Point of View, 1971 Through Now

Chowk Staff #220 is the same as #219 and was written by me, not mantolives. So it is obviously some technical glitch in your otherwise fine website. (or perhaps it is an extreme example of ``great minds think alike`` ha! ha! )

``what better way of doing it by claiming the country as a Islamic Republic``

A naive statement. Jinnah did not make Pakistan the ``Islamic Republic``. The constitution that he authored and which remains buried, according to Begum Shahnawaz, in the yet to be declassified Jinnah papers had no vision of ``an Islamic republic``

``and putting a crescent and green on the national flag. ``

This is another naive statement. As successor authorities the Congress tricolor and the Muslim League flags were to become national flags. Jinnah infact Modified the flag to add the white to represent the non-muslims.. It is a well known fact that ``crescent`` itself is a Turkish symbol with no Islamic relevance... the crescent of Pakistani flag was modified also pointing upwards as an aspiration of progress. The meaning of the color green was also changed to stand for prosperity. The white, that was added for the minorities had a dual purpose to stand for peace.

``So, why did he and his coterie asked for a muslim state?``

Please read the Lahore Resolution. What are they asking for? Can you tell us? Because frankly it seems quite different from what you are asserting.

``Were they confident that 35-40% muslims will not be treated well by 50-55% Hindus? ``

They believed that constitutional safeguards and an adequately federal constitution with powers resting in the provinces will guarantee their rights in a United India... to this effect they accepted the Cabinet Mission Plan which was vetoed by Nehru.

``What about the fate of 10-15% non-muslims, maybe it didn`t matter him.``

What a sad and ironic statement to make about a man who was called the ``Protector general of the Hindus`` in the aftermath of partition. The Lahore resolution is clear on the matter ... Non-Muslim minorities would have equal rights.

``What about the muslims who would be left behind in india for some reasons?``

The Lahore Resolution did not envisage an exchange of populations. Instead it sought to make it binding on all states to protect the rights of minorities.

Sincerely

YLH

Yaseer
My Christmas euphoria is still there. Ok, if that makes you happy let us call it,... within couple of years law minister had to run from Pakistan and move to Calcutta.
And
Congress leaders (and minorities in Pakistan) still believed in some sense remaining in Pakistan`s new leadership. One of them (minorities) even accepted to become Pakistan`s law minister.

I would suggest moving away from celebrating/denigrating dead leaders. They are gone. Boundaries are there to stay. No need to defend anything that happen at that time as none of were even born than.

Monac

What nikki (in)articulates is interesting. panjabis, specially from indian side blame nehru and gandhi, and to a lesser extent jinnah for the 1947 mayhem. to me, this is astonishing. i mean, its the neighbors who killed neoghbors and men raped women with their own organs. at least at a social level, the panjabiyat should bear some responsibility, rather than blame nehru and gandhi. i mean, would panjabis do anything that nehru, gandhi (or jinnah for the wrong side of the border) ordered? yes, as political leaders they bear personal responsibility the same way HPs and Tahmeds favorite hero Modi does. But the people who did the mayhem with their own hands, and the society formed by its people are the first and second order beares of responsibility for the mayhem brought on their neighbors.

dost mittar #207 As the one who coined this phrase, and with all due respect, I think it is for me and not you to explain (as I have in my earlier post) what I mean by this phrase.

You insist on changing the meaning of this term to make it appear unfair to the indian posters you are seeking to defend. No, sir, these Indians you seek to portray as asking gentle questions based on scholarly studies of the western press in fact are not as innocent as you make them appear. These are individuals who are obsessed with ridiculing Pakistan, and make representations that have no bearing on the facts (or even the very articles that they themselves provide links to!!). They dont ask ``uncomfortable questions`` as you claim - they make malicious statements that misrepresent facts. Some of these have in fact themselves proudly claimed to come to chowk for purposes of ``paki-bashing``. So please dont try to paper over these obvious facts that are plain to see for anyone who has been on chowk for any length of time.

dost mittar #207 As the one who coined this phrase, and with all due respect, I think it is for me and not you to explain (as I have in my earlier post) what I mean by this phrase.

You insist on changing the meaning of this term to make it appear unfair to the indian posters you are seeking to defend. No, sir, these Indians you seek to portray as asking gentle questions based on scholarly studies of the western press in fact are not as innocent as you make them appear. These are individuals who are obsessed with ridiculing Pakistan, and make representations that have no bearing on the facts (or even the very articles that they themselves provide links to!!). They dont ask ``uncomfortable questions`` as you claim - they make malicious statements that misrepresent facts. Some of these have in fact themselves proudly claimed to come to chowk for purposes of ``paki-bashing``. So please dont try to paper over these obvious facts that are plain to see for anyone who has been on chowk for any length of time.

friend...

A factually incorrect and inaccurate comment from you.

Pakistan`s first Law Minister, Mr. Jogindranath Mandal, appointed by Mr. Jinnah(died 1948), resigned his post in 1950 owing to his own dissatisfaction with the Pakistani government especially with respect to the ``Objectives Resolution`` which I am totally against as well. His letter doesn`t show that he had to run for his life. Nor did he leave within ``months`` as you allege... how about a few years instead of few months.

Also inaccurate is your assertion that Jogindranath Mandal was a Congressite. He was a harijan Hindu from Bengal and an Ally of the Muslim League...

mannyd: You stand exposed for the lowlife that you are (given your own earlier post that HP identified and on which I also commented) by your crude remarks about christians, women, and dalits. I also recall your earlier defense of the murderer Modi.

Dont flatter yourself into thinking that I will waste any more time with caste-obsessed subhuman like you.

mannyd. . . #217 and others.

i stopped interacting at this thread for a reason. . . i think we`ve veered too far away from this being about the missing 54, and are once again trading potshots.

just let it go with tahmed and those approving of him. . . his gharoor and his prejudice, and his tendency to criticize the very thing he himself appears to lean towards in his posts. . . is there for more than a few to see. i see you`ve mentioned my name more than a few times. . . and am glad that you pay attention to what i have to say. but i would appreciate it if you didn`t use me as an example to fire any more volleys his way.

this ridiculous notion of CREIPS. . . is made even more so, when there are pakistanis here who waste no time themselves in presuming, assuming and putting forth who indians are and what they should be. i see no end to these presumptions, assumptions and definitions. . . what you are trying to impress here, has already been done time and time again. he will not change. move on?

re:#214 by Gandiv

``there is a law that says that a woman must produce 4 witnesses to prove a rape,

How in the holly hell they expect 4 people to silently watch the rape, note the time and place and pack back home to appear before court?

This really sounds moronic! ``

Thats not the end of it. The woman will be tried for adultery !!! This is Justice, Mohammed sthyle ....

re:#212 by Mantolives

``Minorities living in Pakistan or Hindustan do not cease to be citizens of their respective states by virtue of their belonging to particular faith, religion or race.``

So why the hell did he ask for a seperate muslim state?

``that the minorities in Pakistan would be treated as our citizens and will enjoy all the rights as any other community. Pakistan SHALL pursue this policy and do all it can to create a sense of security and confidence in the Non-Muslim minorities of Pakistan.``

Yeah Right, what better way of doing it by claiming the country as a Islamic Republic and putting a crescent and green on the national flag.

So, why did he and his coterie asked for a muslim state?
Were they confident that 35-40% muslims will not be treated well by 50-55% Hindus?
What about the fate of 10-15% non-muslims, maybe it didn`t matter him.
What about the muslims who would be left behind in india for some reasons?

It is quite foolish the way things were executed on both the sides of the border.

#191 by HP on January 10, 2005 5:44pm PT

As Avenger has pointed out before, you have a disease of selective quotation. Go back and read my post #187 again slowly and speak each word as you read it. It might help you with understanding it or it may not but it is worth a try. You said ``Muslims are Achchoot, Dalits are achchoot , Christians are Achchoot. Muslims, Dalits and Christians and people of other faiths are not allowed in any ``Genetically superior`` household because they would “Nashat” the house, after all they are all ``Neech Zaat`` and Kameen. ``

You did not feel any repugnance in bringing Christians and untouchability in your assertion about Hinduism.

“I find it repugnant that you chose to bring the Christians in to this in such a despicable manner. But why did I expect anything less?”

I find it far more repulsive for you to use words like ‘repugnance, despicable manners’ or use political correctness to deny historical facts or twist my words to silence me. Tell me which one of my following statements is wrong:

1. There were latrines in ‘Pakistan’ in 1946.
2. They were cleaned by low caste Hindus.
3. After 1947, most of these low caste Hindus converted to Christianity.
4. If there are any Paki Chowkis belonging to this group, please come out and show us Hindus how you fared in Pakistan in the last fifty seven years. If you did well, more power to you.

Why is this question so despicable and repugnant?

“But why did I expect anything less?”.

You are the only one who can answer what and why you expected. I can only venture some guesses:

A. Because you are a duffer?
B. Because I believe in exceeding the customer’s expectations?
C. Because of your genetic inferiority?

Talking of genetics, it has been my experience that all Paki Chowkies either are descendents of Prithvi Raj Chauhan, Halaku, Abdali or the Prophet. There are none who would say “ Hey, my grandma cleaned toilets, became Muslim and put my father through Govt. College Lahore” or “ I come from a long line of Khandani Chamaars, who became Muslim and threw away the yoke of Hindu oppression”.

May I please have my CREIP award now?

Comments 204 and 205 are mine.

Tahmed32 #196, 197, 198 and 199:

Do not look now but you do look like a Hanuman with his tail on fire. No need to apologise to any nice Indians about your `strong` language. Please hand me my CREIP award quickly and all will be forgiven.

If you do have any questions, you can ask me directly or if you prefer I can wait until HP translates your squeals. If you do not know what `Chuhdi` means, ask your buddy Salim. He was calling Ana by that term on UP until Ana explained that not all christians are low caste `Chuhadaas` and Manto had to `vouch` for her true blue Pakistaniness. I thought you knew everything. Apparently not.

Veeresh:

You are hitting a stone wall on chowk....none of them are interested in even thinking about 1971...especially Indian POW-s.....and anyway the Paki army takes no POW-s remember Saurabh KAlia......the Paki Faujis consider themselves as the ultimate jehadis and have a fascination for those long knives....so forget this miserable hunt for the missing POW-s................OTH, I would advise you to get hold of a good private investigative agency and ask them to recruit some un-employed youth to infilterate PAkistan....bribe the jailors and get the information.....then get some merceneries to conduct a jail break Rambo style.....I would be willing to contribute for this operation......

Veeresh:

You are hitting a stone wall on chowk....none of them are interested in even thinking about 1971...especially Indian POW-s.....and anyway the Paki army takes no POW-s remember Saurabh KAlia......the Paki Faujis consider themselves as the ultimate jehadis and have a fascination for those long knives....so forget this miserable hunt for the missing POW-s................OTH, I would advise you to get hold of a good private investigative agency and ask them to recruit some un-employed youth to infilterate PAkistan....bribe the jailors and get the information.....then get some merceneries to conduct a jail break Rambo style.....I would be willing to contribute for this operation......