Is Thackeray a Terrorist?

Finally Pakistanis are beginning to realize Jinnah`s vision. On Saturday an individual by the name of S I Malik had asked for proof that Jinnah wanted a secular state in Dawn and I responded to him too but today Dawn published the letter of M Haider:



Quaid`s pronouncements

This is in response to the letter by Mr Malik. Jinnah may or may not have said categorically that Pakistan would be a secular state but all his pronouncements especially the August 11th speech clearly lead to one inescapable conclusion - it was not supposed to be a theocracy. It is inconceivable that the Quaid-i-Azam, a thorough secularist would have acquiesced in the implementation of the Shariat law.

The battle cry for Pakistan was for the `creation of a homeland for Muslims` which is not synonymous with an Islamic state. Furthermore, if Pakistan was supposed to be a theocracy why did Maulana Maudoodi and other religious leaders fight its creation tooth and nail?

Actually, the real status of the Pakistan government except for the subversive aberrations of the regimes of Zia ul Haque and of his creation Nawaz Sharif, has been in the middle position between a secular and theocratic state.

In earlier times, non-Muslims of great eminence such as Jamsheed Marker and many others served in positions of influence without any hue and cry from any quarters.

It is high time the religious right in Pakistan realized that the attempts to force theocracy on people will never work except in a setting of totalitarianism and even then the effects will last only as long as the totalitarian regime lasts.

The example of the policies of Zia ul Haque is proof enough. Rather than indulge in this endless and futile debate, let the electorate decide what law they want.

M. HAIDER

New Jersey, US

RE: Reply #: 373

ylh

``Rsaxena`s glaring and bright `realities`

20th century`s Oxymoron: `Secular` India

Thank God I am a Pakistani.

...

Hindu saints come marching in.``

ylh,

Looks like you have very little to be thankful for. Anyway, here`s another gathering that I would like to interest you in.

DECCAN HERALD

Thursday, January 31, 2002



Saint Khwaja Bande Nawaz urs begins

DH News Service

GULBARGA, Jan 30

The ‘urs’ (fair) of the famous Sufi Saint Khwaja Bande Nawaz, who advocated communal harmony throughout his life, began in Gulbarga today with much gusto among his lakhs of Hindu and Muslim devotees who converged here today from different parts of the country, especially from Hyderabad. This is the 597th urs of the saint and is being observed at the historic Bande Nawaz Darga in Gulbarga.

The urs, which will be held for three days till February 1, is expected to attract nearly six lakh devotees. Various religious observations would be undertaken at the ‘Darga Shareef’ premises. Along with this, as is the tradition is from centuries, a handicrafts’ exhibition is also being held. Artists from as far as Kashmir, Delhi, Kanpur, Nagpur, Hyderabad and other places come here during the urs and exhibit their artifacts.

In a sense, Gulbarga is the cradle of Khwaja Bande Nawaz and that of Saint Sharanabas aveshwara.

The two saints, who came out of their respective religious borders and spent their lives in expounding the importance of life and the way to attain peace, are like the two eyes of Gulbarga. It is common to see the devotees of Khwaja Bande Nawaz visit the Sharanabasaveshwara Temple and vice versa.

Khwaja Bande Nawaz was born in Delhi during the rule of Mohammad bin Tughlaq in the 13th century. He later shifted to Daulatabad (now in Maharashtra), when he was 15 years of age, which was then a province of the Tughlaq empire.

By the time the Bahmanis came to Gulbarga, Sultan Feroz Shah Bahmani invited Bande Nawaz to Gulbarga. It has been stated that when Bande Nawaz entered Gulbarga at Aland around AD 1397, the Sultan himself went there and welcomed Bande Nawaz.

Bande Nawaz is credited with authoring nearly 130 books in Urdu, Arabic and Persian languages and innumerable poems. The urs takes place on the 15th Zikhaida (Muslim calendar). The most important functions during the three days of the urs are applying sandal paste to the tomb of Bande Nawaz, which is brought by the devotees in a procession, singing devotional songs, and singing qawalis.

DARGA: The Darga is considered a speciality of the Bahmani architecture. Paintings on the walls and the domes are in Turkish and Iranian style. Some of the relics of Khwaja Bande Nawaz are still preserved in the tomb along with some art pieces of those days. The Nizams of Hyderabad had made it a point to pay annual visits to the Darga. Also, visitors and the VVIPs who visit Gulbarga do not fail to visit the Darga.

Special trains have been introduced for the devotees to come to Gulbarga, while some trains have been extended from Wadi Junction to Gulbarga. Special bus services have been introduced for the urs from parts of the State, including City buses to the Darga from the main bus stand.

Re: YLH #370

``...Jinnah`s secular vision...``

YLH dear, it seems that it will remain just that -- a vision. Sigh!

Pakistan not meant to be `secular`: Musharraf

http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1792000/1792252.stm

Nasah,

As opposed to? Do you mean Indian women? Like the ones constantly obsessed with make up, shoes and holi? I`ve met some dumb Indian women in my time here in San Jose, but I will reserve my judgement on an entire people. Like all wise people, I know more than I admit, but I am going to sit on the side lines, and see ylh make `bhurkas` out of you Indians, armed only with facts and truth.

ylh,

I admire the way you have faced off the chachoonders attacking you. The sword of your logic and facts, has triumphed over hate and lies once again. Well done and Wasalaam, and ofcourse Pakistan Zindabad.

Aisha Fayyazi Sarwari

Anny behanji, maufi chahta hoon. Aap mujhe thappad mat mariye. However, I don`t see any reason to apologize to YLH. He is hypersensitive and that makes him stupid. If you see he hogs 40% of all message space. He can`t make his point and bad mouths everybody who disagrees with him. I have to call a spade a spade.

YLH, you painted a very contrived picture of Jinnah. If you want I can paint you a picture of the devil where he is kindness personified.

How about the following scenario? Don`t you think the following is much more plausible. Jinnah was a power hungry politician. First he tried to share power projecting himself as a secular leader. When that didn`t help he resorted to communalism. That is easily explained by the death of half a million people because of his insistence on partitioning India. If he was really so caring about minorities would he have wanted Pakistan at the cost of million lives. He cared two hoots for minorities and that very well comes out from how the minorities have been wiped out from Pakistan.

You can scream all you want, but you will never be able to explain how at 1947 Pakistan started out with 10% minorities and has reduced them to 2% in 1990.

If Hindus were really as cruel as you say the minorities wouldn`t have increased from 15% in 1947 to the current 20%.

I am sorry that Pakistan has been spawned by the devil himself. But that can`t be an excuse to post zillions of posts that go nowhere.

Fooling naive little Kids aka Akash,

Methinks.. Harimau has made a living out of misinforming and infusing with hatred naive little minds such as our own `masoom Bacha` aka Akash. There are liars, bigots and hate mongers on both sides of the border. The only difference is that the hate mongers on the Pakistani side are confined to Madrassahs... the Indian hate mongers are let loose in cyberspace.

Stop it harimau, stop taking advantage of naive little kids.

PS tvarad, I am waiting for you to bring me the UN resolutions calling for the right of self determination of NWFP, not that it had anything to do with the argument ... as per my last post. Hope you will read it.

Akash,

If twisting historical facts and muddling Historical facts is `knowledge` than I agree with you ... Your friend Harimau is quite knowledgeable... But even a fool can point out the flaws in his extremely bigoted argument. He knows this quite well. Nothing he had said was a new revelation. Its the color that he wishes to color them in, the facts that is... as shown earlier ..

One example: I mentioned the names of the various different parties and groups good and bad which endorsed the Pakistan demand. It included the such great names as `B R Ambedkar` but Harimau, in order to once again `obscure` facts went on a diatribe against the tamils ... as if?

You, akash, have shown yourself at times to be openminded... then don`t be one sided in everything.



tvarad,

Another flawed argument my dear in a long list of flawed arguments arising undoubtedly because of the convolution of facts especially after Harimau has jumped into the fray with his lies.

The Plebiscite that happened in NWFP which determined that province`s intention to join Pakistan shows that the majority of Pathans wanted to join Pakistan. In any event even Bacha Khan`s staunchest supporters are patriotic Pakistanis who wish to serve Pakistan. The frontier Gandhi pledged allegience to Pakistan barely a month after the Independence .. by going to Karachi and meeting Jinnah and offering him his fullest support.

But that was not what I was talking about. A G Khan and his followers have fought to preserve the rights of the tribal areas ... and today Pakistan is being accused for the actions of the very same tribals. A G Khan and his party have fought for `Pushtunvali` or so they claim. This means preserving the male dominated Pushtun Culture in NWFP. Not that other politicians in Pakistan are free of blame, but it is A G Khan`s western educated son, Wali Khan, who has constantly stood in the way of legislation against Honor Killings. In the last local body elections, ANP endorsed the demand in Malakand and Dir to forbid women from voting there. Amazingly, Sadna, another Indian, on this board had launched a diatribe because of this... and yet you Indians go in a circular argument... these are your people ... A G Khan and the like who infringe upon the women`s rights.

RE: Reply #: 365 ylh

``If pointing out the pro-tribal, pro-ethnic, anti-Progress and anti-Women stances of NAP and ANP the parties of Abdul Ghaffar Khan and his (western-educated) heirs is anti progressive and anti-India than so be it...``

I thought that his crime was asking for self-determination for Pathans, much like Pakistanis clamoring for self-determination for the Kashmiris?

Rsaxena`s glaring and bright `realities`

20th century`s Oxymoron: `Secular` India

Thank God I am a Pakistani.



http://asia.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/01/29/tully.column/index.html

Hindu saints come marching in

January 30, 2002 Posted: 12:02 PM HKT (0402 GMT)

Tens of thousands of Hindus gathered in New Delhi vowing to begin construction of the temple

By Mark Tully

NEW DELHI, India (CNN) -- In India Hindu holy men and their supporters have completed a march from Ayodhya to Delhi to press their demand that a temple be built on the site of a mosque pulled down in 1992.

They claim that the Ayodhya site is the birthplace of the Hindu god Rama.

The march was timed to coincide with the start of campaigning in elections for the State Assembly of Uttar Pradesh which could prove crucial to the survival of the central government.

There are fears that the campaign to revive the Ayodhya issue could lead to a dangerous clash between the government and the Hindu holy men, known as saints.

When the mosque in Ayodhya was pulled down an Indian journalist said to me, ``they have killed the chicken which lays the golden egg,`` arguing that replacing the mosque -- a powerful symbol of hatred -- with a temple was not such an emotive issue.

On the day the mosque was pulled down I well remember hearing speaker after speaker describe it as ``a symbol of Hindu slavery,`` and the slogans were full of hatred for Muslims. The current slogan, ``we will build a temple there`` certainly doesn`t seem to have the same pull. When the saints came marching into Delhi they didn`t attract the attention they used to during the height of the campaign to pull down the mosque.

So why has the campaign to build the temple been revived at this time?

There are two possible explanations, both centering on the election to the State Assembly of Uttar Pradesh in three weeks time.

Ayodhya is in Uttar Pradesh, and it is possible that the leaders of the Ram Temple campaign marched to Delhi hoping to force Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee`s hand by demanding a firm commitment this time.

If so they were disappointed. When the saints met Vajpayee, he merely promised to review the legal dispute about the land, a case which has dragged on now for nearly ten years and shows no sign of resolution.

It`s more likely that the leaders of the temple campaign and Vajpayee`s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) strategists planned the revival of the Ayodhya issue together.

With State Assembly elections in India tending to go against the incumbents, the BJP needs issues to take the electorate`s attention off the lackluster record of its government in Uttar Pradesh.

The government certainly hopes that its current bellicose attitude to Islamic Pakistan, its preparations for war, will detract attention from local issues.

Anti-Muslim subtext

There is an anti-Muslim subtext to that message which Ayodhya would reinforce, and the BJP is the only party in the fray which has consistently supported the Rama temple campaign even though it has so far accepted the legal constraints on building it.



Hindu nationalists chant religious slogans

If my journalist friend is right, Ayodhya will only be an issue which attracts support from hardcore supporters of the BJP`s Hindu ideology. History also suggests that this will be so.

The BJP and its predecessor have always had to face the dilemma of needing religious issues to hold their hardcore together but finding that those issues do not attract the wider support needed to come to power in the center or any state.

The saints at the Delhi rally complained that they had brought Vajpayee to power with the Ayodhya issue but he was ignoring his commitment to them.

Whether they are right to say that it was Ayodhya which brought Vajpayee to power or not, he can`t meet their demand because he didn`t win enough seats to form a government on his own and his coalition partners won`t allow him to build the temple.

Even in Uttar Pradesh itself the Ayodhya issue was not enough of a vote-winner to give the BJP anywhere near an absolute majority. There too they have been heading a coalition.

Surface issue



The Hindu saints are trying to force Vajpayee into a corner

But it would be dangerous for Vajpayee and the BJP to assume that because the Ayodhya issue only commands limited support the saints and their temple are mere froth on the surface of Indian politics which can be blown into a big bubble when required and will then subside peacefully.

The BJP maintains that it didn`t want the mosque pulled down without legal sanction. But it created the fervor which led to its illegal destruction and to the riots which wracked India afterwards.

It also undermined the sense of security felt by Muslims by putting in place blatantly partisan riot police, and spotlighted the tarnishing of India`s international reputation as a country which respects all religions and allows freedom of belief and worship.

It may be that Ayodhya is not as hot an issue as it was when the mosque was standing, but so long as the saints are encouraged to believe that the BJP depends on them they may yet decide to carry out their threat to assemble in Ayodhya again and start constructing the temple.

If they do, the consequences for India`s secularism, and for harmony between its different religions, will be grave whether the government uses force to stop the saints or allows them to go ahead.

Syed Ahmed,

No Question about it. Terrorist Advani should be handed over to Pakistan or no deal.

What a country, secular in name, run by Hindu fundamentalists and terrorists. Time for a reality check for India...

Sincerely

Yasser Hamdani

I don`t why I keep calling him Narain, when he is Kuldip Nayar... anyway I apologize:

Here is the article I promised which is the expose of the `Nationalist` Muslims:

http://news.indya.com/indepth2006nayar.html

``They were so steadfast in their conviction to keep India united that they withstood the ridicule of the community. In the forefront were bodies like the Deoband Ulema and the Ahrar-e-Islam, which are still run down in Pakistan.

Their argument against the subcontinent`s division was that as Muslims they were not prepared for a moment to give up their right to treat the whole of India as their domain and to share in the shaping of its political and economic life. To them, it seemed a sure sign of cowardice to give up what was their patrimony and content themselves with a mere fragment of it.``

Harimau,

I think any objective individual who would read your posts and compare them to mine, will see that misinformation oozes out of your every single word, not to mention the fact that despite your hatred, you have been forced to concede every single point that I have made.

Not only that... but now you are pointing out

that Mr. Mandal left Pakistan after Jinnah`s death, something which I have already admitted.. as if I am trying to argue to that Pakistan has lived up to the expectations of Pakistan... Like I said and have said repeatedly my point for pointing out Jinnah`s secular vision is for Pakistan and Pakistan itself. I don`t care what you Indians do or think of him as in Jinnah.

I am shocked at how Indians like you love jumping from argument to argument : let me remind you what the original issue was... Jinnah wanted to make a secular state in Pakistan, and NOT that Pakistan is a secular state. Whether or not Jogindranath Mandal left Pakistan after Jinnah`s death is irrelevant to the argument in question and I have already stated that fact a million times. Does the fact that Jogindranath Mandal leave Pakistan in the 1950s show that Jinnah didn`t want a secular state? No. It shows that Jinnah didn`t get the time to create the required writ of the state and his successors did not have the gutts to stand up to the Mullahs, who only a few years before were allied with Gandhiji.

In case you didn`t read my Jogindranath Mandal Post I had said:

`4) Jogindranath Mandal left Pakistan after Jinnah`s death and Liaqat`s death because he saw that Pakistan was moving away from its original goals of a secular state for all faiths who had previously fought to escape Hindu caste domination.`

So who is the master of Half truths? It is something that liars and bigots like you do quite well Harimau.

In any event here is how your arguments go in circles, you say rather shamelessly:

`Let us take the Tamils and the few Tamil Organizations that you talk about.`

First of all, I had made it clear that Pakistan demand was endorsed by a variety of groups good and bad... since a Hindu bigot like you seems to be hell bent on against the tamils, I am sure they are awesome people...

But why talk about the tamils only? How about the first Law Minister of India? B R Ambedkar? WHy not talk of his endorsement of the Pakistan demand? Why not talk of Scheduled caste Federation? Why not talk of the several christian parties, and why not talk of Jogindranath Mandal`s party?

The point is proved and you have accepted it yourself: Pakistan demand was endorsed by many different political and religious groups with one common fear ie Caste Hindu Domination

Rsaxena,

Again employing `Occam`s Razor` eh? Nothing more Indians like you can do especially because of the little knowledge that you all seem to possess. The reality and facts are quite different from what you think they are ... the fact is simple:

India, the secular state, is ruled by a coalition of Hindu fundamentalist and terrorist parties and is slowly turning its wheels towards a theocracy.

In Pakistan on the other hand the fundamentalists have never gotten more than 2% of the popular vote... and as for the legacy of religious apartheid that Zia`s externally driven motives brought us in the 1980s, is on its way out.

These are the facts.. which your `saddam Hussain syndrome` affliction and your delusions about the greatness of your secular state in name Hindu Theocracy in practise is becoming.

By the way, Congratulations Indians: Vajpayee the secular prime minister of India has agreed to build Ram Mandar in place of the Babri Mosque...

Can anyone remind me last time a Mosque was built in place of a Mandar in the horrible horrible Islamic republic? When I took my friend Prem and my friend Anthony Aschettino to the city of `Sargodha` ... they saw a temple right next to my ancestral home. Now mind you ... No Hindus use that temple... but that temple has stood as it is for the 50 years... in a city which is also the strong hold of the Wahabi Sipah e Sahaba these days.

These are the true realities... which are often missed... because people like you are busy putting up glittering tokens of `secularism`, while pointing at the apparent `intolerance` of Pakistani society, which is only apparent because our extremists shout too much and our moderates are soft spoken.



Remember Saxena ... All that glitters is not Gold.

Harimou#361

You are really quite knowledgeable about Indian independence movement as is clear from your post.

Harimou#361

You are really quite knowledgeable about Indian independence movement as is clear from your post.

There are errors in my last post:

It reads :

`... that is precisely why when Mullah Azad was hired to woo the `traditionalists` there was another colossal miscalculated to think of.`

it should read :

`... that is precisely why when Mullah Azad was hired to woo the `traditionalists` there was another colossal miscalculation to think of.`



and

it reads:

`See Mullah Azad was exactly the kind of Muslims, the Hindus were ready to tolerate...`

it should read:

`See Mullah Azad was exactly the kind of Muslim, the Hindus were ready to tolerate...`