Is this Pakistan’s Democratic Revolution?

Re: # 233

VRV/Folio

The Burger King delivery boy mentality reflects itself when you talk of hot sauce pans. BTW
you got the spelling wrong.

Grow up, mate. Return to the topic.

Loksevak,

Why expect understanding from namak haraami types like Mantolives?

Pak history had congenital genetic deformity. They had to live with that.

Just watch and enjoy the show of the cat on hot sause pan.

http://www.ford.utexas.edu/grf/Funeral/smith.asp

Gerald Ford could be a surprising man.

As part of the Millennium celebrations, Time Magazine invited prominent Americans to identify the pre-eminent figure of the twentieth century, along with a backup selection in case their first choice had already been taken. I fully expected President Ford to nominate a Winston Churchill or Dwight Eisenhower. He did nothing of the kind. Without hesitation he declared the greatest man of the century to be Mahatma Gandhi. The second greatest, in his opinion, was Anwar Sadat.

Kisne Nathuram ki goli Khai?

Kisne Harijanon ki Tatti Uthai?

Kisne Pakistan ki 55 crore Rs. ke liye fasting ki?

Kisne Naukhali mein raat bitai?

Kaun aeroplanese Karachi Pahuncha?

Kaun Char sal ke liye London mein retire hua?

Kaun Apna Mumbai ka Ghar only Firangionko rent karne wala tha?

Harish mian,

Why are you so adamant about fooling everyone ?

Aww now you are depending on Bourkewhite`s of what Jinnah said (which as usual is inconclusive)... and that too I have dealt with in detail by exposing the glaring contradictions in Margaret Bourkewhite`s account on another board which I gladly quote if you want...

But lets just put that as is, and see that despite what you think Jinnah meant or didn`t mean ... the facts are that every primary source says that

1. Armed with guns and swords Hindus and Sikhs were being bussed in to Calcutta, as opposed to Muslims who reportedly were throwing bottles and had sticks in their hands etc ...

2. Three times more Muslims died than Hindus.

3. The government did not find any evidence of Muslim League`s involvement despite hue and cry by the Congress...


All these point towards Congress` culpability and are clear proof of who was behind what.

Ofcourse... later the Congress used words like ``trouble`` ... ``pistol`` etc to falsify history in classical 1984 fashion... but I think beyond perception of the common Hindu fascist brought up on a diet of hate and bigotry... no one really would buy their bs.

The question remains... while Gandhi`s followers were razing Calcutta to the ground... where was Gandhi ? What rat hole was he getting his salt enema administered in?

I wonder...

#228 by Yasser

So lets get this straight... Jinnah gives a call for strike. His followers go on strike. Gandhi`s followers butcher them left right and center .... and Gandhi has no responsibility because Jinnah gave the call for strike.

Abay chutiye, the fact that you still haven`t been able to disprove my contention that it was Jinnah`s call to Direct Action that led to the violence shows that you have no legs to stand on. If you have any evidence to the contrary, share it with us. Also, what evidence do you have to show that it was Gandhi`s followers who did it?

And moron, there is a huge difference between a strike and what Jinnah was planning

Direct Action in Calcutta

Excerpt:

``There was silence for a moment, broken only by the cooing of pigeons, hopping over Jinnah`s manicured lawn. Then he added in the same toneless voice, so strangely unmatched to his words: ``Why do you expect me alone to sit with folded hands? I also am going to make trouble.``

I know you`re paid to lie in your profession, but we won`t let you off the hook so easily here. You still have no answer to the above questions which have been asked on this board at least a couple of times now, which proves that you`re merely skirting the issue, perhaps in the hope that this board will die down in a couple of days from now.

In your zeal to defend the racist casteist Hindu fascist Bigot Gandhi you`ve lost all balance which is why you are now down to calling me names you probably fondly call your father by...

Nope, I reserve those names for calling special cases like you. I`m considering using them for your father too, first for having given birth to a dumbhead like you and then spending lakhs to educate you in the west without any success. Looks like he got zero ROI, poor fellow!

Okhla99,

Well said. These two jokers think of themselves as some sort of defenders of India`s honor and protectors of Gandhiji`s dhoti...


Harish mian,

So lets get this straight... Jinnah gives a call for strike. His followers go on strike. Gandhi`s followers butcher them left right and center .... and Gandhi has no responsibility because Jinnah gave the call for strike.

To use your logic... General Dyer had NO moral responsibility (like Gandhi) because it was those Sikhs who wanted independence and put pressure on the government and making inflammatory statements against the government and congregate etc .... Do you see how stupid you sound? Ofcourse you don`t... because you are blind. In your zeal to defend the racist casteist Hindu fascist Bigot Gandhi you`ve lost all balance which is why you are now down to calling me names you probably fondly call your father by...

``That is like Mushy blaming Shaukat Aziz``

Then pray tell why didn`t Nehru resgn instead of Shastri. You as always are a genius at contradicting yourself.

Suhrawardy was asked to resign because as the head of the Muslim League government he had not managed to control the law and order... which meant that the Congress Goons had a free rein of killing innocent people on Direct Action day... It was the lapse of law and order and not some moral culpability (which I have proved lay directly with the Congress Goons who were bussed in to Calcutta in large numbers armed to teeth with guns and swords)

Sir Francis Tuker says:
Static guards took over from police guards and a party of troops under Major Littleboy, the Assistant Provost-Marshal, did valuable work in the rescue organisation for displaced and needy persons. Outside the `military` areas, the situation worsened hourly. Buses and taxis were charging about loaded with Sikhs and Hindus armed with swords, iron bars and firearms.

And Lord Wavell wrote:

``Last weekend has seen dreadful riots in Calcutta. The estimates of casualties is 3000 dead and 17000 injured. The Bengal Congress are convinced that all the trouble was deliberately engineered by the Muslim League Ministry, but no satisfactory evidence to that effect has reached me yet. It is said that the decision to have a public holiday on 16th August was the cause of trouble, but I think this is very far-fetched. There was a public holiday in Sind and there was no trouble there. At any rate, whatever the causes of the outbreak, when it started, the Hindus and Sikhs were every bit as fierce as Muslims. The present estimate is that appreciably more Muslims were killed than the Hindus``


The million dollar question is that when Congress was bussing in Hindus and Sikhs into Calcutta, armed to the teeth, what was Gandhi doing? Getting a salt enema administered? or fasting to remain fit?

Your failure to answer why Gandhi didn`t stop Hindus and Sikhs - despite incontrovertible evidence that they were butchering Muslims left right and center... shows the real story.

Folio,

So you are saying all black people in South Africa were sweepers which is why Gandhi hated them? And what about the inferior genetic stock... their inability to live like human beings ... and all the other fine divinely revealed ``Indo-Aryan`` superiority clauses that Gandhi gave in support of his position that all Black people were subhuman?

So far you`ve got nothing. Let me refresh your memory as to what Gandhi really said:



Gandhi’s Mein Kempf

Like Adolf Hitler, Gandhi also compiled his racist manifesto when he was an accomplished barrister of age 35. Please note his extensive usage of the word “Kaffir” for black people- Citations are from Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi ... they may be checked again and again from any library in the US...


``A general belief seems to prevail in the colony that the Indians are little better, if at all, than the savages or natives of Africa. Even the children are taught to believe in that manner, with the result that the Indian is being dragged down to the position of a raw Kaffir. ``
Collected works of MK Gandhi, Vol. 1, pg 150-151

``the whole objection to the Indian proceeds from sanitary grounds, the following restrictions are entirely unintelligible:
1. The Indians, like the Kaffirs, cannot become owners of fixed property.
2. The Indians must be registered, the fee being 3 pounds 10S.
3. In passing through the Republic, like the Natives, they must be able to produce passes unless they have the registration ticket.
4. They cannot travel first or second-class on the railways. They are huddled together in the same compartment with the Natives.
So far as the feeling has been expressed, it is to degrade the Indian to the position of the Kaffir. ``
Petition to Lord Ripon, CWOMG, Vol. 1, pg 199-200


``Ours is one continual struggle against a degradation sought to be inflicted upon us by the Europeans, who desire to degrade us to the level of a raw Kaffir whose occupation is hunting, and whose sole ambition is to collect a certain number of cattle to buy a wife with and, then, pass his life in indolence and nakedness ``
Address in Bombay, CWOMG, Vol. 2, pg 74

``...A reference to Hunter`s `Indian Empire`, chapters 3 and 4, would show at a glance who are aborigines and who are not. The matter is put so plainly that there can be no mistake about the distinction between the two. It will be seen at once from the book that the Indians in South Africa belong to the INDO-GERMANIC STOCK or, more properly speaking, the ARYAN stock

We believe as much in the purity of race as we think they do, only we believe that they would best serve these interests, which are as dear to us as to them, by advocating the purity of all races, and not one alone. We believe also that the white race of South Africa should be the predominating race. ``
Indian Opinion 24-9-1903, CWOMG Vol. 3, pg 453

...The petition dwells upon ``the co-mingling of the Coloured and white races``. May we inform the members of the conference that, so far as the British Indians are concerned, such a thing is practically unknown? If there is one thing, which the Indian cherishes more than any other, it is the purity of type. Why bring such a question into the controversy at all?
The Transvaal Chambers and British Indians, Indian Opinion 24-12-03, CWOMG Vol. 4, pg 89

Why, of all places in Johannesburg, the Indian Location should be chosen for dumping down all the Kaffirs of the town passes my comprehension. ...Of course, under my suggestion, The Town Council must withdraw the Kaffirs from the Location. About this mixing of Kaffirs with the Indians, I must confess I feel most strongly
Indian Opinion, 10-4-04, CWOMG Vol. 4, pg 130-131

It is one thing to register Natives who would not work, and whom it is very difficult to find out if they absent themselves, but it is another thing and most insulting to expect decent, hard-working, and respectable Indians, whose only fault is that they work too much, to have themselves registered...
What is a Coolie, Indian Opinion 2151904, CWOMG Vol. 4, pg 193

It reduces British Indians to a status lower than that of the aboriginal races of South Africa and the Coloured people.
Indian Opinion 15-9-1906, CWOMG Vol. 5, pg 419-423

Mr. Stead has boldly come out to give us all the help he can. He was therefore requested to write to the same Boer leaders that they should not consider Indians as being on the same level as Kaffirs.
Indian Opinion, 15-12-1906, CWOMG Vol. 6, pg 183

...the Governor of the gaol tried to make us as comfortable as he could...But he was powerless to accommodate us beyond the horrible din and the yells of the Native prisoners throughout the day and partly at night also. Many of the native prisoners are only one degree removed from the animal and often created rows and fought amongst themselves in their cells.
Indian Opinion 7-3-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 120

Apart from whether or not this implies degradation, I must say it is rather dangerous. Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized -- the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty, and live almost like animals. Each ward contains nearly 50 to 60 of them. They often started rows and fought among themselves. The reader can easily imagine the plight of the poor Indian thrown into such company!
Indian Opinion, 7-3-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 135

When I reached there, the chief warder issued an order that all of us should be lodged in a separate room. I observed with regret that some Indians were happy to sleep in the same room as the Kaffirs, the reason being that they hoped there for a secret supply of tobacco, etc. This is a matter of shame to us. We may entertain no aversion to the Kaffirs, but we cannot ignore the fact that there is no common ground between them and us in the daily affairs of life. Moreover, those who wish to sleep in the same room have ulterior motives for doing so. Obviously, we ought to abandon such notions if we want to make progress.
Indian Opinion, 6-1-1909, CWOMG Vol. 9, pg 149

CWMOG = Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi

Gandhi`s racism against scheduled castes and dalits

He wrote in 1922 for Niya Jawan

(1) I believe that if Hindu Society has been able to stand it is because it is founded on the caste system.
(2) The seeds of swaraj are to be found in the caste system. Different castes are like different sections of miliary division. Each division is working for the good of the whole....

(3) A community which can create the caste system must be said to possess unique power of organization.

(4) Caste has a ready made means for spreading primary education. Each caste can take the responsibility for the education of the children of the caste. Caste has a political basis. It can work as an electorate for a representative body. Caste can perform judicial functions by electing persons to act as judges to decide disputes among members of the same caste. With castes it is easy to raise a defense force by requiring each caste to raise a brigade.

(5) I believe that interdining or intermarriage are not necessary for promoting national unity. That dining together creates friendship is contrary to experience. If this was true there would have been no war in Europe.... Taking food is as dirty an act as answering the call of nature. The only difference is that after answering call of nature we get peace while after eating food we get discomfort. Just as we perform the act of answering the call of nature in seclusion so also the act of taking food must also be done in seclusion.

(6) In India children of brothers do not intermarry. Do they cease to love because they do not intermarry? Among the Vaishnavas many women are so orthodox that they will not eat with members of the family nor will they drink water from a common water pot. Have they no love? The caste system cannot be said to be bad because it does not allow interdining or intermarriage between different castes.

(7) Caste is another name for control. Caste puts a limit on enjoyment. Caste does not allow a person to transgress caste limits in pursuit of his enjoyment. That is the meaning of such caste restrictions as interdining and intermarriage.

(8) To destroy caste system and adopt Western European social system means that Hindus must give up the principle of hereditary occupation which is the soul of the caste system. Hereditary principle is an eternal principle. To change it is to create disorder. I have no use for a Brahmin if I cannot call him a Brahmin for my life. It will be a chaos if every day a Brahmin is to be changed into a Shudra and a Shudra is to be changed into a Brahmin.

(9) The caste system is a natural order of society. In India it has been given a religious coating. Other countries not having understood the utility of the caste system, it existed only in a loose condition and consequently those countries have not derived from caste system the same degree of advantage which India has derived. These being my views I am opposed to all those who are out to destroy the caste system.

#225, Majumdar {``Well Indian/Lankan/Bdeshi politicans are not much better, some possibly a lot worse, but haven`t heard any suggestion from these countries that democracy be dumped. Besides, I am not suggesting that democracy is a solution to all problems, at least in the short-term. And if you have a grouse about most of democratcially elected rulers being Punjoos, that is the demographic reality of Pak, what can you do about it? All but one of US Presidents have been White Protestant Males. So hardly unique to Pak.``}

Majumdar Bhai,

I agree with your comments regarding the need to give democracy a chance and the importance of building permanent institutions and processes - including the peaceful transition of power. Even under ``democratic`` rule, Pakistan has had only one peaceful transition of power. The fact is that Mushy`s benign dictatorship has a far better record when it comes to freedoms of press, assembly, and expression. Consider Bhutto, Bezameer, and Besharif`s sad autocratic manner of governing.

I think that your unintentional justification of ``mob rule`` resulting in Punju hegemony cannot draw support from the pigmentation of past US presidents. The US Constitution ensures the concept of local government, protection of minorities, and the rights of smaller states. I think that Mushy is trying his best, under very difficult circumstances, to build the kind of democracy and institutions that will lead to an acceptable level of democracy in Pakistan.

#215 by Yasser

Also... nobody has answered the simple question as to why - when Gandhi`s followers were butchering Muslims in and around Calcutta, did Gandhi wait four months before trying to stop them?

Chutiye, that is because it was not Gandhi who gave the call to DAD. If anyone had to do it, it was Jinnah, but the old TB-ridden crook was bent on showing the street power of his ML thugs, which is why his cronies were issuing inflammatory statements. While his cronies were causing bloodshed on Calcutta`s streets, the old coot was perhaps masturbating.

Asking Jinnah to call off a strike after the day was infact over was a truly moronic argument worth harish hyd`s reputation ...

But it is your repututation that lies in tatters after you`ve failed to prove that it was not Jinnah whose call was responsible for the DAD violence.

#214 by Yasser

Just because you say something, it does not stand ``proved``. I know you are quite delusional about your self importance, but please allow me to say it is not true.

Abay Gadhay, if you had half the brains that the humble animal that is embedded in your name, you would know that nothing I wrote is said by me. They`re said by the crook Jinnah`s contemporaries, be they newspaper editors or politicians. But how would you know, given your mental prowess..er..I mean the lack of it?

If Lal Bahadur Shastri resigned for the train accident, so was Suhrawardy removed and replaced with Nazimuddin. So your point is what... because what you are arguing as usual does not make any sense.

This is like Mushy blaming Shaukat Aziz for the CJP fiasco. Wonder why Yasser wants Mushy to go when it was Shaukat Aziz who is to blame. The fact is that Suhrawardy was made the convenient scapegoat for Jinnah`s crimes. After the DAD resolution was passed, Suhrawardy said, ``We await the Quaid`s clarion call`` which clearly shows that he was acting at the old crook`s behest.

So since Jinnah called for direct action day, a peaceful day of protest, Gandhi`s goons were free to maim and murder Muslims left right and center?

Oh really? When every newspaper editor and politician of the day was of the view that the DAD would lead to bloodshed, this chutiya thinks it was a ``peaceful day of protest``...LOL!

There is no definitive answer to who started what. But all reports speak of Muslims with sticks and stones and Hindus with guns etc... so it is clear that it was Congress that had planned the whole thing well in advance to bring down the Muslim League government.

The Time Magazine, Margaret Bourke White`s book, Stanley Wolpert, all say that it was Muslim Leaguers who started the violence, and yet this foolsays its not clear who started it? Is there anything more left to say? LOL!

corection:

Btw, urs is a racist family too i.e nobody married a sweeper or a black.

i/o

Btw, urs is a racist family too i.e nobody married a a sweeper of a black.

Yasser,

So ur mind in ossified at the certain milestones of the lives of Gandhi & Jinnah. As many does, the lives of Gandhi & Jinnah shud be looked at for the sum contributions. It`s clear for the umpteenth time that u dont have stomach to look at history wholesomely. U are at best a propagandist. What a life!.

Btw, urs is a racist family too i.e nobody married a a sweeper of a black.

Gandhi was a saint, Jinnah was a blood-thirsty beast.

okhla``99``,

Are u busy doing 99?

U are are ideological eunuch. U never wrote that can be called discussion but taking breaks from 99 to butt-in on chowk discussions. Poor chap. Get engaged in 99. Dont turn over 4 me, idiot-in-chief.

Folio mian,

If Jinnah called Gandhi humanistic... Gandhi, along with most other Indian leaders that you respect, also called Jinnah the best ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity and a true Indian nationalist and patriot on several occasions-even as late as 1939... so your logic falls flat on its face...

So you can go on abusing Jinnah... but history cannot be rewritten by abuses.

Salimbhai,

(I find it difficult to believe that Pakistan has been without a rudder for the past 7+ years. :)

That was not my suggestion. Sorry if that has been the meaning conveyed. Mush has certainly governed Pak and possibly reasonably well by Third World standards (although I would not be the best judge of that), my only submission was that the recent good growth shown by Pak may not be entirely credited to Mush.

(We had civilian and ``democratically-elected`` PPP and Punju administrations under Nawaz Besharif and Bezameer Bhutto for well over a decade and look at what they did. )

Well Indian/Lankan/Bdeshi politicans are not much better, some possibly a lot worse, but haven`t heard any suggestion from these countries that democracy be dumped. Besides, I am not suggesting that democracy is a solution to all problems, at least in the short-term. And if you have a grouse about most of democratcially elected rulers being Punjoos, that is the demographic reality of Pak, what can you do about it? All but one of US Presidents have been White Protestant Males. So hardly unique to Pak.

But what about military govts, what about the long-term damages they have caused.

(Mushy is a military, albeit a benign, dictator)

You may be right on this although many Pakis these days would beg to differ. But that is not the point. Even if he is very good, what if he is bumped off? Would the good job that he is doing be sustained. For that reason, Pak needs to build instituitions- constitutional governance, independent judiciary (as Manto mian keeps emphasising), free press, freedom of citizenry, apolitical armed forces/bureaucracy etc. It wont be easy to build, it wont yield results for years, maybe even a generation, but in the long run that is the only option that Pak (or any country has in the long run).

(but give him some credit for steering Pakistan through a very difficult period - especially since 9/11.)

The problem is Pakistan is located in a very difficult place, and its location will keep it in a very volatile, troubled state. And that would mean a permanent justification for junta rule.

Regards

Yasser,

Tell me when u come close to reading the volumes of the 1947?

Congress was not a communal party but Muslim League was. Gandhi was humanistic (acknowledged by Jinnah) but Jinnah was a communal, blood thristy beast.

Btw whether any of ur family members married sweepers or blacks??

Okhla,

I dont know if I am in 69 - which in anyway is heterosexual - u are in 99, a gay stuff. Does it need a second word that u are an idiot-in-chief??

Shut-up and write something we can discuss.....keep ur homilies to ur homo-guyz.

Okhla,

I dont if I am in 69 - which in anyway is heterosexual - u are in 99, a gay stuff. Does it need a second word that u are an idiot-in-chief??

Shut-up and write something we can discuss.....keep ur homilies to ur homo-guyz.