Is Thackeray a Terrorist?

Spring Is Key in South Asia Standoff

Mon Feb 11, 3:20 AM ET

By BETH DUFF-BROWN, Associated Press Writer

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20020211/ap_on_re_as/south_asia_standoff_1

NEW DELHI, India (AP) - It could be the springtime thaw in the Himalayas before India and Pakistan warm up to pulling back from their military standoff.

That`s the season when Islamic militants traditionally cross into India`s portion of Kashmir (news - web sites) to help a Muslim insurgency, and the Indian government is waiting to see if Pakistan lives up to its pledge to curb extremist groups.

Until then, nearly a million soldiers likely will remain facing each other across the 1,800-mile frontier, keeping worries high about the possibility of a fourth war between the South Asian neighbors, both of which now have nuclear weapons.

The standoff has complicated the U.S. campaign against terrorist groups in this region. Pakistan, whose president is to meet with President Bush (news - web sites) this week, has been a key U.S. ally in the Afghan war, and Washington has been working to improve relations with India.

The crisis began after gunmen staged a suicide assault on India`s parliament complex Dec. 13. India`s government blamed the attack on Islamic extremist groups based in Pakistan, and both sides began reinforcing military forces on the border.

In an effort to ease tensions, Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf promised to keep militants from crossing the frontier to launch attacks in the part of Kashmir controlled by India. India says it won`t pull back until it sees proof Pakistan is living up to that vow.

``The only real test of whether the infiltration is going to increase, decrease or remain the same is going to come in April or May, once the snows melt and the passes open up,`` said Rahul Bedi, a New Delhi-based defense analyst who writes for Jane`s Defense Weekly.

Robert Blackwill, the U.S. ambassador to India, said last week that the border crisis has eased since Musharraf`s Jan. 12 speech announcing a crackdown on Islamic militants and promising terrorism in the cause of Kashmir would not be tolerated.

``But the crisis has definitely not gone away,`` Blackwill added. ``It is quite dangerous that both countries have their forces on highest alert. A spark can set off an unintended conflict.``

The leaders of both counties continue to fan the flames with harsh rhetoric over Kashmir, a predominantly Muslim region that India and Pakistan have fought over twice since independence from Britain in 1947.

In a speech last Tuesday to mark Kashmir Solidarity Day in Pakistan, Musharraf accused India of murder, torture and gang rape. Kashmiris on India`s side of the frontier have had ``humiliation of the worst kind heaped upon them through the instrument of state terrorism,`` he said.

He added that Pakistan would continue to extend ``diplomatic, political and moral support to the Kashmiri people in their just struggle`` to break away from India, where Hindus predominate.

Indian Prime Minister Atal Vihari Vajpayee scoffed in response and reiterated India`s charge that Pakistan`s government is sponsoring a proxy war to bring all of Kashmir under Pakistani control.

``They can go on celebrating Kashmir Day for as long as they wish and to their heart`s content,`` Vajpayee thundered at a political rally Wednesday. ``But they can be certain about one thing, which is they will never, ever be able to get Kashmir.``

The Indian government puts the death toll for the 12-year-old rebellion at 32,000 civilians, militants and Indian soldiers. Musharraf estimated Tuesday that at least 70,000 lives had been lost.

Indians worry that Pakistan is getting the best of the international public relations war.

``The major powers, particularly the U.S., do not want these crazy Indians and Pakistanis to get into a nuclear conflict,`` said J.N. Dixit, a former Indian foreign secretary and ambassador to Pakistan. ``Musharraf has made all the right noises and the world goes by noises, and not by facts.``

Riffat Hussain, chairman of defense and strategic studies at Quaid-e-Azam University in Islamabad, Pakistan`s capital, said it is up to India to end the crisis.

``They are the ones who have initiated tensions by massing the troops. And they are the ones who have to determine whether they want to defuse the tension or reciprocate the steps taken by President Musharraf to defuse the tensions,`` Hussain said. ``The ball is in the Indian court.``

Bedi, the Jane`s analyst, said India had ``become a victim of its own rhetoric.``

``Having deployed their troops into a high state of alert, they don`t have a means to pull back without achieving something,`` he said.

MaheshG

Your questions have been answered by Dost Mittar, a countrymen of yours who is fairly objective and unbiased in his assessment.

By Mr. Mahesh G`s warped logic, Gandhi wasn`t much of a hero either.

Reply Yasser #522

Mian, who is trying to provoke you? Parsis came up, I found a few websites I thought were interesting - unfortunately they focused on Bombay rather than talking about other centres - I ended my post saying ``live and learn``. Which is a good thing to do, no? Please believe me - no offence intended to you, to Pakistan or to Jinnah. In case I have inadvertently offended, please accept my unconditional apology.

Reply Rdesikan #525

Don`t know about Pearl Padumsee (btw do you remember her role in Junoon...priceless line about kaghaz ke saatha apne aap ko ponchthe hain...) but the Padumsee she married was/is a Khoja, not a Parsi.

dost-mittar # 531

``In the united Panjab, Muslims hardly ever figured in the list of the first ten in the Panjab University Matric examination; the number of muslims in colleges and professions was far below their proportion in the population; I do not see how that would have substantially changed if we (I was one of them) had not been kicked out of there.``

Dost-mittar, while I do not wish to contradict what you speak from personal experience, I can name one stunning counterexample: Nobel-prize winning physicist Abdus Salam, who had the foundations of his education laid in pre-partition Panjab (uptil an MA in 1946), apparently scored the highest marks ever recorded to the time for the matriculation examination at Panjab University.

``Also, when I see the Pakistani diplomats and representatives on TV, they do at least as good a job, if not better, as their Indian counterparts, while during pre-partition days, most of the articulate Indians were Hindus.``

Here is another counterexample - Sir Zafarullah Khan, again born and educated in united Panjab, who was Pakistan`s first Foreign Minister and a fearsomely articulate diplomat.

Curiously enough, both of these gentlemen were Ahmadiyya Muslims.

Why don`t you counter my arguments first? Then you can call me all kinds of names.

1) What rights that Jinnah was fighting for have been denied to minorities in post independent India?

2) Why are minorities in the so called secular vision of secular Jinnah suffering to the point of non-existence?

Yaar, if yu are making a list of awesome Parsi`s please put Meher Poonawala`s Mom on there, she made the most awesome Patra-nu-macchi :-)

Further on Mahesh G,

It doesn`t make you a bigot to not appreciate Jinnah. What does make you a bigot is calling him the `devil` in classic Ossama Bin Laden style exactly how he calls US the devil, putting up no plausible arguments, denigrating a respected father figure of another people, calling him an idiot, and accusing him of the crimes that your ancestors committed.

That is what makes you a Bigot.

MaheshG

You have no argument ... all your arguments come to naught. The bottom line is that you are a bigot first second and last.

Dost-mittar, please convince me why Jinnah is a Hero to Pakistanis.

Would you make the following statement as well, ``one man`s terrorist is another man`s freedom fighter?``

Since, Paksitanis consider most of the terrorists in Kashmir freedom fighters would you also dismiss this discussion as a difference of perceptions?

-----

YLH, now you are giving me gaaliyan. Where is AnNy behan when you need her? AnNy behan, aap yahan zar tashreef layengi?

Now I am a bigot? Why? Can you define to me what makes somebody a bigot? Does not appreciating Jinnah make me a bigot?

Please let me know. I don`t want to be known as a bigot. I will also appreciating Hitler to get this tag of bigotry removed from my name.

Re vineet 520

Sime big mistakes and gaping holes in your list: Pearl Padamsee`s ex was a parsi, but she is jewish herself. David Davidar is a Tamilian christian -- read his new books for distinct clues. I thought that Vijay Merchant was a hindu and Farukh Engineer a bohra--but I could be wrong.

I see some big names missing: Field Marshall Maneckshaw. The former solicitor general Soli Sorabjee. And what about the late politician Piloo Mody? And what of the Bombay Dyeing Wadia family whose current scion though not a parsi is the grandson of jinnah.

vineet #520
Penaz Masani singer?
Soli Sorabjee Solicitor General?
Nani Palkiwala lawyer, diplomat,economist ?

tvarad,

By your invincible Argument, the current greatest man on Earth is Michael Jackson in close competition with Ossama Bin Laden. There is a reason why Michael Jackson is infinitely more well known than say Pearl Jam or say U2 for example world over. There is a reason why more people know of Michael Jackson all over the world than they know Jim Morrison and the Doors, and it ain`t because Michael Jackson is more talented. You Indians are incredible. Your arguments are incredible.. your logic is incedible. I bow to thy greatness oh great maharaj.

No seriously So what if Gandhi is famous world over? what should I do? When did I put them in competition? I can care less what Gandhi is or isn`t. A Man`s worth is realized by his people, and Gandhi has been forgotten by India, whereas Pakistan is beginning to revisit Jinnah and his dreams for Pakistan.

We have already visited this question of `fame` in the discussion and we have established fame is not necessarily in correlation with greatness, and anyone who thinks so is stupid. What are you trying to prove anyway? I am not even sure why you would once again point out your Devta`s greatness. I agree that you have managed to throw mud in the world`s eye.

By the way, did Nelson Mandela quote bite you or was it Harry S Truman?



Ladies and Gentlemen,

Tvarad`s response is typically Indian. When an Indian loses an argument he claims : `But more people know of Gandhi, More people know of India, no one knows of Pakistan, no one knows of Jinnah`

You can`t fight on logic.. hence you resort to childish popularity contests.



Even more signs of Indian insecurity:

Mr. Vineet`s post on Indian parsis? Can you please explain why you suddenly decided to enlighten us? Was there a competition going on between Pakistan and India ... was it because I mentioned Cowasjee and Bapsi Sidwah? And you had to show that India, which 10 times bigger than Pakistan has 10 times more famous parsis? What the hell is wrong with you people.

All of you are pakistan obsessed diseased Keeras. If we say Jinnah is a great man, you come up with oh but more people know Gandhi. If we celebrate our great parsis you jump in with 50 irrelevant names.

Grow up Indians ... not everything is about you. Don`t flatter yourselves...



In comes Zafar Al Talib

What the hell are you trying to prove to me. I know Parsis in Lahore and Karachi, and I know that they are a lot... a lot more than 2000 .. God give me a break.

Ironically the only parsi on chowk is a Pakistani... Behram Atashband... Why doesn`t anyone ask Behram Atashband how many parsis there are in Pakistan. All in all, your entire Indian nation needs to seek help... all of you are plagued with some kind of complex which leads you to act in this childish and immature way.

Famous Parsis (zoroastrians) of India

AFS Talyarkhan (Cricket Commentator/Broadcaster)

Vijay Merchant (Cricket)

Persis Khambhatta ( Bollywood actress)

Sabira Merchant (TV Host)

JRD Tata (Industrialist)

Jamshedji Tata (Industrialist)

Soli Sorabjee (Lawyer)

Bhikaji Cama (Freedom Fighter)

Pearl Padamsee (Actress)

Feroze Gandhi (Politician)

Farrukh Dhondy (Writer)

David Davidar (Writer)

Rohinton Mistry (writer)

Zubin Mehta (Music Conductor)

Jamshed Kanga (Politician)

Kaizad Gustad (filmmaker)

Sohrab Mody (Actor)

H.B. Wadia (Film maker)

Farrukh Engineer (Cricket)

Homi Bhabha (Scientist)

Homi Sethna (Scientist)

Russy Mody (Cricket)

Polly Umrigar (Cricket)

Nari Contractor (Cricket)

Sooni Taraporevala

Freddy Mercury (Music)

Dadabhai Naoroji (Freedom Fighter)

Mancherjee Bhownagree

Jehangir Sabavala (Painter)

Meher Mistry (Model)

Firdaus Kanga (Writer)

Shehnaz Patel (Actress)

Perizaad Zorabian (Model and Actress)

Sir Phirojshah Mehta

Sir Dinshaw Wacha

Dinshah Irani (Solicitor)

Shiamik Davar (Choreographer) ......

and many many more. Their contribution to India is immense. Such a tiny community but have contributed so much. Same with Indian Jews.

RE: Reply #: 515 ylh

``When I was giving you arguments your countrymen were busy putting up statements of Einstein on Gandhi, now when I do it, it is a crime.``

Not to get into a p * * *ing contest with you on this subject, but there is a reason why there are statues of Gandhi and not Jinnah all over the world and there is a reason why the civil rights movement in the U.S. was patterned after Gandhi`s non-violence movement and not Jinnah`s struggle for ``Muslim rights`` or whatever flavor of the moment struggle you make it out to be.

As for the rest of your spirited defense of what Jinnah wanted for Muslims and minorities, as they say, talk is cheap. I can tell you that Pakistan is the paragon of democracy and emancipation but does that make it true? Show me where the money is.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0205/p09s01-coop.html

A chameleon ally in Pakistan

By Benazir Bhutto

The Sept. 11 assault upon America changed the contours of the world. It also gave Pakistani military dictator Pervez Musharraf an avenue to respectability.

The Pakistani general, who seized power in a coup d`état in 1999, was a principal architect of policies that empowered Osama bin Ladin and strengthened the Taliban regime harboring Al Qaeda. General Musharraf failed to close the militant Islamic schools in Pakistan that filled youngsters with hatred toward the West and were the prime recruiting grounds for Mr. bin Ladin`s war on civilization.



Twice during Musharraf`s tenure as Army chief, a position he still holds, two confrontations have taken place with India that have brought South Asia to the brink of nuclear Armageddon. By marginalizing democratic forces, Musharraf has permitted a political vacuum for the religious parties to fill.

Musharraf has a record of disingenuous manipulation of world public opinion at the expense of basic human and democratic rights. Although he now denounces the contours of a theocratic state in Pakistan, he and his establishment supporters have yet to dismantle the governmental structure on which it rests. Though he now claims containment of terrorists and militants, for years he turned a blind eye to the Islamic groups Lashkar-e-Tayyaba and Jaish-e-Mohammad, which many believe were involved in the Dec. 13 attack on the Indian Parliament.

Musharraf now denounces Pakistan`s ``state within a state`` - the Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI - while he and his military predecessors tasked the ISI to destabilize democratic government in Pakistan and manipulate the electoral process. He denounces the Islamicization of Pakistan, while for years the exploitation of Islam has been the military`s way of stifling the Pakistani people.

In September 2001 he addressed the Pakistani nation to announce that he was joining the ``lesser evil`` (the United States) in the war against terror, suggesting it was necessary to avoid more international support for a greater evil, India. These words were out of touch with the emerging world realities. Both of these ``evil`` forces coalesced to press him to act against the militias and militants that his regime patronized for years.

His administration stood by as Pakistani Taliban supporters printed posters, hired trucks, established camps, and exhorted young Pakistanis to ``join the jihad`` led by Al Qaeda after the war against terror began. Thousands of young Pakistanis crossed over into Afghanistan. Their dead bodies are a monument to the pre-Sept. 11 policies of Pakistan`s dictatorship.

Tragically, there is indifference around the world to the human and political price paid by Pakistanis for the fatally flawed policies of this regime. The West accepts Musharraf for his post-Sept. 11 turnabout on the Taliban and the January 2002 turnabout on terrorism against India. But these strategic somersaults are tarred by unreliability. It is only a matter of time before circumstances change, new opportunistic alliances are created, and Musharraf and his men surely will morph back into their previous incarnation.

Just as we must recall Western miscalculation in abandoning Afghanistan after the Soviet defeat, let us remember the lessons of Iran. The Shah was the West`s surrogate regional policeman for decades. His policies of choking and victimizing democratic forces led to the fundamentalist revolution from which the world has yet to recover.

Musharraf plans to continue his military dictatorship through a manufactured political party in elections next October almost certain to be fraudulent, shutting out from the contest the legitimate political parties and leaders of Pakistan. This will play into the long-term goals of Pakistani Islamic fundamentalism.

Only an internationally monitored, free and fair, party-based election open to all political parties - including the Pakistan People`s Party, which I chair - can create the legitimacy that would derail the fundamentalists` dream of a theocratic state.

The Musharraf military dictatorship, like that of Zia ul Haq`s two decades ago, is an assault on the fundamental human and democratic rights of the Pakistani people. The regime`s confrontation with the values of peace, democracy, human rights, rule of law, and justice erodes civil society.

Unless Musharraf revamps his administration and reaches out to democratic forces in agreeing on the modalities of a fair election and transfer of power, the domestic situation in the country will remain dangerous. In a democratic Pakistan, Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl would not have been kidnapped by a fundamentalist cabal.

Remember that just as democracies do not start wars, democracies do not sustain state-sponsored terrorism. The modus operandi of dictatorship is war, fundamentalism, and terrorism. To contain terror, we must promote democracy.

For the moment, some might find Musharraf`s dictatorship useful. But the United States must proceed with great caution and wisdom. In the words of John F. Kennedy, ``foreign policy requires the long view.`` Ultimately, the West`s blind eye to democracy and human rights can have unintended, unforeseen, and deadly consequences, not just in Pakistan, but for regional and world peace.

• Benazir Bhutto was prime minister of Pakistan from 1988 to 1990 and 1993 to 1996. She is the chairperson of the Pakistan People`s Party, and is based in the United Arab Emirates.

re: dost-mittar

{{MaheshG#498

``Please don`t say things like one person`s hero is another person`s villian. Show me one thing that Jinnah did that could be considered heroic.``

Would you deny that he is a hero to Pakistanis? or even some Indians? (ask Studebaker!)}}

one can be a devil to some, a hero to others...that`s life...even hitler was a hero to some...

Reply YLH # 510

Re: parsis – who, what, where, how many…here are some interesting sites.

http://theory.tifr.res.in/bombay/history/ethnic/parsi.html

“In 1780, 9.2% of the population of Bombay were Parsis. A first wave of migration followed a famine in Gujarat in 1790. By 1812 the number of Parsis in Bombay had quadrupled. In 1837, a second large wave of migrations to Bombay followed a huge fire in Surat. Today, more than 70% of all Parsis live in Bombay.”

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/1998/int/980316/india.html

“Today only about 125,000 people still follow the faith first propagated by the prophet Zarathustra (or Zoroaster) in Central Asia some time between 1500 and 600 B.C., and the largest concentration is in Bombay where Kotwal resides…roughly 55,000.”

You may notice that the two sources’ numbers do not add up properly, but they both say point to the role of Bombay in parsi life. The articles are all a bit depressing, in that they go on and on and the decline in numbers. Sorry – no ready figures on how many parsis where. Vaisai, I didn’t know that there were many parsis settled traditionally in Lahore (only family I can think of is the Bogas, and they moved before Partition?), so I guess live and learn. Perhaps Bina can be persuaded to tell us about it?

``Arre baba, instead of feeding me what other people have said about Jinnah why don`t you give me some arguments.``

Kitnay koi chootiyah hai tu. When I was giving you arguments your countrymen were busy putting up statements of Einstein on Gandhi, now when I do it, it is a crime.

All of Jinnah`s statements and his efforts after partition were directed at getting minorities empowered. This he saw as a fundamental principle for he had championed a minority cause to make Pakistan. Jinnah wanted a secular Pakistan.

Secondly I have shown with facts that Pakistan was endorsed by more non Musim groups than Muslim groups, though almost all of the Muslims stood overwhelmingly with Pakistan. The Pakistan demand was not completely unacceptable, the creation of a muslim majority state and a Hindu Majority state and both of them coming together in a minimal confederation was Iqbal`s and Jinnah`s aim. In 1946 Jinnah agreed to exactly that but Nehru rejected it through his `bombshell` at the news conference.

I don`t know what exactly secular means but Jinnah had 4 important phases in his Political career:

1) Secular Indian Nationalism 1906-1924

2) Indian nationalism on the basis of parity 1934-1940

3) Minority Muslim Nationalism 1940-1947

4) Secularism 1947-1948 after Pakistan.

Much is written about these phases, and alot on these boards as well... but you are too blinded by your hate to read it.

So please drop it now.

Read what freedom at midnight has to say about Jinnah. In any event, Pakistan was a necessity to be rid of bigots like you and Harimau. Read what he has been writing. Thank God for Pakistan.

#509 Sadhana

That was cruel!

You could make grown men cry..

ylh # 497

``... Try counting the years... Pakistan has been a democracy for 31 years and a dictatorship for 24 (which includes the reformist pseudo-dictatorship of Musharraf).``

I did try counting the years. Pakistan was a dictatorship under Ayub Khan from October 1958 to March 1969, and under Yahya Khan from March 1969 through December 1971, for a total of 13 years. It was subsequently a dictatorship under Zia-ul-Haq from July 1977 to August 1988, for a total of 11 years. And it has been a dictatorship from October 1999 to the present, for a total of 2 years and 4 months. Further, the period of Z A Bhutto`s rule as civilian CMLA from December 1971 to August 1973 should also count as 1 year and 8 months of dictatorship. This adds up to at least 28 years of outright dictatorship, leaving at most 27 years worth of non-dictatorial rule.

The various attempts made by Ayub, Zia, and soon no doubt Musharraf to `legitimise` and provide a quasi-democratic veneer to their rule cannot alter the fact that they could not be divested of power via the ballot box. On the contrary, Junejo`s government served at Zia`s pleasure and was eventually dismissed on a bogus pretext, hardly an endorsement of democracy.

One could in fact argue that the various elected Pakistani governments of the 90`s were not true democratic governments either, because they could be, and were, dismissed at will by the unelected establishment. Not a single one of those governments served out its full term. The form of democracy will only be established in Pakistan when governments succeed each other in orderly fashion as the result of normally scheduled elections or loss of majority in a national assembly; and when they possess ultimate authority over the army, rather than the other way around.

YLH,

Arre baba, instead of feeding me what other people have said about Jinnah why don`t you give me some arguments.

Why did Jinnah want Pakistan?

Your answer: Because he wanted Muslims to have the same rights as Hindus which he was sure wouldn`t have been possible in a united India.

I said: Please show me one right that has been denied to Muslims in post independent India that Jinnah was fighting for.

Your answer: Because he wanted to ensure the rights of the minorities. Because he was secular.

I said: Please show me how the rights of minorities have been protected in Pakistan. In fact, they have been hounded so much that they have practically non-existent.

So, please explain to me how was Jinnah heroic. Seems to me all his promises were main words. All his bugaboos were just those.



BTW, freedom at midnight blames Muslims for starting the violence during partition. A tidbit for you.

Shammi dearest,

I think my parents alone know more than 2000 parsis in Pakistan. My dentist in Pakistan was a very famous parsi. In 1980 there were close 200 000 parsis in the whole world, close to 60 000 of which lived in Pakistan.

Please also consider that out of the three major centers of Parsis in the Subcontinent 2 are located in Pakistan ie Lahore and Karachi. Furthermore, we know that Parsis have been very active in Pakistan... and Parsis, in the separate electorates used to win the seat reserved for Parsis, sikhs and buddhists almost always. Now there is a very visible sikh community. We know some of the Major parsis by name, Ardeshir Cowasjee, Bapsi Sidwah.

100 000 is a very accurate estimate of the total strength of parsis in Pakistan.



Dost Mittar:

Not Druze, but people of the similar beliefs are found in South Baluchistan... I forgot what they are called but their similarity with the druze struck me.

hariharan #505
``Now, Musharraf is saying that he owes his position to Allah. In other words, what he is trying to say, is that only Allah can ask him to leave his office after 5 more years in office.``

As long as he understands that Allah has also put the Indian Army at his country`s borders..

Re: YLH

``...close to hundred thousand parsis,..``

I read somewhere that Pakistan has 2000 Parsees, and India has close to 100,000. There are less than 200,000 Parsees throughout the world.

BB has spoken re Musharraf. Read this opinion piece in CSM dated 01/05/02.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0205/p09s01-coop.html

Thanks

http://www.hindustantimes.com/nonfram/050202/dlfor60.asp

Now, Musharraf is saying that he owes his position to Allah. In other words, what he is trying to say, is that only Allah can ask him to leave his office after 5 more years in office.

Thanks

im zuts glad they menson not kasmir

http://www.amnesty-usa.org/stoptorture/india_fear_and_discrimination.pdf

YLH,

But I am not that good of a follower of Jinnah so I will do what you are unwilling to do.

Dear Mahesh G:

GANDHI JI KI PYARI BATEIN:

a) CASTE SYSTEM:

GANDHI JI:

`Varnashram (Caste system) is inherent in human nature and Hinduism has simply reduced it to a science. It does attach by birth. A man cannot change his Varna by choice.`

(C.Sankaran Nair, Gandhi and Anarchy, Madras, Tagore and company 1922 Page 68)

Vithalbhai Patel moved a Bill against Caste system in 1918, which was supported tooth and nail by Mohammed Ali Jinnah. But my dear friends what was the great Mahatma`s reaction to it? He opposed it.

Gandhi ji said:

`the seeds of swaraj can be found in Caste system different castes are like different sections of a military division.`

(Dr BR AMBEDKAR `Gandhi or Gandhism`, Jullunder, Bheema Patrika Publications, 1970 Page 128)

Then on page 152 of the above mentioned book we find the following quote :

`To the Shudra who only serves (the high caste) as a matter of religious duty and who will never own any property, who indeed as no ambition to own anything, is deserving of many obeisances .. the very God will shower down flowers on him`

So here we have Gandhi and his benevolent stance on Caste system completely EXPOSED!

Now about Muslims

Gandhi Ji says :

`Prohibition against intermarriage, and interdining is essential for the rapid evolution of the soul`

and then if you read on you will find this GEM:

`(Just) like we perform the act of answering the call of nature in seclusion so also the act of taking the food should be done in seclusion`

(BR Ambedkar`s book Gandhi or Gandhism)

Gandhi Ji said:

`My own experience confirms that the Musalman as rule is a bully, and Hindu as a role is a coward. As a Hindu I am more ashamed of Hindu Cowardice than Muslim bullying` (Young India May 29th 1924)

And it is an accepted fact that `shudhi and Sanghtan` movements were instrumental in breaking the thin fabric of Unity ... so let us now examine Gandhi`s role in that

Gandhiji, :`Sanghtan is a really sound movement. Every community is entitled, indeed bound to organize itself as a seperate entity`

(Young India January 6th 1927)

Gandhi`s famous comments about the role of Religion in Politics:

`Politics divorced from Religion is like a corpse only fit to be buried` Bandopadhya `Social and Political Thought of Gandhi, Calcutta, Allied Publishers

Conclusion: Gandhi was the Devil.

(I am just playing the bad cop)

Dear Mahesh G:

GANDHI JI KI PYARI BATEIN:

a) CASTE SYSTEM:

GANDHI JI:

`Varnashram is inherent in human nature and Hinduism has simply reduced it to a science. It does attach by birth. A man cannot change his Varna by choice.`

(C.Sankaran Nair, Gandhi and Anarchy, Madras, Tagore and company 1922 Page 68)

Vithalbhai Patel moved a Bill against Caste system in 1918, which was supported tooth and nail by Mohammed Ali Jinnah. But my dear friends what was the great Mahatma`s reaction to it? He opposed it.

Gandhi ji said:

`the seeds of swaraj can be found in Caste system different castes are like different sections of a military division.`

(Dr BR AMBEDKAR `Gandhi or Gandhism`, Jullunder, Bheema Patrika Publications, 1970 Page 128)

Then on page 152 of the above mentioned book we find the following quote :

`To the Shudra who only serves (the high caste) as a matter of religious duty and who will never own any property, who indeed as no ambition to own anything, is deserving of many obeisances .. the very God will shower down flowers on him`

So here we have Gandhi and his benevolent stance on Caste system completely EXPOSED!

Now about Muslims

Gandhi Ji says :

`Prohibition against intermarriage, and interdining is essential for the rapid evolution of the soul`

and then if you read on you will find this GEM:

`(Just) like we perform the act of answering the call of nature in seclusion so also the act of taking the food should be done in seclusion`

(BR Ambedkar`s book Gandhi or Gandhism)

Gandhi Ji said:

`My own experience confirms that the Musalman as rule is a bully, and Hindu as a role is a coward. As a Hindu I am more ashamed of Hindu Cowardice than Muslim bullying` (Young India May 29th 1924)

And it is an accepted fact that `shudhi and Sanghtan` movements were instrumental in breaking the thin fabric of Unity ... so let us now examine Gandhi`s role in that

Gandhiji, :`Sanghtan is a really sound movement. Every community is entitled, indeed bound to organize itself as a seperate entity`

(Young India January 6th 1927)

Gandhi`s famous comments about the role of Religion in Politics:

`Politics divorced from Religion is like a corpse only fit to be buried` Bandopadhya `Social and Political Thought of Gandhi, Calcutta, Allied Publishers



Conclusion: Gandhi was the Devil.

(I am just playing the bad cop)

MaheshG,

Once again, you have exposed the bigoted Mindset and mentality that plagues you. even the most rabid Jinnah haterz have come to accept that Jinnah was self less and incorruptible... yet you, a Hindu Bigot with little knowledge and even little sense persists with his nonsense. I can make similar statements about Gandhi... but then there will no difference between the follower of Jinnah (ie Brave, just and incorruptible) and the so called follower of Gandhi.

``Jinnah cared two hoots for minority rights. All he wanted was power and he didn`t care who he sacrificed to achieve that. He was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, Muslims and Hindus alike.``

No honest historian, and no contemporary of Jinnah accused him of that. You were `not even a gleam in your mother`s eye when Jinnah was around` who do you think you are? Do you really think your verdict counts? Jinnah`s name has become synonymous with incorruptiblility. Does it bite you so much? Even the book that Indians love to quote so much `fREEDOM AT midnight` calls Jinnah that. Next time before you make such a stupid and absolutely wrong statement try reading the facts...

As for Hindus and Muslims massacred... You are welcomed to check the figures from any source. Many more Muslims died than Hindus. It is a Historic fact. Pick up `Freedom at Midnight` by LA Pierre and Collins, the Favorite authors of India..



TRIBUTES TO QUAID E AZAM MUHAMMAD ALI JINNAH THE REAL TRUE HERO:

Jinnah unlike others needs no endorsements but here are some anyway:



HARRY S TRUMAN US President

``[He was] the originator of the dream that became Pakistan, architect of the State and father of the world`s largest Muslim nation. Mr. Jinnah was the recipient of a devotion and loyalty seldom accord to any man.``



NELSON MANDELLA Ex-South African President

`Ali Jinnah is a constant source of inspiration for all those who are fighting against racial or group discrimination.` (Nelson Mandela had come to Islamabad in 1995 and had insisted on including Karachi as a destination to visit Jinnah`s Grave and his house in Karachi where upon reaching he drove straight to the Quaid`s Mazar) At another occasion while addressing the ANC Mandela mentioned three names Ali Jinnah, Gandhi and Nehru as sources of inspiration for the movement against apartheid.





BILL CLINTON

(I am) A committed friend who will stand with the people of Pakistan as long as you seek the stable, prosperous, democratic nation of your founder`s dreams. More than half a century ago, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, shared that vision as he addressed Pakistan`s constituent assembly. ``If you work together``, he said, ``in a spirit that everyone of you is first, second and last a citizen with equal rights, privileges, and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make.`` Pakistan can have a future worthy of the dreams of the Quaid-e-Azam. If you choose that future, the United States will walk with you. I hope you will make that choice. And I pray for our continued friendship, for peace, for Pakistan. Pakistan Zindabad.





SAROJINI NAIDU

a sincerity of purpose and the lasting charm of a character animated by a brave conception of duty and an austere and lovely code of private honour and public integrity... Tall and stately, but thin to the point of emaciation, languid and luxurious of habit, Mohammad Ali Jinnah`s attenuated form is a deceptive sheath of a spirit of exceptional vitality and endurance. Somewhat formal and fastidious, and a little aloof and imperious of manner, the calm hauteur of his accustomed reserve but masks, for those who know him, a naive and eager humanity, an intuition quick and tender as a woman`s, a humour gay and winning as a child`s. Pre-eminently rational and practical, discreet and dispassionate in his estimate and acceptance of life, the obvious sanity and serenity of his worldly wisdom effectually disguise a shy and splendid idealism which is of the very essence of the man. (Sarojini Naidu, Advocate of Hindu Muslim Unity)



GANDHI

`Jinnah is Incorruptible and Brave` (Interview with gandhi Louis Fischer)





NEHRU

The old Advocate of Unity, Mr. M.A.Jinnah, ... was advanced than his colleagues, and stood head and shoulders above them. (Paraphrased: Quoted from his book freedom at midnight)





SARAR CHANDRA BOSE

``Mr. Jinnah`` he said on his death on 1948, ``was great as a lawyer, once great as a Congressman, great as a Leader of Muslims, great as a world politician and diplomat, and greatest as of all as a man of action. By Mr. Jinnah`s passing away, the world has lost one of the greatest statesmen and Pakistan its life-giver, philosopher and guide.``



This one will Bite you particularly hard:

M C RAJAH:

``All religions hold that God sends suitable people into the world to work out his plans from time to time and at critical junctures. I regard Mr Jinnah as the man who has been called upon to correct the wrong ways in which the people of India have been led by the leadership of Mr Gandhi. Congress took a wrong turn when it adopted wholesale the non cooperation programme of Mr Gandhi and assumed an attitude of open hostility towards Britain and tried to infusew the minds of people a spirit of defiance of law and civil disobedience more of less thinly veiled under a formula of truth and non violence. Moreover by Mahatmafying Mr Gandhi it appealed to the idolatorous sperstition of the Hindus, thus converting the religious adherence of the Hindu section of the population to the Mahatma into political support of his non cooperation movement.While this strategy was of some avail in hustling the British Government to yield more and more it divided the people into Hindu and non hind! u sectionsIn these circumstances a man was needed to stand up to congress and tell its leaders that their organization however powerful numerically and financially doesnot represent the whole of India. I admire Mr Jinnah and feel grateful to him because in advocating the cause of the Muslims he is championing the cause of all the classes that are in danger of bein crushed under the steam roller of the caste Hindu majority, acting under the inspiration and orders of Mr Gandhi `` (25th December 1940, 9 months After the Pakistan Resolution, Seen here are Scheduled castes of India)

But I suppose Mahesh G knows better than all of these people.

YLH,

[[[[[Mahesh G,

Looks to me that you are either the son or a grandson of some communal murderer whose constant guilt is now making you lash out at Pakistan`s founder...]]]]]

AnNy behan, YLH mujhe gaali de raha hai. Aap YLH sahib ko zara sambhaliye. Ek thaapad quafi hai.

[[[[ Let me tell you the standard for guilt `I took the Gun, and I shot my wife`.

Jinnah`s crime was only asking for the right of self determination for his constituents and his group. The result of that right of self determination was unfavorable to certain elements particularly Hindus and Sikhs and they started killing everyone. ]]]]]

Oh yeah. Please explain to me what rights was Jinnah fighting for that have been denied to the minorities in post independent India? Name one. If Hindus were going to be such villians then why is that they are the ones who have suffered at the hands of Muslim victims in Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Jinnah cared two hoots for minority rights. All he wanted was power and he didn`t care who he sacrificed to achieve that. He was responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, Muslims and Hindus alike.

Please show me proof for you statement that Hindus and Sikhs were responsible for the massacre during partition. Don`t just pull stuff out of thin air like you do with that number 7.



Dost-Mittar,

Please don`t say things like one person`s hero is another person`s villian. Show me one thing that Jinnah did that could be considered heroic. It`s okay to appear unbiased but it should be done with reason.

Harimau,

Harimau... you didn`t quote anything from Hodson which proves any of your claims... you said Mandal was appointed as a counter move, but what of his appointment after partition, what was Jinnah countering then. You know that you selectively quote Hodson, and none of your nonsense makes any sense far from proving your point. Hodson`s view of Jinnah is clear... an eminently rational man who was selfless, honest and a man of integrity. Nothing that you have quoted proves otherwise. You know it very well. And you know that you have lost the debate.

By the way ... you still haven`t answered the Question ... how does it feel to lose to someone half your age?



Rsaxena,

You are such a pathetic little creature with your pathetic little notions that you are not beyond stating lies: `Pakistan has mostly been a dictatorship`... Try counting the years... Pakistan has been a democracy for 31 years and a dictatorship for 24 (which includes the reformist pseudo-dictatorship of Musharraf). Please don`t inform us of your doubts. Like I said you are just not important...

As for my debate... I think I got the endorsement of some of the most rational people of chowk for example Sigalph, who thought my arguments were masterly. So I just don`t care what a little fool like yourself who claims to have been educated at Ivy League (Highly Doubt) thinks... what did you do there? were you the jamadar?



Dost Mittar,



``in saying this I do not want to take away from the fact that you have undoubtedly broadened the knowledge of many of us regarding the multi-faceted personality of Jinnah, both directly by providing several incidents and quotations from and about him and indirectly by the reaction to those quotes by your adversaries who have produced their own plethora of quotations and incidents``

Thankyou :)

``In India, Gandhi is nothing more than a statutory holiday and Jinnah a fading memory. In the rest of the world, Gandhi has become a symbol of non-violent civil disobedience against oppression and, to those who know, Jinnah is the creator of Pakistan. In Pakistan, of course, Jinnah is obviously held in much greater esteem than Gandhi.``

Agreed. Now here is the point. A man`s greatness is judged by his impact on his own peoples` conscience. So you see to me Gandhi`s popularity all around the world is irrelevant, what are the people of Gandhi doing? testing Agni 3? is that nonviolence? So Gandhi is indeed irrelevant to me since, his positive legacy has been forgotten by India, the neighbor of my country, which has made India into an arrogant and raging bull. Jinnah on the other hand is making a come back in Pakistan, for he too was over the past 20 odd years merely a picture on the wall and name. His vision for Pakistan has become relevant again.

``(in this case though, the ``jews``, i.e., the Hindus were not that innocent and exacted their own revenge by killing and throwing out million of Muslims from India)``

I am afraid I have to disagree. Hindus and Sikhs in Pakistan by all genuine Historical accounts became the target of persecution after harrowing stories of massacres came from India... this is not to say that what happened with Hindus in Pakistan was justified because that was not what Pakistan was all about. In any event it is a well known fact which community lost more people.. but such facts are cruel and heartless to bring up. So I don`t want to re-open any old wounds.

``This does not mean that secularism has no relevance for Pakistan. It does, and so your fight is worthwhile; but its import is in the separation of religion from statecraft; the rights of minorities are merely symbolic in this fight.``

Agreed. Kind of like post 1922 Turkey, where it was a homogenously Muslim society yet it became secular. However, to say minorities in Pakistan are like daal mein namak is little too much.. unlike you like your daal too salty.

The last census that happened in pakistan and whose results were revealed was in 1981. So no one, not even President Musharraf, knows what the real figures are... but according to my own estimate which I have come up with... Pakistan has close to 4 Million Christians (earlier estimate of 3 was based on a different figure), 1.5 Million Hindus, half a million sikhs, close to hundred thousand parsis, and a Hundred thousand Buddhists.

Furthermore, secularism is necessary simply because even in Islam there are 73 sects with very different interpretations of Islam, and almost all of these sects are present in Pakistan in some number.

Sincerely

Yasser Latif Hamdani

Sigalph #482,

Please explain to me Jinnah`s greatness. I am all ears. I promise I will listen carefully and not dismiss anything you say offhand.

Pakistan shifts proxy war to India`s east

By Sultan Shahin

http://atimes.com/ind-pak/DB06Df01.html

Map

NEW DELHI - The Indian government is gradually coming round to the view that the attack on policemen guarding the American Center in Kolkata on January 22 marks the shifting of the theater of Pakistan`s proxy war.

Though official spokespeople continue to claim that militant infiltration in Kashmir is continuing on the previous scale, a feeling is growing that the focus of Pakistan-sponsored terrorist activities is now moving to India`s east and northeast, as Pakistan may not be able to defy strong international pressure to close shop in Kashmir.

A realization is gradually dawning upon India`s security officials that Pakistan`s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency has been preparing for such an eventuality for a long time. As well-informed analyst Hiranmay Karlekar writes in his column in the Pioneer newspaper (January 25): ``The ISI, in collaboration with sections of Bangladesh`s intelligence outfits and fundamentalist Islamic organizations, has been training and supporting northeast Indian insurgent outfits like the United Liberation Front of Asom [Assam] (ULFA), both Khaplang and the Isaac Swu-Thuingaleng Muivah groups of the National Socialist Council of Nagaland (NSCN), Bodo rebels in Assam and tribal insurgents in Tripura for years.

``Its plans include the separation of the whole of northeastern India from the rest of the country and the creation of an autonomous Islamic state in the northeast comprising parts of Assam, Nagaland and Myanmar. Should it ever come close to success in implementing its plans, trouble in the Siliguri-Islampur corridor, hampering movement of troops and supplies to the northeastern states, would be of critical advantage to it.``

According to Indian government sources, the basic objective of the ISI in Bangladesh is intelligence encirclement of India. It uses the strategy of supporting and fomenting insurgency in India`s northeast and encouraging militants of various shades in different parts of India. It makes direct use of Bangladesh territory to infiltrate its agents and saboteurs across the border.

Of particular advantage to the ISI is the long and porous India-Bangladesh border which makes crossings either way easy, particularly when there are elements all along it to facilitate the process. According to reports in the Pakistani media, India has recently moved more forces to the India-Bangladesh border. This may be part of an effort to stop or at least reduce infiltration of militants from this border.

The recent incident in Kolkata is not the first of its kind in West Bengal. On December 22, 1994, two boys in Domkal in West Bengal`s Murshidabad district discovered several bombs very near a temporary dais from which Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, now chief minister of West Bengal and then an important minister, was to address a public meeting on December 24 along with other functionaries of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) (CPI-M).

This may explain why Bhattacharjee has gone out of his way in condemning and acting against the latest terrorist outrage, though his colleagues in the party were not inclined initially to implicate Pakistan or the ISI. CPI-M politburo member Sitaram Yechury had indeed accused Home Minister Lal Krishan Advani as having ``jumped the gun`` in pointing fingers at the ISI without adequate information.

Having investigated the Domkal incident, reports Karlekar, India`s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) concluded that an organization called Ahl-e-Hadith (AeH) was involved. The same organization, it further believed, was behind five explosions that occurred on trains in different parts of India on December 6, 1993, the first anniversary of the demolition of the Babri Mosque, and 42 others - not including the serial bomb blasts in Bombay on March 12, 1993 - in various parts of the country from 1988 to 1993.

One reason for this conclusion was that the explosives used in the Domkal bombs were the same as in the five train and 42 other blasts. The Domkal bombs also had the same kind of timers the five railway bombs had. Besides, the other 42 blasts had occurred in areas marked by acute communal tension where they could have triggered riots. Murshidabad district had been such an area for quite some time then. The CBI also believed that three of the five people sought for questioning in connection with the blasts were hiding in West Bengal.

The CBI was convinced that the ISI was behind the bombs. The conculsion is corroborated by Yossef Bodansky in his book Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America. ``The ISI actively assists bin Laden in the establishment of an Islamic infrastructure in India ... The primary venues for the distribution of Islamic literature and incitement material are the institutions run by the Ahl-i-Hadith religious charity which is associated with Lashkar-i-Toiba, an Islamist Kashmiri organization.`` Under the command of Abdul Karim Tunda, the Lashkar-i-Toiba is already responsible ``for several bomb explosions``.

Thus by the end of 1994, according to Karlekar`s information, the ISI, which had started operating with the utmost freedom in Bangladesh after Begum Khaleda Zia became prime minister in 1991, had already established a significant presence in West Bengal and was even in a position to shelter wanted persons from other parts of India in the state. Using Bangladesh as its springboard and aided by West Bengal state government`s complacency, it extended its network far and wide in the state in the next few years, using it as a staging area for its agents entering from Bangladesh to carry out terrorist acts in other parts of India and for sending people from different parts of India to Bangladesh for onward journey to Pakistan and Afghanistan for training as agents. It established ``safe houses``, planted ``sleepers`` - agents who merged with the local people and remained dormant for long periods before acting - and centers for recruiting agents.

The ISI built up a substantial presence in several areas of Kolkata and almost all districts of the state bordering Bangladesh - with the Siliguri subdivision of Darjeeling district in the north receiving particular attention. All this was dramatically brought to light in January 1999, when Delhi police arrested Syed Abu Nasir, a Bangladeshi who had crossed over from Bangladesh to bomb the US Embassy in Delhi and the US Consulate General in Chennai. He reportedly revealed during interrogation that he and his team of nine had gathered in Kolkata in December 1998. From there, the three Indian members had been sent to Siliguri to establish a support base in collaboration with ISI agents stationed there, while the six ``Afghans`` - a generic term used to signify Afghans as well as various Arab and other terrorists trained in Afghanistan by al-Qaeda - went to Chennai. The three Indians who went to Siliguri were subsequently arrested while the six ``Afghans`` managed to disappear.

The ISI`s activities in the area attracted further attention during the Kargil war when a blast in a train in North Jalpaiguri station on June 24, 1999, directed at a group of soldiers traveling to Kashmir, killed two of them and injured 16. There were several other attempts to sabotage the movement of troops and equipment from northeastern to northwestern India. These incidents clearly underlined the reason for the ISI`s activities in Siliguri. Northeastern India`s sole direct land link with the rest of the country passes through the subdivision, particularly the narrow Siliguri-Islampur corridor.

Indeed, according to Indian intelligence sources, the ISI has long been providing assistance to insurgents in the northeast in a variety of ways, including helping them run their training camps in Bangladesh. After the installation of the Awami League government in Bangladesh in 1996, the Indian insurgent groups were asked to leave Bangladeshi soil. But dominant groups such as the National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isaac Swu/Muivah (NSCN-I/M), ULFA, All Tripura Tiger Force (ATTF) and National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) continued to function in that country in a more covert manner by forging local-level links with Bangladeshi security forces.

Initially, in March/April 1997, Indian intelligence sources perceived some decline in insurgent activities and the militants, mainly belonging to ULFA and NSCN-I/M, had started winding up their overt activities and shifting their camps temporarily to Myanmar. But through support from such parties as the Bangladesh National Party (BNP), Jamaat-e-Islami (JEI) and Freedom Party (FP), the militants started reorganizing themselves and re-established their camps in Bangladesh.

The ISI has managed to establish a rather intricate network in Bangladesh, thanks to the presence of the residue of pro-Pakistan sympathizers after 1971 and the influence it wielded between 1975 and 1996 when the Awami League was out of power. The period from 1991 to 1996, when Khaleda Zia was prime minister of the BNP government, proved particularly fruitful. During this period the ISI was not only able to subvert various local agencies, including the army, but also ran training camps for northeast Indian insurgents with the consent of the government.

After the Awami League government took power in June 1996, there was a review of government policy and official patronage of such anti-India activities was withdrawn. However, on account of loyalties built up over the years, and religious indoctrination and rampant corruption in the ranks of both Indian and Bangladeshi security forces, networks continued to facilitate movement of Indian insurgent leaders and also supply these groups with arms.

The ISI obviously realizes the importance of mobilizing anti-India and pro-Pakistan political elements in Bangladesh and bringing them to power with a view to securing state patronage. It has therefore nurtured the BNP while in and out of power, shoring it up up politically and financially. It has done the same with various rightist parties such as the FP and JEI. More recently the ISI has been playing a leading role in patching together an alliance between these rightist parties and assisting them in devising and launching a strategy to dislodge the Awami League from power.

After June 1996, on account of an unfriendly party being in power in Bagladesh, the ISI has had to give up its earlier brazenness and work covertly through various channels. While some operations are still controlled from the local Pakistani mission - where the ISI unit was said to be headed by A H Qureshi, a minister-rank official - a larger part of anti-Indian activities are conducted through various mosques, madrasas (seminaries) and attached training camps across the country, and through Pakistani agents and facilitators placed in various private organizations and political parties. There has also been liberal use of the country`s press for anti-India propaganda with communal overtones. The aim is to keep anti-India feelings high so that no government is ever in a position to accede to Indian requests for information about northeastern militants, and to stalemate Indian influence in Bangladesh.

The ISI makes use of prominent Bangladeshi names and institutions for its purposes. Indian officials cite the example of the Beximco Group - which employs about 600 Pakistanis and whose owners, Sohel and Solman Rahman, are alleged to have pro-Pakistan sympathies. Beximco Group has been allegedly used as conduit for funds to the BNP. Prominent local politicians Salauddin Qader Chowdhury, Syed Iskander (brother of Khaleda Zia) and Anwar Zahed, who are ensconced in the BNP, are alleged to have a well-documented history of indulging in arms trafficking into India`s northeast.

A number of other commercial establishments, namely Ibnesina, Islami Bank, Habib Bank, Pak Land and Lever Brothers, with known Pakistani links, and front organizations of fundamentalist parties like the JEI, Tablighi Jamaat, Jamaat-e-Tulaba and Jamaat-ul-Mudarreseen, allegedly serve the interests of the ISI. Moreover, Pakistan sympathizers within the army, various intelligence agencies and the bureaucracy continue to aid the ISI.

Indian officials allege that apart from intelligence operations conducted by Pakistan`s mission in Dhaka, agents are being sent directly from Pakistan for specific tasks such as training, briefing, supervising, providing funds, and meeting with militants. Some people collaborate with the ISI for political and religious reasons. Salahuddin Qader Choudhary and his brother Giasuddin Choudhary - both BNP leaders and alleged arms smugglers - are actively involved in abetting fundamentalists, militant groups such as Harkat-ul-Jihad, and rightist political parties such as JEI and IOJ. Notorious terrorist Abdul Karim Tunda from Chittagong, and Pakistan-trained alleged terrorist Asif Khan, who visited India to foment trouble during the last general elections, fall into this category.

The ISI is also said to have connections with non-governmental organizations such as Islamic Relief Organization and Junudul Muqawat Al Islamiya, as well as with madrasas such as Rabeta in Ramu, Cox`s Bazaar. The latter is a nerve center of all ISI operations in Greater Chittagong. Pakistani agents regularly visit and hold meetings there with Indian outfits like ULFA, NSCN-I/M, NLFT, and All Tripura Tiger Force.

The ISI`s intelligence operations include provision of funds to political parties - Gholam Azam of JEI and Salahuddin Qader Choudhary of BNP are allegedly to have received huge amounts for fomenting agitations - and militant outfits on Bangladesh, India and Myanmar. It also organizes recruitment and dispatch of potential mujahideen from madrasas and the youth wings of JEI, Shibir, IOJ etc, for induction into Indian territory to create disturbances.

If Indian apprehensions are correct, the east and northeast may present even greater challenges for Indian security agencies than does insurgency in Kashmir. If reports of India having increased its strength along the border with Bangladesh are correct, it may mean that India is already conscious of the dangers represented by ISI networks and its ambitions in the area. Since Pakistan does not have a border with India in the east, India may not even be able to denounce this in the familiar terminology of cross-border terrorism.

Ref bong_dongs #: 488

[#483

Oh, the article is by Praful Bidwai (our very own wanna-be Chomsky)! should have guessed :-) ]

And published in Frontline, the magazine of the ``Hindu`` group of publications. N. Ram is famous for going to China after May 1998 and publishing an entire issue devoted to why India should give up its nuclear arms and kiss the Chinese arse.

Ref ylh #: 479

[That is exactly what Harimau`s supporters notable Rsaxena, Akash and MaheshG are doing. Harimau knows well that he is bs-ing out of his rear orifice, but he is taking advantage of the naivety of the people.]

Not only have I quoted Hodson accurately, I have even given you the numbers of the pages from which I have quoted Hodson on Jinnah. So you cannot accuse ME of BS-ing.

You may choose to quote Hodson on Jinnah from a different page. I don`t have a problem with that. But I do have a problem when you argue that Hodson`s analysis of Jinnah`s motives for certain actions is wrong because Hodson`s overall opinion of Jinnah is different. The fact is Jinnah was a good -- not brilliant -- tactician who knew how to outlast those opposing him but that doesn`t absolve him of the crimes committed by him or in his name. As for ``brilliant`` lawyer, the man had no answer when every single argument he advanced for partitioning the country was used by Nehru, Patel and Mountbatten for partitioning the provinces and giving him a ``moth-eaten`` Pakistan.

As for not wanting to deal with me anymore, I remember you saying triumphantly ``End of debate`` quite a few posts back and then coming back into the fray. You will be back for more.

re: ylh

your broken record never stops, does it? anyway, go ponder on reality...pakistan is and mostly has been a dictatorship for much of its existence..the number of religious minorities has plummeted...so much for jinnah`s dreams, even if they were real (highly doubt)...

re: shankar

{1) I WILL include Kashmiri hindus, sikhs & buddhists in my movement.

2) My vision for an independant Kashmir should be a secular, democratic country, FREE of meddling from either India, Pakistan or China.

3) My message should be; We are KASHMIRIS...muslims, hindus, sikhs or buddhist..DOESNT MATTER...We want to be INDEPENDANT..}

...there are two HUGE problems with that...first, most hindu and buddhist kashmiris have been driven out of their homes by the jehadis...second, no hindu or buddhist kashmiri would ever support such BS, and that is why they have never been asked to...

RE: Reply #: 483 cutandpaste

``Nationalism gone berserk

...This is the story of two boys, Pinku (10) and Rinku (17), who wanted to become the ``heroes of the nation`` by avenging the December 13 attack on Parliament House - by assassinating Pervez Musharraf, no less.``

Actually, I find the story more amusing than serious. I am sure there are plenty of folks in Pakistan itself with magnitudes more firepower than Bollywood inspired imaginations who would love to have a go at Musharaff. Like the numerous lovers that he and his coterie jilted at the altar - the Taliban, JEM, LET, Al Qaeda.

But not to worry. If the Pakistani Military leadership is known for anything, it`s for survival instinct. As someone said, Pakistan is a cat on it`s fifth or sixth life.

This story is being highlighted to give the great Islamic emancipator a tinge of vulnerability in his newly anointed role of statesman.

#483

Oh, the article is by Praful Bidwai (our very own wanna-be Chomsky)! should have guessed :-)

re tahmed

``Agent YLH is specially trained to confuse people like you!!``

ha ha. And trained to confuse people with enormously winded postings that`s enough to cause narcolepsy. Trained to inflict death by boredom!

re tahmed

``Agent YLH is specially trained to confuse people like you!!``

ha ha. And trained to confuse people with enormously winded postings that`s enough to cause narcolepsy. Trained to inflict death by boredom!

MaheshG #481 to ylh ``YLH, tell me what fascination does the number 7 ``

This is a Pakistani conspiracy to cause cross-border confusion, and YLH is Agent 007 of ISI who has been licensed to confuse you. That`s right, you MaheshG.

And what is the significance of the letter 7 in all this, you may ask. I cannot reveal state secrets, but you may wish to count the letters in your nick, MaheshG, which is also 7! Be afraid, MaheshG! Be verry afraid!! Agent YLH is specially trained to confuse people like you!!

Sigalph,

Thankyou sir. It is compliment enough coming from you. A long time ago, when I was debating Bhutto and I had made a comparison, you had written to me telling me how insulting it is for the Quaid e Azam to be compared to Bhutto. That is precisely when my fascination with Quaid e Azam started and when I came to realize how much more Quaid e Azam is.

You are absolutely right. Quaid e Azam was nononsense type of guy... it takes character to be not-a-likeable individual and not care. Like Campbell Johnson said `he couln`t afford to be charming`.

Sincerely :)

Yasser

Nationalism gone berserk

http://www.frontlineonnet.com/fl1903/19031200.htm

The growing hubris-driven, illiberal, intolerant nationalism in India falsifies and glorifies the country`s ``Hindu`` past. It is viscerally hostile to Pakistan, but servile to the United States.

HAVE Indians reached such a point of moral degeneration and self-brutalisation that plotting to assassinate Pakistan`s leaders becomes the ultimate test of ``patriotism`` for the country`s youth? A terrible story from Shivpuri in Madhya Pradesh, not far from Gwalior, suggests that this may be actually happening. This is the story of two boys, Pinku (10) and Rinku (17), who wanted to become the ``heroes of the nation`` by avenging the December 13 attack on Parliament House - by assassinating Pervez Musharraf, no less.

Brought up on a daily diet of Bollywood-style ``patriotism``, and hero-worship of the Knights in Shining Armour who take on the mighty with their macho strength, Pinku and Rinku decided that India must wage war on Pakistan, or else they would become good ``patriotic`` terrorists, buy arms, smuggle themselves into Pakistan, and go and kill Musharraf.

On January 11, they kidnapped Shanu, the eight-year-old son of a businessman, for ransom, with which to procure the weapons for the Great and Holy Deed of killing Musharraf the Monster. Driven as they were by the role-models offered in films such as Gadar and Indian, and Fiza and Mission Kashmir, they hatched a plot to hold the boy, Shanu, hostage and collect the money they needed to execute their plan.

But once they abducted Shanu, they realised they could not really hide him anywhere. Nor could they invent credible alibis, nor even ways of collecting the ransom. They panicked and strangled him to death with a shoelace. According to The Telegraph (January 21), the boys confessed to their crime, but the district authorities believe that their motivation was indeed ``patriotic``.

It is tempting to discount this gory incident as a mere aberration, a rare case of ``juvenile delinquency`` coupled with ``misguided patriotism``, as exposure to ``too much Bollywood``, and so on. But it warrants serious, sober, reflection on the kind of values we are imparting to a whole generation of young people - through textbooks, through extremely competitive merit-ranking at school, through cinema and television, through accepted but aggressive patterns of behaviour in the street, and more generally, through our general social and political discourse.

These values have long glorified maleness, raw power, violence, aggression and war, and ``normalised`` or routinised cruelty. For years, India`s ``popular`` cinema and television have shamelessly promoted negative, hate-driven images of heroes as well as vamps and villains. This phenomenon has recently got even more perverse as the hero and the villain have merged, and the vamp has become the quintessential bride-dancer whom wedding parties emulate, especially in northern India. The cynical depiction of violence and aggressive behaviour has kept pace with sex and sleaze in the mass media.

Take education. Many of our schools, cast in the post-colonial ``nation-building`` tradition, valorise military-style discipline and a stressfully competitive view of ``achievement`` and excellence. The typical child grows up believing that hubris and pride in India`s ``inherent`` greatness and moral-cultural superiority is a ``normal`` characteristic of the good citizen. The tone and tenor of school and college debates has become increasingly raucous under the influence of the same kind of aggressive nationalism.

This nationalism is self-aggrandising. It pits itself against reason, logic and truth. It constructs indefinitely continuous communities (for example, ``Hindus``, from the Vedic period, followed by the rise of Buddhism, through the Brahminical-caste consolidation phase, and the Bhakti movement, to the late medieval period), where none existed. This nationalism validates aggressive and militarist notions of power relations as part of ``human nature``. Thus, India is ``naturally`` great. It has always been. Millions of Indians are being drilled and coached into believing `Mera Bharat Mahan`!

HUMAN Resource Development Minister Murli Manohar Joshi and his people in the National Council for Educational Research and Training, and numerous other institutions, have added a particularly toxic ingredient to this already foul cocktail of values and prejudices by saffronising education and rewriting history. This enterprise, a veritable cultural counter-revolution in itself, has been subjected to so much incisive criticism that it is unnecessary to recall the factual inaccuracies, the lies and half-truths, the indelible ethnic-religious prejudices, and the sophistry and irrationality that suffuse it.

The larger, central, overwhelming, purpose of Joshi and Co`s project is to ``prove`` that India is the greatest civilisation and culture in world history, that virtually everything valuable in the ``ancient`` world was derived from India. This ``ancient`` periodisation can be arbitrarily stretched to the 10th or even the 13th century, as in the case of the Konark or Lingaraja temples of Orissa or the Nataraja temple of Chidambaram. Joshi claims that it is now ``proved`` that the river Saraswati actually existed. The other day he proudly announced the discovery of a 7,500 year-old ``civilisation`` in the Gulf of Cambay - a strange thing for a Minister to do in the absence of an academic paper, and when the ``finds`` there are still under interpretation and in need of corroboration.

The concept of nationalism involved here is ethnic-religious and cultural. It conceives of India as a quintessentially traditional society. It cannot accommodate modernist notions of universal values, political identity or citizenship. It demands total, blind, loyalty to the woolly concept of an ``Eternal India``, which is further mystified and deified as ``Bharat Mata``.

In this view, respect, or rather reverence, for the nation is based on unquestioning devotion to the abstract notion of India`s ``inherent`` greatness and its unique superiority, its spectacular, unmatched achievements in all fields. These are grossly exaggerated and mystified. (For instance, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh sarsanghchalak K.S. Sudarshan claimed in his last Vijayadashami address that an Indian had built and flown an airplane in Baroda years before the Wright Brothers did so - a ludicrous assertion!)

In this scheme, pride in one`s nation is premised upon disdain for, or hatred of, other nations or identities. Islam and Muslims have functioned as the Other longest of all within this ethnic-nationalist demonology. Everything that is ``Eastern``, but other than Indian, is trivialised, minimised, parodied or reviled. This could be Persian or Chinese, or from Sumer or Sri Lankan. These cultures are considered at best derivative (and unimportant) in relation to India. The ``true``, essential, authentic, subject of the Nation is one particular community. ``Others`` can be accommodated on its fringes. But that is because `We` are tolerant, not because India is plural.

In the contemporary context, this hatred of the Other gets focussed upon Pakistan, which is demonised as a country, society, state and regime which is inherently inimical to India and with which peaceful co-existence is virtually impossible. Pakistan is credited with virtually mystical powers to subvert and destabilise India and create havoc. As in the classical Savarkar formulation, Pakistan is the external manifestation of the eternal ``internal`` threat embodied by Muslims - just as Indian Muslims represent Pakistan`s Fifth Column.

India`s sheer size allows the votaries of this nationalism to look at our other neighbours (barring China) as dwarfs, midgets and non-entities compared to the Indian giant. India is unique, India is exceptional, India is unmatched, India is eternal. This is precisely the kind of nationalism that Rabindranath Tagore described as a ``great menace``. As he put it: ``It is the particular thing which for years has been at the bottom of India`s troubles``.

This toxic, aggressive, exclusive, competitive, belligerent nationalism is the very opposite of a relaxed, self-confident, inclusive view of the nation and the world. It binds and encloses. It does not liberate. In fact, it lacks a progressive character. It is not anti-imperialist. At least no longer. It does not question the skewed distribution of power in the world. It accepts the dominant-dominated duality as the ``natural`` order, but wants India to be the co ck of the walk.

This nationalism kowtows to the powerful, the dominant, the hegemonic. In its present form, it is servile to ``the West``, in particular to the United States, just as it is arrogant towards ``the East`` (minus India, of course, which being Aryan, ``really`` belongs to the West). Nothing illustrates this better than the Indian official reception to Musharraf`s landmark address of January 12, and the growing intimacy between the Vajpayee government and President George W. Bush, now leading to dangerous liaisons in intelligence-sharing and even ground-level operations.

MUSHARRAF in his speech set out to do something exceptionally bold: undermine a major part of the foundation of his own state (namely extremist political Islam). This is the sharpest and most comprehensive criticism of ethnic-religious fundamentalism voiced by the head of any South Asian state in the past half-century. Musharraf minced no words in laying out Pakistan`s pathology, marked by its mix of Islam and politics, the military and the mullahs, the Taliban and terrorism. He posed the choice for Pakistan clearly: between a ``theocratic state`` and a modern, moderate, liberal, tolerant society.

Musharraf also told jehadi militants not to mess around with other countries, whatever the offence to Islam there. Implicit here is the view that Pakistan has paid dearly by pandering to pan-Islamic ideas. Musharraf has since cracked down on jehadi militants, arresting 2,500 of them. He may have started cutting the umbilical cord between the Pakistani state and political Islam, and proceeded to dismantle communal electorates.

Musharraf has launched only ``half a revolution``. His reform agenda lacks a ``perspective from below``, one that arises from the struggles of the working people. It has no economic content worth the name. Musharraf`s chosen agency for his reform ``from above`` is none other than the Pakistani state, a thoroughly corrupt, compromised and unreliable entity. He may not succeed. Formidable forces are arrayed against him.

To point this out is one thing, to term his address an exercise in ``deception`` or ``doublespeak`` is quite another. This approach ridicules the very possibility of reform in Pakistan by declaring it irredeemable. Indian leaders have at best been grudging and mean-spirited in acknowledging that Musharraf has done something remarkable. Thus, L.K. Advani called the address ``path-breaking``, but only for its domestic agenda. Vajpayee only saw some ``positive elements`` in it.

This leaves one wondering if this parsimonious response has something to do with the Bharatiya Janata Party`s general fear of secularisation and modernisation - contrasted to its own agenda of turning India into a morass of obscurantism, superstition and communal prejudice.

Contrast this with the Vajpayee government`s kowtowing to the U.S. Never before has any Indian government so pusillanimously colluded with hegemonic U.S. moves in this region or actively invited American interference in its internal affairs. Vajpayee & Co not only uncritically supported the U.S. ``war on terrorism`` with all its excesses and its devious manipulation of the United Nations. They did not let out even a squeak of protest or concern at the U.S.` current construction of four military bases in Pakistan.

It allowed an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation to visit Kolkata after the recent ``terrorist`` attack just as it welcomed a whole stream of FBI, Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), ``counter-terrorism`` and other officials. According to The Telegraph (January 21 and 22), it is about to launch joint operations along with U.S. agencies to stop possible terrorist infiltration and activities in Jammu and Kashmir. The Indo-U.S. Joint Working Group, which met in New Delhi in the third week of January, has announced a broad range of ``cooperative`` activities including ``political, diplomatic, military, intelligence and financial measures``.

India has ``welcomed`` a U.S. ``pilot project`` involving equipment and technology to strengthen ``border management and surveillance``. The two sides reportedly also discussed ``forensic cooperation`` and added aviation security to their agenda, and placed ``special stress`` on ways to beef up intelligence and investigative cooperation, including the possibility of access to each other`s databases on terrorists.

This goes far beyond ``intelligence sharing``, even ``cooperative monitoring`` through agencies such as the Sandia National Laboratories of New Mexico, a well-known U.S. weapons design and production facility. On the cards are ``joint operations`` on the ground, for which the way may have been paved by the visit of DIA chief Admiral Thomas Wilson to the Kashmir Valley, including to ``sensitive`` border areas. This spells serious interference in India`s affairs and erosion of its sovereignty, with potentially dangerous consequences.

re ylh 472

Absolutely masterful dissection of the criticisms directed at the Quaid-e-Azam. The lawyer in Jinnah would have been pleased.

See, Jinnah was not a likeable or even lovable individual. That made it even easier for his contemporaries to criticize him. But none of that can take away from the fundamental greatness of a man whose very name was and is synonymous with incorrigibility.

``So whose the murderer? tis like saying all the Murders that the Indian Army commits in Kashmir is because Mir Waiz or the Hurriyat Conference wants Independence... let me tell you something, it is on record that more 70% of those killed at Partition were people moving westward... and their children are proud of the sacrifices their ancestors gave for getting Pakistan and thats why they are the first ones to scream when there is injustice in Pakistan. ``

YLH, tell me what fascination does the number 7 hold for you guys. It is 70,000 killed by 700,000 troops in Kashmir. It is 700,000 troops have amassed at the border to harass Pakistan. And now, it is 70% of those killed were moving westwards. You could have pulled any number from thin air but somehow you always seem to pluck out 7.

Indian History at its finest:

`Pakistan is rattling its nuclear sabre`

Mind explaining what keera had bit Bajpai in 1998 that he went on with the nuclear tests? or what was up Indira`s rearside that she started tested nukes in 1974? India is the one who is responsible for the nuclear arms race in South Asia.

Harimau,

Still more lies, still more twisting of facts, still more fallacies. I don`t think you are even worth my time anymore. For an uncle `educated in Nehru`s time` you are too immature and uneducated to even waste my time on so I`d rather not read your `zillions of words` which are a waste of time. For the Israel post... let me say that my intention was to show how you bigots support a jewish theocracy but then single out Pakistan calling it exclusive, not that it was meant to be. As for painting Pakistan in other colors, surely Indians know a trick or two in that field for Indians love painting a God Obsessed caste ridden Hindu Theocracy as a `secular democratic` state and have done well in doing so.

1) The deadline for Interest free banking passed in June of last year. Has Pakistan adopted `Interest` free banking? No.

2) I don`t know the point you are trying to make through `Mandal commission`, but my point is simple. Mandal, a Hindu, was Pakistan`s first Law Minister (which is a very symbolic move keeping in mind that in Islam the preoccupation of the intellectual is law). I don`t know why you are so insecure about India that you have to make comparisons. By mentioning Mandal my intention is to show my countrymen that Pakistan was not meant to be a religiously exclusive theocracy. Why does that bite you so badly.

As for Hodson, why don`t you quote the pages I have asked you too?

1) Nothing you have quoted proves any of your assertions ie Jinnah was evil Jinnah was the devil Jinnah was power hungry.

2) Hodson`s view of Jinnah is very clear: Honest man of integrity, self-less, a logical and rational man. This is clearly expressed in the book unlike the obscure quotes you put which I still don`t understand what you are quoting in regards to. Do you have a `focus` problem by any chance? Attention deficit disorder perhaps? Cuz I have a few friends in the psychiatry profession who can help you.



Ladies and Gentlemen,

Uncle Harimau reminds me of a character `Janu German` from a PTV Play `Chohti see Duniya`. The play is about this other guy (I don`t remember the character`s name so lets call him Mr.X) who returns from `Villayet` to his small village in Pakistan. The villagers are naturally enchanted by him, but having been westernized, Mr.X gets sick of the villagers who keep bringing him mithai and doodh etc., so he starts being rude to the villagers. The ignorant Villagers in turn claim that he never went to `villayet` and challenge him to `English` Muqabla with `Janu German`. Mr.X doesn`t want to but is irked on by his wife.

So here is how the dialogue goes.. (note the similarities between Janu German and Harimau, and the ignorant villagers and Mr.Harimau`s supporters on this website).

Mr.X: Hello

Janu German: vat (what)?

M.X: What what?

Janu German: vy (why)?

M.X: What why?

Janu German: Stooooopad

Mr.X: Why are you calling me stupid?

Janu German: a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p...

Ignorant Villagers in chorus: Wah Wah shabash Janu German Shabash.

Mr.X: Why are you doing the ABCD?

Janu German : one two three four five six seven eight nine

Mr X is flabbergasted and stunned.

Ignorant villagers pick up Janu German screaming `Janu German ko ingrezi ati hai, janu german sahee villayeti hai`.

That is exactly what Harimau`s supporters notable Rsaxena, Akash and MaheshG are doing. Harimau knows well that he is bs-ing out of his rear orifice, but he is taking advantage of the naivety of the people.



Sincerely

YLH

Ref ylh #: 472

[1) Has Interest free banking been enforced? The answer is NO. The federal Sharia court is usually ignored]

The Sharia Court has set a deadline on Islamic banking. When that deadline passes without Islamic banking becoming the law of the land, you can talk about the Sharia Court being ignored.

[2) When I spoke of the rarely used laws... I meant Islamic punishments. No one in Pakistan has ever been stoned, nor has any one had his hand chopped off.]

On the other hand, women have been jailed for preferring complaints about rape because, under the Hudood ordinance, they have to produce 4 male witnesses to the act of penetration which they are unable to; but they have confessed to having sex outside marriage and so are jailed. Tell me this is NOT happening in Pakistan. I will then be able to quote from Amnesty International reports so that you can go around saying I was quoting selectively.

[3) About the blasphemy law.. neither did I say it was `rarely` used which part of : [``laws in Pakistan, not even the horrible draconian blasphemy law, are based on anything remotely Quranic but instead on British common law, torts, and the Magna Carta ( Note: 295 C is an adaptation of British Government of India act 1935 295 A and is not a fundamental principle of Islam.. if anyone has an objection to this statement please show me the precedent for draconian 295 C in any of 5 Islamic jurisprudence traditions or any Islamic Law put in place by any state)... ]`` did your foolishness not UNDERSTAND?]

It is your Mullahs` claim and your government acquiescence in those claims that these punishm