewriting it.

Conclusion: A High-Stakes Bet

Trump’s tariff policy is a gamble rooted in nostalgia for a bygone era, but the world has moved on. While the method—economic nationalism, political signaling, and geopolitical leverage—has logic, the madness lies in its disregard for modern realities: global interdependence, labor shortages, and cultural shifts. Unless Trump adapts, the policy could harm more than it helps, leaving America isolated, its industries weakened, and its markets in turmoil. As the S&P 500 hovers at $505.28 and the world watches nervously, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Only time will tell if this 100-year-old strategy can navigate the complexities of 2025.

[lahore2toronto]

“We know you’re tired, tired and scared. Happens to everyone, okay? Just don’t let your feet stop.”

— Haruki Murakami

[lahore2toronto]

“In this world, there are things you can only do alone, and things you can only do with somebody else. It’s important to combine the two in just the right amount.”

— Haruki Murakami