Dislodging a Dictator

``Vote for a progressive, patriotic , philanthropist who brought more glory to Pakistan than its narcicisstic military. ``

As an Imran Khan fan, I will say that yes he is patriotic, and a philanthrophist and probably brought more glory to Pakistan than anyone else. However progressive he is not.. Since PTI is a dictatorship like most political parties, PTI`s character is determined by the character of Imran Khan. Imran Khan, the Quaid of the tehreek, is anti-feudal.. not because he is a progressive urbanite.. but because beyond the veil of his Oxford education, good looks, pseudo-sophisticated dressing sense, he is a tribal at heart. Since he is a tribal , his party has a tribal character as well. Imran Khan recruited Meraj Muhammad Khan (not to be confused with Meraj Khalid) an ex PPP and Labor leader from the 1970s... yet sick of Imran`s lack of vision, Meraj Muhammad Khan left the party after writing an open letter to Imran in the press. I was one of the original tehreek-e-Insaaf supporters in 1997. I tried to convince my parents to vote for Imran Khan. My mother`s vote was disputed then... and my father voted for PPP I think. This time around I voted for PPP and my father voted for PTI (Imran Khan`s pseudo-liberal pseudo-conservative total contradiction kind of suits my father`s own temperament).

I think anyone who has heard Imran Khan speak on issues knows that if such a man was to come into power he would be a lose cannon... because IQ wise, Imran Khan doesn`t seem to be gifted much.

-Manto

echoboooom :)

Good one... made me laugh for a long time.

This article is typical of Pakistani pseudo-historians. The article makes mention of the cases Jinnah took for Muslims, and his speech on the Wakf bill. The article makes no mention of his most famous case when he defended the Hindu leader Tilak... nor does the article mention his greatest and most idealistic speech in the Indian legislative Assembly in 1931 ... which was in defence of Shaheed Bhagat Singh. As you can see Jinnah`s most important speech to the Pakistan Constituent Assembly is also missing and so are his famous words from his address to the American people (broadcast both in the US and in Pakistan): `Make No Mistake about it. Pakistan Shall not be a Theocracy to be run by priests with a divine mission.`

The article seems to be trying to prove that Jinnah studied Islam and had a close relationship with God... I can`t comment on that since I didn`t get to meet him. Unlike the author of this article I am not going to second guess History. Ok First of all Sindh Medresseh was a British High school with a British principal. Just want to get that out of the way.

Now coming to the other points:

1)`` As a part of his legal education in London for the practice of the law in multi-religious India, the young Jinnah had to study Islamic jurisprudence also.``

Not true... Lincoln`s Inn`s curriculum never included Islamic Jurisprudence. It is not an LLB degree. Jinnah didn`t have an LLB Degree. He was a simple barrister educationally. Bar doesn`t include formal law education but rather practical experience.


2) ``According to his sister, Fatima Jinnah, the teenager Jinnah touched neither ham nor bacon nor alcoholic drinks--a promise he had made to his parents before proceeding to England. The strength of his character and morals is borne out by the story narrated in ``Jinnah of Pakistan`` by Stanley Wolpert, ``


On Page 78 and 79 of Stanley Wolpert`s book we have Jinnah eating Pork. That he enjoyed strong liquor is an open secret. Before he left for Pakistan on 7th August 1947... he held a press conference where he had a glass of whisky in his hand. However the strength of character and morals is tested by other things. He held women in the greatest of respects always getting up and bowing to them. There is no scandal associated with him eventhough he was a mover and shaker in Bombay`s high society.


3) There is very little mention of Jinnah`s association with the Congress which was deep and emotional. In those days Jinnah used to contribute 1000 Rupees to the Congress Fund every month.

4) ``In the Khilafat Movement in India, between 1918 and 1922, Jinnah supported the cause of the Ottoman Empire and the preservation of the Constantinople-based Caliphate. ``

It is a known fact that Jinnah remained aloof from the issue of the Ottoman Empire and the Khilafat movement. He infact left Congress Party in protest of Gandhiji`s noncooperation movement.

5) ``Islam, he pointed out, had taught Muslism equality of man, justice and fairplay to everybody.``

This was definitely Jinnah`s view, and he sought to justify the secularism of the new created homeland for Muslims on these grounds. To him secular democracy was not in conflict with the doctrine of Islam. Was he right or wrong, that is another issue.


These are only some of the points I am going to counter right now.. because I am studying for my law exams. However rest assure that the whole article is one big fat lie...

-Manto

YasserLatifHamdani

How would you analyse this excerpt from a sketch of the greatleader by qutbuddin aziz?

Others please read & give your opinion.



``The first school in Karachi to which Jinnah was admitted by his father was the Sindh Madressah which was established in Karachi in 1885 by the Sindh Mohammedan Association under the leadership of a renowned Muslim philanthropist and promoter of education for Muslims in Sindh, Hassan Ali Effendi. Before launching this school, he had visited the MAO College in Aligarh and discussed with Sir Syed Ahmed Khan. Islamic teachings and reading the Quran was included in the curriculum of the Sindh Madressah and Jinnah learnt more about Islam there. During his childhood years, Jinnah went to Bombay to meet his loving auntie and uncle and stayed with them for six months. They admitted him to a school of the Anjuman-e-Islam where Islamic teachings were a part of the curriculum. Before proceeding to England in January 1893, he studied at the Church Mission school in Karachi for a few years but he continued to read about Islam. Jinnah`s marriage at the age of 16 with 14-year-old Emibhai was conducted in Paneli in Kathiawar under Muslim rites. His mother had arranged his marriage hurriedly to ensure that no English damsel in London would entice him. Before he boarded he ship at Karachi for the journey to England, he received many amulets from his family members in conformity with a Muslim tradition. Thus all through his childhood years in Karachi, Jinnah`s parents made him aware of his Muslim identity and Muslim beliefs.

During his three year`s legal education at Lincoln`s Inn in London (April 1893-July 1986), Jinnah joined his Muslim co-religionists in celebrating the Eid festival and at times visited a small mosque in East London. As a part of his legal education in London for the practice of the law in multi-religious India, the young Jinnah had to study Islamic jurisprudence also. He had learnt about Christianity at the Church Mission School in Karachi. He had Hindu and Parsi friends and took interest in knowing about their faiths. His exposure to Western education and polity in England made him liberal, broad-minded and tolerant towards the followers of other faiths. According to his sister, Fatima Jinnah, the teenager Jinnah touched neither ham nor bacon nor alcoholic drinks--a promise he had made to his parents before proceeding to England. The strength of his character and morals is borne out by the story narrated in ``Jinnah of Pakistan`` by Stanley Wolpert, the Quaid`s American biographer, that on the occasion of Jinnah`s first Christmas and New Year in London he was invited by his landlady to an evening party in their home. She had a pretty daughter who tried to become friendly with the teenage Jinnah. In the party, the damsel suggested to him that under an English custom he could kiss her under the mistletoe hung from the ceiling. Jinnah`s response was that such an act of intimate behaviour was not in conformity with the moral code in which he had been brought up in his home and that his mother and his 15-year-old wife would mind it in Karachi.

In London, the teenage Jinnah visited the British museum many a time. Of great interest to him was the section dealing with the Middle East, the Arabs, the Islamic civilization and the Indus Valley. While on way from Karachi to England by boat, Jinnah had a day`s glimpse of Egypt when it halted at Port Said on the Suez canal. The archaeological exhibits from ancient and Medieval Egypt in the British Museum interested him considerably.

When Jinnah returned to India as a barrister and enrolled as a lawyer with the Bombay high Court in August 1896, he made a deeper study of the laws in force in India, especially Muslim canonical and personal law. This was of immense help to him when he served as Presidency Magistrate in Bombay from May to November 19. Many cases that he handled involved Muslims for which a thorough knowledge of the major schools of Muslim jurisprudence was essential. In Bombay, Jinnah visited the Anjumna-e-Islamia often and donated to its funds. When he took to legal practice early in 1901, his circle of friends expanded and he had a large number of Muslims, Parsi, Hindu, Christian and European friends. He showed respect for their religious beliefs and practices.

Jinnah`s brilliant speech on Muslim Endowments (Wakful Aulad law in force in India in the Congress session in Calcutta in December 1906 was a proof of the profundity of his knowledge of Islamic jurisprudence and the holy Quran. Muslim Associations and scholars from many parts of India congratulated him on his able advocacy of the Muslim viewpoint on this issue. It is noteworthy that Jinnah won his first legislative election in 1909 from a constituency reserved for Muslims in Bombay. It was a tough election and the local Muslims would not have elected him to the Imperial Legislative Council, based in Calcutta, unless they were convinced that he was a practising Muslim, having deep knowledge of Islam and the problems of the Muslim community. In the Imperial Legislative Council, it was Jinnah`s privilege to navigate successfully his Private Member`s bill on Muslim Endowments in 1911. Under the new law for Muslim Endowments, enacted through Jinnah`s efforts, these Muslim institutions and their beneficiaries got a better deal. The speeches he made in support of his Bill in the Imperial Legislative Council got him all-India acclaim from Muslims for his mastery over the Islamic canon and Jurisprudence. Scores of Muslim organisations in India rushed him messages of congratulations and gratitude for his resounding achievement in the service of Muslims. Among them were Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani and Maulana Hussain Ahmed Madani. As a Muslim legislator from Bombay, Jinnah attended many meetings organised by the Muslims organisations on the festive occasions of Eid and the Prophet`s birthday. He advocated the political, economic and educational emancipation of Muslims, particularly Muslim women.

Jinnah joined the All India Muslim League as a member in London in 1913 when it amended its constitution and included self-rule for India in its aims and objects. But he made it clear that he would continue his membership of the Congress which had joined in 1903. The Muslims of Bombay were so pleased with Jinnah`s services to the Muslims that they again voted him to the Imperial Legislative Council from Bombay`s Muslim constituency in 1916. In the Congress fold, Jinnah devotedly worked for Hindu-Muslims cooperation to achieve independence for India from British rule and he was hailed as the Ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity as the architect of the famous Lucknow Pact for their cooperation in the pursuit of freedom for India.

In 1918, Jinnah consented to marry Parsi-born Ruttie Petit after she turned 18 and embraced Islam in the presence of the chief cleric of the Isna Ashri Muslims in Bombay and the Islamic name of Maryam was given to her. The next day, Jinnah married her in an Islamic wedding ceremony with Muslim scholars and his Muslim friends attending it. Among them was the elder Maharaja of Mahmudabad. In 1929, when Rutie died in Bombay, Jinnah had her burial done in a Muslim graveyard according to Muslim rites supervised by a Muslim Imam (religious scholar). He donated to Muslim and other charities in Bombay and elsehwere. On the festive occasion of Eid, his Muslim friends and constituents visited him regularly and exchanged Eid greetings. Even during his stay in London (1931-35), he used to visit a mosque in East London for the Eid prayers. According to his chauffeur during his London years, Bradbury, Jinnah was visited by many Muslim friends in his Hampstead home on the occasion of Eid and they exchanged Eid greetings. In the Khilafat Movement in India, between 1918 and 1922, Jinnah supported the cause of the Ottoman Empire and the preservation of the Constantinople-based Caliphate. As the Chairman of the company which ran a popular Bombay-based English dilly, Bombay Chronicle, he encouraged its English Editor, B G Horniman to give due coverage to their Khalifat Movement and its leaders, Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar and his elder brother, Maulana Shaukat Ali, and Gandhiji. He articulated the viewpoint of India`s Muslims against the liquidation of the Ottoman Empire and the Caliphate before a Parliamentary Committee in London in the early 1920s.

From 1935 onwards when, on his return from England, Jiunnah became the President of the All India Muslim League, he attended a large number of the meetings of Muslims and spoke on Islam, the Prophet`s life and the Muslim cause in India and abroad. In his speeches, he extolled the virtues of the Prophet of Islam (PBUH) and the universal nature of Islam`s teachings. He read more books on Islam and was influenced by Allama Iqbal`s exposition of the tenets of Islam and his call for an Islamic renaissance in his writings and inspiring poetry. Jinnah also sought advice from Maulana Shabbir Ahmed Usmani on Islamic matters. Jinnah advocated the Muslims viewpoint in the Shaheedganj Mosque case in Lahore and the Cawnpore Mosuqe case.

In 1926, Jinnah was re-elected to India`s Central legislature from the Bombay Muslim constituency. It demonstrated the immense trust the Muslims reposed in him as a good Muslim leader.

Jinnah`s love for his only daughter, Dina, was profound. But when she decided to marry Parsi-born Neville Wadia, Jinnah said he would permit her to do so if he converted to Islam. When he did not do so and Dina married Wadia, Jinnah froze his fatherly relations with Dina.

Jinnah`s understanding of Islam was reflected in these powerful words which he spoke in his presidential address in the All India Muslim League Conference held in Karachi on December 26, 1943: ``What is it that keeps the Muslims united as one man and who is the bedrock and sheet anchor of the community? It is Islam; it is the Great Book--the Quran which is the sheet anchor of Muslims India. I am sure that as we go on and on, there will be more Oneness-One God, One Book, One Prophet and One nation ``. In his Eid-ul-Fitr message to the Muslims in September 1945, Jinnah said: ``.. Islam is not merely confined to the spiritual tenets and doctrines or rituals or ceremonies. It is a complete code regulating the whole Muslims society, every department of life, collectively and individually``. Addressing the All India Muslims League session in Delhi on April 24, 1943, Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah said: ``.. The equality of mankind is one of the fundamental principles of Islam. In Islam, there is no difference between man and man. The qualities of equality, liberty and fraternity are the fundamental principles of Islam. . the prophet was the greatest man the world had ever seen. Thirteen hundred years ago he laid the foundations of democracy..`` Jinnah preached and practised tolerance towards the followers of other religions and this was amplified in his historic address to the Constituent Assembly of Pakistan on August 11, 1947, in Karachi. Jinnah was opposed to theocracy and sectarianism in any form.

In a broadcast to the people of the USA in February 1948, Governor-General Jinnah said that he expected Pakistan`s new constitution to be of a democratic type embodying the essential principles of Islam. Islam, he pointed out, had taught Muslism equality of man, justice and fairplay to everybody. His Eid-ul-Fitr message on August 18, 1947--four days after Pakistan`s birth--was addressed to the Muslims of Pakistan and also to Muslims all the world over. In this Eid message resounded Jinnah`s hope for the dawn of ``a new era of prosperity that will mark the onward march of the renaissance of Islamic culture and ideals``. On that festive day, Jinnah, dressed in a cream-coloured sherwani and wearing the Jinnah cap, offered his Eid prayers in the Eidgah maidan in Karachi and exchanged Eid greeting with a huge concourse of Muslims, thanking Allah for his gift of Pakistan. ``

Ref dost-mittar #151[harimaou#134
The Engineering College at Hauz Khas in IIT. They also have an older Engineering College in Delhi. I dont think it was built with the aid of any specific country.
P.S. Are you sure the Soviets helped build the IIT at Bombay?]

Yes, I am sure about IIT Bombay and here is the history from their webpage.

http://www.iitb.ernet.in/about/index.html

History of IIT Bombay

How was IIT Bombay set up?

A high-power committee of Govt. of India recommended in 1946 establishment of four higher institutes of technology of the level of their counterparts in Europe and United States to set the direction for the development of technical education in the country. These institutes were designed to provide the necessary dynamism and flexibility of organization in the light of expanding knowledge and changing socio-economic requirements of modern society.
Planning for the Institute at Bombay began in 1957 and the first batch of 100 students was admitted in 1958. The Institute campus at Powai extends over 200 hectares and is situated in picturesque surroundings with Vihar and Powai lakes on either sides and green hills strewn around.

In 1961, by an act of Parliament, the Institute was declared an institution of national importance and was accorded the status of a university with power to award its own degrees and diplomas.

IIT Bombay was established with the cooperation and participation of the UNESCO, utilizing the contribution of the Govt. of USSR. The Institute received substantial assistance in the form of equipment and expert services from USSR through the UNESCO from 1956 to 1973. The Institute received several experts (59) and technicians (14) from several reputed institutions in the USSR. The UNESCO also offered a number of fellowships (27) for training of Indian faculty members in the USSR.

Under the bilateral agreement of 1965, the USSR Govt. provided additional assistance to supplement the Aid Program already received by the Institute through UNESCO.

As to IIT Delhi, (http://www.iitd.ernet.in/about/index.html)

Indian Institute of Technology Delhi is one of the seven Institutes of Technology created as centres of excellence for higher training, research and development in science, engineering and technology in India, the others being at Kanpur, Kharagpur, Madras, Bombay, Guwahati and Roorkee. Established as College of Engineering in 1961, the Institute was later declared an Institution of National Importance under the ``Institutes of Technology (Amendment) Act, 1963`` and was renamed ``Indian Institute of Technology Delhi``. It was then accorded the status of a deemed university with powers to decide its own academic policy, to conduct its own examinations, and to award its own degrees.

HRH Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, laid the foundation stone of the Institute on January 27, 1959. The Institute was inaugurated by Prof.Humayun Kabir, the then Union Minister for Scientific Research and Cultural Affairs on August 21, 1961. The Institute buildings were formally opened by Dr.Zakir Hussain, the then President of India, on March 2, 1968.

Location of the Institute

IIT Delhi is situated at Hauz Khas in South Delhi, which is a landmark place in the colourful and chequered history of Delhi.

Naqshbandi: ``Should I abandon 1400 years of qualified Islamic scholarship [aka ulama] and accept your or my own views? Would you let me operate on you if I had only read a book on neurosurgery and not gone to medical school? In the same way my PhD in biomedical engineering (almost!) does not qualify me to derive rulings from the Koran sharif. That is only for the mujtahid imams and the ulama who followed them in an unbroken chain to today.``

This is, I am afraid, the biggest mistake you are making.

All I can tell you is that, in Islam, there is no concept of a professional Ulema. That is the beauty of Islam, along with its egalitarian ideas. Muhammad, Abu-Bakr, Umar, Usman, Ali - none of them were professional maulvis. They were all normal working folks, like you and me. They were salesmen, shepherds, beaurecrats, soldiers, businessmen etc. If maulvis were to run the religion, then one of them would have been a maulvi. At least.

You, with a Ph.D. in biomedical engineering, and a willingness to read the Quran, are more qualified than any of the Ulema you are following. Quran is a simple book. It does not require 1400 years of scholarship. It does, howeve, require a knowledge of everyday life, which comes through Ph.Ds and such.

Anyone, who tries to own Islam, as an, ``Ulema`` is creating more problems than he is solving. They have made a joke of Islam. People are scared of them, all over the world. Even scared of the ones who are well-meaning. I have discussed issues with these types of individuals, and eventually they run out of arguments. They are building false castles on each other`s ideas, and have created a huge beaurecracy in a religion, which, by defintion is not supposed to have beaurecracy. It creates a direct connection between man and God.

All I can do is, advise you is to discover religion yourself, by relying on your own common sense, the Quran and your Ph.D degree. Had Islam been meant for Ulemas, Prophet Muhammad would not have been a shepherd and an import/export salesperson. He would have been a professional, ``Aalim.``

I have seen you argue religion with so many people on this site, and have not seen a single person be convinced by the arguments you have presented on religion. It is because you are repeating whatever an aalim has told you. You are not using your own mind. Your ideas, thus, only appeal to poeple with your last name. The true sign of an aalim is not one who can appeal to his co-followers, but someone whose arguments appeal to people who do not originally believe in what he says. This was the great quality of Prophet Muhammad. I doubt his personality fit into the mould that the current Ulema have fitted into.

These professional Ulema are going to take Islam and Islamic societies down the drain. It is sad to see that even with an Ph.D, you haven`t figured this out. People who get so addicted to Ulema, tend to go to the other extreme also. I wouldn`t be surprised, if, in fifteen years or so, you start hating religion. It has already happened to one or two individuals, on this site.

Anyways, as a fellow Muslim, I have attempted to warn and educate you. After that, it is up to you. If you want to follow people far less educated than yourself, then there is nothing much I can do about it.

Just remember, Quran was not designed for neurosurgeons. It was designed for normal everyday people.

Shankar #152: I can see how all this could be confusing to someone. I was very confusing to me also, when I was initially exposed to it. I knew PTI would not win in feudal areas, but I thought PTI would sweep the urban votes within five to six years. That never happened. Seeing a bit of politics from the inside, really opens up ones eyes. I now realize I knew very little about Pakistani politics, until experiencing it practically. Here are some answers to your questions, based on what I saw. Just my opinion:

“Mushy did all he could to keep the corrupt feudals out of the reckoning in this election. In fact, if I recall correctly, that was what you were saying before the election, for Mushy`s benefit. So, in your mind, this election was as fair as Pakistasn has had since 71.”

I was hoping he would keep the feudals out, but he didn’t. In fact, my biggest complain against Musharraf is that he didn’t go after the feudals. This has been my biggest complain against every Martial Law. This election was not fair, in its pre-election sense. A lot of parties were manipulated. It was fair on polling day, however, since there were so many international agencies monitoring it. The international agencies share my view.

I think Musharraf should have wiped out the feudals, banned them all, carried out massive land reforms, and then held elections. And then he should have left, and moved to Boston. This is what I have been saying all along. Musharraf, as a person, is completely unknown to me. I am just interested in what he does. I could care less whether he is from the Army or from the BJP. I support him over Maulana Fazl, Benazir, Nawaz, Altaf etc. However, I do not support him over Imran Khan, Omer Asghar Khan, etc. and even over a few of the members of PPP and PML. Currently, the second group has zero chance of coming into power, and I am afraid if the first group comes into power, it will destroy Pakistan, like it did before.

“I`m a little mystified why you felt ``energised`` after the election results.”

Your feeling is quite incorrect. How could I feel energised when the party I support, from a distance, and my family supports actively, only won one seat. I was hoping PTI would sweep Lahore. Even Imran Khan lost there. Also, I am not energised, because I do not support the success of MMA in two provinces. Though I think they deserve to rule, since they were voted in fairly. Most of all, I do not support the victories of the same feudals of PPP and PML again.

I think Musharraf handled the referendum and elections poorly. I am not saying this, because PTI lost. I am saying this, because the same crowd is back in politics again.

“because of the mindset of the average Pakistani voter (urban or rural) is so resigned, frustrated & helpless (because of an authoritarian, corrupt, rigid, jury-rigged system of governance) that they just vote for their immediate ``benefit``....or ..whats the phrase?...immediate ``sense of security``.”

You have hit the nail on its head. This is exactly the problem. This is also why people in Pakistan don’t shed a tear when Martial Law is implemented. This is also why they get frustrated of the same Martial Law, within a few years. And then of democracy a few years later.

“Ergo, the ``genious`` & ``system`` of Pakistan is not suited to democracy. The only choice is that a paternalistic, super-patriotic, heroic institution such as the Pakistani military is suited to oversee the governing of your country.”

This is not correct either. Pakistanis love politics and democracy. They discuss it so much that Pakistani hotels and buses have specific signs stating, “Please do not discuss too much politics.” The Army is not the answer. I say this, not because I hate the Army, or love it, but, because I have seen it from the inside. It can, at best be the answer for a brief two to three years.

However, the current lot of feudal politicians is not the answer either. Look at what Benazir has done, yet the feudals will still vote her the head of her party. MMA is not the answer, either. People like Imran Khan are the answer. Or people like Asghar Khan or his late son. People like Zubaida Jalal and Maleeha Lodhi and Shaukut Aziz and Aitezaz Ahsan and Meraj Khalid and Abdus Sattar Edhi are the answer. These people are close to the top, however, these people can never get the very top job in Pakistan, until the feudals are kicked out. Once these people get the top job, then the army will never be supported by Pakistanis in politics. I doubt any Army general would ever have a successful coup, if Imran Khan type people are Prime Minister. The population would not support the army coup, against credible well-performing leaders.

Musharraf, is a short term answer, but not a long term answer, either.

“Rural people may be illiterate & naieve--but they are`nt stupid. If they feel the zamindar & his family are oppressing them, & the sahibs & memsahibs are living the life of the idle rich it stands to reason that they WONT vote for them. How can muslims, literate or illeterate, in all conscience vote for the local ``prince`` if the latter is so cutoff from them?...ESP in an egalitarian society? “

Have you seen the movie Mother India with Nargis and Sunil Dutt? Did you see how their lives are controlled by the powerful landlord system. They aren’t stupid, but there is nothing they can do. One has to live in those areas to understand the situation. Recently, a feudal authorized the gang rape of a lady through his own judicial system. Had the press not picked up on it, there would have been nothing the lady could have done. She is not stupid. She is just powerless. How hard would it be to get her to vote one way or the other. The feudals have owned their land and the people on it, for generations. In areas like Baluchistan, the literacy rate for women is 3.7%. In rural Sind, it isn’t much higher. You should meet the haris and mazaras in these places. It is basically slave labor. You should see the feudal families of some of the Chowk interactors, who make eloquent arguments on human rights, in action in their feudal lands.

I spent around two to three years in feudal Southern Punjab. And I saw how people there were treated. I cannot believe any beaurecrat, any factory owner, any Army general, any MMA leader ever being able to treat a human being so pathetically.

This is different from, lets say, my village in Kashmir, which is non-feudal. It is rural, but with no big feudal owning excessive land. Over there, everyone votes as they like. And the candidates are answerable to the voters. Since they don’t own the voters’ land. That village has no politician who is known in Pakistan, yet it is decades ahead of the feudal villages in Punjab that I have seen, which produce all the powerful political leaders of Pakistan.

I think if elections are allowed to continue in Pakistan, the urban population will get out of the, “security” mentality, will develop faith in elections, and will vote for good people (once they know that elections will be held again and again). And PTI type parties will win more.

However, I just cannot see how things will change in feudal areas. And feudals still control 66% of the votes. So, urban parties will always be a minority. Why do you think these feudals are so addicted to elections and politics. If elections were going to remove them, they would be the first to oppose elections. Yet the leading, “fighters for democracy” in Pakistan are all feudals, like Benazir and Amin Fahim etc. Why? Because, they know that the current election system is the best way for them to ensure that they make all the laws, and thus do not allow anyone to finish off their feudalism. It is a Catch-22 situation. To get rid of feudalism, the current electoral system needs to change. To change the current electoral system, you need to get rid of feudals.

However, once the feudals are gone, the Army will never be able to step in.

What is the solution? Massive land reforms. And the rejection of the feudal as the face of progressive secularism in Pakistan, by educated Pakistanis. Feudals are only secularists on the face of it. The only two groups I can think of who can get rid of feudalism are the Army and the maulvis. The Army, for some reason, has always joined the feudals (Gohar Ayub, Ejaz-ul-Haq), rather then eliminating them. And has thus created furthur problems.

The maulvis have had success in removing them in NWFP and Baluchistan. The maulvis maybe able to remove them, in other areas, because they point to the only source which voters in feudal areas consider their hope against the powerful feudal, i.e. God. However, maulvis, as we know have their own issues, like living in the 8th century. So it is a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.

Romair: I was in the states when Miyanji won in 1996 or was it 1997. My friends, all urban, were hardcore IJI supporters. They said Imran Khan is a ``gora`` guess its not just the feudals who have it in for him..

Romair,
#116

Jeeze, your reasons why Imran didnt win; if I understand you correctly, is because of the mindset of the average Pakistani voter (urban or rural) is so resigned, frustrated & helpless (because of an authoritarian, corrupt, rigid, jury-rigged system of governance) that they just vote for their immediate ``benefit``....or ..whats the phrase?...immediate ``sense of security``.

Ergo, the ``genious`` & ``system`` of Pakistan is not suited to democracy. The only choice is that a paternalistic, super-patriotic, heroic institution such as the Pakistani military is suited to oversee the governing of your country.

The shrink in me is trying to decipher your logic & get to the jist of what you are trying to say...so I can very well misunderstand you.

{{The people in feudal areas, do know what is best for them, however, their hands are tied, since they owe their livelihood to the feudal boss. So they, by force, have to vote for one feudal or the other.}}

I think you are giving human beings very little credit. Rural people may be illiterate & naieve--but they are`nt stupid. If they feel the zamindar & his family are oppressing them, & the sahibs & memsahibs are living the life of the idle rich

---

it stands to reason that they WONT vote for them. How can muslims, literate or illeterate, in all conscience vote for the local ``prince`` if the latter is so cutoff from them?...ESP in an egalitarian society?

I mean...is the Pakistan rural voter made to believe there is a hidden camera in the polling booth & that his/her vote isnt anonymous?...
or is the voting system so corrupt that no matter who the villagers vote for, the feudal wins in the final tally?
or are they so brainwashed into believing that if the feudal loses they will be out of a job?

{{Pakistanis city voters, currently, have no faith in the system. They vote more to protect themselves, then for progress. In essence, it is like the Chicago mafia stories. Everyone needs a powerful thug to protect him against the other party’s powerful thug. If you candidate is not a powerful thug, regardless of how good he maybe, he cannot win. Because, voters know he cannot protect them from the thugs they need protection from. Hence they will not vote for him, even if he is Gandhi.

This is a Catch-22. Once voters feel your guy cannot get elected, they will not vote for him, even furthur, even if they know he is the best candidate. They do not want to end up in the bad books of the thug who does get elected. Why support a guy who cannot get into power, and make enemies for one’s self. Why not create a powerful ally, who can protect you from other powerful people?}}

In Chicago, if Al Cappone was running elections & it was free & fair, he would`nt have won.
What youre trying to say is that the only ``benefit`` that an urban Pakistani voter sees in the election system is to elected their own personal ``godfather``--who ``protects`` their security (while corruptly shaking them down at the same time).

What your saying goes against the instincts of human nature...
Pakistanis are intelligent human beings & theyre NOT from the planet Klingon!:)

The only moral of the story I get from Imran`s personal & party defeat is:
The Pakistani awam was given 3 choices:
1) Vote for King`s party (ergo endorse the army line)
2) Vote for fundos
3) Vote for a progressive, patriotic , philanthropist who brought more glory to Pakistan than its narcicisstic military.

Mushy did all he could to keep the corrupt feudals out of the reckoning in this election. In fact, if I recall correctly, that was what you were saying before the election, for Mushy`s benefit. So, in your mind, this election was as fair as Pakistasn has had since 71.

I`m a little mystified why you felt ``energised`` after the election results.
The one hope Pakistan had to get a progressive leader at the helm....
& the awam chose (2)-(1) & then (3)...in that order...

In fact, I think (3) lost very badly.
Dont ``blame`` the system now; blame the voter

harimaou#134
The Engineering College at Hauz Khas in IIT. They also have an older Engineering College in Delhi. I dont think it was built with the aid of any specific country.
P.S. Are you sure the Soviets helped build the IIT at Bombay?

Naqshbandi

``but since anyone would be better for india`s muslims --who are our brothers--than the bjp i will be happier if sonia wins than if the bjp win``

BJP doesn`t believe in using lovey dovey slogans to win over Muslims. Let us not forget that it is a BJP government which has chosen a Muslim head of the state. Yet your own biases against the Hindus leads you make such fallacious statements. I would rather be a Muslim under the rule of the BJP, then be a christian or a hindu or even a Muslim under the rule of the MMA. So what about our brothers in Pakistan who are not Muslim... who is going to care about them?


-Manto

I think the issue of Jinnah`s personal faith which is a stupid issue anyway should be closed once and for all with this following excerpt from the rediff article:

``After Jinnah`s death in September 1948, his sister Fatima and then prime minister Liaquat Ali Khan had jointly filed a petition in the Karachi high court describing Jinnah as a ``Shia Khoja Mohammedan`` and sought that his will may be executed under the Shia inheritance law. Again, when Fatima died in 1967, another sister Shirin Bai claimed her property under the Shia law.``


After that there is no need for any court decisions.

Errata

By Islamist counterparts I mean his MMA counterparts.

The debate on Jinnah`s personal faith,

The debate on Jinnah`s personal faith is stupid and pointless but the matter can be irrevocably decided by reading the Jinnah papers especially the reference I made last. It is also recognized that conversion that took place in 1901 was to Ithna Ashari shia Islam from Ismaili Islam and not to sunnism. This is well documented.

The article that you have quoted proves so well how Pakistanis will stop at nothing to distort history .... For God`s sake man, according to the article both Fatima Jinnah and Shirin Jinnah are claiming to be shiites and claiming that their brother is shiite, but it seems that the court is hell bent on making something else out of him. So in 1948 Fatima Jinnah inherits property under Shiite Khoja Ismaili law.. And in 1967 the other sister Shirin Jinnah inherits that property under the same law... yet in 1970 some idiot gets up and declares that Jinnah was sunni and not only that both his sisters were sunni, they were just pretending to be shia in public. In 1976 the court decided Jinnah was a shia. In 1984, a court operating under Zia`s Martial Law, declares that no Jinnah was not a shia. Can you see how stupid that sounds? A court deciding the religion and the faith of the Jinnah family once all members have passed away?

Who are you going to believe? This is very flimsy dude... very flimsy, and that is why I suspect Rediff published it... to show us Pakistanis how stupid and idiotic we are trying to change even the faith of the founder of the nation so that he is in line with our narrowminded ideals.

It goes without saying that the nazaria pakistan foundation also has functions on the life of Mariam Jinnah the ideal muslim woman of great Islamic character. I realized after long thought that Mariam is the elegant sophisticated and westernized Ruttie. Sure I think Ruttie is a great role model for Muslim Women. I definitely would like to see more Muslim women dress as elegantly in low cut dresses as Ruttie did.


-Manto

Naqshbandi,

Having seen MinhajulQuran up close and the ideology of Professor TahirulQadri ... I can say that while the Aqida might be same, TahirulQadri`s political ideology is total contrast to Noorani... for the record I don`t think the Professor is the best choice for the leadership of the country, nor am I even saying that I would want him to become the PM, but I think a man like him deserves to be in the assembly.

TahirulQadri is an Islamist ... nowhere have I suggested that he is or the MinhajulQuran is secular. Yes he speaks of a mustafvi inquilab, but let us also not forget his stance on issues:

1) He doesnt want to impose a selective version of Islam on anyone.

2) His views on women`s participation are way more advanced than his other Islamist counterparts.

3) He has taken a progressive stance on all issues, especially birth control and population control despite opposition from other mullahs.

4) His election campaign made little or no reference to the religious agenda. His platform was entirely political.

5) He doesn`t consider Shiites Kafir or fasiq. He considers them equal muslims of a different point of view.

6) He has been a major force in supporting a Muslim-christian solidarity forum. He regularly attends meetings of Pakistani christian community and attends their religious functions as well.

7) His MinhajulQuran is a freethinking institute which is instilling rational thought amongst the religious.

-Manto

manto--i am not pinning any hopes on sonia..i just asked a general q to harimau but since anyone would be better for india`s muslims --who are our brothers--than the bjp i will be happier if sonia wins than if the bjp win...this is not an endorsement of secularism. i will support any1 who will treat the muslims of india best..

**

as for jinnah`s being a sunni or shia..

:

Was Jinnah a Shia or Sunni?
Which sect of Islam did Mohammad Ali Jinnah belong to, Shia or Sunni?

Though it is commonly believed he was a Shia, Khaled Akhtar, a Communist, has evidence that the Quaid-e-Azam converted and became a Sunni later.

After Jinnah`s death in September 1948, his sister Fatima and then prime minister Liaquat Ali Khan had jointly filed a petition in the Karachi high court describing Jinnah as a ``Shia Khoja Mohammedan`` and sought that his will may be executed under the Shia inheritance law. Again, when Fatima died in 1967, another sister Shirin Bai claimed her property under the Shia law.

But this claim was contested in 1970 by Hussain Ali Ganji Walji in the high court. He maintained that both Jinnah and his sister were Sunnis and hence the property be disposed of in accordance with the Sunni inheritance law.

Syed Sharifuddin Pirzada, who appeared as a witness in the case, said that in 1901 Jinnah broke from the Ismaili Shia faith and became a Sunni when his sisters married Sunnis. This may have been a result of the disapprobation expressed by the Ismaili community.

In February 1970, the court rejected the joint affidavit of Fatima Jinnah and Liaquat Ali Khan which claimed Jinnah was a Shia. By then Fatima Jinnah had already died.

But in December 1976, the court rejected Ganji Walji`s plea against Shirin Bai`s claim on Fatima`s property under the Shia law. Which effectively meant the court had accepted the Jinnah family as Shia.

A high court bench reversed this verdict in December 1984. Now the court maintained that ``while the Quaid (Jinnah) was definitely not a Shia, the issue whether Fatima Jinnah was a Shia or not was also now open to for further inquiry``. Which suggested that Jinnah was a Sunni.

In the 1965 presidential election, Fatima Jinnah, who was pitted against President Ayub Khan, used the Shia card in Shia majority areas.

UNI

from http://www.rediff.com/news/1998/may/09jinnah.htm

manto==my comment about benazir becoming a good sunni perhaps by reading tahir ul qadri sahib`s books was made half in jest as i am convinced that she has only joined minhaj ul quran as a political stunt...

**

btw i have no problems with Minhaj ul Quran people--some of them are good friends of mine and in aqida the Minhajis as well as Prof. Tahir ul Qadri himself are all ``Barelvis`` (ie Sunnis). The aqida of Prof Sahib and Mawlana Noorani sahib is exactly the same. Their political positions are slightly different with the Prof being more flexible in his principles to get into power whereas Noorani sahib is more principled hence my preference for him but i would have no problems with prof. qadri or someone from his MuQ becoming PM of pakistan. btw the MuQ are Sunnis and not secularists by any stretch of the imagination. The prof is on record as saying that he wants a ``Mustafawi Inqilab`` in Pakistan.

``So I will keep to my Imam Ghazzali etc. thank you very much! :-) My eternity depends on it.``

Ah... so by condemning Ghazzali and the damage and harm he brought upon the Muslim thought with his rigid fixed and non-ijtehadi interpretation of Islam, we become kafirs eh?

-Manto