The Irreverent Hero Islam Forgot

Re: # 268
I read Freud (actaully a sexist Fraud) when I was (shhh...) still suffering from P-envy. But that was when I was under ten years old!

Re: # 341

Yar BJ ok. While you have failed to impugn the facts you so liberally call fiction, we all know that even your fiction is plagiarized. The King of Plagiarism is mortally estopped from accusing others of misconduct- especially on the basis of flimsy evidence and prejudice.

Re: # 248

Please correct that to read: "...was shown the doorknob."

PS: Now let me try the condo-zamin, as you suggested. Never realised what a dual-purpose REAL THING it is!

Re: # 227
Sorry, surgeon Cheema, I did not read this blasphemous interact! So is THIS what makes Razi great in your eyes? One fool misleads a hundred.

Again, read the Qur'an translation that I recommend to see for yourself if you need guidance (if!).

I always give full credit to the devil, and have noticed with great joy that you've FINALLY learnt to spell Qur'an right! Hallelujah--no wait, al-hamdu lilah!

Doctors are an intelligent lot I think.

Peace.

Re: # 226
I'm afraid Mr. Cheema, if you listen to Mr. Hawkins explain who and what God is, beware that scientists are the greatest secret believers in God, yet they never admit so in public out of fear of being laughed at. But it doesn't matter; guess who will get the last laugh?

When you finally grow up (one does utter nonsense in the teens), the reality of things will dawn upon you. For now, I must leave you alone with your resident demons.

Peace.
PS: I know so many Cheemas; we will connect somewhere someday! Until then, more peace...

Re: # 346
Guru...
Babasaheb was not so much of a people leader like Mayawati. He was not a visionary like Kanshiram. He could have reached out to even leaders like Sawarkar who were working for abolishing casticism. He did not open any educational institutions or built any cooperatives for Harijans.

Ans: agree...
Actually, Babasaheb was the tool used by Congress to weaken RSS...He was not a popular leader like Babu Jagajivan Ram or Kanshiram....

Contd...
Political voice does not empower people, education does...

I mean empoverished Gulf Land without oil.

Few hints for compulsions:

When did Shah of Iran grabbed the throne?

11th of Sept 1973, crippling railway strike led to Pokharan I.

Who killed Mujib? Nehru, Patel and Indira feared becoming Salvador. Indira used to complain about hidden hand whose birth was on the eastern side of Atlantic in 1947.

# masadi
Religion,idealogy and democracy etc. is a fodder used by Machavillian pundits to sedate or inflame the masses to achieve certain objectives,sometimes they succed and sometimes they dont.Sometimes thier objectives are selfserving and sometimes they are noble(Machavillians are capable of doing good).Now lets come to Pakistan.Without being pedantic or googling unnecessary details one can ask a simple question,what was the need for pakistan?Was it religion or something else?
If you study the history objectively,that you cannot do without being detached from it,you will draw the conclusion that underlying currents for every religion,idealogy and war etc.were economic.The creation of pakistan is no exception,religion was a tool to mobblize the masses.Now the question is,has pakistan served the purpose?Yes it has. but what about the indian muslims?Too bad its not good for them.But thier lot would not have changed even if there was no partition. sorry i can not type for too long.

Re: # 312
Masadi...

The colonials did not resist the partition of India rather they drew the map that was most beneficial for them, as they did in the ME, where they kept countries busy with each other and used Pakistan. Jinnah was facilitator of the colonial plan, and he was the public face of the colonial game in India- how hard is that for you to understand? A secular person evoking religious identity for the purpose of seperation- knowing nothing about either religion or the pulse of the people who had no part in the partition except through religiously invoked hatred by these elite.

Ans: Again blaming British!!!!! Were Brits involved during 1971 partition of Pakistan?
What Jinnah had done was good for muslims. The other alternative available for muslims was little difficult. Work hard and bridge the gap with upper caste Hindus/Parsees...Jinnah had taken the safest route.
In undevided India, muslims were far backward in education and related professional fields (teacher,professor,doctor, engineer,lawyear,scientist...). For British, muslims were never threat (numerically Hindus were more; so were the intellectually).Why British will discriminate against muslims?
Coming back to political voice, it would not have ensured quality of life for muslims in undevided India....
In Tamilnadu, more than 67% seats are reserved (now Karunanidhi included Muslims and Christians) to suppress Tamil brahmins...That failed ...
Hitler had tried to eliminate German jews...They (jews) migrated to USA and made the place most advanced in all sectors (media, banking, technology,medical science, physical science, agriculture....)...

Re: # 322 Ekbhai,

I was goading Manto not to quote Babasaheb for whom I respect. But we should keep in mind that he was tallest among the leader who were job seekers under British rule which included many in Congress, except Gandhi, Subhash and other revolutionary with socialist types. Job seeking leaders are needed and have there space. But the foundation is laid and organization is built by the spiritual, inspirational leaders such as Gandhi and Subhash. MAJ was a super job seeker. When British brought MAJ and Babasaheb on their side of the table, congress leadership panicked. Compulsions they felt never came on the pages of Times of India. World war II was good for India ... it exhausted British and they left in a haste. If they had stayed a decade longer India would look like Gulf land.

Babasaheb was not so much of a people leader like Mayawati. He was not a visionary like Kanshiram. He could have reached out to even leaders like Sawarkar who were working for abolishing casticism. He did not open any educational institutions or built any cooperatives for Harijans. On day to day basis he could not relate to them. I do not fault him so much because of his long stay in west and marriage (second marriage to saraswat bramhin) he had very less in common with them. A milder version of MAJ. I hate to talk about other people esp dead ones. He was a great man given the odds he faced. Period. But keep it in mind that India is functional democracy because it has Dharmic culture. His greatest contribution was choosing a Dharmic Panth over Abrahmic religion. I think some where even Babasaheb wrote that his decision was based on which among the choices does not alienate Harijans from their neighbor, which does not make them give up their language, script and culture, which does not make rever distant land and prophet. I can respect the prophet but not at the expense of my mom and dad.

In #344 read "otherwise they could have just as readily used that.."

as "otherwise they would have just as readily used that.."

Manto writes "Now I understand why that horrible Hindu Majumdar puts up (PBUH) next to Jinnah's name. The whole thing was a grand anti-Muslim conspiracy just like the Hizb-e-Tahrir claims."

Classic use of the straw man fallacy. When stumped by his opponents genuine arguments, he "invents" an alien argument, attributes it to me so he can dismantle the argument of his own creation and muddy my real arguments. It was not an "anti-Muslim conspiracy" as it was a "pro-colonial conspiracy"- Muslims just happened to be at the receiving end whose religion was exploited to fragment India...they couldn't use Hinduism for that purpose because of the Hindu association with India as a nation, otherwise they could have just as readily used that.....

In #342 read "What is fictitious in your BS is your cheerleading for anil " as

What is fictitious is your BS in your cheerleading for anil

Manto writes "The fact is that you've failed to answer the basic question asked by HP in his post. I suggest you read and learn from it."

No need to return to your dishonest lying self if you have been stumped by my arguments. No question raised by HP in his post has been left unanswered by me. The new order that emerged, partners to which the British were- that of US hegemony used Pakistan and is still using it- that was the least of the questions that needed addressing because it is so obvious. His other questions regarding further division by ethnicity etc were comprehensively answered by me. What escapes you in all this is the fact that HP acknowledges that the colonials extrated mileage out of this division, it was a division granted not gained through struggle, in ohter words the country "was given". Except for the details of the methodology of division and his confusion that I was claiming that the "purpose" was primarily to weaken the Muslim political strength, when I wasnt claiming that as the primary motive is the only difference. In the broader picture he agrees more with me than with you. What is fictitious in your BS is your cheerleading for anil who claims that there was no such thing as British colonization, it was merely an extension of Mughal rule with white faces....and you called that a great post! Go figure.....

[Dear Masadi,
That is an interesting bit of fiction.]

Pay attention Masadi miaN. The interactor who said that has left a long track record of creative fiction behind him.