Nehru’s Legacy: Time to pay tribute
Aparna Pande January 3, 2007
#868 Posted by harish_hyd on January 23, 2007 5:07:39 am
#865 by Yasser
I am surprised that British citizen Salman Rushdie, whose entire family lives in Karachi, is being claimed by the saffron brigade as their own.
Umm...sorry to rain in on this parade of self-delusion, but here`s what Salman Rushdie himself had to say in an interview on NDTV.
Barkha: Because clearly there are references to India, there is references to Kashmir, there are references to New York, Bombay, London. But is Karachi part of Salman Rushdie.
Rushdie:Not really, I know which side I am on in, the cricket test.
Barkha: And which side is that?
Rushdie: Its always India, India-Pakistan - no problem for me.
As for Victor Menezes ... who the hell is he.
Paki ignorance never ceases to amaze me. If this is the plight of a supposedly well-heeled Paki, one can only imagine what average Abdul`s IQ would be.
Victor Menezes
The ``World Famous`` Indians don`t live in India nor would they ever live in India because of the shithole it really is.
But isn`t it the Paki women who`re getting raped in order to get visas to Canada? Wonder why that is if Pakistan were the paradise you`re claiming it is.
The ``World famous in Pakistan`` Pakistanis live in Pakistan and doing very well right here.
Sure..like Cecil Chaudhary, who couldn`t get a promotion because of his religion, or Mohammed Yousuf, who had to convert in order to bolster his chances of becoming the captain.
I am surprised that British citizen Salman Rushdie, whose entire family lives in Karachi, is being claimed by the saffron brigade as their own.
Umm...sorry to rain in on this parade of self-delusion, but here`s what Salman Rushdie himself had to say in an interview on NDTV.
Barkha: Because clearly there are references to India, there is references to Kashmir, there are references to New York, Bombay, London. But is Karachi part of Salman Rushdie.
Rushdie:Not really, I know which side I am on in, the cricket test.
Barkha: And which side is that?
Rushdie: Its always India, India-Pakistan - no problem for me.
As for Victor Menezes ... who the hell is he.
Paki ignorance never ceases to amaze me. If this is the plight of a supposedly well-heeled Paki, one can only imagine what average Abdul`s IQ would be.
Victor Menezes
The ``World Famous`` Indians don`t live in India nor would they ever live in India because of the shithole it really is.
But isn`t it the Paki women who`re getting raped in order to get visas to Canada? Wonder why that is if Pakistan were the paradise you`re claiming it is.
The ``World famous in Pakistan`` Pakistanis live in Pakistan and doing very well right here.
Sure..like Cecil Chaudhary, who couldn`t get a promotion because of his religion, or Mohammed Yousuf, who had to convert in order to bolster his chances of becoming the captain.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#867 Posted by CoolAL on January 19, 2007 11:18:12 am
# 866
Tell me, do you really believe this crap you spout? I would find it amazingly entertaining if you did.
Oh, I would also urge you to read through some of your interacts to that article, I found them to be quite entertaining as well.
Tell me, do you really believe this crap you spout? I would find it amazingly entertaining if you did.
Oh, I would also urge you to read through some of your interacts to that article, I found them to be quite entertaining as well.
#866 Posted by MantoLives on January 19, 2007 4:51:46 am
Uba 864,
Well done.
Read that again. Then read Nehru`s statements. You`ll see who wanted what and who was what. But then again, Indian Chowkies are known to suffer from blindness every now and then.
Sanatani,
You spoke about contigious units. The word ``units`` is the key. By partitioning Punjab and Bengal the situation changed. Then the same courtesy should have been accorded to all provinces of British India.
CoolAl
Ah... Cecil Chaudhry`s interview from 2001 eh?
Truth be told .. in 2001, I used to believe similarly. Infact my arguments were along the same line. I too believed that India had proved itself blah blah blah nonsense. And that we Pakistanis needed to prove ourselves.
Then I realised that most of what we were told about India was a media PR effort. The intercommunal disharmony became obvious.
It goes without saying that Pakistan is far from perfect and has all the flaws that the great Pakistani hero Cecil Chaudhry has pointed out... but India is even worse...
Well done.
Read that again. Then read Nehru`s statements. You`ll see who wanted what and who was what. But then again, Indian Chowkies are known to suffer from blindness every now and then.
Sanatani,
You spoke about contigious units. The word ``units`` is the key. By partitioning Punjab and Bengal the situation changed. Then the same courtesy should have been accorded to all provinces of British India.
CoolAl
Ah... Cecil Chaudhry`s interview from 2001 eh?
Truth be told .. in 2001, I used to believe similarly. Infact my arguments were along the same line. I too believed that India had proved itself blah blah blah nonsense. And that we Pakistanis needed to prove ourselves.
Then I realised that most of what we were told about India was a media PR effort. The intercommunal disharmony became obvious.
It goes without saying that Pakistan is far from perfect and has all the flaws that the great Pakistani hero Cecil Chaudhry has pointed out... but India is even worse...
#865 Posted by MantoLives on January 19, 2007 4:41:41 am
Ah ... I see a lot of saffron dhotis on fire as usual. In any event... the point has been adequately made.
I am surprised that British citizen Salman Rushdie, whose entire family lives in Karachi, is being claimed by the saffron brigade as their own. As for Victor Menezes ... who the hell is he. Fareed Zakaria, the scion of that Rafiq Zakaria, is the only person who can be conceded.
I do the spot the difference. The ``World Famous`` Indians don`t live in India nor would they ever live in India because of the shithole it really is. The ``World famous in Pakistan`` Pakistanis live in Pakistan and doing very well right here.
#864 Posted by uba on January 18, 2007 12:43:36 am
Ayesha Jalal holds:
``By apparently repudiating the need for any centre, and keeping quiet about its shape, Jinnah calculated that when eventually the time came to discuss an all-India federation, British and Congress alike would be forced to negotiate with organised Muslim opinion, and would be ready to make substantial concessions to create or retain that centre. The Lahore resolution should therefore be seen as a bargaining counter, which had the merit of being acceptable (on the face of it) to the majority-province Muslims, and of being totally unacceptable to the Congress and in the last resort to the British also. This, in turn, provided the best insurance that the League would not be given what it now apparently was asking for, but which Jinnah in fact did not really want`` (The Sole Spokesman; page 57).
``The Lahore resolution of the League does not look forward to the proposed regional states assuming immediately, as they are formed, powers of defence, external affairs, communication, customs, etc. This argues that there should be a transitional stage during which these powers should be exercised by some agency common to them all...
Jinnah disowned it and even repudiated the Committee`s locus standi. (For the text of the Report vide The Pakistan Issue edited by Nawab Nazir Yar Jang Bahadur; Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, Lahore; 1943; pp 73-92). It was not unanimous. A leak to the press created a sharp controversy. But these lines in the Report showed keen perception:
``A common coordinating agency would be necessary...; for, under the third principle of the Resolution, it will be impossible to implement effectively the provisions of safeguards for minorities without some organic relationship subsisting between the States... an agreed formula has to be devised whereby the Muslims shall share the control at the Centre on terms of perfect equality with the non-Muslims`` (page 88). In plain words, Pakistan would spell the ruin of Indian Muslims unless it had an ``organic relationship`` with the rest of India.
Jinnah did not wish publicly to concede a Centre. Confident of his tactical skills he thought he would pull it off when the chips were down. He miscalculated. The Congress was not interested in sharing power. His abrasive rhetoric impaired his credentials as an interlocutor.
Nehru wrote in his jail diary on December 28, 1943:
``Instinctively I think it is better to have Pakistan or almost nothing if only to keep Jinnah far away and not allow his muddled and arrogant head from (sic) interfering continually in India`s progress`` (Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru; First Series; Vol.13; page 324). He accurately predicted: ``I cannot help thinking that ultimately the Muslims of India will suffer most`` (ibid; page 24).
``By apparently repudiating the need for any centre, and keeping quiet about its shape, Jinnah calculated that when eventually the time came to discuss an all-India federation, British and Congress alike would be forced to negotiate with organised Muslim opinion, and would be ready to make substantial concessions to create or retain that centre. The Lahore resolution should therefore be seen as a bargaining counter, which had the merit of being acceptable (on the face of it) to the majority-province Muslims, and of being totally unacceptable to the Congress and in the last resort to the British also. This, in turn, provided the best insurance that the League would not be given what it now apparently was asking for, but which Jinnah in fact did not really want`` (The Sole Spokesman; page 57).
``The Lahore resolution of the League does not look forward to the proposed regional states assuming immediately, as they are formed, powers of defence, external affairs, communication, customs, etc. This argues that there should be a transitional stage during which these powers should be exercised by some agency common to them all...
Jinnah disowned it and even repudiated the Committee`s locus standi. (For the text of the Report vide The Pakistan Issue edited by Nawab Nazir Yar Jang Bahadur; Sh. Muhammad Ashraf, Lahore; 1943; pp 73-92). It was not unanimous. A leak to the press created a sharp controversy. But these lines in the Report showed keen perception:
``A common coordinating agency would be necessary...; for, under the third principle of the Resolution, it will be impossible to implement effectively the provisions of safeguards for minorities without some organic relationship subsisting between the States... an agreed formula has to be devised whereby the Muslims shall share the control at the Centre on terms of perfect equality with the non-Muslims`` (page 88). In plain words, Pakistan would spell the ruin of Indian Muslims unless it had an ``organic relationship`` with the rest of India.
Jinnah did not wish publicly to concede a Centre. Confident of his tactical skills he thought he would pull it off when the chips were down. He miscalculated. The Congress was not interested in sharing power. His abrasive rhetoric impaired his credentials as an interlocutor.
Nehru wrote in his jail diary on December 28, 1943:
``Instinctively I think it is better to have Pakistan or almost nothing if only to keep Jinnah far away and not allow his muddled and arrogant head from (sic) interfering continually in India`s progress`` (Selected Works of Jawaharlal Nehru; First Series; Vol.13; page 324). He accurately predicted: ``I cannot help thinking that ultimately the Muslims of India will suffer most`` (ibid; page 24).
#863 Posted by KaalChakra on January 17, 2007 1:38:49 pm
re: soysauce #849
Nehru`s misfortune was that he led an ancient, poor, envervated nation which was big only in size then. So he had to be civil to (beg from) American Presidents whom he did not regard his equal. Had a man like that been born in a country of real power and standing....
(Or may be, it is for the better that such idealists do not get that much power. When they latch on to ideas (say socialism, in his case) they can go all dreamy-eyed).
Nehru`s misfortune was that he led an ancient, poor, envervated nation which was big only in size then. So he had to be civil to (beg from) American Presidents whom he did not regard his equal. Had a man like that been born in a country of real power and standing....
(Or may be, it is for the better that such idealists do not get that much power. When they latch on to ideas (say socialism, in his case) they can go all dreamy-eyed).
#862 Posted by DrDr on January 17, 2007 12:04:59 pm
I know of a Xtian extended family in seattle from pakistan who claim they emigrated coz of discrimination. They say its tough 4 xtian kids there..
#861 Posted by CoolAL on January 17, 2007 11:07:04 am
This is too easy. Here is what Cecil Chaudhry has to say. Form the chowk archive no less !! ;-)
Group Captain Cecil Chaudhry, SJ
Q. Did you ever experience any discrimination at any stage in your service because you were a Christian?
I was cleared for promotion to the rank of an Air Commodore by the Air Board but was not approved by Zia, who in any case was supposed to be a rubber-stamping authority. No Chief, Shamim or Jamal had the moral fibre to tell me why. Would I then be wrong to conclude that it was my religion that came in the way?
Q. Does the Christian Community have faith in the future of Pakistan as a State, which is in line with the Founder of the nation’s speech of 11th August?
Not just the Christian Community but all the non-Muslim citizens are fighting for their rights as guaranteed by the Founder. We are totally disillusioned by what is happening to Pakistan. We created Pakistan, we are developing Pakistan, we fought gallantly for the defence of Pakistan against external enemies and now we are fighting against the internal enemies who are trying their utmost to destroy Pakistan.
Q. Has induction of Pakistani Christians in the Armed Forces particularly the Air Force increased or decreased from 1947 till 2000?
It has definitely decreased and there are a number of reasons for this. Because of gross discrimination against the minorities Christian youth have become demoralized and generally do not attempt to join the Armed Forces. Actually seeing highly professional officers being by-passed for higher promotions and eventually being superseded, thus asking early retirement, especially during the Zia era, has been a strong contributing factor. Lastly, a large number of educated Christian families have since migrated due to frustration.
Q. How would you compare the state of religious tolerance and equality of opportunity between India and Pakistan?
With deep regret I have to admit that there is no comparison. India is a proven secular country and the state of religious tolerance and equality is far better than that of Pakistan.
Group Captain Cecil Chaudhry, SJ
Q. Did you ever experience any discrimination at any stage in your service because you were a Christian?
I was cleared for promotion to the rank of an Air Commodore by the Air Board but was not approved by Zia, who in any case was supposed to be a rubber-stamping authority. No Chief, Shamim or Jamal had the moral fibre to tell me why. Would I then be wrong to conclude that it was my religion that came in the way?
Q. Does the Christian Community have faith in the future of Pakistan as a State, which is in line with the Founder of the nation’s speech of 11th August?
Not just the Christian Community but all the non-Muslim citizens are fighting for their rights as guaranteed by the Founder. We are totally disillusioned by what is happening to Pakistan. We created Pakistan, we are developing Pakistan, we fought gallantly for the defence of Pakistan against external enemies and now we are fighting against the internal enemies who are trying their utmost to destroy Pakistan.
Q. Has induction of Pakistani Christians in the Armed Forces particularly the Air Force increased or decreased from 1947 till 2000?
It has definitely decreased and there are a number of reasons for this. Because of gross discrimination against the minorities Christian youth have become demoralized and generally do not attempt to join the Armed Forces. Actually seeing highly professional officers being by-passed for higher promotions and eventually being superseded, thus asking early retirement, especially during the Zia era, has been a strong contributing factor. Lastly, a large number of educated Christian families have since migrated due to frustration.
Q. How would you compare the state of religious tolerance and equality of opportunity between India and Pakistan?
With deep regret I have to admit that there is no comparison. India is a proven secular country and the state of religious tolerance and equality is far better than that of Pakistan.
#860 Posted by Sanatani on January 17, 2007 5:46:33 am
Re: # 858
Absolutely brilliant.
Also consider the following list
What do the following have in common
Abdul Ghafoor
Anawara Taimur
AR Anatulay
MOH Farook
RK Theko
They are all muslims who became chief ministers of Hindu majority states Bihar, Assam, Maharashtra, Pondicherry and Manipur.
Not that I consider it an achievment. One thing I personally am thankful for to the post Shah bano backlash that these f**krs will never head a Hindu majority state again
Absolutely brilliant.
Also consider the following list
What do the following have in common
Abdul Ghafoor
Anawara Taimur
AR Anatulay
MOH Farook
RK Theko
They are all muslims who became chief ministers of Hindu majority states Bihar, Assam, Maharashtra, Pondicherry and Manipur.
Not that I consider it an achievment. One thing I personally am thankful for to the post Shah bano backlash that these f**krs will never head a Hindu majority state again
#859 Posted by VRV on January 17, 2007 5:42:18 am
Re: # 858
Majumdar,
Wow, that`s really great.
Btw, who`s the Kerala Christian in Bush administration who pushed India-US deal in the field of nuclear cooperation? One more born-again guy Bobby Jindal, the gubernatorial candidate for Lousiana (lost, of course but he`s the Republican candidate for Governor). Mr. Jindal was the youngest advisor to the US govt (in the field of medicne, I think) b4 he became the gubernatorial candidate.
What abt Mahesh Bhupathi and Leander Peas, Sania Mirza.....many more successful minorties?
I read that Salman Rushdie`s family migrated to the El Dorado and Salman worked for radio/TV of Pakistan in Karachi b4 he moved out of that country. Anyway now he identifies himself with India than with Pakistan. That`s more than eloquent.
Majumdar,
Wow, that`s really great.
Btw, who`s the Kerala Christian in Bush administration who pushed India-US deal in the field of nuclear cooperation? One more born-again guy Bobby Jindal, the gubernatorial candidate for Lousiana (lost, of course but he`s the Republican candidate for Governor). Mr. Jindal was the youngest advisor to the US govt (in the field of medicne, I think) b4 he became the gubernatorial candidate.
What abt Mahesh Bhupathi and Leander Peas, Sania Mirza.....many more successful minorties?
I read that Salman Rushdie`s family migrated to the El Dorado and Salman worked for radio/TV of Pakistan in Karachi b4 he moved out of that country. Anyway now he identifies himself with India than with Pakistan. That`s more than eloquent.
#858 Posted by majumdar on January 17, 2007 4:36:42 am
Manto mian,
Diff between Indian and Pakistani minorities.
Dr. Nazir S Bhatti- leading writer, world famous in Pakistan, Salman Rushdie writer - world famous in the whole world
Mary Lou radio personality world famous in Pakistan, Fareed Zakaria newsman- world famous in the whole world
Leon Menezes, HR Professionals world famous in Pakistan, Victor Menezes banker - world famous in the whole world
Spot the difference
Regards
Diff between Indian and Pakistani minorities.
Dr. Nazir S Bhatti- leading writer, world famous in Pakistan, Salman Rushdie writer - world famous in the whole world
Mary Lou radio personality world famous in Pakistan, Fareed Zakaria newsman- world famous in the whole world
Leon Menezes, HR Professionals world famous in Pakistan, Victor Menezes banker - world famous in the whole world
Spot the difference
Regards
#857 Posted by devkant on January 17, 2007 3:30:01 am
#856 by sanatani on January 17, 2007 2:45am PT
lets add to this list: -
field marshall sjf manechshaw,
mufti md syed,
barkatullah khan,
dr. manmohan singh,
gen jj singh,
gulam nabi azad,
Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed
captain arminder singh,
zakir hussain,
prakash singh badal,
pratap singh kairon,
giani zail singh,
Amin ud-din Ahmad Khan
monto bhaiya...unlike your pathetic list of non muslims in pakistan who have never gone beyond tokenism, the list of minority indians here are the ones who are either chief ministers of states, generals of the army, persident of the country or governer of the states.
in short, the buck stopped at them for their respective responsibilities.
the above list is not even complete. there are still more names that can be added. lets see you come up with something better.
rgds,
devkant.
lets add to this list: -
field marshall sjf manechshaw,
mufti md syed,
barkatullah khan,
dr. manmohan singh,
gen jj singh,
gulam nabi azad,
Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed
captain arminder singh,
zakir hussain,
prakash singh badal,
pratap singh kairon,
giani zail singh,
Amin ud-din Ahmad Khan
monto bhaiya...unlike your pathetic list of non muslims in pakistan who have never gone beyond tokenism, the list of minority indians here are the ones who are either chief ministers of states, generals of the army, persident of the country or governer of the states.
in short, the buck stopped at them for their respective responsibilities.
the above list is not even complete. there are still more names that can be added. lets see you come up with something better.
rgds,
devkant.
#856 Posted by Sanatani on January 17, 2007 2:45:38 am
Re: # 855
Let me add Gen SF rodigues name here and mantolies pls let us talk of min people of this level i.e. cabinet ministers of soem improtnt portfolios like home, defence, finance, railways or heads of states or heads of armed force services to whic I could also add
Admiral Ronnie Pereria and OS Dawson
Air Chief Marshalls Idris Latif, DA La Fontaine, Engineer, Arjan Singh, Dilbagh Singh,
Sanatani
Let me add Gen SF rodigues name here and mantolies pls let us talk of min people of this level i.e. cabinet ministers of soem improtnt portfolios like home, defence, finance, railways or heads of states or heads of armed force services to whic I could also add
Admiral Ronnie Pereria and OS Dawson
Air Chief Marshalls Idris Latif, DA La Fontaine, Engineer, Arjan Singh, Dilbagh Singh,
Sanatani
#855 Posted by devkant on January 17, 2007 1:59:02 am
854 - monto....now what do we do....produce a list of famous minorities in india?????
lets start with 3 names: -
1) K Anthony,
2) George Fernandes,
3) Dr. Kalam.
rgds,
devkant.
lets start with 3 names: -
1) K Anthony,
2) George Fernandes,
3) Dr. Kalam.
rgds,
devkant.
#854 Posted by MantoLives on January 17, 2007 12:42:03 am
Here are some famous Christians off the top of my head... they are certainly more than 15...
A R Cornelius the most admired Chief Justice of Pakistan and the founder of Cornelius Lane and Mufti, Pakistan`s number 1 law firm.
Cecil Chaudhry PAF GDP
Mervyn Middlecoat PAF GDP
Peter O Rieley PAF GDP Nishan-e-Jurat
Alexandar John Bishop
J. Salik - Popular christian leader and politician
General Julien Peters of the Pakistan Army
Jamshed Marker - Pakistan`s erstwhile representative to the UN
Mira Phailbus- Pakistan`s leading educationist
Michael Nazir Ali- Now Church of England
Joseph Felix- a leading Pakistani educationist
Joseph P Boota- leading Pakistani lawyer
Dr. Nazir S Bhatti- a leading writer
Mary Lou the famous Pakistani radio personality and wife of
Leon Menezes, one of Pakistan`s leading HR Professionals and a radio celebrity
Natasha De Souza, singer, actress par excellence from Karachi
Sunita Marshal,
The Benjamin sisters ..3 of them
Marjorie Hassan, a leading writer,
and her son, Mekaal Hassan, Pakistan`s godfather of music... both practising beliving christians.
Akram Masih Gill- PML Q leader
Mushtaq Victor - Federal minister, PML Q Leader
And these are just a few that have come to my mind... there are many more.. singers, musicians, writers etc...
Pakistani Hindus...
(I am leaving out scheduled castes for now)
1. Sobo Gianchandani, politician par excellence
2. Rana BhagwanDas Supreme court justice
3. Raja Trivedi Roy (though he converted to Buddhism at some point)
4. Deepak Parwani
5. Anil Dalpat
6. Danesh Parbharkar Kaneria
7. Ameet K. Jajothan
I have to go for Lunch... so I`ll complete this list later.
A R Cornelius the most admired Chief Justice of Pakistan and the founder of Cornelius Lane and Mufti, Pakistan`s number 1 law firm.
Cecil Chaudhry PAF GDP
Mervyn Middlecoat PAF GDP
Peter O Rieley PAF GDP Nishan-e-Jurat
Alexandar John Bishop
J. Salik - Popular christian leader and politician
General Julien Peters of the Pakistan Army
Jamshed Marker - Pakistan`s erstwhile representative to the UN
Mira Phailbus- Pakistan`s leading educationist
Michael Nazir Ali- Now Church of England
Joseph Felix- a leading Pakistani educationist
Joseph P Boota- leading Pakistani lawyer
Dr. Nazir S Bhatti- a leading writer
Mary Lou the famous Pakistani radio personality and wife of
Leon Menezes, one of Pakistan`s leading HR Professionals and a radio celebrity
Natasha De Souza, singer, actress par excellence from Karachi
Sunita Marshal,
The Benjamin sisters ..3 of them
Marjorie Hassan, a leading writer,
and her son, Mekaal Hassan, Pakistan`s godfather of music... both practising beliving christians.
Akram Masih Gill- PML Q leader
Mushtaq Victor - Federal minister, PML Q Leader
And these are just a few that have come to my mind... there are many more.. singers, musicians, writers etc...
Pakistani Hindus...
(I am leaving out scheduled castes for now)
1. Sobo Gianchandani, politician par excellence
2. Rana BhagwanDas Supreme court justice
3. Raja Trivedi Roy (though he converted to Buddhism at some point)
4. Deepak Parwani
5. Anil Dalpat
6. Danesh Parbharkar Kaneria
7. Ameet K. Jajothan
I have to go for Lunch... so I`ll complete this list later.
#853 Posted by arjun2 on January 16, 2007 11:20:31 pm
#850 by devkant on January 16, 2007 10:22pm PT
a few christians,
Mohd Yusuf?
a few christians,
Mohd Yusuf?
#852 Posted by Sanatani on January 16, 2007 11:18:04 pm
Re: # 841
How come we do not see any tokens in Bakistan (thats how you bedou masters call your country). Oh I forget Bakis are against tokens they believe in general welfare and upliftment of the non muslims and minorities. So all billionaires in Bak are actually Hindus and Christians and like the famous software companies of Bak about whom nobody has heard one has also not heard of the rich and famous Baki Hindus and Xtians.
Bhaiyon yeh bhi hamari galti hai.
Regards
Sanatani
How come we do not see any tokens in Bakistan (thats how you bedou masters call your country). Oh I forget Bakis are against tokens they believe in general welfare and upliftment of the non muslims and minorities. So all billionaires in Bak are actually Hindus and Christians and like the famous software companies of Bak about whom nobody has heard one has also not heard of the rich and famous Baki Hindus and Xtians.
Bhaiyon yeh bhi hamari galti hai.
Regards
Sanatani
#851 Posted by Sanatani on January 16, 2007 11:16:00 pm
Re: # 838
Not at all. The idea was to give on only contiguous areas where any section had a distinct majority. Anyway the CHT should never have gone to you but we did not make a stink about it.
Also you keep harping about promises given by Jinnah to the Sikhs. What about Jinnahs statement that Pakistan would be a secular nation and that Ahmadis would be considered Muslims. Oh I forgot this was just a statement not a promise.
Regards
Sanatani
Not at all. The idea was to give on only contiguous areas where any section had a distinct majority. Anyway the CHT should never have gone to you but we did not make a stink about it.
Also you keep harping about promises given by Jinnah to the Sikhs. What about Jinnahs statement that Pakistan would be a secular nation and that Ahmadis would be considered Muslims. Oh I forgot this was just a statement not a promise.
Regards
Sanatani
#850 Posted by devkant on January 16, 2007 10:22:44 pm
``#841 by Mantolives on January 16, 2007 5:40am PT
but if I mention famous Pakistani non-Muslim patriots... you balk``
how many names can you come up with dude. for every one names you mention, we indians can mention 10 more names.
except for a few tokens like rana bhagwandas, deepak perwani, danish kaneria and a few christians, you guys have nothing to show us. and as someone rightly pointed out that being the general of the indian army, being the prime minister of india are tokens, then you need to admit yourself in a mental asylum.
``#840 by VRV on January 16, 2007 5:00am PT
Dev, Can u straighten dog`s tail? If yes, try for it. If no, then accpet the fact.``
i accept the fact vrv. i publicly apologise to monto for trying to straighten his tail. i accept the fact that a the tail of a dog and monto cannot be straightened.
rgds,
devkant.
but if I mention famous Pakistani non-Muslim patriots... you balk``
how many names can you come up with dude. for every one names you mention, we indians can mention 10 more names.
except for a few tokens like rana bhagwandas, deepak perwani, danish kaneria and a few christians, you guys have nothing to show us. and as someone rightly pointed out that being the general of the indian army, being the prime minister of india are tokens, then you need to admit yourself in a mental asylum.
``#840 by VRV on January 16, 2007 5:00am PT
Dev, Can u straighten dog`s tail? If yes, try for it. If no, then accpet the fact.``
i accept the fact vrv. i publicly apologise to monto for trying to straighten his tail. i accept the fact that a the tail of a dog and monto cannot be straightened.
rgds,
devkant.
#849 Posted by soysauce on January 16, 2007 8:54:22 pm
``[H]e`ll have been proved to have been one of the greatest men in any country at any time in history`` Mountbatten upon unveiling Nehru`s portrait in India House in London.
Video here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8369350139923914359&pr=goog-sl
Video here: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8369350139923914359&pr=goog-sl
#848 Posted by KaalChakra on January 16, 2007 4:48:56 pm
``chittagong hill tracts(CHT) which inspite of being 97% nonmuslim population was awarded to pakistan.``
Why, UBA? Was that done to make the administration of different areas easier?
Why, UBA? Was that done to make the administration of different areas easier?
#847 Posted by kaurasach on January 16, 2007 12:48:56 pm
Praising Nehru/gandhi or jinnah is like a hijra performing fellatio on a kanjar.....lowest of the low
#846 Posted by zeemax on January 16, 2007 7:40:30 am
#834 by sanatani
Raja Tridev Roy was the Federal Minister for Tourism in ZAB`s time, and ZAB had great confidence in his abilities. Raja Roy did a great job during his tenure in promoting tourism in the Northern Areas of Pakistan, and was immensely popular as a public figure.
So don`t believe this `token` crap.
Raja Tridev Roy was the Federal Minister for Tourism in ZAB`s time, and ZAB had great confidence in his abilities. Raja Roy did a great job during his tenure in promoting tourism in the Northern Areas of Pakistan, and was immensely popular as a public figure.
So don`t believe this `token` crap.
#845 Posted by uba on January 16, 2007 6:57:12 am
# 834
sanatani ,
u mentioned about raja roy.
plz check the background of this chap. he was a feudal from the chittagong hill tracts(CHT)
which inspite of being 97% nonmuslim population was awarded to pakistan. He died in 1975. But before his death , he bitterly regreted his decision of backing pakistan & abandoning his own people (the chakmas).
An IAS officer(with chakma background) had an oppurtunity to interact with this chap & has mentioned him in details in his memoirs.
The same story is about Jogindranath Mandal(an SC/OBC ?) who died exiled in india !
In the Land of the Pure, they were nothing more than ``token figures`` , Jogindranath realised it much early & that Roy much later.
sanatani ,
u mentioned about raja roy.
plz check the background of this chap. he was a feudal from the chittagong hill tracts(CHT)
which inspite of being 97% nonmuslim population was awarded to pakistan. He died in 1975. But before his death , he bitterly regreted his decision of backing pakistan & abandoning his own people (the chakmas).
An IAS officer(with chakma background) had an oppurtunity to interact with this chap & has mentioned him in details in his memoirs.
The same story is about Jogindranath Mandal(an SC/OBC ?) who died exiled in india !
In the Land of the Pure, they were nothing more than ``token figures`` , Jogindranath realised it much early & that Roy much later.
#844 Posted by masanamuthu on January 16, 2007 6:56:16 am
Re: # 831
Better than being roasted in India for being a Christian or a Muslim don`t you think?
Whatever you say buddy.. With your neo-Dalit Muslim background, I have to empathise with you.. Your father is the best example of a non-Muslim patriot of Pakistan. :-)
Better than being roasted in India for being a Christian or a Muslim don`t you think?
Whatever you say buddy.. With your neo-Dalit Muslim background, I have to empathise with you.. Your father is the best example of a non-Muslim patriot of Pakistan. :-)
#843 Posted by VRV on January 16, 2007 6:00:12 am
Yasser,
Jogindranath Namdal was a token.
Prime Minister, Army Chief, Planning Commission heads cant be called tokens.
It looks like that ur stuck `there` again!
Jogindranath Namdal was a token.
Prime Minister, Army Chief, Planning Commission heads cant be called tokens.
It looks like that ur stuck `there` again!
#842 Posted by harish_hyd on January 16, 2007 5:52:24 am
#841 by Mantolives
Awww so many Sikh heroes in a country like India - wow. Yes ``Tokens`` are good enough when talking of India... but if I mention famous Pakistani non-Muslim patriots... you balk.
They may be ``famous Paki non-Muslim patriots`` alright, but how the Paki state treats them is there for everyone to see. Abdus Salam and all that stuff.
As for Sikhs being ``tokens``, you have proved yourself to be more foolish than I imagined. When ``tokens`` become as commonplace as Sikhs are in India, they are not tokens anymore, only an utter idiot would imagine them to be so. OTOH, rare examples like Rana Bhagwan Das, Deepak Parwani, and Danish Kaneria, and that Sikh soldier are indeed tokens, for you would be hard-pressed to name more than a dozen of them.
Awww so many Sikh heroes in a country like India - wow. Yes ``Tokens`` are good enough when talking of India... but if I mention famous Pakistani non-Muslim patriots... you balk.
They may be ``famous Paki non-Muslim patriots`` alright, but how the Paki state treats them is there for everyone to see. Abdus Salam and all that stuff.
As for Sikhs being ``tokens``, you have proved yourself to be more foolish than I imagined. When ``tokens`` become as commonplace as Sikhs are in India, they are not tokens anymore, only an utter idiot would imagine them to be so. OTOH, rare examples like Rana Bhagwan Das, Deepak Parwani, and Danish Kaneria, and that Sikh soldier are indeed tokens, for you would be hard-pressed to name more than a dozen of them.
#841 Posted by MantoLives on January 16, 2007 5:40:44 am
Awww so many Sikh heroes in a country like India - wow. Yes ``Tokens`` are good enough when talking of India... but if I mention famous Pakistani non-Muslim patriots... you balk.
However... the Golden Temple issue is infront of you.
#840 Posted by VRV on January 16, 2007 5:00:37 am
Re: # 839
devkant,
``..next time monto, please give everyone a balanced view.``
Dev, Can u straighten dog`s tail? If yes, try for it. If no, then accpet the fact.
In the meanwhile we talk the subject, let him talk rubbish.
devkant,
``..next time monto, please give everyone a balanced view.``
Dev, Can u straighten dog`s tail? If yes, try for it. If no, then accpet the fact.
In the meanwhile we talk the subject, let him talk rubbish.
#839 Posted by devkant on January 16, 2007 4:04:14 am
``#828 by majumdar on January 15, 2007 5:01am PT
(Instead they chose Golden Temple massacre. )
Dr. Manmohan Singh, Ranbaxy as well. ``
you see mujumdar....this is the problem with monto...selective reading and commenting. the dude does not know that sikhs apart from choosing golden temple massacre also chose dr. manmohan singh and ranbaxy as you have mentioned.
let me add that they also chose the following: -
1) Max india,
2) appolo tyres,
3) domination of car spare parts business in bombay,
4) general jj singh,
5) dr. montek singh ahluwalia,
6) jj vallaya,
7) model jesse randhawa,
8) rabbi shergil,
9) daler mehdi,
10) jagjit singh
11) ex miss indian manpreet brar,
12) Bishen Singh Bedi,
13) Balwinder Sandhu,
14) Navjot Singh Sidhu
15) Mandira Bedi
and god alone knows how many more such things can be added to what the sikhs chose in india.
next time monto, please give everyone a balanced view.
rgds,
devkant.
(Instead they chose Golden Temple massacre. )
Dr. Manmohan Singh, Ranbaxy as well. ``
you see mujumdar....this is the problem with monto...selective reading and commenting. the dude does not know that sikhs apart from choosing golden temple massacre also chose dr. manmohan singh and ranbaxy as you have mentioned.
let me add that they also chose the following: -
1) Max india,
2) appolo tyres,
3) domination of car spare parts business in bombay,
4) general jj singh,
5) dr. montek singh ahluwalia,
6) jj vallaya,
7) model jesse randhawa,
8) rabbi shergil,
9) daler mehdi,
10) jagjit singh
11) ex miss indian manpreet brar,
12) Bishen Singh Bedi,
13) Balwinder Sandhu,
14) Navjot Singh Sidhu
15) Mandira Bedi
and god alone knows how many more such things can be added to what the sikhs chose in india.
next time monto, please give everyone a balanced view.
rgds,
devkant.
#838 Posted by MantoLives on January 16, 2007 1:10:14 am
Sanatani,
The issue was of reconstituting a new centre or centres around existing units.
If Hindus and Sikhs in Punjab and Bengal were to be given an option of seceding... then Muslims of all provnces of India should have given the same choice..
hence small Pakistan enclaves
The issue was of reconstituting a new centre or centres around existing units.
If Hindus and Sikhs in Punjab and Bengal were to be given an option of seceding... then Muslims of all provnces of India should have given the same choice..
hence small Pakistan enclaves
#837 Posted by MantoLives on January 16, 2007 12:24:00 am
Re: # 835
Yes... HP ... don`t you know Wolpert is on ISI payroll... the same ISI which is out to bump Sadna.
Yes... HP ... don`t you know Wolpert is on ISI payroll... the same ISI which is out to bump Sadna.
#836 Posted by Ranjit on January 15, 2007 8:37:46 pm
Re:anil#817
[..Punjabi Muslims have very interesting sociology....]
Anil, I have often wondered why Punjabi muslims were so dormant during the 800 years of muslim rule in India? Where were the Lashkar-e-Toiba or Jaish-e-Mohammad type people in those days? They had a sultan or a mughal emperor in Delhi/Agra to back them up. If they had developed jihadi aspirations, they could have forced the conversion of entire North India. Somehow they did nothing for 800 years in India, yet today they are strong supporters of jihad in Kashmir, Afghanistan, Chechneya and even Somalia. Why did they become so religiously active after 1947? Maybe some Punjabi muslim or Sanatani can explain this strange phenomenon.
[..Punjabi Muslims have very interesting sociology....]
Anil, I have often wondered why Punjabi muslims were so dormant during the 800 years of muslim rule in India? Where were the Lashkar-e-Toiba or Jaish-e-Mohammad type people in those days? They had a sultan or a mughal emperor in Delhi/Agra to back them up. If they had developed jihadi aspirations, they could have forced the conversion of entire North India. Somehow they did nothing for 800 years in India, yet today they are strong supporters of jihad in Kashmir, Afghanistan, Chechneya and even Somalia. Why did they become so religiously active after 1947? Maybe some Punjabi muslim or Sanatani can explain this strange phenomenon.
#835 Posted by sadna on January 15, 2007 9:04:47 am
HP
My point was never about blaming one side only for Hindu-Muslim problems/violence in pre-partition India. The point is to provide public domain information from Transfer of Power papers that Wolpert will never write a book about.
My point was never about blaming one side only for Hindu-Muslim problems/violence in pre-partition India. The point is to provide public domain information from Transfer of Power papers that Wolpert will never write a book about.
#834 Posted by Sanatani on January 15, 2007 7:34:29 am
Re: # 829
Are why do you call it abuse you are achampion lawyer and it will do your practise a world of good if you show the world what sort of a liar u are:
Secular is simply a separation of church and state. Nothing else. So according to you Britian is not secular.
I have already mentioned how the Punjabi ex-unionist elite who Sajjad Zaheer had been a nightmare of, in collaboration with the army sidelined the real Muslim Leaguers and took control. In any event, 1951 was phenomenal stupidity on the part of both communists and the establishment. Nehru just took advantage of a situation ... So what situation did Nehru take advantage of he just got a guy who was pleading for his life back into India increasing the Muslim headcount by 1 and then many hundreds ex-communists like him.
Also pls enlighten us on what the phenomenal stupidity on the part of both communists and the establishment was?
Because Indians who backed East Pakistan`s secession would never allow it. However that may just be the logical conclusion to this drama. As for Bengali Non-muslims... Raja Trivedi Roy actually moved to Pakistan and served as its ambassador to several countries. ... Even if we take this statement as true then there would be some voices (loony, fringe etc) who would clamour for the same like in Assam and Tamil Nadu don`t you think the absence of the same tells you something. But then I forgot you don`t think you cut and paste.
Now the gem and piece de resistance rolled into 1:
I did not claim that there was strong Hindu support for United Punjab and Bengal. I claimed that the partition of Punjab and Bengal instead of letting them choose between Pakistan and India went against the grain of the agreement on which this was claimed.
Do you believe this guy? Manot Idiiiot see what have you written ``the partition of Punjab and Bengal instead of letting them choose between Pakistan and India`` of course they choose betwen Pakistan (the Muslims) and India (the Hindus and Sikhs). Or you are implying that to choose India for the Hindus and Sikh would have meant that they should have agreed to a United Punjab and Bengal and then conveniently did Hijrat to India to allow you and your race of hewers of wood and drawers of water (yes that was what the majority of these muslais were) even more ill gotten wealth than you got when the Hindus and Sikhs had to flee with nothing more than the clothes on their back.
BTW you have been giving us rubbish about Indic and Gangetic people . So are the Pashtus Indic and why did they not have the right of self determination in 1947 which you are so eager to grant to the Bengalis for united Bengal. So far you have been harping on the superiority of Indic over Gangetic so why should the Bengalis who are manifestly Gangetic have a right that the superior Indic Pashtu did not have. And while we are at it what about the Balochis.
Also what about self determination of the People of Chittagong Hill Tracts who were 98% Hindu and Buddhist and how come fo all their love of minorities did the Pakistanis not give them any sort of constitutional protection the way the Indians gave to the Kashmiris.
Please enlighten us abusive Indians o great reincarnation of Manto.
Sanatani
Are why do you call it abuse you are achampion lawyer and it will do your practise a world of good if you show the world what sort of a liar u are:
Secular is simply a separation of church and state. Nothing else. So according to you Britian is not secular.
I have already mentioned how the Punjabi ex-unionist elite who Sajjad Zaheer had been a nightmare of, in collaboration with the army sidelined the real Muslim Leaguers and took control. In any event, 1951 was phenomenal stupidity on the part of both communists and the establishment. Nehru just took advantage of a situation ... So what situation did Nehru take advantage of he just got a guy who was pleading for his life back into India increasing the Muslim headcount by 1 and then many hundreds ex-communists like him.
Also pls enlighten us on what the phenomenal stupidity on the part of both communists and the establishment was?
Because Indians who backed East Pakistan`s secession would never allow it. However that may just be the logical conclusion to this drama. As for Bengali Non-muslims... Raja Trivedi Roy actually moved to Pakistan and served as its ambassador to several countries. ... Even if we take this statement as true then there would be some voices (loony, fringe etc) who would clamour for the same like in Assam and Tamil Nadu don`t you think the absence of the same tells you something. But then I forgot you don`t think you cut and paste.
Now the gem and piece de resistance rolled into 1:
I did not claim that there was strong Hindu support for United Punjab and Bengal. I claimed that the partition of Punjab and Bengal instead of letting them choose between Pakistan and India went against the grain of the agreement on which this was claimed.
Do you believe this guy? Manot Idiiiot see what have you written ``the partition of Punjab and Bengal instead of letting them choose between Pakistan and India`` of course they choose betwen Pakistan (the Muslims) and India (the Hindus and Sikhs). Or you are implying that to choose India for the Hindus and Sikh would have meant that they should have agreed to a United Punjab and Bengal and then conveniently did Hijrat to India to allow you and your race of hewers of wood and drawers of water (yes that was what the majority of these muslais were) even more ill gotten wealth than you got when the Hindus and Sikhs had to flee with nothing more than the clothes on their back.
BTW you have been giving us rubbish about Indic and Gangetic people . So are the Pashtus Indic and why did they not have the right of self determination in 1947 which you are so eager to grant to the Bengalis for united Bengal. So far you have been harping on the superiority of Indic over Gangetic so why should the Bengalis who are manifestly Gangetic have a right that the superior Indic Pashtu did not have. And while we are at it what about the Balochis.
Also what about self determination of the People of Chittagong Hill Tracts who were 98% Hindu and Buddhist and how come fo all their love of minorities did the Pakistanis not give them any sort of constitutional protection the way the Indians gave to the Kashmiris.
Please enlighten us abusive Indians o great reincarnation of Manto.
Sanatani
#833 Posted by harimau on January 15, 2007 6:44:31 am
Nehru`s true legacy:
We can`t hang Afzal Guru convicted of planning the attack on Indian Parliament because it was so close to Ramzan. He has still not been hanged
George W. Bush hanged Saddam Hussein on the eve of Bakr-Eid.
Proves that Nehru effectively castrated Indian politicians forever.
We can`t hang Afzal Guru convicted of planning the attack on Indian Parliament because it was so close to Ramzan. He has still not been hanged
George W. Bush hanged Saddam Hussein on the eve of Bakr-Eid.
Proves that Nehru effectively castrated Indian politicians forever.
#832 Posted by MantoLives on January 15, 2007 6:42:16 am
A`null, Sadna,
Hope you fellas don`t miss my responses to your hogwash.
Hope you fellas don`t miss my responses to your hogwash.
#831 Posted by MantoLives on January 15, 2007 6:38:52 am
Re: # 830
Better than being roasted in India for being a Christian or a Muslim don`t you think?
Better than being roasted in India for being a Christian or a Muslim don`t you think?
#830 Posted by masanamuthu on January 15, 2007 6:09:18 am
Pakistanis are actually creating new minorities....Ahmedi were not a minority before the partition....Give the credit where it is due.....
ROFL.. this is the best.. And the example of the best treatment of ``non-Muslim`` minorities is Mantolives` dad who owns a Maybach.. :-)
ROFL.. this is the best.. And the example of the best treatment of ``non-Muslim`` minorities is Mantolives` dad who owns a Maybach.. :-)
#829 Posted by MantoLives on January 15, 2007 5:57:16 am
Re: # 828
``You know I am suspicious of anyone who is claimed to have been an opponent of Brits.``
Well you ought to be. Because I have just shown proves that those like the Congress who claimed to be this that and other were actually busy propping up imperialist toadies.
The rest of your stuff is merely speculation.
Re: # 827
Sanatani,
No need to abuse me to show that you too are like your Indian compatriots.
1. I did not claim that there was strong Hindu support for United Punjab and Bengal. I claimed that the partition of Punjab and Bengal instead of letting them choose between Pakistan and India went against the grain of the agreement on which this was claimed.
2. Because Indians who backed East Pakistan`s secession would never allow it. However that may just be the logical conclusion to this drama. As for Bengali Non-muslims... Raja Trivedi Roy actually moved to Pakistan and served as its ambassador to several countries.
3. I have already mentioned how the Punjabi ex-unionist elite who Sajjad Zaheer had been a nightmare of, in collaboration with the army sidelined the real Muslim Leaguers and took control. In any event, 1951 was phenomenal stupidity on the part of both communists and the establishment. Nehru just took advantage of a situation ...
4. Secular is simply a separation of church and state. Nothing else.
``You know I am suspicious of anyone who is claimed to have been an opponent of Brits.``
Well you ought to be. Because I have just shown proves that those like the Congress who claimed to be this that and other were actually busy propping up imperialist toadies.
The rest of your stuff is merely speculation.
Re: # 827
Sanatani,
No need to abuse me to show that you too are like your Indian compatriots.
1. I did not claim that there was strong Hindu support for United Punjab and Bengal. I claimed that the partition of Punjab and Bengal instead of letting them choose between Pakistan and India went against the grain of the agreement on which this was claimed.
2. Because Indians who backed East Pakistan`s secession would never allow it. However that may just be the logical conclusion to this drama. As for Bengali Non-muslims... Raja Trivedi Roy actually moved to Pakistan and served as its ambassador to several countries.
3. I have already mentioned how the Punjabi ex-unionist elite who Sajjad Zaheer had been a nightmare of, in collaboration with the army sidelined the real Muslim Leaguers and took control. In any event, 1951 was phenomenal stupidity on the part of both communists and the establishment. Nehru just took advantage of a situation ...
4. Secular is simply a separation of church and state. Nothing else.
#828 Posted by majumdar on January 15, 2007 5:01:14 am
Manto,
(they would have gotten an autonomous Sikh state and would have been Pakistan`s strongest defence. )
For the short-term, yes. In the long-term halaal instead of jhatka.
(Instead they chose Golden Temple massacre. )
Dr. Manmohan Singh, Ranbaxy as well.
(which was the only force in Punjab that was fighting the British bureaucracy )
You know I am suspicious of anyone who is claimed to have been an opponent of Brits.
Regards
(they would have gotten an autonomous Sikh state and would have been Pakistan`s strongest defence. )
For the short-term, yes. In the long-term halaal instead of jhatka.
(Instead they chose Golden Temple massacre. )
Dr. Manmohan Singh, Ranbaxy as well.
(which was the only force in Punjab that was fighting the British bureaucracy )
You know I am suspicious of anyone who is claimed to have been an opponent of Brits.
Regards
#827 Posted by Sanatani on January 15, 2007 4:08:30 am
Re: # 826
Ok mantolies bahut bakwaas likh li but pls answer 2 questions:
1) In case there was such strong Hindu sentiment for having a united Bengal or Punjab then why were there protests by Hindus and Sikhs in Punjab only against partition of India but none against the partition of Punjab and Bengal.
2) And when once Bangladesh was established initially ostenibly a secular state why was there no demand by West Bengalis to merge with for a united Sonar Bangla or for that matter like so many muslims from areas like Tamil Nadu and Kerela who did not face riots or persecution but went to Pakistan anyway as they saw in it a culmination of all the privations and campaigns did any Bengali Hindu who left E Bengal prior to 1969 return to Bangladesh as the logical culmination of a Bengali homeland.
3) Why did Sajjad Zaheer leave Pakistan no not leave but run away and who rehabilitated him back in India. For the record he was hounded out of Pakistan by the same so called secular establishment for ladiniyat and was rehabilitated by Nehru.
4) How do you define secular
I realise that answering 4 questions may be beyond your mental faculties so answer 2.
Sanatani
Ok mantolies bahut bakwaas likh li but pls answer 2 questions:
1) In case there was such strong Hindu sentiment for having a united Bengal or Punjab then why were there protests by Hindus and Sikhs in Punjab only against partition of India but none against the partition of Punjab and Bengal.
2) And when once Bangladesh was established initially ostenibly a secular state why was there no demand by West Bengalis to merge with for a united Sonar Bangla or for that matter like so many muslims from areas like Tamil Nadu and Kerela who did not face riots or persecution but went to Pakistan anyway as they saw in it a culmination of all the privations and campaigns did any Bengali Hindu who left E Bengal prior to 1969 return to Bangladesh as the logical culmination of a Bengali homeland.
3) Why did Sajjad Zaheer leave Pakistan no not leave but run away and who rehabilitated him back in India. For the record he was hounded out of Pakistan by the same so called secular establishment for ladiniyat and was rehabilitated by Nehru.
4) How do you define secular
I realise that answering 4 questions may be beyond your mental faculties so answer 2.
Sanatani
#826 Posted by MantoLives on January 15, 2007 3:25:25 am
``#800
Yasser,
The thing to remember is that most of the Union ministries in Punjab were supported by the Congress. Unionist had Sikh and Hindu support or coalition. The unionist made an alliance with Muslim League only when they saw the writing on the wall..... ``
I have a very similar view... I wrote this post to Anil and Dostmittar:
Anil, Dostmittar,
I strongly suggest both you gentlemen pick up Sajjad Zaheer`s ``League-Unionist Conflict`` and read it several times to understand what is being said.
Now Evan Jenkins has become the new Indian hero... but for god`s sake who said the British secret reports and claims were in anyway honest? Sadna`s selective meanderings notwithstanding, following go without saying:
1. The British and the Congress threw their entire might behind the unrepresentative and unpopular Unionist Party regime... I am just surprised that today, the old cronies of the British Empire... the jee huzooris who took their orders from Deputy Commissioners ... the likes of Sir Fazli Hussain, Sikandar Hayat and Khizer Hayat are being ``championed`` by the Indians... in exclusion the Muslim League, which was the only force in Punjab that was fighting the British bureaucracy and toadyism... while Congress- despite its tall claims and self righteousness of freedom struggle- was siding with the Unionists ....
2. The Muslim League did not favour partition of Punjab and Bengal but was completely against it...
[On May 17 Mahomed Ali Jinnah made this following appeal to reason – which Mountbatten and Nehru had none:
“The Muslim League cannot agree to the partition of Bengal and the Punjab… it cannot be justified historically, economically, geographically, politically or morally. These provinces have built up their respective lives for nearly a century… the principle underlying the demand for the establishment of Pakistan and Hindustan is totally different… In the name of justice and fairplay, do not submit to this clamour. For it will be sowing the seeds of future serious trouble and the results will be disastrous for the life of these two provinces.” (Jinnah’s letter to Mountbatten TOP X, p 852)
Sir Eric Meiville met with Jinnah on May 20th and reported the following to Mountbatten:
“At the end of our talk he (Jinnah) took my arm and said ‘I am not speaking as a partisan, but I beg to tell Lord Mountbatten once again that he will be making a grave mistake if he agrees to the partition of Punjab and Bengal.” (TOPP X 916)
What had Jinnah offered the Sikhs: Essentially a signed blank cheque… inter alia autonomy, defence ministry, permanent position as the Forces Chief…This is confirmed by Terrence Shone’s discussion with Jinnah . According to Terrence Shone, Jinnah said that he had offered 3.5 million Sikhs and Master Tara Singh everything he wanted, but “Sikhs in many ways admirable people lacked the leadership of the highest order”. (TOP Volume X P. 280) ]
The fact of the matter is that it was Master Tara Singh, who was egged on by Nehru and the lot who was responsible for the misery of the Sikhs... they would have gotten an autonomous Sikh state and would have been Pakistan`s strongest defence. Instead they chose Golden Temple massacre.
3. I am yet to see the smoking guns that you keep talking about. The smoking guns I see through the ``diligent research`` is that of British imperialist make in the hands of the Congress` funded murderers.
.....
The problem with Sadna is that she doesn`t see how damning her own admissions are to the Congress` tall claims...
Yasser,
The thing to remember is that most of the Union ministries in Punjab were supported by the Congress. Unionist had Sikh and Hindu support or coalition. The unionist made an alliance with Muslim League only when they saw the writing on the wall..... ``
I have a very similar view... I wrote this post to Anil and Dostmittar:
Anil, Dostmittar,
I strongly suggest both you gentlemen pick up Sajjad Zaheer`s ``League-Unionist Conflict`` and read it several times to understand what is being said.
Now Evan Jenkins has become the new Indian hero... but for god`s sake who said the British secret reports and claims were in anyway honest? Sadna`s selective meanderings notwithstanding, following go without saying:
1. The British and the Congress threw their entire might behind the unrepresentative and unpopular Unionist Party regime... I am just surprised that today, the old cronies of the British Empire... the jee huzooris who took their orders from Deputy Commissioners ... the likes of Sir Fazli Hussain, Sikandar Hayat and Khizer Hayat are being ``championed`` by the Indians... in exclusion the Muslim League, which was the only force in Punjab that was fighting the British bureaucracy and toadyism... while Congress- despite its tall claims and self righteousness of freedom struggle- was siding with the Unionists ....
2. The Muslim League did not favour partition of Punjab and Bengal but was completely against it...
[On May 17 Mahomed Ali Jinnah made this following appeal to reason – which Mountbatten and Nehru had none:
“The Muslim League cannot agree to the partition of Bengal and the Punjab… it cannot be justified historically, economically, geographically, politically or morally. These provinces have built up their respective lives for nearly a century… the principle underlying the demand for the establishment of Pakistan and Hindustan is totally different… In the name of justice and fairplay, do not submit to this clamour. For it will be sowing the seeds of future serious trouble and the results will be disastrous for the life of these two provinces.” (Jinnah’s letter to Mountbatten TOP X, p 852)
Sir Eric Meiville met with Jinnah on May 20th and reported the following to Mountbatten:
“At the end of our talk he (Jinnah) took my arm and said ‘I am not speaking as a partisan, but I beg to tell Lord Mountbatten once again that he will be making a grave mistake if he agrees to the partition of Punjab and Bengal.” (TOPP X 916)
What had Jinnah offered the Sikhs: Essentially a signed blank cheque… inter alia autonomy, defence ministry, permanent position as the Forces Chief…This is confirmed by Terrence Shone’s discussion with Jinnah . According to Terrence Shone, Jinnah said that he had offered 3.5 million Sikhs and Master Tara Singh everything he wanted, but “Sikhs in many ways admirable people lacked the leadership of the highest order”. (TOP Volume X P. 280) ]
The fact of the matter is that it was Master Tara Singh, who was egged on by Nehru and the lot who was responsible for the misery of the Sikhs... they would have gotten an autonomous Sikh state and would have been Pakistan`s strongest defence. Instead they chose Golden Temple massacre.
3. I am yet to see the smoking guns that you keep talking about. The smoking guns I see through the ``diligent research`` is that of British imperialist make in the hands of the Congress` funded murderers.
.....
The problem with Sadna is that she doesn`t see how damning her own admissions are to the Congress` tall claims...
#825 Posted by Sanatani on January 15, 2007 2:44:21 am
Re: # 785
Well Anil wants to give sadna competion for dhimmi of the year.
It survived for 1 reason mentioned here but also because Hindus were not totally Dhimmi then. They were vigorpus fighters for desh and dharam. They were not given to intellectualising the devastation caused by this cult of beastliness but were willing to take it head on at a considerable loss of life and possessions.
But unfortunately now compared to the resurgent jihadis and crusaders we are faced with a traitorious elite like you and sadna apart form the 4M`s and this is why this time we will lose.
But have no fear on 1 account we will give a good account of ourselves. This time there will be in the end no heroic rear guard actions like 1947 this time we will stare and face death mano amano face to face.
Sanatani
S
Well Anil wants to give sadna competion for dhimmi of the year.
It survived for 1 reason mentioned here but also because Hindus were not totally Dhimmi then. They were vigorpus fighters for desh and dharam. They were not given to intellectualising the devastation caused by this cult of beastliness but were willing to take it head on at a considerable loss of life and possessions.
But unfortunately now compared to the resurgent jihadis and crusaders we are faced with a traitorious elite like you and sadna apart form the 4M`s and this is why this time we will lose.
But have no fear on 1 account we will give a good account of ourselves. This time there will be in the end no heroic rear guard actions like 1947 this time we will stare and face death mano amano face to face.
Sanatani
S
#824 Posted by devkant on January 15, 2007 1:42:30 am
HP....i posted the editorial link about press freedom in pakistan not because i enjoyed reading that or because i want to score some brownie points over you guys. I posted that because i felt very sad at the lack of press freedom in pakistan.
``Pakistani Census is on the net look it up... ``
incase you forget, i have looked it up and u have yourself acknowledged seeing the link to the pakistani census in my post 173.
however, please show me where can i find increase or decrease of pakistani minority population from 1947 onwards....something similar to what is available in the indian census.
rgds,
devkant.
``Pakistani Census is on the net look it up... ``
incase you forget, i have looked it up and u have yourself acknowledged seeing the link to the pakistani census in my post 173.
however, please show me where can i find increase or decrease of pakistani minority population from 1947 onwards....something similar to what is available in the indian census.
rgds,
devkant.
#823 Posted by Sanatani on January 15, 2007 1:30:11 am
Re: # 764
You dumb cuuuunt Ranjit is not stupid you are. And not only stupid but an imbecile. Secularism means ladiniyat for a muslim and a secular muslim is an oxymoron.
It is this same rubbish that dhimmi traitorous hindus like you spew about muslims being secular. oh yeah even if we take that useless definition of secularism as equal respsect for all religions then pray do let us know why in the 2 muslim majority towns in Maharashtra Malegaon and Bhiwandi no Ganpati pandal can be set up except very deep inside Hindu mohallas.
Read Bengalvoice.com or Sardar Gurcharan Singh Talibs book ``The Muslim leagues attack on the Hindus and Sikhs of the Punjab`` to clear your stupid brain. One thing will stand out how the UP trained Mullahs of Nadwa, Firangi Mahal and Bareli were in the lead in aousing the people against the Hindus to attack them kill the men and claim their women and belongings as booty.
The same set is known as nationalist muslims todays. At least the muslai and xtian loving jokers of the RSS while holding similarly stupid views are not averse to fighting for the Dharam and Matrabhumi when the need arises unlike u pathetic creatures who then start singing the raag of your traitorious and cowardly master gandhi when confronted with armed to the teeth mobs of muslims who have been provoked by:
1) Arti or Music coming from a temple.
2) Invasion of Iraq,
3) Situation in Palestine
4) Cartoons of the errand boy of the moon god. (Read Manto`s post when he quotes Asghar Ali Engineer of what happened in Lucknow when protest were organised by muslims to protest the danish cartoons in which 4 Hindus were killed for no other reason that they were Hindus)
And you stuupied biatch want us to diffrentiate between secular and non secular muslims show me a secular muslai and I will show you an apostate
Go kil;l yourself
Sanatani
You dumb cuuuunt Ranjit is not stupid you are. And not only stupid but an imbecile. Secularism means ladiniyat for a muslim and a secular muslim is an oxymoron.
It is this same rubbish that dhimmi traitorous hindus like you spew about muslims being secular. oh yeah even if we take that useless definition of secularism as equal respsect for all religions then pray do let us know why in the 2 muslim majority towns in Maharashtra Malegaon and Bhiwandi no Ganpati pandal can be set up except very deep inside Hindu mohallas.
Read Bengalvoice.com or Sardar Gurcharan Singh Talibs book ``The Muslim leagues attack on the Hindus and Sikhs of the Punjab`` to clear your stupid brain. One thing will stand out how the UP trained Mullahs of Nadwa, Firangi Mahal and Bareli were in the lead in aousing the people against the Hindus to attack them kill the men and claim their women and belongings as booty.
The same set is known as nationalist muslims todays. At least the muslai and xtian loving jokers of the RSS while holding similarly stupid views are not averse to fighting for the Dharam and Matrabhumi when the need arises unlike u pathetic creatures who then start singing the raag of your traitorious and cowardly master gandhi when confronted with armed to the teeth mobs of muslims who have been provoked by:
1) Arti or Music coming from a temple.
2) Invasion of Iraq,
3) Situation in Palestine
4) Cartoons of the errand boy of the moon god. (Read Manto`s post when he quotes Asghar Ali Engineer of what happened in Lucknow when protest were organised by muslims to protest the danish cartoons in which 4 Hindus were killed for no other reason that they were Hindus)
And you stuupied biatch want us to diffrentiate between secular and non secular muslims show me a secular muslai and I will show you an apostate
Go kil;l yourself
Sanatani
#822 Posted by HP on January 15, 2007 12:56:23 am
here are some comments on the blog about ms. Gall
read the third and the last one...HAHAHAHA!
Reporters without borders, what a laugh. They are working on the assumption they are saving lives, this is a joke, right?
If this happened? then the individual was being punished for showing no respect. Makes me wonder about the ``times,`` are they really a professional org? No> I don`t think so, else the reporting would be conducted in a manner that would really point out the abuses through video, stills and sound recordings, along with the printed word.
Their arrogance as shown once again they live in a gilted world, they think they are operating with in the bounds of America or England! Stupid!
W E Stewart
Glad to hear the Pakistani secret police are doing their jobs in silencing the Taliban and Al Queda propoganda arm AKA New York Times. Nice job guys, keep up the good work. Crack some more skulls at the NYT.
Posted by: Tim Mills | Dec 26, 2006 2:22:00 PM
Sounds like she failed to obey a police officer to me, maybe she shouldn`t have been punched in the face, but if the police were to ever knock on my door, I`d open it, and even if I didn`t, I wouldn`t try grabbing my laptop back from them once they stormed the room. The word `assaulted` is too strong in the headline, something about a victim of excessive force is more appropriate.
Posted by: m. alexis | Dec 26, 2006 2:30:24 PM
This reporter got what was comming to her, and she can whine and cry all she wants, but there is no ACLU to save her over there, the Pakastani government does not engage in liberal politically correct games.
Posted by: james bell | Dec 26, 2006 3:00:27 PM
Without simple behavioral instructions, the New York Times sent her to the front line ill prepared. They are responsible for a misguided training that infused her with an above the law and country, attitude. She holds no allegiance except to the New York Times, what a schmuck.
Can you imagine brushing aside a State Trooper when he asks you for I.D.? Depending on his self control is where your fate would lie; you’d have to be out of your mind on drugs, arrogance, or stupidity, to ignore him. If cops knock on your door in Pakistan let them in and be nice. Otherwise they’re going to slap you around. This woman disrespected and challenged them, asking for their wrath, a masochist’s behavior. The secret police are among the intelligent ones, they have developing egos too.
read the third and the last one...HAHAHAHA!
Reporters without borders, what a laugh. They are working on the assumption they are saving lives, this is a joke, right?
If this happened? then the individual was being punished for showing no respect. Makes me wonder about the ``times,`` are they really a professional org? No> I don`t think so, else the reporting would be conducted in a manner that would really point out the abuses through video, stills and sound recordings, along with the printed word.
Their arrogance as shown once again they live in a gilted world, they think they are operating with in the bounds of America or England! Stupid!
W E Stewart
Glad to hear the Pakistani secret police are doing their jobs in silencing the Taliban and Al Queda propoganda arm AKA New York Times. Nice job guys, keep up the good work. Crack some more skulls at the NYT.
Posted by: Tim Mills | Dec 26, 2006 2:22:00 PM
Sounds like she failed to obey a police officer to me, maybe she shouldn`t have been punched in the face, but if the police were to ever knock on my door, I`d open it, and even if I didn`t, I wouldn`t try grabbing my laptop back from them once they stormed the room. The word `assaulted` is too strong in the headline, something about a victim of excessive force is more appropriate.
Posted by: m. alexis | Dec 26, 2006 2:30:24 PM
This reporter got what was comming to her, and she can whine and cry all she wants, but there is no ACLU to save her over there, the Pakastani government does not engage in liberal politically correct games.
Posted by: james bell | Dec 26, 2006 3:00:27 PM
Without simple behavioral instructions, the New York Times sent her to the front line ill prepared. They are responsible for a misguided training that infused her with an above the law and country, attitude. She holds no allegiance except to the New York Times, what a schmuck.
Can you imagine brushing aside a State Trooper when he asks you for I.D.? Depending on his self control is where your fate would lie; you’d have to be out of your mind on drugs, arrogance, or stupidity, to ignore him. If cops knock on your door in Pakistan let them in and be nice. Otherwise they’re going to slap you around. This woman disrespected and challenged them, asking for their wrath, a masochist’s behavior. The secret police are among the intelligent ones, they have developing egos too.
#821 Posted by HP on January 15, 2007 12:47:45 am
#819 by devkant
``Ms Carlotta Gall of the New York Times was roughed up by intelligence agents in Quetta a couple of months ago despite the fact that she had a valid visa to visit the province.``
I am glad this btch was roughed up. First she went to Quetta w/o permission then when the Pakistani security identified itself she refused to open the door.
If this btch had done this to the US police they too would have taken down the door.
Then she was resisting arrest.. Has she ever tried that in the US? These people think that since they are white and from the US they can do anything and no local laws applies to them...
I happend to read her blog and people`s comments were just hilarious let me find that for you to enjoy....
``Ms Carlotta Gall of the New York Times was roughed up by intelligence agents in Quetta a couple of months ago despite the fact that she had a valid visa to visit the province.``
I am glad this btch was roughed up. First she went to Quetta w/o permission then when the Pakistani security identified itself she refused to open the door.
If this btch had done this to the US police they too would have taken down the door.
Then she was resisting arrest.. Has she ever tried that in the US? These people think that since they are white and from the US they can do anything and no local laws applies to them...
I happend to read her blog and people`s comments were just hilarious let me find that for you to enjoy....
#820 Posted by HP on January 15, 2007 12:38:11 am
#806 by devkant
“just like people have lost count of the number of minorities who were killed and driven away from pakistan. there?”
#815 by devkant
“for any mass scale attack, you need to have mass scale minorities.”
How these two statements gel?
#818,
I am sure minority numbers are increasing in India after all ``Hum panch hum Pachees`` has not come about from the thin air... In fact, Minority numbers are on the increase in India like the the rest of the population but percentages are pretty static.
Minority numbers in Pakistan are not decreasing but the percentages are. Now do you understand this statement?
``i am sure you can back this claim with proofs.``
Pakistani Census is on the net look it up...
“just like people have lost count of the number of minorities who were killed and driven away from pakistan. there?”
#815 by devkant
“for any mass scale attack, you need to have mass scale minorities.”
How these two statements gel?
#818,
I am sure minority numbers are increasing in India after all ``Hum panch hum Pachees`` has not come about from the thin air... In fact, Minority numbers are on the increase in India like the the rest of the population but percentages are pretty static.
Minority numbers in Pakistan are not decreasing but the percentages are. Now do you understand this statement?
``i am sure you can back this claim with proofs.``
Pakistani Census is on the net look it up...
#819 Posted by devkant on January 15, 2007 12:31:50 am
i always used to think that mushy for all his faults at least freed the press in pakistan. but i guess i am wrong.
rgds,
devkant.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007 01 15 story_15-1-2007_pg3_1
Not such a free press
The South Asia Free Media Association (SAFMA) has put together a report on the freedom of the media in South Asia. But what concerns us here is the section on Pakistan. The country topped the list for abductions and killings of journalists during the past year. The tribal areas have been turned into no-go areas for journalists and the situation in Balochistan and interior Sindh remains quite dangerous for journalists.
In 2006 four journalists were killed while performing their professional duties. Mr Hayatullah, who was abducted in December 2005 allegedly by intelligence agencies in Waziristan for an expose, was found dead on June 16, sending out signals of personal risk to other journalists. Mr Munir Ahmed Sangi, a photographer of Sindhi-language daily Kawish, was shot dead while covering a clash between two tribes in Larkana on May 29. In Dera Ismail Khan, Maqbool Hussain Siyal, district correspondent of the Online News Agency, was gunned down by unidentified assailants on his way to meeting a PPP leader on September 14. The fourth killing was that of Malik Muhammad Ismail, editor of Pakistan Press International (PPI) Islamabad.
This year has started ominously too. Two days ago, Makhdoom Mohammad Rafiq, chief editor of Sindhi newspaper Nijaat, was killed by unidentified men, apparently in a dispute over property, in Khairpur.
According to SAFMA, intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies are quick to kidnap and harass journalists who breach their red lines. Intelligence agencies abducted Abdul Aziz Lasi, bureau chief of the Urdu-language daily Intikhab, from Hub because he took pictures of Chinese engineers killed in firing on the same day. While not all of the deaths and abductions were carried out by the state, too many incidents of very clear state involvement have come to the fore. This is not a good sign for the times ahead and the government must recommit itself to freedom of expression in the country.
Foreign journalists too are coming in the line of fire. Ms Carlotta Gall of the New York Times was roughed up by intelligence agents in Quetta a couple of months ago despite the fact that she had a valid visa to visit the province. Her Pakistani photographer Akhtar Soomro got a worse deal. This is a shameful precedent. How can we now expect the American media to be sympathetic to this regime if it too is at risk from the regime’s goons? So much for the ‘image of Pakistan’ that General Pervez Musharraf is trying to build. Clearly, some people are more loyal than the King and they are the ones who are harming not just his cause but that of Pakistan too. They must be corralled. *
rgds,
devkant.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2007 01 15 story_15-1-2007_pg3_1
Not such a free press
The South Asia Free Media Association (SAFMA) has put together a report on the freedom of the media in South Asia. But what concerns us here is the section on Pakistan. The country topped the list for abductions and killings of journalists during the past year. The tribal areas have been turned into no-go areas for journalists and the situation in Balochistan and interior Sindh remains quite dangerous for journalists.
In 2006 four journalists were killed while performing their professional duties. Mr Hayatullah, who was abducted in December 2005 allegedly by intelligence agencies in Waziristan for an expose, was found dead on June 16, sending out signals of personal risk to other journalists. Mr Munir Ahmed Sangi, a photographer of Sindhi-language daily Kawish, was shot dead while covering a clash between two tribes in Larkana on May 29. In Dera Ismail Khan, Maqbool Hussain Siyal, district correspondent of the Online News Agency, was gunned down by unidentified assailants on his way to meeting a PPP leader on September 14. The fourth killing was that of Malik Muhammad Ismail, editor of Pakistan Press International (PPI) Islamabad.
This year has started ominously too. Two days ago, Makhdoom Mohammad Rafiq, chief editor of Sindhi newspaper Nijaat, was killed by unidentified men, apparently in a dispute over property, in Khairpur.
According to SAFMA, intelligence agencies and law enforcement agencies are quick to kidnap and harass journalists who breach their red lines. Intelligence agencies abducted Abdul Aziz Lasi, bureau chief of the Urdu-language daily Intikhab, from Hub because he took pictures of Chinese engineers killed in firing on the same day. While not all of the deaths and abductions were carried out by the state, too many incidents of very clear state involvement have come to the fore. This is not a good sign for the times ahead and the government must recommit itself to freedom of expression in the country.
Foreign journalists too are coming in the line of fire. Ms Carlotta Gall of the New York Times was roughed up by intelligence agents in Quetta a couple of months ago despite the fact that she had a valid visa to visit the province. Her Pakistani photographer Akhtar Soomro got a worse deal. This is a shameful precedent. How can we now expect the American media to be sympathetic to this regime if it too is at risk from the regime’s goons? So much for the ‘image of Pakistan’ that General Pervez Musharraf is trying to build. Clearly, some people are more loyal than the King and they are the ones who are harming not just his cause but that of Pakistan too. They must be corralled. *
#818 Posted by devkant on January 15, 2007 12:29:07 am
HP...forget the bonded labour one. that was not for you, but only for queen cut and paste aisha.
``In 1951, that number was 400K so what do you think how 400k became 2.5 mil.? ``
i am sure you can back this claim with proofs.
of course you could not see and read the links that point to the increasing minority population in india. selective reading and knowledge is nothing new from you pakistanis and you are just following the great traditions of your people.
rgds,
devkant.
p.s.
i do not know about your census, but indian census is fairly reliable data.....there will always be some loopholes which i am fair enough to admit.
``In 1951, that number was 400K so what do you think how 400k became 2.5 mil.? ``
i am sure you can back this claim with proofs.
of course you could not see and read the links that point to the increasing minority population in india. selective reading and knowledge is nothing new from you pakistanis and you are just following the great traditions of your people.
rgds,
devkant.
p.s.
i do not know about your census, but indian census is fairly reliable data.....there will always be some loopholes which i am fair enough to admit.
#817 Posted by anil on January 15, 2007 12:26:36 am
Re: # 795
Ranjit:
Interesting analysis.
Punjabi Muslims have very interesting sociology. A friends father, retired brig. from Indian army had a retired lt. gen. from Pakistani army as colleague in Libya about 20 years ago. The brigadier sahib narrated an interesting observation that the general made that Punjabi Muslims before partition were mercenaries, they always provided people to fight be for hindu kings, afghans, moghuls or recently british. They rarely ruled or built their own kingdom, they accepted land grant and share of revenue with other central authority. It could be for this reason they did not force conversion, but were just happy to be head in their own way in a pecking order.
I think Jiziya was a very potent to force a change, especially those who reached certain level of wealth through trading, as agriculture was mainly with Muslim Punjabis through land grant. For them converting to Islam must have been very attractive. Also, another force was Pirs to counter pandits. V. S. Naipaul in his book Beyond Belief writes how pandits words were used in Sindh and Punjab to kill them and install Pirs as replacements of God`s men. If the conversion was forced then chain reaction would not have stopped. If your point on equality is true, then African slaves would not be converted.
Ranjit:
Interesting analysis.
Punjabi Muslims have very interesting sociology. A friends father, retired brig. from Indian army had a retired lt. gen. from Pakistani army as colleague in Libya about 20 years ago. The brigadier sahib narrated an interesting observation that the general made that Punjabi Muslims before partition were mercenaries, they always provided people to fight be for hindu kings, afghans, moghuls or recently british. They rarely ruled or built their own kingdom, they accepted land grant and share of revenue with other central authority. It could be for this reason they did not force conversion, but were just happy to be head in their own way in a pecking order.
I think Jiziya was a very potent to force a change, especially those who reached certain level of wealth through trading, as agriculture was mainly with Muslim Punjabis through land grant. For them converting to Islam must have been very attractive. Also, another force was Pirs to counter pandits. V. S. Naipaul in his book Beyond Belief writes how pandits words were used in Sindh and Punjab to kill them and install Pirs as replacements of God`s men. If the conversion was forced then chain reaction would not have stopped. If your point on equality is true, then African slaves would not be converted.
#816 Posted by HP on January 15, 2007 12:19:44 am
Devkant,
True that mostly I ignore your posts as there is nothing in them to read. I went back and looked at the post you mentioned.
There are 2.5 million Hindus in Sindh now. In 1951, that number was 400K so what do you think how 400k became 2.5 mil.?
After reading your both posts I am not sure you are worth the effort to go into the whole nine yards with you. so first prove any mass scale murder of minorities in the current Pakistan and especially of Hindus. And we move forward from there…
The links in you post # 173 you so proudly pointed out don’t mention any mass scale murder of Hindus in Pakistan…
One link deals with bonded labor…Are you saying there is no child and bonded labor in India?
The other link is to Pakistani population, what is that you want me look?
#815 Posted by devkant on January 15, 2007 12:04:33 am
``#807 by HP on January 14, 2007 11:44pm PT
Devkant,
``isn`t the percentage of minorities in pakistan decreasing while in india``
Prove it! ``
gawd....you are so bludy pathetic. you are so unaware of your own country. check out my post #173 addressed to the queen of cut and paste - aisha.
after this post she has not returned to this board.
``Also prove any mass scale attacks on any minority in Pakistan after the partition riots. Cite one example of the scale of barbarianism that was seen in Gujarat... ``
for any mass scale attack, you need to have mass scale minorities. where do they exist in your pakistan. show me...show us all infact. this is one info we all wanna know. also go back by about a 100 posts and see stuff posted by vagabond and others. you will see plenty of stuff of how well you guys treat minorities.
#809 by ranjit on January 14, 2007 11:49pm PT
silly me. i should have known that pakistanis need someone to curse and kill for their faults. if not hindus and christians, the ahmedis, shias etc etc will also do. my apologies.
rgds,
devkant.
Devkant,
``isn`t the percentage of minorities in pakistan decreasing while in india``
Prove it! ``
gawd....you are so bludy pathetic. you are so unaware of your own country. check out my post #173 addressed to the queen of cut and paste - aisha.
after this post she has not returned to this board.
``Also prove any mass scale attacks on any minority in Pakistan after the partition riots. Cite one example of the scale of barbarianism that was seen in Gujarat... ``
for any mass scale attack, you need to have mass scale minorities. where do they exist in your pakistan. show me...show us all infact. this is one info we all wanna know. also go back by about a 100 posts and see stuff posted by vagabond and others. you will see plenty of stuff of how well you guys treat minorities.
#809 by ranjit on January 14, 2007 11:49pm PT
silly me. i should have known that pakistanis need someone to curse and kill for their faults. if not hindus and christians, the ahmedis, shias etc etc will also do. my apologies.
rgds,
devkant.
#814 Posted by HP on January 15, 2007 12:01:55 am
Anil,
I call him Sindhi.....He is my Sindhi brother a little misguided though... Sindhis are not communal. You are a Sindhi first and anything else later...
Ranjit is a little misguided after living in Delhi with Upians....
#813 Posted by anil on January 14, 2007 11:58:28 pm
Re: # 805
HP & Ranjit:
Why don`t you call each other Sindhi?
HP & Ranjit:
Why don`t you call each other Sindhi?
#812 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:57:43 pm
Dada!
Don`t hide behind the Indian census..we know how censuses are done in both countries...
If census is the criteria, then go and check Pakistani census too...
#811 Posted by majumdar on January 14, 2007 11:52:57 pm
HP sain,
(Prove it! )
As far as the indian part if concerned, you can get it from the Census of India. www.censusindia.net
(Pakistanis are actually creating new minorities....Ahmedi were not a minority before the partition....Give the credit where it is due..... )
LOL. Maybe in due course add some more, Ismailis, Bohras, Shias, Barelvis, Deobandis, Ahl-e-Hadith etc.
Regards
(Prove it! )
As far as the indian part if concerned, you can get it from the Census of India. www.censusindia.net
(Pakistanis are actually creating new minorities....Ahmedi were not a minority before the partition....Give the credit where it is due..... )
LOL. Maybe in due course add some more, Ismailis, Bohras, Shias, Barelvis, Deobandis, Ahl-e-Hadith etc.
Regards
#810 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:52:10 pm
#806 by devkant
``just like people have lost count of the number of minorities who were killed and driven away from pakistan. ``
Also prove any mass scale attacks on any minority in Pakistan after the partition riots. Cite one example of the scale of barbarianism that was seen in Gujarat...
``just like people have lost count of the number of minorities who were killed and driven away from pakistan. ``
Also prove any mass scale attacks on any minority in Pakistan after the partition riots. Cite one example of the scale of barbarianism that was seen in Gujarat...
#809 Posted by Ranjit on January 14, 2007 11:49:30 pm
Re:devkant#806
[..talk for your self....isn`t the percentage of minorities in pakistan decreasing while in india increasing?????..]
Devkant, what are you talking about? With the ahmedis first and now the shias, minority percentage is growing every day in Pakistan. ;-) I even heard that they are fighting about sub-sects these days, barelvis vs. deobandis amongst Sunnis. Soon you may see yet another minority. He he!!
[..talk for your self....isn`t the percentage of minorities in pakistan decreasing while in india increasing?????..]
Devkant, what are you talking about? With the ahmedis first and now the shias, minority percentage is growing every day in Pakistan. ;-) I even heard that they are fighting about sub-sects these days, barelvis vs. deobandis amongst Sunnis. Soon you may see yet another minority. He he!!
#808 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:46:04 pm
#806 by devkant
Pakistanis are actually creating new minorities....Ahmedi were not a minority before the partition....Give the credit where it is due.....
#807 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:44:14 pm
Devkant,
``isn`t the percentage of minorities in pakistan decreasing while in india``
Prove it!
``isn`t the percentage of minorities in pakistan decreasing while in india``
Prove it!
#806 Posted by devkant on January 14, 2007 11:39:43 pm
``#796 by HP on January 14, 2007 11:06pm PT
People have lost count of number of Gujarats in India since the partition.... ``
indeed....just like people have lost count of the number of minorities who were killed and driven away from pakistan.
talk for your self....isn`t the percentage of minorities in pakistan decreasing while in india increasing?????
rgds,
devkant.
People have lost count of number of Gujarats in India since the partition.... ``
indeed....just like people have lost count of the number of minorities who were killed and driven away from pakistan.
talk for your self....isn`t the percentage of minorities in pakistan decreasing while in india increasing?????
rgds,
devkant.
#805 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:39:20 pm
#803 by ranjit
At least I have no interest in lying about things that never happened.... But I Do agree that Hindus are the most noble people on the face of the earth. In fact, it pains me to call them Hindu...I should just call them saints....
At least I have no interest in lying about things that never happened.... But I Do agree that Hindus are the most noble people on the face of the earth. In fact, it pains me to call them Hindu...I should just call them saints....
#804 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:36:38 pm
Yasser,
I want you to read post#743 by sanatani. The analysis though somewhat tainted still captures as to how the Indian National congress attempted to blackmail the British.
I will discuss that some other time but the essence of the whole drama that was played from 1939 to until the Congress abandoned the quit Indian movement, tells the story of a failed congress blackmail, attempt to cleanse itself of the radical Indians, launch quit India movement and later abandon it to make peace with the British....
I want you to read post#743 by sanatani. The analysis though somewhat tainted still captures as to how the Indian National congress attempted to blackmail the British.
I will discuss that some other time but the essence of the whole drama that was played from 1939 to until the Congress abandoned the quit Indian movement, tells the story of a failed congress blackmail, attempt to cleanse itself of the radical Indians, launch quit India movement and later abandon it to make peace with the British....
#803 Posted by Ranjit on January 14, 2007 11:36:14 pm
Re:HP#799
You know what you are right. Muslims are all pure like snow. They can never harm anyone and all hindus just left peacefully with all their wealth. Such delusions...
You know what you are right. Muslims are all pure like snow. They can never harm anyone and all hindus just left peacefully with all their wealth. Such delusions...
#802 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:28:18 pm
#800
Yasser,
The thing to remember is that most of the Union ministries in Punjab were supported by the Congress. Unionist had Sikh and Hindu support or coalition. The unionist made an alliance with Muslim League only when they saw the writing on the wall.....
Yasser,
The thing to remember is that most of the Union ministries in Punjab were supported by the Congress. Unionist had Sikh and Hindu support or coalition. The unionist made an alliance with Muslim League only when they saw the writing on the wall.....
#801 Posted by MantoLives on January 14, 2007 11:26:15 pm
Re: # 796
``Let’s not forget that incidents of communal violence in Muslim dominated provinces were rare and there was no pattern. whereas, pretty much all Hindu dominated provinces had almost a routine of communal violence and in 99% of the cases it was the minority community which suffered most of the losses.
In fact, by all accounts in the central India, Majority Hindu community was responsible for starting the communal violence in every area….This is the fact…..They still do the same....People have lost count of number of Gujarats in India since the partition.... ``
It will be completely irresponsible for people like you and I not to confront Sadna`s obfuscation with facts like these which have been deliberately been hidden from the light. Indians are clearly an unrepentant lot for the crimes that they have committed against humanity.
``Let’s not forget that incidents of communal violence in Muslim dominated provinces were rare and there was no pattern. whereas, pretty much all Hindu dominated provinces had almost a routine of communal violence and in 99% of the cases it was the minority community which suffered most of the losses.
In fact, by all accounts in the central India, Majority Hindu community was responsible for starting the communal violence in every area….This is the fact…..They still do the same....People have lost count of number of Gujarats in India since the partition.... ``
It will be completely irresponsible for people like you and I not to confront Sadna`s obfuscation with facts like these which have been deliberately been hidden from the light. Indians are clearly an unrepentant lot for the crimes that they have committed against humanity.
#800 Posted by MantoLives on January 14, 2007 11:22:51 pm
Communist Party of India`s analysis of Muslim League`s mass mobilisation and civil disobedience movement is completely different from Sadna Gupta`s analyses and her praise of the imperialist unionist party which was in alliance with the Congress:
``The task of every patriot is to welcome and help this democratic growth which is at long last is now taking place aongst the Muslims of Punjab. The last strong hold of Imperialist bureacracy in India is being invaded by the League. Let us all help the people of Punjab capture it``
Sajjad Zaheer ``League Unionist Conflict P. 33``
Unionist Party, that Indians have suddenly discovered as a great patriotic party of India because it supported the Congress in the dying days of the raj was a creature of the British powers... The communist Party lent complete support to the Muslim League to defeat it starting April 1944... and through the massive civil disobedience movement the League carried out against it.
As for ML using Barelvis... Barelvis, sufis and pirs represent the heterodox popular Islam...
unlike the straitjacket Deobandi Islam which was lined up behind the Congress Party... the difference between a Barelvi and a Deobandi is between a sufi and a mullah...
#799 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:21:47 pm
#797 by ranjit
Ranjit,
Now you are making up another story. You talked about your both maternal and paternal side...Now which side was in Sindh and where were they treated so shabbily?
Sindhi Hindu did leave their property back but they left Sindh with all their cash, Jewelry and life through a safe passage not in 1947 but mostly in 1948.
Ranjit,
Now you are making up another story. You talked about your both maternal and paternal side...Now which side was in Sindh and where were they treated so shabbily?
Sindhi Hindu did leave their property back but they left Sindh with all their cash, Jewelry and life through a safe passage not in 1947 but mostly in 1948.
#798 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:17:36 pm
#794 by Mantolives
This whole thing is just the continuation of the conspiracy theory so ardently believed by every uneducated Indian mind that the British created Pakistan to keep ``a check on India`s potential``. As if the British had the crystal ball and knew exactly what India`s potential was going to be in the 21 century.
I have already asked these morons to have a debate on this. Muslim league has barely ten years of History in pre partition India whereas the Congress sat with the British for over 50 years in different capacities.
Let these idiots come forward and I can easily show them who asked for more favors and got more favors from the British right up to the partition.
#797 Posted by Ranjit on January 14, 2007 11:14:05 pm
Re:HP
We had property in Sindh and relatives living in Punjab before partition. While we lost our property in Sindh, my relatives were killed in Punjab while making their way to India.
We had property in Sindh and relatives living in Punjab before partition. While we lost our property in Sindh, my relatives were killed in Punjab while making their way to India.
#796 Posted by HP on January 14, 2007 11:06:23 pm
#775 by ranjit
“We lost all our property and several people from both maternal and paternal sides who were brutally killed in the violence.”
That is a complete lie! You claim to be a Sindhi Brahmin…Provide me the name of the area in Sindh where your “maternal and paternal sides who were brutally killed in the violence”.
There were a few isolated incidents of communal violence in Sindh in 1947. There weren`t many who died maybe <10 in the whole province. You are simply lying….
Sadna quotes from British Bureaucrat whose job was to stop the violence in Punjab and the British admin did not do its job and later blamed whosoever it found convenient to blame.
But the Brits were not doing their job Since the early 20th century when communal violence became a norm in all Hindu dominated provinces…UP, Bihar, MP AP, Bengal to just a name a few.
Let’s not forget that incidents of communal violence in Muslim dominated provinces were rare and there was no pattern. whereas, pretty much all Hindu dominated provinces had almost a routine of communal violence and in 99% of the cases it was the minority community which suffered most of the losses.
In fact, by all accounts in the central India, Majority Hindu community was responsible for starting the communal violence in every area….This is the fact…..They still do the same....People have lost count of number of Gujarats in India since the partition....
#795 Posted by Ranjit on January 14, 2007 10:57:45 pm
Re:anil#785
[..Think and answer why Hinduism surived?....]
Interesting question!! Hinduism was able to avoid the terrible fate of other faiths that opposed Islam e.g. Zoroastrianism got almost wiped out in Iran. You are right that hinduism is in our minds more than our physical space. In that sense, hinduism has a lot more depth than other faiths and a deeper hold amongst its followers.
However there were several other factors acting in our favor as well. First of all, the subcontinent is vast and the population of hindus is massive. Any muslim ruler in the heartland found it challenging to exterminate such a huge population and equally challenging to convert everyone. Any muslim ruler, who would be far off from his own homeland, needed a kingdom and subjects to function and the hindus were willing subjects. So the muslim rulers preferred to just impose imperial rule on hindus and enjoy a life of privilege rather than waste time, energy and resources in exterminating/converting hindus.
An equally important criteria must have been racism as well. When it was easy to rule hindus as subjects, why bother to convert them to Islam and extend equality to some extent? I am sure the central asians did not find the thought of making all hindus their equals to be very appealing.
However, the biggest factor helping hinduism was - Punjabi Muslims. Typically Islam had always spread when a newly converted people focused on converting their neighbors - a sort of daisy chain, if you will. For instance, the arabs converted persians, persians converted turks, turks converted afghans, afghans/turks converted punjabis etc. Logically speaking, Punjabi muslims should have jumped on their neighbors, Punjabi hindus and converted them. In turn , they would have converted UP and Rajashthan, UP would have converted Bihar and so on. It did not happen. God knows why but Punjabi Muslims broke the daisy chain that had started in Mecca and simply did not take up converting. There is not one incident of Punjabi muslims organizing any conversion exercise to the east. My personal guess is that Punjabi muslims were themselves reluctant converts and it took them a long while to get used to their new faith. They have gone evangelical only after partition with their Laskhar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad etc, but now it is too late. When they had the chance, especially with a Mughal Emperor or Sultan to back them up in Delhi, they chose not to do anything. Our good fortune, I guess. :-)
[..Think and answer why Hinduism surived?....]
Interesting question!! Hinduism was able to avoid the terrible fate of other faiths that opposed Islam e.g. Zoroastrianism got almost wiped out in Iran. You are right that hinduism is in our minds more than our physical space. In that sense, hinduism has a lot more depth than other faiths and a deeper hold amongst its followers.
However there were several other factors acting in our favor as well. First of all, the subcontinent is vast and the population of hindus is massive. Any muslim ruler in the heartland found it challenging to exterminate such a huge population and equally challenging to convert everyone. Any muslim ruler, who would be far off from his own homeland, needed a kingdom and subjects to function and the hindus were willing subjects. So the muslim rulers preferred to just impose imperial rule on hindus and enjoy a life of privilege rather than waste time, energy and resources in exterminating/converting hindus.
An equally important criteria must have been racism as well. When it was easy to rule hindus as subjects, why bother to convert them to Islam and extend equality to some extent? I am sure the central asians did not find the thought of making all hindus their equals to be very appealing.
However, the biggest factor helping hinduism was - Punjabi Muslims. Typically Islam had always spread when a newly converted people focused on converting their neighbors - a sort of daisy chain, if you will. For instance, the arabs converted persians, persians converted turks, turks converted afghans, afghans/turks converted punjabis etc. Logically speaking, Punjabi muslims should have jumped on their neighbors, Punjabi hindus and converted them. In turn , they would have converted UP and Rajashthan, UP would have converted Bihar and so on. It did not happen. God knows why but Punjabi Muslims broke the daisy chain that had started in Mecca and simply did not take up converting. There is not one incident of Punjabi muslims organizing any conversion exercise to the east. My personal guess is that Punjabi muslims were themselves reluctant converts and it took them a long while to get used to their new faith. They have gone evangelical only after partition with their Laskhar-e-Toiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad etc, but now it is too late. When they had the chance, especially with a Mughal Emperor or Sultan to back them up in Delhi, they chose not to do anything. Our good fortune, I guess. :-)
#794 Posted by MantoLives on January 14, 2007 10:47:20 pm
`` it is Indians` own fault for promoting a false history where the Indians including Indian Muslims resisting the Muslim League were all communal and the Muslim League was alone secular``
Yes... it is the Indians` own fault that some of them are honest enough to see through the hogwash that has been shoved down naive minds... I salute those Indians who have dared to challenge the lies perpetuated by the Congress Party and their latter day goons.... I salute those who have dared to tell the truth about partition.
Long Live India of those brave people who have told people like Sadna to go to hell.
Yes... it is the Indians` own fault that some of them are honest enough to see through the hogwash that has been shoved down naive minds... I salute those Indians who have dared to challenge the lies perpetuated by the Congress Party and their latter day goons.... I salute those who have dared to tell the truth about partition.
Long Live India of those brave people who have told people like Sadna to go to hell.
#793 Posted by MantoLives on January 14, 2007 10:42:41 pm
Re: # 780
This is why I call Indians like Sadna and A`null nothing but dishonest crooks... A`null`s argument accords us ample opportunity to see the ugliness of this mind at work. It is amazing how the elections upon which the Congress claimed its majority are now being decried by their most fervent supporters as being ``unrepresentative``.
Why don`t you tell us what fraction of the Indian Muslim population in 1946 had the franchise... clearly much greater than 1937... which meant a clear victory for the Muslim League. So 100% expansion in electorate from 1937 to 1946 ... 100% increase in victory for the Muslim League.
This is why I call Indians like Sadna and A`null nothing but dishonest crooks... A`null`s argument accords us ample opportunity to see the ugliness of this mind at work. It is amazing how the elections upon which the Congress claimed its majority are now being decried by their most fervent supporters as being ``unrepresentative``.
Why don`t you tell us what fraction of the Indian Muslim population in 1946 had the franchise... clearly much greater than 1937... which meant a clear victory for the Muslim League. So 100% expansion in electorate from 1937 to 1946 ... 100% increase in victory for the Muslim League.
#792 Posted by MantoLives on January 14, 2007 10:38:04 pm
``and now they can`t deal with Afganistan``
Yes... because Sadna thinks Afghanistan is 99% Hindu... Since Indians are so fond of Afghans, why don`t they take in the 4 million Afghan Refugees that have sucked Pakistan dry?
Yes... because Sadna thinks Afghanistan is 99% Hindu... Since Indians are so fond of Afghans, why don`t they take in the 4 million Afghan Refugees that have sucked Pakistan dry?
#791 Posted by MantoLives on January 14, 2007 10:36:11 pm
``score academic points against Manto``
She wishes... Sadna Gupta is trying to score points by fudging the facts. Muslim League`s civil disobedience movement only provoked as much violence as Congress` antics did for the last 20 years... Despite all of her tall claims... we find that many more Muslims were killed... and it was the government of Pakistan that raised the issue of holocaust at the UN... India`s answer through VP Menon: That is merely communal disturbances..
Partition of Punjab was Congress’ countermove as the sore losers put in place by the resolution of March 8, 1947, against ironically even Gandhi’s strong opposition. The reason…. Divided Punjab and Bengal would destroy Pakistan. Ironically, the date Lord Mountbatten and Nehru triumphantly decided to inflict such a horrible price on Pakistan was the 1st of April to make it repent.
The more I read the drama at the very end of the partition saga, the more I realize that Gandhi had seen the error of his ways at the very end… I suppose this following is the reason why Jinnah had described Gandhi as a friend of the Muslims after the latter’s death, despite the latter’s obvious role against the Muslims.
Mohandas Gandhi wrote this following letter to Mountbatten on May 8, 1947:
“I feel sure that the partition of Punjab and Bengal is wrong in every case and a needless irritant for the League… Whilst the British power is functioning in India, it must be held principally responsible for the preservation of peace.” (TOPP Volume X 667-668)
On May 17 Mahomed Ali Jinnah made this following appeal to reason – which Mountbatten and Nehru had none:
“The Muslim League cannot agree to the partition of Bengal and the Punjab… it cannot be justified historically, economically, geographically, politically or morally. These provinces have built up their respective lives for nearly a century… the principle underlying the demand for the establishment of Pakistan and Hindustan is totally different… In the name of justice and fairplay, do not submit to this clamour. For it will be sowing the seeds of future serious trouble and the results will be disastrous for the life of these two provinces.” (Jinnah’s letter to Mountbatten TOP X, p 852)
Sir Eric Meiville met with Jinnah on May 20th and reported the following to Mountbatten:
“At the end of our talk he (Jinnah) took my arm and said ‘I am not speaking as a partisan, but I beg to tell Lord Mountbatten once again that he will be making a grave mistake if he agrees to the partition of Punjab and Bengal.” (TOPP X 916)
What had Jinnah offered the Sikhs: Essentially a signed blank cheque… inter alia autonomy, defence ministry, permanent position as the Forces Chief…I remember Dullah Bhatti once asked Sadna this and Sadna refused to verify it. This is confirmed by Terrence Shone’s discussion with Jinnah . According to Terrence Shone, Jinnah said that he had offered 3.5 million Sikhs and Master Tara Singh everything he wanted, but “Sikhs in many ways admirable people lacked the leadership of the highest order”. (TOP Volume X P. 280)
On Bengal, Suhrawardy came up with the plan of a United Bangladesh endorsed and completely supported by Sarat Chandrabose and Kiran Shankar Roy… the major reason as John Tyson, Burrow’s special representative at the Governors Conference, reported was that
“Eastern Bengal alone was not going concern and never would be. It could not feed itself … it would become, in Sir Frederick Burrows words, a rural slum… Muslims knew all this as well as the Hindus- so they felt that the object of the cry to partition Bengal was to ‘torpedo Pakistan’”.
Mountbatten replied: “ Anything that resulted in torpedoing Pakistan was of advantage.”
(Minutes of the Governors Conference, 15th April. Page 255 TOP X)
To quote Stanley Wolpert:
“Two weeks later, Mountbatten asked Jinnah what he thought of Suhrawardy’s proposal to create a separate sovereign Bengal, expecting him to be shocked at his Muslim League lieutenant’s treachery. Much to Mountbatten’s surprise, Jinnah calmly replied: ‘I should be delighted. What is the use of Bengal without Calcutta; they had better remain united and independent. I am sure they would be on friendly terms with us.” And when Mountbatten added that Suhrawardy would like Bengal to remain in the Commonwealth, Jinnah retorted, ‘Ofcourse, just as I indicated to you that Pakistan would wish to remain within the commonwealth.’ Had Mountbatten followed the advice of Gandhi, Jinnah or Suhrawardy, instead of listening to only to Nehru, Punjab and Bengal might have been spared the deadly horrors, and a richly United Bangladesh, with its capital in Calcutta, would have emerged instead of the fragmented, impoverished Bangladesh born from its eastern half a quarter of a century later.” (Shameful Flight, Page 142)
I think we can make out very well that the partition of Punjab and Bengal was imposed on the subcontinent by Nehru and Mountbatten… with Patel absenting … Jinnah, Gandhi and to some extent Azad opposing …. Had this not been undertaken, perhaps the violence and the legacy of violence would not have existed… there would have been three more or less secular republics i.e. Pakistan, Hindustan and Bangladesh…. existing with mutual understanding in this great common subcontinent of ours… as opposed to the three polarized and hostile ones today.
She wishes... Sadna Gupta is trying to score points by fudging the facts. Muslim League`s civil disobedience movement only provoked as much violence as Congress` antics did for the last 20 years... Despite all of her tall claims... we find that many more Muslims were killed... and it was the government of Pakistan that raised the issue of holocaust at the UN... India`s answer through VP Menon: That is merely communal disturbances..
Partition of Punjab was Congress’ countermove as the sore losers put in place by the resolution of March 8, 1947, against ironically even Gandhi’s strong opposition. The reason…. Divided Punjab and Bengal would destroy Pakistan. Ironically, the date Lord Mountbatten and Nehru triumphantly decided to inflict such a horrible price on Pakistan was the 1st of April to make it repent.
The more I read the drama at the very end of the partition saga, the more I realize that Gandhi had seen the error of his ways at the very end… I suppose this following is the reason why Jinnah had described Gandhi as a friend of the Muslims after the latter’s death, despite the latter’s obvious role against the Muslims.
Mohandas Gandhi wrote this following letter to Mountbatten on May 8, 1947:
“I feel sure that the partition of Punjab and Bengal is wrong in every case and a needless irritant for the League… Whilst the British power is functioning in India, it must be held principally responsible for the preservation of peace.” (TOPP Volume X 667-668)
On May 17 Mahomed Ali Jinnah made this following appeal to reason – which Mountbatten and Nehru had none:
“The Muslim League cannot agree to the partition of Bengal and the Punjab… it cannot be justified historically, economically, geographically, politically or morally. These provinces have built up their respective lives for nearly a century… the principle underlying the demand for the establishment of Pakistan and Hindustan is totally different… In the name of justice and fairplay, do not submit to this clamour. For it will be sowing the seeds of future serious trouble and the results will be disastrous for the life of these two provinces.” (Jinnah’s letter to Mountbatten TOP X, p 852)
Sir Eric Meiville met with Jinnah on May 20th and reported the following to Mountbatten:
“At the end of our talk he (Jinnah) took my arm and said ‘I am not speaking as a partisan, but I beg to tell Lord Mountbatten once again that he will be making a grave mistake if he agrees to the partition of Punjab and Bengal.” (TOPP X 916)
What had Jinnah offered the Sikhs: Essentially a signed blank cheque… inter alia autonomy, defence ministry, permanent position as the Forces Chief…I remember Dullah Bhatti once asked Sadna this and Sadna refused to verify it. This is confirmed by Terrence Shone’s discussion with Jinnah . According to Terrence Shone, Jinnah said that he had offered 3.5 million Sikhs and Master Tara Singh everything he wanted, but “Sikhs in many ways admirable people lacked the leadership of the highest order”. (TOP Volume X P. 280)
On Bengal, Suhrawardy came up with the plan of a United Bangladesh endorsed and completely supported by Sarat Chandrabose and Kiran Shankar Roy… the major reason as John Tyson, Burrow’s special representative at the Governors Conference, reported was that
“Eastern Bengal alone was not going concern and never would be. It could not feed itself … it would become, in Sir Frederick Burrows words, a rural slum… Muslims knew all this as well as the Hindus- so they felt that the object of the cry to partition Bengal was to ‘torpedo Pakistan’”.
Mountbatten replied: “ Anything that resulted in torpedoing Pakistan was of advantage.”
(Minutes of the Governors Conference, 15th April. Page 255 TOP X)
To quote Stanley Wolpert:
“Two weeks later, Mountbatten asked Jinnah what he thought of Suhrawardy’s proposal to create a separate sovereign Bengal, expecting him to be shocked at his Muslim League lieutenant’s treachery. Much to Mountbatten’s surprise, Jinnah calmly replied: ‘I should be delighted. What is the use of Bengal without Calcutta; they had better remain united and independent. I am sure they would be on friendly terms with us.” And when Mountbatten added that Suhrawardy would like Bengal to remain in the Commonwealth, Jinnah retorted, ‘Ofcourse, just as I indicated to you that Pakistan would wish to remain within the commonwealth.’ Had Mountbatten followed the advice of Gandhi, Jinnah or Suhrawardy, instead of listening to only to Nehru, Punjab and Bengal might have been spared the deadly horrors, and a richly United Bangladesh, with its capital in Calcutta, would have emerged instead of the fragmented, impoverished Bangladesh born from its eastern half a quarter of a century later.” (Shameful Flight, Page 142)
I think we can make out very well that the partition of Punjab and Bengal was imposed on the subcontinent by Nehru and Mountbatten… with Patel absenting … Jinnah, Gandhi and to some extent Azad opposing …. Had this not been undertaken, perhaps the violence and the legacy of violence would not have existed… there would have been three more or less secular republics i.e. Pakistan, Hindustan and Bangladesh…. existing with mutual understanding in this great common subcontinent of ours… as opposed to the three polarized and hostile ones today.
#790 Posted by sadna on January 14, 2007 10:08:20 pm
ranjit#783
It was a paranoia about Hindus which led to creation of Pakistan, separated East Pakistan and made the rest 97% Muslim. Not only did their paranoia about Hindus render them unable to deal with majority Hindus, later they couldn`t deal with minority Hindus in East Pakistan and now they can`t deal with an independent Afghanistan.
``Eternal vigilance`` is the price of pluralism, not ``paranoia``, which only destroys all options except the very worst one. I too think like you do that there is continuity in what is happening in J&K and what happened at and before partition. The thing to remember however, is that the Indian state is now invested in preserving its own integrity. Even when India was weak and at mercy of foreign powers for its food and arms in the 40s, 50s and 60s, it didnot compromise on J&K.
You might not know but even Gandhi supported sending troops to J&K to fight back Pakistani invaders.
Gandhi in November 1947:
Problem And Solution
WHAT IS the situation? It is stated that a rebel army composed of Afridis and the like, ably officered, was advancing towards Srinagar, burning and looting villages along the route, destroying even the electric power house, thus leaving Srinagar in darkness. It is difficult to believe that this entry could take place without some kind of encouragement from the Pakistan Government. I have not enough data to come to a judgment as to the merits of the case. Nor is it necessary for my purpose. All I know is that it was right for the Union Government to rush troops, even a handful, to Srinagar. That must save the situation to the extent of giving confidence to the Kashmiries…..
The result is in the hands of God. Men can but do or die. I shall not shed a tear if the little Union force is wiped out, like the Spartans, bravely defending Kashmir nor shall I mind….. Muslim, Hindus and Sikh comrades, men and women, dying at their post in defence of Kashmir, that will be a glorious example to the rest of India. Such heroic defence will infect the whole of India and we will forget that the Hindus, the Muslim and the Sikhs were ever enemies. (H, 9-11-1947, p. 406)
Gandhi in December 1947:
I am amazed to see that the Government of Pakistan disputes the veracity of the Union’s representation to the UNO, and the charge that Pakistan has a hand in the invasion of Kashmir by the raiders. Mere denials cut no ice. It was incumbent upon the Indian union to go to the rescue of Kashmir when the latter sought its help in expelling the raiders, and it was the duty of Pakistan to co-operate with the Union. But while Pakistan professed its willingness to operate, it took no concrete steps in that direction…..
A war will bring both the Dominions under the sway of a third power and nothing can be worse. I plead for amity and goodwill….. The understanding should however be genuine. To harbour internal hatred may be even worse than war. (H, 12-1-1948, p.509)
(Speech at the Prayer Meeting on 4th January 1948)
Today there is talk of war everywhere. Everyone fears a war breaking out between the two countries. If that happens it will be a calamity both for India and for Pakistan. India has written to the U.N. because whenever there is a fear of conflict anywhere the U.N. is asked to promote a settlement and to stop fighting from breaking out. India therefore wrote to the U. N. O. however trivial the issue may appear to be, it could lead to a war between the two countries. It is a long memorandum and it has been cabled. Pakistan’s leaders Zafrullah Khan and Liaquat Ali Khan have since issued long statements. I would take leave to say that their argument does not appeal to me. You may ask if I approve of the Union Government approaching the UNO I may say that I both approve and do not approve of what they did. I approve of it, because after all what else are they to do? They are convinced that what they are doing is right. If there are raids from outside the frontier of Kashmir, the obvious conclusion is that it must be with the connivance of Pakistan. Pakistan can deny it. But the denial does not settle the matter. Kashmir has acceded the accession upon certain conditions. If Pakistan harasses Kashmir and if Sheikh Abdullah who is the leader of Kashmir asks the Indian Union for help, the latter is bound to send help. Such help therefore was sent to Kashmir. At the same time Pakistan is being requested to get out of Kashmir and to arrive at a settlement with India over the question through bilateral negotiations. If no settlement can be reached in this way then a war is inevitable. It is to avoid the possibility of war that the Union Government has taken the step it did. Whether they are right in doing so or not God alone knows. Whatever might have been the attitude of Pakistan, if I had my way I would have invited Pakistan’s representatives to India and we could have met, discussed the matter and worked out some settlement. They keep saying that they want an amicable settlement but they do nothing to create the conditions for such a settlement. I shall therefore humbly say to the responsible leaders of Pakistan that though we are now two countries – which is a thing I never wanted – we should a
It was a paranoia about Hindus which led to creation of Pakistan, separated East Pakistan and made the rest 97% Muslim. Not only did their paranoia about Hindus render them unable to deal with majority Hindus, later they couldn`t deal with minority Hindus in East Pakistan and now they can`t deal with an independent Afghanistan.
``Eternal vigilance`` is the price of pluralism, not ``paranoia``, which only destroys all options except the very worst one. I too think like you do that there is continuity in what is happening in J&K and what happened at and before partition. The thing to remember however, is that the Indian state is now invested in preserving its own integrity. Even when India was weak and at mercy of foreign powers for its food and arms in the 40s, 50s and 60s, it didnot compromise on J&K.
You might not know but even Gandhi supported sending troops to J&K to fight back Pakistani invaders.
Gandhi in November 1947:
Problem And Solution
WHAT IS the situation? It is stated that a rebel army composed of Afridis and the like, ably officered, was advancing towards Srinagar, burning and looting villages along the route, destroying even the electric power house, thus leaving Srinagar in darkness. It is difficult to believe that this entry could take place without some kind of encouragement from the Pakistan Government. I have not enough data to come to a judgment as to the merits of the case. Nor is it necessary for my purpose. All I know is that it was right for the Union Government to rush troops, even a handful, to Srinagar. That must save the situation to the extent of giving confidence to the Kashmiries…..
The result is in the hands of God. Men can but do or die. I shall not shed a tear if the little Union force is wiped out, like the Spartans, bravely defending Kashmir nor shall I mind….. Muslim, Hindus and Sikh comrades, men and women, dying at their post in defence of Kashmir, that will be a glorious example to the rest of India. Such heroic defence will infect the whole of India and we will forget that the Hindus, the Muslim and the Sikhs were ever enemies. (H, 9-11-1947, p. 406)
Gandhi in December 1947:
I am amazed to see that the Government of Pakistan disputes the veracity of the Union’s representation to the UNO, and the charge that Pakistan has a hand in the invasion of Kashmir by the raiders. Mere denials cut no ice. It was incumbent upon the Indian union to go to the rescue of Kashmir when the latter sought its help in expelling the raiders, and it was the duty of Pakistan to co-operate with the Union. But while Pakistan professed its willingness to operate, it took no concrete steps in that direction…..
A war will bring both the Dominions under the sway of a third power and nothing can be worse. I plead for amity and goodwill….. The understanding should however be genuine. To harbour internal hatred may be even worse than war. (H, 12-1-1948, p.509)
(Speech at the Prayer Meeting on 4th January 1948)
Today there is talk of war everywhere. Everyone fears a war breaking out between the two countries. If that happens it will be a calamity both for India and for Pakistan. India has written to the U.N. because whenever there is a fear of conflict anywhere the U.N. is asked to promote a settlement and to stop fighting from breaking out. India therefore wrote to the U. N. O. however trivial the issue may appear to be, it could lead to a war between the two countries. It is a long memorandum and it has been cabled. Pakistan’s leaders Zafrullah Khan and Liaquat Ali Khan have since issued long statements. I would take leave to say that their argument does not appeal to me. You may ask if I approve of the Union Government approaching the UNO I may say that I both approve and do not approve of what they did. I approve of it, because after all what else are they to do? They are convinced that what they are doing is right. If there are raids from outside the frontier of Kashmir, the obvious conclusion is that it must be with the connivance of Pakistan. Pakistan can deny it. But the denial does not settle the matter. Kashmir has acceded the accession upon certain conditions. If Pakistan harasses Kashmir and if Sheikh Abdullah who is the leader of Kashmir asks the Indian Union for help, the latter is bound to send help. Such help therefore was sent to Kashmir. At the same time Pakistan is being requested to get out of Kashmir and to arrive at a settlement with India over the question through bilateral negotiations. If no settlement can be reached in this way then a war is inevitable. It is to avoid the possibility of war that the Union Government has taken the step it did. Whether they are right in doing so or not God alone knows. Whatever might have been the attitude of Pakistan, if I had my way I would have invited Pakistan’s representatives to India and we could have met, discussed the matter and worked out some settlement. They keep saying that they want an amicable settlement but they do nothing to create the conditions for such a settlement. I shall therefore humbly say to the responsible leaders of Pakistan that though we are now two countries – which is a thing I never wanted – we should a