My Pakistan Diary: The Feudal

Zamir...


After 2 weeks of arguing with this guy Nakhok... I am surprised that he hasn`t uttered a word of apology for accusing me of everything under the sun... nor has he answered the questions I asked him.

What our army did in Bangladesh was shameless and utterly wrong ... and so was the indiscriminate killing of innocent West Pakistanis.. What happened with Bangladesh was the result of 12 years of Military rule... and lack of democracy...

Bengalis are our brothers... and I am sure you join me in wishing them all the best in their effort to become a modern democratic state.... dair aye durust aye.

-YLH

Montolives #154

I agree with you, arguing with this guy is a waste of time. Look at #164 – He has got the question right, but a question which could have been answered in simple Yes or No and a two digit number was turn into a long speech with nothing worth reading.

AlephNull #164
I am aware of the facts regarding the current status of Pakistan’s economy as well as the economies of other south Asian countries. You have missed the point. The purpose of referring to a five year old article was show what most outsiders think and what they see. Besides the numbers you refer to are also questionable – we have to remember that at least 70% of Pakistan’s economy is underground. If foreign exchange is your criteria then Pakistan’s foreign exchange is also about $12 billion and the per capita income is expected to reach $600 by the end of the year.

Nakhok #164
You haven’t given me a straight answer. Let me repeat the question “… what percent of Bengalis really wanted to separate, and weather they were in a majority or not?

As I said earlier, I don’t know any Pakistani who does not blame our own wrong policies for the events of 1971. However, Tikka Khan is not a national hero in Pakistan, but the murderers, rapists, thugs of Indian trained Mukti-Bahini terrorist army are national heros in Bangladesh.


nakhok #165
What Bangladesh has achieved in last few decades is really remarkable. The programs started by Greeman Bank are being studied all over the world and are being copied in several countries including Pakistan. I am not going to argue with you about the numbers you refer to from UNDP either.

If these numbers make you feel better than that is fine with me. However, the ground realities are different. There is a reason why hundreds of thousands of Bangladeshis are living illegally in both India and in Pakistan. It is estimated that there are over a million Bangladeshis living illegally in Karachi alone. If you visit any upper, or upper middle class household in Karachi chances are that you will run into a Bangladeshi working as a domestic servant. Most of them make about $100 - $125 per month, but they prefer to work illegally in Pakistan than to stay in Bangladesh. Before you jump on my case – I would like to point out that most of them are not living in Pakistan from before 1971 – but most have come after 1971.


Risking their lives, thousands of illegal immigrants from Bangladesh cross the India-Pakistan border in a desperate attempt to find food and shelter…
http://www.flonnet.com/fl2005/stories/20030314006612300.htm

There are an estimated 16 lakh illegal Bangladeshi immigrants in Karachi.
(http://www.blonnet.com/2003/02/26/stories/2003022600110800.htm)


Over the years, some parts of Pakistan, including the city of Karachi in Sindh province, the North West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Balochistan Province, have become practically ungovernable because of large-scale illegal migration from Bangladesh and Afghanistan
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EB06Df03.html

Pakistan. A study by Shirkatgah, a non-governmental organization, found that an influx of over a million migrant workers in the fishing industry is the main reason for a decline in wages of local men and women in the Korangi coast area. …. Illegal immigrants from Bengal and Burma have taken over the task of shrimp cleaning, displacing local women.
(http://migration.ucdavis.edu/mn/more.php?id=2056_0_5_0)

Ofcourse we can expect the repetition of same lies from Nakhok.... he will launch personal attacks against me, call me racist , anti-Bengali, and a bigot... but he will not accept that his lies have been caught yet again.

Nakhok,


Fine... I am a liar, untrained, obfuscator and racist against Bengalis etc...


But for the 100th time ... How do you account for Suhrawardy`s letters as archived by the US NATIONAL ARCHIVES 845.00/11-2847

How are `RETURN ADDRESSES` merely `INFERENCES` ? Gandhi also wrote to these addresses... maybe Gandhi was also part of this grand anti-Bengali conspiracy hatched by those Punjabi and Mohajir politicians?


These letters are there archived in many document collections and confirmed by A G Noorani who is an Indian writer... (see posts 190-191)


Similarly your claims about Nazimuddin being the henchman of Jinnah are contradicted by A K Azad who describes Nazimuddin as a man of great organizational ability sidelined because Suhrawardy was a henchman of Jinnah? Is the famous Maulana Azad a Pakistani agent too? By not answering direct question and calling me names you`ve lowered yourself in the eyes of those who you are trying to convince, not that you can convince by making up nonfacts.


Learn a lesson from this exchange.... grow up and accept the facts. And stop lying about me... and my posts. I haven`t accepted any of your lies. The fact that you can lie so blatantly about my posts goes to show that you are without any sense of integrity or shame.

PS:

`` like Joseph Goebbels, believes that a falsehood, repeated a myriad times, will get to be accepted as the truth.``


You`ve indeed described your style of argument very eloquently. This is what you`ve done. Shameless... thats all I have to say for you.

A good book on Suhrawardy`s life :

Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy : a biography
By: Shaista Suhrawardy Ikramullah
Publisher: Karachi ; New York : Oxford University Press, 1991.
ISBN: 0195774140


Thank God ... there are enough books out there to rebutt the goebellian lies of people like Nakhok.

MORE INFO:

On 6th March 1948.... Hossein Shaheed Suhrawardy addressed the Pakistan Constituent Assembly for the first time.... he said:


`Sir, a person has not only loyalty, he has several loyalties to several causes which are not ``antagonistic to each other, and I feel, Sir, that the greatest loyalty which a person can possess, is a loyalty to humanity which transcends all parochial loyalties .... if this State is not founded on the cooperative goodwill of all the nationals, a time will come when this State will destroy itself. `



Where does Nakhok think the Pakistan Constituent Assembly was? Calcutta...


The PCA was located in Karachi, the present building of the Sindh Assembly.... records can be checked for the PCA debates....

For verification online... here is a letter by M P Bhandara, Parsi leader, Pakistani MP, and Bapsi Sidhwa`s brother :


http://www.dawn.com/2002/01/19/letted.htm#9


Now .... I wonder if M P Bhandara is lying too?

And here is the view of Barrister Shahida Jamil who is the granddaughter of Suhrawardy.... Maybe she is lying too...




http://www.dawn.com/2001/12/16/letted.htm#2

In his article (Dec 5), Mr M. P. Bhandhara has paid kind tributes to the memory of my late grandfather, Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy, former Prime Minister of Pakistan, 38 years after his death, but has also made some unfortunate comments, probably due to the ``random readings`` he did on my grandfather. It is always dangerous to attempt assessments after ``random readings``. I am, therefore, constrained to write to set the record straight, lest some student of history gets confused.

Mr Bhandara has wrongly stated that late Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy was a ``Bengali nationalist``. In fact, he was a strong Pakistani nationalist before Partition and after Partition. His famous speech delivered in 1946 at the Muslim League Legislators Convention, presided over by the Quaid-i-Azam at Delhi, when he moved the formal Delhi Resolution on Pakistan as the Premier-elect of Bengal of the only Muslim League Ministry formed by virtue of its elected majority, was titled, ``Pakistan is my life``. In 1962, in his famous letter to the late President Ayub Khan, he says, ``Pakistan is one and indivisible. It is for this we risked our lives and have grown old``.

He was also not of ``Iranian extraction``. His lineage is derived from the great Sufi scholar, Sheikh Shahbuddin Suhrawardy of Baghdad, who was of Arab descent.

Mr Bhandara has also referred to ``his efforts leading towards a nonfederal type of state``, which he claims, ``made sense to the sensible`` and which he goes on to describe as,`` ... confederation``.

I knew my grandfather`s political views well, as I was fortunate enough to have had several discussions with him while studying political science for my B.A Degree. He opposed ``confederation``. In his own words on the subject, written in his unfinished memories, just before his death, published by University Press Ltd., he records: ``The idea of confederation was then mooted as the only possible solution that would avoid separation. I had been approached by those who were thinking on the above line, as well as by students and others amongst the younger generation, and I had put my foot down on all talk which might loosen the ties between East and West Pakistan``.

So let there be no doubt, Suhrawardy`s struggle for a fair disbursement of powers between the Centre and the provinces was, as he says, ``for the sake of an integrated Pakistan`` and was based in his firm conviction that ``Pakistan is one and indivisible``. This makes more sense to the sensible.

BARRISTER SHAHIDA JAMIL

Federal Minister for Law, Justice Human Rights and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad

---

http://www.dawn.com/2001/12/05/op.htm#2



Remembering Suhrawardy




By Mr M.P. Bhandara


This is a personal memoir of a fabulous man whom I had the good fortune of being fairly closely acquainted with for a short period, some forty years ago. I met him in adverse circumstances. What follows are a few remembered vignettes and some random readings on him, much later.

My father was recalled to the Mercy of the Lord in March 1961. Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy was his legal counsel in an on-going litigation before the Lahore High Court. I was a green 21 years old and HSS was in his 70th year. It appeared intimidating to me to deal with so senior a person as my distinguished lawyer, who had rubbed shoulders on equal terms with Gandhi, Jinnah and Nehru, who had been a prime minister of Pakistan and was at the time one of the great legal luminaries of the Pakistan bar.

We had a common Oxford bond, which helped. He was one of the first Indians to win the prestigious Bachelor of Civil Law degree from Oxford (he kept up with his Latin to his last days), and me, with a most undistinguished record of a sojourn there. From our first meeting, HSS put me at ease as one accustomed to switching effortlessly to the wavelength of the interlocutor. There was nothing avuncular, patronizing or condescending in this wavelength adjustment. Chronological age never mattered to HSS; he counted himself among the young at heart and mind.

I suggested that he stay with us at our Warris Road residence instead of the once famous Faletti`s Hotel, an offer that was accepted immediately. We gave him a bedroom upstairs, which soon became a legal chamber, teahouse, and political meeting place. The bedroom next door was for Menezes, a stuttering hero-worshipping amanuensis who was wont to hark back to the `Mid-Mid-Mid-napore` antecedents of his hero. A bit of a Sancho Panza.

A typical scene could be described as follows: HSS sprawled on a bed receiving a massage, which might last for an hour or more, with books, letters, papers lying all over, simultaneously listening to junior lawyer(s) reading relevant law texts with closed eyes in preparation for a court appearance the following day; HSS dictating notes to Menezes.

A room that could barely hold ten persons would soon be overflowing with about thirty as the evening shadows lengthen; politico-lawyer types and other adulators crowd in throwing questions and HSS answering in his impeccable melodious crisp Queen`s English with a relish of civilized humour and bits of Ghalib and other Urdu poetry thrown in. Quite often HSS would recite the first line or two and the caucus in the room would make an impromptu chorus and complete the stanza.

HSS was short, rotund, quick of wit, word and movement. Had he been less diminutive than he was, a parody might have suggested comparison with the rubber man of Michelin. And indeed on the ballroom floor - and remember in those good old days Saturday night fever enveloped the nocturnal hours every evening at the Faletti`s - HSS would be bouncing in his carefully attired DJ on the floor like a yoyo ball for the best part of the evening.

My recall is that his favourite drink was a plain soda; I was surprised that he did not drink alcohol. Yet, as the evening wore on his spirits rose with the ambience of the gathering of which he was the centre invariably.

He believed in living life to the full with seldom a dull moment. Once after a Faletti`s evening, he suggested that we call on the Watsons. I protested it was already I a.m. in the morning, but the protest was dismissed and under a cold December moon we headed in my trusty non-heated Opel for the Canal Bank residence of the Watsons.

Watson, an American academic of sorts, with his Russo-Japanese wife, a former ballerina, were a popular couple. Later it was discovered during the Nixon Watergate hearings that he was a CIA undercover man. Watsons had an open house. On an earlier occasion I noticed HSS and political friends were being entertained in one part of the house and in another was lodged Faiz Ahmad Faiz and assorted literary types.

Two great constellations almost under one roof. But back to the Watson house, HSS suggested that I toot the horn hard to wake up the household. A perplexed Watson emerged in his dressing gown. What followed was a hilarious interlude which lasted till the wee hours of the morning with peals of laugher and Mrs Watson refusing to do a bit of ballet for us.

People often refer to HSS as a `ladies man`. This is but a vulgarization. HSS adored the company of cultured and intelligent women, who were a foil to his quick wit and charm.

But, what made this man fabulous? His generosity, humanity and bravery. He seemed not to care a Tinker`s cuss for money. His wealth was himself; it was his bank. Money had value only in the hands of a needy. He was incapable of holding money - a compulsion to give it away the moment it came into his hands to poor political friends or servants so that he would soon be reduced to the `pennyless state` he preferred to be in. In this sense he was a `fakir.` Most of the great houses of Pakistan were open to him and he had enough meal invitations to last more than one lifetime. Politics, law, socializing were strands that wove into one another to promise him a brimful of life.

Apart from this fakir-like quality, he was as brave as a lion. He often narrated how he and Gandhi literally avoided a massacre of Muslims by going unarmed to live in the midst of a violent Hindu upsurge during the Calcutta Riots of 1947. He was then no longer chief minister of Bengal. The Hindus were after his blood, holding him responsible for the carnage done earlier by the Muslims. Instead of relying on the British Indian army force, Suhrawardy and Gandhi decided to jointly enter the maelstrom, preaching nonviolence and offering their lives to save Muslim lives.

What mattered for HSS was living the day, not yesterday. He was considerably upset with Ayub Khan`s rule. He was sure a cataclysmic event would soon overtake the country. One of his remarks I do remember well: ``You people sit comfortably in West Pakistan and have no idea of the seething alienation in the East. If only I had one tenth of the power of Ayub Khan, as prime minister, I would have made Pakistan a going concern. East Pakistan simply won`t carry on this way. Talking to you Punjabis is like a dialogue between the deaf and the dumb.``

Whenever Ayub Khan was discussed, it seemed to distress him. He clearly saw Ayub moving on a false tack. If only Ayub Khan had made a partnership with the Big Daddy of Bengal, instead of throwing him into prison; but that, alas, was not to be.

My strong impression is that he believed in Pakistan and all his efforts leading towards a nonfederal type of state made sense to the sensible but not to an influential Lahore newspaper and its middle class readership to whom the word confederation itself was treason. He saw himself as the last link. One of his favourite quips: ``Apart from the English language and PIA, I am the only link between East and West Pakistan.``

HSS, no doubt, was a Bengali nationalist. But he was not strictly speaking a son of the soil, being of Iranian extraction. He would certainly have preferred a tripartite partition of India, as was envisaged in the original Pakistan resolution of 1940. But after an initial spell in India following partition in deference to his great concern for Indian Muslims left behind - an interlude played up by his enemies in Pakistan no end - he returned to East Pakistan and played a distinguished role in Pakistan politics. He was founder of the Awami League; one of his acolytes was Sheikh Mujibur Rahman who ultimately became the `father of Bangladesh.` The `tripartite solution` of the subcontinent did finally come about in ways that did little credit to us.

HSS did not wear his patriotism on his sleeve. He would have heartily agreed with Samuel Johnson`s dictum: `patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.` He was a humanist, a renaissance man of the widest culture; he had no time for the pettiness of pelf and power. He was a big enough man to suffer the insults heaped on his integrity and could forgive his accusers for they knew not in their ignorance and blind prejudice where the nation was heading.

The goodness of a good man permeates all his actions. It penetrates through the heavy foliage that blocks the beneficial rays of the sun. Not only does it enhance the quality of life of those exposed to it but also is a lighthouse for generations to come.

The writer is a former member of the National Assembly.

Here is another interesting piece of information.... AIML was dissolved in the Karachi session of December 1947.... 2 Members voted against the dissolution of the All India Musim League: 1) Iftikharruddin 2) Suhrawardy...

Here is an `internet` proof of this: Page 4/145 of A G Noorani`s research work:

http://www.jamiahamdard.edu/PDF/Studies%20on%20Islam.pdf


How could Suhrawardy vote against the resolution to dissolve the AIML if he wasn`t physically present in Karachi in Mid December?? Unless ofcourse they had video conferencing or something... amazing man this Suhrawardy... according to Nakhok he was banned from Pakistan, but he was giving Lahore and Karachi addresses on his letters, addressing the PCA for the first time on 6th March 1948... and voting against the Resolution to dissolve the AIML in December of 1947 in Karachi.


Simply amazing...


Ofcourse... Nakhok will not take up this in his repetitive post.

# 193 mantolives

+++++
Suhrawardy`s staying back in Kolkata is not the issue. Your claim was that he was not allowed into Pakistan. His letters archived in US National Archives, the citation of which I have already given in a number of posts proves otherwise...
+++++

Deliberate and false inferences. Typical obfuscations. Downright lies.

Mantolives is deliberately drawing errorneous inferences from ``letters archived in US National Archives`` to prove what he knows to be false. This is indeed the height of dishonesty

Mantolives has finally admitted that Suhrawardy had initially stayed back in Kolkata. And regardless of whether Mantolives likes to acknowledge it or not, it is a quite well known fact that when Suhrawardy tried to enter Pakistan, he was dubbed a traitor and an Indian agent and then sent back to Kolkata. I have given two references readily accessible by the internet (one from Pakistan and one from Bangladesh). Anyway this is a very well known fact - and certainly not a closely guarded secret. I shouldn`t have to quote chapter and verse from a thousand different sources to prove it. Two are more than enough.

And Mantolives knows the facts as well, but he is deliberately making false inferences from ``letters archived in US National Archives`` to prove otherwise.

Initially Liaqat Ali Khan pretended that he had nothing to do with the externment - on July 13, 1948 (Jinnah was still the Governor General) Prime Minister Liaquat Ali Khan informed Suhrawardy that the action of expulsion from East Bengal taken against him was a ``matter entirely for the Provincial Government and he (Liaquat Ali Khan) can`t interfere in their administration.``

But even this pretext was not maintained for long. Liaqat Ali Khan declared in the Constituent Assembly, ``Today in Pakistan there is no difference between the Central Government and Provincial Government. The central Government is composed of the provinces. …. We must kill this provincialism for all times.`` The Liaqat Ali Khan government had Suhrawardy`s membership to the First Constituent Assembly terminated with effect from March 2, 1949 on the plea that Suhrawardy was not a permanent resident of Pakistan!

Mantolives found it difficult to accept that:
(1) When Suhrawardy tried to come to Pakistan from Calcutta, he was dubbed a traitor and sent back to Calcutta.
(2) The Liaqat Ali Khan government terminated Suhrawardy`s membership in the first Constituent Assembly on the plea that he was not a permanent resident of Pakistan.

Mantolives took the above facts so badly that he accused me of concocting facts, demaded ``Have you no shame?``, made pejorative innuendoes about ``Bengali historians`` and advised me condescendingly not to get hung up on ``some op ed and some Bangladeshi professor`` and poured scorn over the National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh in the bargain.

Mantolives is deliberately drawing errorneous inferences from ``letters archived in US National Archives`` to prove what he knows to be false. This is indeed the height of dishonesty. If dissembling is his delight, then he can continue to wallow in his falsehoods. What do I care.

Perhaps Mantolives, like Joseph Goebbels, believes that a falsehood, repeated a myriad times, will get to be accepted as the truth. Fortified by this Goebbelsian believe, Mantolive can continue to lie and dissemble. But the past won`t change just because Mantolives chooses to lie and lie and lie.

Whether Mantolives can accept it or not, it will remain a fact that:
(1) When Suhrawardy tried to come to Pakistan from Calcutta, he was dubbed a traitor and sent back to Calcutta.
(2) The Liaqat Ali Khan government terminated Suhrawardy`s membership in the first Constituent Assembly on the plea that he was not a permanent resident of Pakistan.

Welcome awaits India`s PM in Pakistani birthplace

By Tahir Ikram

GAH, Pakistan (Reuters) - The people of Gah in Pakistan have a good feeling about Manmohan Singh.

He may have left more than 60 years ago, but this native son has become India`s prime minister-elect.

``I am very happy a son of our village is going to be the prime minister of India,`` said Raja Gulsher, a farmer who served in the medical corp during the 1965 war, one of three fought with India since Partition in 1947.

``If any of the air and water in this place has had an effect on him, he will strike a friendship with Pakistan.``

In a quirky happenstance, both leaders of the nuclear-armed rivals India and Pakistan were born in what is now enemy territory.

Pakistan`s President Pervez Musharraf was born in Delhi.

Both men carry memories of those tumultuous times when the subcontinent was divided, millions of Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus were killed, and Pakistan was created.

Singh has pledged to work with Musharraf to put decades of enmity between their now nuclear-armed nations behind them.

Gulsher said he knows it won`t be easy for Singh.

``We know his constraints. Even then I am sure he will maintain friendship with us. If he comes to our village I`ll be the first to welcome him.``

The pace of life in this rural backwater some 80 km southwest of Islamabad hasn`t changed much since Singh was raised here in the 1930s.

Traffic races over the nearby motorway, but there is no road from it to Gah. Women still draw water by hand from the wells, where Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs of a bygone era once filled their pitchers from separate pools.

They have electricity these days, and some have televisions.

But the modern world makes few intrusions among the mud walled homes or down the narrow uneven lanes of this community of less than two thousand people and their cattle, sheep and goats.

What has changed now is that everyone is a Muslim.

PRIMARY SCHOOL

When Singh attended the government primary school in the late 1930s, Hindus and Sikhs accounted for about half of Gah`s population.

``We used to live without any problem. We used to help each other,`` said Mohammad Khan about relations between Muslims and Hindus. ``They were half of the population. We used to play together, we used to fight together, we used to study together.``

Khan was serving with the British Indian Army in Malaysia in August, 1947 when independence came, and recalls raising a Pakistan flag, while a Christian soldier hoisted India`s tricolour.

Memories of Partition in Gah were less proud.

Baz Khan was 12 years old.

``I was grazing cattle when people came running towards me saying the village has been attacked. I could see smoke and fire coming out of the village.``

Muslims from other villages had attacked Hindu and Sikh households. Some Muslims from Gah, Khan says, gave shelter to their Hindu and Sikh neighbours.

Manmohan Singh`s father moved his family from Gah some years earlier and and during the upheaval of Partition, the dried fruit merchant moved to Amritsar.

Memories in Gah have faded.

Ahmed Khan can`t remember attending class with the young Manmohan Singh, though the school register shows they were contemporaries.

But Khan, while tilling his field under the scorching sun with temperatures soaring above 40 Celsius, said he was proud of the fact today.

``It`s a matter of great happiness. I would want him to be prime minister of India and he should come and visit his village,`` Ahmed Khan told Reuters.

Farmer Mohammad Ashraf at first didn`t remember any Manmohan Singh either.

But asked if he knew a son of Gurmukh Singh Kohli, Ashraf`s seventy-year-old wrinkled face broke into a grin.

``Oh, you mean little Mohna.``

He has no idea what happened to little Mohna after 1941.

``I failed class four, and he passed, after that I don`t know where he went.``

Singh`s new address is 7, Racecourse Road, New Delhi, official residence of the Prime Minister of India. It`s a long way from Gah.

Nakhok,

Now that you know that you deliberately misrepresented facts and got caught you are trying to confuse the entire issue in esoteric issues and by lying about me. You are attributing statements I never made and you deliberately detracking the argument. Merely repeating the same garbage 100 times will not make it true. Unlike you I have the satisfaction of knowing that I am not a liar. My posts and citations are there and so are yours... your citations don`t even back up your claims. I have no personal interest or axe to grind. Let this be a lesson to you. If you can`t argue on facts, don`t concoct lies and try to claim them as facts. Suhrawardy`s staying back in Kolkata is not the issue. Your claim was that he was not allowed into Pakistan. His letters archived in US National Archives, the citation of which I have already given in a number of posts proves otherwise... there is no misinterpreting them... Suhrawardy wrote the return address himself, and Gandhi addressed letters to him on the same address. Similarly I never disputed the fact that Suhrawardy`s membership was rescinded in 1949... I challenge you to show where I disputed it.


In any event I have tried my level best not to stoop to your level of personal insults but let me state very honestly that my final conclusion is that you are not ok psychologically and should seek help in the matter ASAP. Either that or you are a very sinister sort of a liar.

-YLH

# 191 by mantolives

+++++
I am disputing your lie that he was not allowed in Pakistan which is such a stupid and idiotic claim even for someone like you.
+++++

Mantolives is disputing facts, and he is doing so knowingly and dishonestly.

Suhrawardy had stayed back in Calcutta after the 1947 partition. Mantolives knows damn well that Suhrawardy was dubbed a traitor and an Indian agent and then sent back to Calcutta when he first tried to enter Pakistan. I have cited articles from DAWN in Pakistan and New Age in Dhaka in support of my claim. But Mantolives already knew the facts - he was acting dishonestly when he disputed the facts and and when he loftily advised me not to get hung up over one op ed or one Bangladeshi historian. Mantolives took to quoting ``primary sources`` and misinterpreting them to dispute facts he knew to be true.

Mantolives wasn`t interested in facts, only in obfuscating them. He was dissembling.

Likewise, Mantolives took to dishonestly disputing the fact that Suhrawardy`s membership to the first Constituent Assembly had been terminated by the Liaqat Ali Khan government on the ground that Suhrawardy was not a permanent resident of Pakistan. To that end, Mantolives took to pouring scorn on the National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh and on what he referred to as revisionist historians at the Awami League Court.

Mantolives initially disputed that Suhrawardy`s memebership in the Constituent Assembly had been terminated, and then, when his lies became unsustainable, Mantolives blurted that the termination had been eventually overturned by the Federal Court. That`s the height of dishonesty. If Mantolives believes that the termination was eventually overturned, why then had he claimed that Suhrawardy`s membership hadn`t been terminated?

Mantolives wasn`t interested in the facts if they were disagreeable to him, only in sweeping the disagreeable facts under the rug by whatever means it took to do so. To that end he made dishonest claims - quoting ``primary sources`` to disprove facts that he knew to be true. And in the bargain, he poured scorn over Bangladeshi historians and the National Encyclopedia of Bangladesh.

Anyway, my citations and quotations were only for those Chowkies who were interested in the facts - not for educating Mantolives who knew the facts but had taken to disputing them dishonestly. I couldn`t care less if Mantolives continues to wallow in willful lies and denial of facts.

Nakhok,

Your lies never stop do they.

Once again... Suhrawardy was the middle man between Jinnah and Gandhi after partition... he travelled between Pakistan and India on several occasions. He stayed at Nawab Mamdot`s villa and Karachi`s palace hotel. I am not claiming anything else... you are deconstructing your own demons.
Gandhi`s famous offer of coming to Pakistan was carried to Jinnah by Suhrawardy himself. Nobody is disputing that Suhrawardy was in Kolkatta .... I am disputing your lie that he was not allowed in Pakistan which is such a stupid and idiotic claim even for someone like you.


In the US National Archives Suhrawardy`s correspondence is filed under Suhrawardy`s Peace Plan .... the citation is : US NATIONAL ARCHIVES 845.00/11-2847 .... the return address on several letters is Mamdot Villa Lahore and Palace Hotel Karachi... on atleast on occasion it is `on plane from Lahore to Karachi`.


Unlike you I am not in the business of concocting facts. You lied. I merely showed you the fact. Instead of accusing me of racism show some humility and humanity that seems to be totally lacking in you. Once again you have completely exposed yourself... pathetic and shameless.


-YLH

PS: None of your tedious citations prove a word of what you are claiming.

FROM Frontline the Indian Newspaper


``The only real disclosure and one of truly historical significance is the little known correspondence between Gandhi, Jinnah, Nehru and Suhrawardy in October 1947 on the question of the minorities. It is not drawn from Jinnah`s papers but from the U.S. National Archives.``


http://www.flonnet.com/fl1924/stories/20021206001107400.htm




These are the letters I am referring to.... they prove conclusively that Suhrawardy was travelling back and forth between Lahore-Karachi-Dehli-Calcutta...



The US National Archives Citation is: US NATIONAL ARCHIVES 845.00/11-2847