Point of View, 1971 Through Now

Dear Veeresh

Was browsing chowk and really liked your article - touching to know there is someone who cares about people `lost`, families waiting, children growing up in an empty wait for fathers/ others who have strayed and not returned.

Cheers to your spirit!

Regards,
Anita Lobo

A ``Thank you`` to those who helped. You know who you are and I respect your confidence as well as trust.

+++


http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=63952

Pak govt report says over 180 Indians in its jails



RAUF KLASRA


Posted online: Thursday, February 03, 2005 at 0208 hours IST



ISLAMABAD, FEBRUARY 2: As many as 182 Indian prisoners, including five
women, have been languishing in Pakistani jails on `unknown charges` since
1971, with many suffering from loss of memory, an official report disclosed.
Interior Minister Aftab Ahmed Khan Sherpao will present the classified
report in the Senate on Wednesday. This is for the first time a Pakistani
government has officially recorded data of Indian prisoners, many of whom
entered mistakenly into its territory. A copy obtained by The News reveals
that out of 182 prisoners, 30 are Muslims and a few are Christians. Rest are
either Hindus or Sikhs.


The report is silent about whether the prisoners were ever produced before
any Pakistani courts and formally charge sheeted or not. An official said
the report suggests the detainees were never produced before any court. It
also fails to explain what charges were framed against the prisoners and the
arrangements were made with India to help their release. Similarly, the
report does not give details whether the government had any plan to release
them if it had no sound cases against them as a gesture of goodwill with
India. The report has also not given the names of jails where they have been
kept.
However, the report says the government had given Indian consular access to
50 Indian prisoners. The report is also silent about their place of birth,
which could have helped their relatives to identify them. A number of the
unfortunate prisoners, according to the sources in the ministry, have lost
their memory and are suffering from depression and psychiatric problems.
India had handed over a list of its 54 citizens believed to be in Pakistani
jails. The exchange of list was also made part of 98 confidence building
measures that India exchanged with Pakistan. The Pakistan government had tri
ed to find out information about those 54 Indians but could not do it.
The names and particulars of prisoners as recorded by the Pakistan Interior
Ministry
Mohammad Sadiq alias Wela s/o Wali Mohammad, Ibrahim Ghulam s/o Ghulam
Hussain, Mohammad Usman s/o Mohammad Amin, Waljis s/o Rai Mal, Mohammad Amin
s/o Haji Mohammad, Mohammad Javed Hussain s/o Mohammad Gulzar Hussain, Gopal
Bhagat s/o Heman Bagat, Mehan Khan so Adat Khan, Maya daughter of Wall
Singh, Qasim s/o Mohamamd, Liaqat Khan so Qurdat Khan, Manoranjan alias
Mohammad Imran so Widya Sagar, Hira Lal s/o Dalir Singh, Munawar Lal s/o of
Das Ram, Hadeep Singh so Charan Singh, Talal Raj s/o Punjab Raj, Ameerjeet
Singh s/o Mohinder Pall, Kernail Singh s/o Kartar Singh, Narmal Singh s/o
Sonara Singh, Sohan Singh so Sinjgara Singh, Rajeev Singh S/O Jashveender
Singh, Satesh Kumar s/o Shery Mohar Lal, Rakesh Kumar s/o Jeet Ram, Sirbjeet
Singh s/o Dilbagh Singh, Pershutum Lal s/o Charan Das, Jaspal Singh s/o
Sardar Chaman Singh, Sohan Singh s/o Ameerjeet Singh, Jaspal Singh s/o Suran
Singh, Jernel Singh so Suran Singh, Charhanjeet Singh so Balvaher Singh,
Mehender Singh s/o Darshan Singh, Perdeep Kumar so Harbans Lal, Gagan Deep
Singh so Dersaj, Haresh Kumar s/o Mangoram, Baljeet Singh so Taram Singh,
arseel Lal s/o Boota Lal, Karnel Singh s/o Purdeep Singh, Jamspal Singh s/o
Sevram Singh, Otar Singh s/o of Mangha Singh, Shahra Singh s/o Sone Singh,
Davinder Singh so Lakhvinder Singh, Daveinder Singh s/o Lakhvinder Singh,
Ilyas s/o Badiu, Ram Kumar s/o of Amir Kumar, Shahidul Islam s/o Abdul Al
Hassan, Wonyou so Abdul Rehman, Umer Farooq s/o Karim Din, Ashok Kumar s/o
of Soran Das, Boota Ram so Dharam Chand, Gopal Das s/o Baharia Lal,
Gurbukush Ram s/o of Amer Nath, Kuldeep Kumar s/o Nanak Chand, Kaldeep Singh
s/o Chanda Singh, Mana Masih so Pala Masih, Manga Ram s/o Kaqtar Ram, Pervez
Ahmed Masood s/o Mohamamd Yousaf Masoodi, Ram Parkash s/o of Dewan Chand;
Shahbuddin Mir s/o Sirajuddin Mir, Surjeet Singh s/o Sucha Singh, Karpal
Singh s/o Dwas Singh, Kashmir Singh s/o Sansar Singh, Manjeet Singh s/o
Solkehea Singh, Abdul Nasir so Abdul Razaak, Ataf Hussain s/o Ghulam
Hussain, Ameerjeet Singh Solekehea Singh, Amjad Khan so Bazaid Khan, Babu
Ram s/o Kaiser Chand, Behram s/o unknown, Bharat Boshan s/o Sat Poul, Chnna
Singh s/o of Ujagar Singh, Chanranjeet Singh Ins Raj Singh, Charan Singh s/o
Hamen Singh, Chitran Das s/o Saman Dad, Dave Das s/o Pooran Das, Daveinder
Singh s/o Auter Singh, Dubinder Singh s/o Naitar Singh, Ganga Ram so Ram
Chander, Golu s/o Mehru, Gourpreet Singh s/o Manjeet Singh, Gula Ram so
Beeka Ram, Gurumail Singh s/o Sawaran, Hakim Singh so Janab Singh, Hardeep
Singh so Rolda Singh, Haribhoran Singh s/o Guru Pangi Singh, Harbans Lal s/o
Kohlu Ram, Jagtar Singh s/o Ghore Bachan, Jasvant Singh s/o Narovander
Singh, Jatinder Kunar s/o Sohan Lal, Journeil Singh s/o Banta Singh, Kala
Singh so Sunder singh, Kala Singh s/o Sundar Singh, Kuldeep Singh s/o Sadhu
Singh, Kalveer Singh s/o Chanan Singh, Kalvinder Singh so Hervent Singh,
Kamal Jeet Singh Jgir Singh, Karamat Rahi Masih s/o Saith Shama Masih,
Khurshid Ahmed s/o Abdul Ahad, Lukvinder Singh s/o Balbir Singh, Lukhvinder
Singh so Kartar Singh, Lal Chand s/o Tarsem Lal, Mahel Singh so Pur Singh;
Majender Singh s/o Lal Singh, Makhen Singh s/o Chanan Singh, Malkeet Singh
s/o Fata Singh, Manjeet Singh s/o Kabal Singh, Mir Mohammad so Haji Matloob,
Mohan Lal s/o Mangi Lal, Mst Fatima Bibi wife of Ramzan Khan, Mst Matii
daughter of Sita Ram, Ms Teena Peka Wife of Rajesh, Mohammad Ali s/o Sarmoj
Ali, Mohammad Irshad so Mohammad Akbar, Mohamamd Ashraf s/o Abdul Rashid,
Mohammad Hassan so Mohammad Riaz, Mohammad Kamal s/o Mohammad Fazal,
Mohammad Muslim Din s/o Abdul Aziz, Mohammad Riasat s/o Abdul Aziz, Naseem
Paul s/o Bhopal, Navinder Pal s/o Stapal, Nazarul Islam s/o Phool Mian,
Nishan Sinh s/o Piyara Singh, Parkash so Gana, Peeru Dival s/o Badu Lal,
Pervaiz s/o Abdul Jabar, Pretum Singh s/o Bakhshu Lal, Radhey Sham s/o Bansi
Lal, Rahat s/o Abdul Hai, Ram Das s/o Frash Chand Das, Ram Paul, s/o Ram
Dari, Ramu Ram s/o Shame Ram, Rashi Paul so ShahiPaul, Sheikh Mohammad s/o
Amir Mohammad, Sheikh Mansoor Ali so Sh Anwar Ali, Surjeet Singh s/o Rolda;
Singh, Sukhveer Singh s/o Nadra Singh, Sukhvender Singh s/o Gurmukh Singh,
Suraj Paul s/o Jeet Ram, SURESH Kumar s/o Valati Ram, Surender Paul s/o
Rathis Ram, Swaran Lal Khotra s/o Shive Ram, Tajinder Kumar s/o Ram Singh,
one prisoner does not know his name even, Veegana so Ram Bhai, Vijay Kumar
so Krishan Chand, Warnu SO Shosha, Balvinder s/o Bachari Singh, Bashir
Ahmed, so Azmatulah, BJ Singh s/o Parkash, David Masih, s/o Pitras Mashi,
Kaka Ram s/o Baloch Ram, Manga Sheikh s/o Mohammad Sharif, Mst Naeema
Shabnam daughter of Abdul Mian, Mohammad Afzal so Nazar Mohammad, Mohammad
Ashraf s/o Mir Ullah, Abdul Aziz s/o Muhammad Din, Mohammad Irshad s/o Lal
Hussain, Mohammad Shafi s/o Piswal, Naseeb Chand s/o Sunder Das, Nazir Ahmad
s/o Abdul Rashid, Omparkash s/o Dittu Ram, Parkash Chand s/o Dhana Ram,
Parkash s/o Gula Budho Ram, Rehmat Din s/o Illam Din, Shambu Nath s/o Kunjan
Chand, Suni Masih s/o Fazal Masih, Syed Rafique s/o Syed Bashir Ahmed,
Mohamamd Razzak s/o Naik Mohammad, Liaqat Ali s/o Sain Mohammad, Mukhtar
Ahmed s/o Allam Din and Abdul Rahid s/o Tana.

yes, we mostly are!!!but you win!

nb
Now you are pulling my leg:(. Waisay, I suspect if we go into what languages you know, it will turn out that you are higher up in the RAW hierarchy than me.

But seriously, except for Hindi-belt chauvinists, educated Indians are generally multi-lingual, no?

I know it all started with RAW. But it shows your intelligence, that people can`t understand how you could be so smart on your own!

nb#318
The Urdu script is very much an Indian script! Simple Urdu is just Hindi in another script, and Hindi is my mother tongue. I am better at learning scripts than languages. I can read simple(printed) Malayalam, for a while I could read simple (printed) Kannada too, though I have forgotten most of that. It is just that I find it difficult to see a script written all over the place on signboards and pamphlets and not try to read it.

nb #318
btw, the RAW designation is the great granddaddy of the ``CREIP``? fatwa. First it was `RAW`, then it was `b_igot`, then it was `hatemongerer`, lately it has become CREIP. `RSS fanatic` has been the loyal Mrs. fatwa helpmate all along. tahmed32 came in after RAW and took over with `b_igot`.

Sadna, I`m completely flabbergasted!Wow! No wonder the RAW jokes....how many scripts can you read?
Tahmed, if you don`t want to accept that it was a Pakistani who called Ana`s community these names, it is up to you, but the truth remains. As the receipient of some of your friend`s abuses, being called those names doesn`t really upset me, patients have done worse when they`re not well.

I personally don`t mind people posting Urdu articles, I simply try to read them now and then for fun, st like doing crosswords.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

tahmed:

i am not going to participate on unplugged. i understand ke ab vahan par ab aap ka bhi Dera hai, but if you should not return here. . this will be my penultimate post here as well. and my last post to you in regards to anything here on chowk.

i don`t really appreciate your allegations of my bending over backwards to find fault with pakistanis and be fair to indians. in the three years that i have been here, i have ``found fault`` as you put it with both indians (the extremist and the moderate ones) and the pakistanis (ditto). now if you are hellbent on believing that i find fault just with the pakistanis alone, then with all due respect, you are wrong. . . and possibly deluded.

i went back more than once and read what mannyd said. . . and what he said about chooRas was asked in the form of a question. . . and when he was challenged as to what he said, he said that he had read that in unplugged. i have already said that i did not appreciate what he said in regards to that which is why i had asked him to stop referring to me. and dost-mittar challenged mannyd, and perhaps some others did too. that was my ``objective`` reading of it, and yes, i am capable of being objective here.

as to your claim to have never seen pakistanis refer to their fellow christians in nothing but the most respectful manner. . . i beg to differ with you.

tahmed, there have been at least two people that have referred to me and my family members as chooRas and bathroom cleaners. one was the interactor hamid 81 and one was your good buddy salim. yes, the very same person who you defend more than admonish. and what mannyd was referring to was what salim had written on unplugged. now you are welcome to call me a liar as well as accuse me of favoring indians over pakistanis just as your good buddies do. it really matters little to me. it has been perfectly acceptable for your pakistani buddies to call indian women ho`s and calcutta c - - - s, and it seems quite acceptable for you now to generalize once again about indians. as for giving yasser as an example, i already know the high regard in which yasser views some of his fellow countrymen and women and this isn`t about yasser.

i needn`t discuss this on unplugged, or defend myself against constant accusations by those who claim that i defend indians more than pakistanis. i think most everyone`s behavior at this particular board has left little to be desired.

i can try to remain fair. but i would suggest that you try to open your eyes a little more and persevere in being honest with yourself before accusing me of bakwaas.

all the best.

sadna:

had a few minutes to spare, so thought i`d transliterate the article you spent so much time reading so you`d have an even better understanding of what the writer was on about. i left the words i couldn`t read clearly at all blank and the question marks are for words i wasn`t certain about. i can read urdu fairly well in terms of literature, but have never been good at deciphering what journalists or so-called journalists and opinion writers put forth. hopefully those errors don`t take too much away from the context of the article.

and the reason i decided to do this. some of us have been going on about politeness. . . i think it`s been rather rude of some posters to post articles about bharat on a board supposedly moderated by an indian in a language most indians cannot read.

and no need to respond to me here. i will not be returning to this board:

koi bataye ke bharat amreeka nahiN

ghair siyaasi bataiN. . . abdul qadir hassan

iss maiN shak nahiN ke 9-11 ke moq`a par sad`r parvez musharraf ka faisla durust tha aur hamare pas isske siwa koi charah nahiN tha ke hum amreeka ki baat maan laiN aur usse apni jaan bichalaiN. amreeka is moq`a shadid zehni hijaan (?) maiN tha, aur uske huk`mraan duniya par ye yik taraf taas`r dene maiN kaamiyaab dekhhayee dete thay ke b`aaz musalmaanoN ne in par hamlah kar ke unki beizzati ki ha aur unhe bohat zyaada nuqsaan poh`nchaaya hai, chunaaNche issi hijaani kaifiyat maiN amreeka pehle afghanistan aur phir iraq par chaRh doRa. pakistan inn donoN mulkoN ke beech main waq`ah tha aur pakistan ko dehisht gardon ka markaz aur tarbiyatgah kaha ja raha tha. sad`r parvez musharraf ke iss fori faislay se pakistan baal baal bach giya varna kaun keh sakta hai ke hamara kya haal hota aur humeiN kin tabahkun (?) haalaat se dau chaar hona paRta. amreeka ne dhamki di thi ke woh pakistan ko patthar ke daur maiN waapis dhekhhail dega, jis tarah afghanistan aur iraq ko dhekhhaila ja raha hai. jaisay changeziyoN aur taimuroN ke hamloN ke b`aad baghdad phir baghdad na ban saka issi tarah ab bhi baghdad ko

---

(the print is too bareek and unclear but it looks like behaal) honay ka imkaan bohat kam baqi rah giya hai. m`aloom nahiN baghdad ke ye zakh`m

---

ho bhi sakaiN ge ya nahiN. amreeka ki bepanah taaqat ke muqaab`lay maiN pakistan ki bhi koi bisaath nahin thi, issliye sad`r parvez ke iss jaan bachanay ke faislay ko durust tasleem kiya giya hai. aik fauji hakumat maiN koi doosra faisla ho hi nahin sakta tha. koi jamhoori hakumat tau koi doosra raasta nikal sakti hai assembly ki manzoori vaghaira ka bahaana kar sakti hai magar humare haaN tau badqismati se jamhoori hakumataiN bhi jamhoori soch se mehroom rahi haiN.

iss durust faislay ke bawajood kya zaroor(i) hai ke hum bharat ke muqab`lay maiN bhi vohi soch aur rawwaiya ikhtiyar karaiN jo amreeka ke baray maiN ikhtiyar kiya giya tha. kya hum ne bharat ko bhi baaladust samajh liya hai. kabhi yik tarfah jang bandi kar ke kashmir main

---

---

laganay ka moq`a f`rahim kartay haiN tau kabhi chup reh kar usse apna paani band karne ka moq`a f`rahim kartay haiN. azad kashmir ke vazir-e-azam jinab sikandar hayat ne ink`shaaf kiya hai ke bharat barah baras pehle se bugliyar band ki t`amir shuroo`h kar chuka tha. in barah barsoN maiN humari sabqah hakumataiN kyooN chup raheeN bhang pi kar soyi raheeN. in main char tau siyaasi hakumataiN bhi theeN. ab jab paani sar se guzarnay laga hai tau humari kisi hakumat ko hosh aaya hai laikan bohat takheer(?) ke b`aad isse tau dair ayed durust ayed bhi nahin kaha ja sakta kyooNke bharat baRi r`aoonat (?) ke saath apne moaqaf par qaim hai jo duniya ki kisi bhi `adalat ke saamne ghalat saabit kiya ja sakta hai magar aaj ki `adalataiN bhi taaqat ke taraazu man`ne par majboor haiN. bharat ne mazakaraat ki nakaami ke b`aad ab phir mazeed mazakaraat ki baat shuroo`h kardi hai. laikan kya hum bharat ke sorakh se baar baar Dasse janay par taiyyar haiN.

bharat kashmir maiN baR (baT`r?) aur kashmir maiN hi chenab par band ki t`amir par hi bas nahiN raha balke ussne balochistan maiN bhi madakhilat shuroo`h kardi hai. janoobi vaziristan maiN bhi usska haath saaf dikhhayi deta hai. bharat humara hoshyar aur chokna dushman hai. voh jab bhi pakistan se kahiN haalaat ko kharaab dekhta hai, foran uss taraf lipakta hai aur pakistan ke aman-o-amaan ke dushmanoN ki b`rah raast na sahi balvasta hausla afzayee shuroo`h kar deta hai. aslahe aur

---

paani se aur halaat ko bohat zyaada bigaaR deta hai. balochistan maiN baloch khatoon doctor ki beharmati par hum agar foran karavayee karte tau humare kisi dushman ko haalaat se faidah uThaane ka moq`a na milta. ab paanch che dinoN se jang ki kaifiyat jari hai donoN taraf se jaanaiN zaay`ah ho rahi haiN aur uss pahaRi ilaaqay maiN jo ghair abaad ilaaqa hai chapamaar qis`m ke sar(shar?) pasandoN ka muqabla bohat mushkal ho sakta hai. sad`r sahib ke sakht `azaim apni jagha durust laikan aik fauji jarnail hum se zyaada jaanta hai ke ye kaam kisi baqa`idah fauj ke liye kitna mushkal ho sakta hai. abhi hum shomali ilaaqoN ki shor`sh se faarigh nahiN huay ke aik naya m`haaz khhul giya hai aur pakistaniyoN ko shak nahiN ke bharat iss maiN mullawass (?) hai. humaiN bharat ko amreeka nahiN samajhna chahiye. bharat humara khhula dushman hai aur usski qudrati taur par khwahish hai ke humaiN andar se itna kamzor karde ke hum apne atom bomb ko dekhtay hi reh jayeN aur bharat iss khufiya jang se hi apna kaam nikalta rahe jo voh kisi khhuli jang maiN nahiN nikaal sakta ke phir tabahi donoN taraf ki barabar hogi fil ghor (?) zaroorat iss baat ki hai ke hum mulk ke andar wasee`h tar mufaahimat (?) ka silsila shurooh karaiN. qaumi mufaadaat par agar hum khud mut`fiq (?) aur muttahid ho gaye tau kisi dushman ki raisha doani humara kuch nahiN bigaR sakegi. lachak choRh kar humaiN bharat ke saamne DaT jaana chahiye varna iske b`az daanishvar tau ab ye tak kehne lagay haiN ke pakistan ki sar zamin in ka `atiya hai pakistan tau kahin nahiN tha inhoN ne apni zamin de kar pakistan banaya hai aur ab inhaiN iss maiN se kuch zamin wapis darkar hai. bharat ke soraakh se hum kab tak apne aap ko Duswatay rahaiNge isse band karna paRega. bharat amreeka nahiN hai.

Ijaz_gul/303 - I am absoulte re-confirmed on facts pertaining to 10/7 Baluch, both from personal accounts as well as archives of 3 countries. They were very much in Karachi on ceremonial duties in mid-August`47, having been moved from Kanpur specifically for this in April`47. The first flag is very much with the Baluch Regiment even today.

I never said this regiment (renumbered) was in East Pakistan, though your VCOAS Lt. Gen. Imtiaz Waraich (late), also a Baluchi, did have some elements of this regiment with him in Chittagong, who were subsequently interned for two years after 1971 in Agra.

What unplugged on 24-Punjab?

MaheshG2 #309
I can attempt to read, dunno if I will ever be able to `read` :(. Mostly I attempt only the nice big widely-spaced headlines.

arjun_m #310
Someone there has an interesting job.

ana: I think you are determined to find fault with Pakistanis, and to bend over backwards to let Indians off the hook, no matter what!!

That is: it was an Indian, mannyd, who referred to christians in this despicable way. Not a Pakistani. And you fault Pakistanis (myself being one of them) for taking him to task on this by asking how come we Pakistanis dont !! Why dont you ask why none of these Indians (who are experts at abusing and namecalling Pakistanis) bothered to challenge mannyd at the despicable manner in which he referred to your fellow christians??

Also, in all these years I have been on chowk I have never seen Pakistanis refer to their fellow christian (or other minority) citizens in anything but the most respectful manner. YLH has on several occassions talked about the sacrifices made by christians for Pakistan. I did that on this very board. I have also seen the arrogant manner in which many Indian posters refer to ``low caste converts`` to not just Islam but Christianity as well.

Please try to remain fair.

I just took a look at this board to see if there was anything interesting going on - I wont be coming back, but if you have a response I will be glad to discuss it on unplugged.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Sadna, you can read urdu? I am impressed!

Urstruly`s article says essentially(it took me 3/4 of an hour and more than a few words are still a deep mystery), that not only Pakistan did nothing when India built the border fence it was smoking bhang in the 12 years that India was building the Bagliar Dam. In addition, it is clear that India is responsible for inciting the trouble in South Waziristan and Baluchistan. Why wasn`t the lady doctor`s case taken care of and India denied that opportunity?

The US had threatened that it would send Pakistan back to stone age, which is why Pakistan is friends with US. Pervez Musharraf`s decision was totally right. India is not the US. India is Pakistan`s only enemy and wants to make Pakistan weak by internal proxy war while also avoiding m-a-destruction of atomi jang. Indians are saying that we gave our land and that is how Pakistan was created, now we Indians want some land back. How long with Pakistan keep getting `bitten` by its enemy India, Pakistanis must unite and face India, the suraakh(snake hole?) has to be ``closed``.

Urstruly is free to correct me, if he has not immediately rushed off to sign up.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

nb. . .

my reading of what mannyd wrote as ``chuhaDaas`` is his approximation of the word ``chooRa`` therefore those who claimed never to hear the word before, and got all up in arms `bout it, perhaps didn`t make the connection right at that time.

the closest i come to knowing what a chooRa is, is those ``class/caste`` of people who are sweepers and toilet cleaners. that is how it was explained to me.

i can`t explain why there are pakistanis on this board who remain silent and don`t object more strenuously to when some of our own countryfolk call any christian, not just me a chooRa, and yet are so quick to be on the pounce when an indian points that out about them. i guess it comes down to, as a friend tells me, not being able to be honest with oneself when showing others the mirror. i don`t know.

don`t know if i`ve answered your question. . . i don`t think much of casteism myself, but casteism to me involves differentiating between skin color and class as well, and some pakistanis would be lying to themselves if they said that they weren`t casteist in that sense.

as for the rest, thank you. :)

arjun
//...is a christian too, me :)....former christian anyways...//

So you mean to say you are NOT the Hindutva Type? You don`t worship the Monkey-God?Hmmm.... interesting - because anybody who whips sanctimonious paki a$$es the way you do is automatically designated as a veritable ``Monkey-God Worshipper``.

COULD SOMEONE DRILL ( IT INTO HINDUS) THAT BHARAT IS NOT AMERICA

Ana,
I have been reading your interacts and log entries over the last few days, and I am really impressed at the way you dealt with certain interactors. Why is it do you think that when someone called you a bathroom cleaner, nobody now on this board objected, but when another person referred to what he had said, the same people came out, guns blazing to criticise casteist Hindus?? Personally, I had never heard the word he used earlier, and I still don`t know what it means.

Vareesh, either you live in a world of your self made perceptions with fictional characters all around you, like a true ``Beautiful Mind``, or you have a knack for irrelevent goosip that turns out what you want to know. Both ways you are extremely intelligent.

To put facts right, the first Gaurd was not presented by 10 Baloch, neither was it in East Pakstan in 1971. In 1971, it was assigned the Gaurd of Honour duties in Islamabad, and thats the closest you come.

By the way I also read your unplugged on 24 Punjab. What fantasy are you trying to create.

I tend to agree with urstruly et al and it dazzles me why so many Indians behave like this. Come on have a heart.

Cheerios

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

arjun #288

i am a christian who cleans my own bathroom in amreeka, and doesn`t have a problem with doing so. :)

the issue with me has never been one of that there are more than a few christians in pakistan who do clean bathrooms. and that`s where, according to some supposedly broad-minded intelligent pakistanis, most christians come from -- the ``caste of bathroom cleaners.`` the issue has been one of certain muslims maligning and misrepresenting the population of christians in pakistan. these people who claim to know so much about us, when they cannot even be honest about themselves. christians who converted in what is now pakistan were from all walks of life from the very rich to the very poor and points inbetween. and a large number were the poorest of the poor, but these are certainly not all of them.

the same pretty much can be said of those who converted to islam. so what exactly is the problem here? what do these muslims get out of making it sound as if christians should be ashamed because goodness gracious, many of them are bathroom cleaners?!!! cheap thrills?!

as for showing some kind of sensitivity, have no fear, that will not be expected of you!

arjun-m
If you are really a decent person, no amount of provocation can change it...

Truer words were never spoken. Those who`d base their opinion on a very large group based on some anonymous posters on a website were simply looking for an excuse to hate any way.
The nicest human being I have had the privilege of getting to know personally happens to be a pakistani. No urstrulys or tahmeds are going to change that fact for me.
The characters here represent a particular line of thinking at the most. They do not represent an entire people.

Dost Mitter and Amit: I agree with botth of you about politeness and respect for the otherpoint of view. I find that missing in a very large percentage of Pakis. There are always exceptions, but they become targets of mob hysteria because they do not quite come up to the mob`s standard of venom and verbal violence against HIndus and Indians. There are examples galore of shutting and shouting down even Muslim Pakistanis (Hamidm, Naqashbandi, Firangikush) because they differ in their presentation of Islam and may not be palatable to the outsiders.
Tahmed32 is the prime leader in shutting down all dissent that does not conform to his ideas of decency, politics or religion. There are others.
I do not know if it stems from their religion or nationality, but we Indians are doing a very valuable service to the Pakis to learn that there are different opinions and religions than theirs and they better learn to grin and bear the differences.

Now Tahmed can stop using words like `MOnkey God Modi`, `Murderer Modi`, `Rapists of 12 year old girls Modi` or come up with a coherent reason why the same type of appellates could not be applied to Jinnah.

`I stand exposed on chowk as a low life`. I hope that is a better reward than CREIP and I had my heart set on getting one. Oh by the way the rape of `Sains` did happen at least once in Pakistan and was described to me by the rapists themselves with pride forty years ago in Berkeley. Could be an isolated incident, but I doubt that. As far as religion is considered, I prefer `untouchability` over `Plough what your left hand possesses`. Personally I would not touch the holiest Brahmin, if he is sneezing and has a runny nose. Tahmed is untoucable too becuase he is always pulling his fingers 0ut of his body cavities.

Who said the following on anpother thread:

``One of my Pakistani friends told me about this incident. His friend, a Pakistani guy, had married an African-American girl in New York. She was well educated, had a good job and had converted to Islam to marry him. He actually took her with him to visit Pakistan. When his parents met her, their first reaction was - ``Yeh, kis bhangi ko utha ke le aaye!! (Which sweeper did you pick up here)``. This is our desi mindset!! So it is kind of hypocritical to complain that others are racist.`` WHoever it was, well said.

DM

There you have it - the near unanimous verdict from the Indian side that they reserve the right to whip a wayward paki into shape anywhere, anytime, for any reason. This is their chowkstaff-given rights and they want to excercise it at they see fit. So your attempt to chaperon is totally unacceptable :)

+++

Now on the ``Ram and the Knife`` issue, don`t break TAhmed`s b@lls.....Because this is true - the hinud banias donot play games no more. They are tired of hiding the Knife in the arm-pits. They are very upfront about their hostilities towards Pakis. And understandably Pakis very upset about it.

urstruly: Kindly observe examples in posts below of Spontaneous Combustion that I brought to your attention earlier. I assume your post #283 was designed to trigger such a reaction.

dm #284 The headline certainly does not attribute it to Hamid Gul. I assume urstruly approves of the message in that article (since he has not provided any comments). I was hoping to engage urstruly in a little discussion on this point, but he has chosen instead to perform lab experiments instead as mentioned in the post I just sent to him.

As for who would get kicked out of chowk if their implementation guidelines were enforced - I wont get into a hypothetical debate on that, and all I can say is: let the chips fall where they may. The important thing is that chowk would then not be poisoned by those who (as I said earlier) come here for this express purpose.

Mantolives:

You are a good man and I agree with you on secularism. I did not like it when you called Indian female interactors `Kutiyas` or a Punjabi scholar `_ulla Bhatti` or you failed to discourage Salim from attacking Paki females with vulgar obscenities. I hope you have outgrown that.

Maybe you have to invoke Jinnah`s name to sell the idea of secularism to your country, but do it only because it is common sense and is the right thing to do not because Jinnah said this or that. The interview posted by CoolAl shows Jinnah to talk out of both corners of his mouth. It is also inconsistent with your other dream of seeing secular India break into managable fragments.

Your devotion to Jinnah is touching. As an excercise, find all the defects he and his sister had and write about them. If nothing else, it will show he was human.

Again thanks for the effort you made for the contacts. Other sanctimonious buffons who are worthless than a `KanA Dhela` are still trying to shore up their self esteem

Friend...

Please read the text of the Government of India Act 1935. I fail to see this logic in its light especially the schedules of power given to the governor general. As a student of Political science I also reject these rigid definitions of parliamentary democracy. I realize that any thing and everything can be described as a departure from parliamentary democracy when you keep one model i.e. Great Britain as the ideal. In that case India, by virtue of its federal structure, negates the idea of parliamentary democracy.

So let us proceed on the basis of Government of India Act 1935 alone...

``Jinnah, while being Governer General, was also president of Muslm league``

He quit the post of the president of the Muslim League in December 1947 once the AIML`s transition into PML and IUML was complete.

``and also president of constituent assembly``

He was elected as the President of constituent Assembly.


``Jinnah made important appointments without involving Liaqut who was actually answerable to assembly.``

Which ones? I am unaware of this.

``Was Jinnah legally answerable to any agency?``

Yes the constituent assembly. It was his status as the undisputed and respected leader of the Muslim League that won him that position.


``Would you clarifiy if Jinnah was ever elected to the post of Governer General?``

Well... this is a naive statement to make and you know it. How did, despite all the protestations of the royal family and ``His Majesty`s`` government, Jinnah manage to prevail over the choice of Mountbatten of the Governor General. Did he have an Army? Did he conquer the country?

It is a little known fact that Jinnah had actually wanted to retire from politics on the 4th June 1947. He was persuaded against it by some Leaguers. The reasons behind Muslim League`s decision are multifold and can be discussed at another time.

Jinnah became the Governor General of Pakistan not simply because the King willed it on the request of the British government. The King willed it because the successor authority i.e. the Muslim League willed it, and the Muslim League could will it because it claimed representation.

-YLH

Friend...

Please read the text of the Government of India Act 1935. I fail to see this logic in its light especially the schedules of power given to the governor general. As a student of Political science I also reject these rigid definitions of parliamentary democracy. I realize that any thing and everything can be described as a departure from parliamentary democracy when you keep one model i.e. Great Britain as the ideal. In that case India, by virtue of its federal structure, negates the idea of parliamentary democracy.

So let us proceed on the basis of Government of India Act 1935 alone...

``Jinnah, while being Governer General, was also president of Muslm league``

He quit the post of the president of the Muslim League in December 1947 once the AIML`s transition into PML and IUML was complete.

``and also president of constituent assembly``

He was elected as the President of constituent Assembly.


``Jinnah made important appointments without involving Liaqut who was actually answerable to assembly.``

Which ones? I am unaware of this.

``Was Jinnah legally answerable to any agency?``

Yes the constituent assembly. It was his status as the undisputed and respected leader of the Muslim League that won him that position.


``Would you clarifiy if Jinnah was ever elected to the post of Governer General?``

Well... this is a naive statement to make and you know it. How did, despite all the protestations of the royal family and ``His Majesty`s`` government, Jinnah manage to prevail over the choice of Mountbatten of the Governor General. Did he have an Army? Did he conquer the country?

It is a little known fact that Jinnah had actually wanted to retire from politics on the 4th June 1947. He was persuaded against it by some Leaguers. The reasons behind Muslim League`s decision are multifold and can be discussed at another time.

Jinnah became the Governor General of Pakistan not simply because the King willed it on the request of the British government. The King willed it because the successor authority i.e. the Muslim League willed it, and the Muslim League could will it because it claimed representation.

-YLH

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

DM
//....I have seen many Pakistanis coming to chowk with a feeling of goodwill towards Indians (though somehow very rarely a kind word about hindus even though they are more than a million or two of their countrymen) and ending up quite bitter and disappointed...//

And I have seen Pakis coming to chowk with big chips on their sanctimonious a$$es, blasting on hindus/indians with all guns blazing from the get go. But then, after being cut down to size by the same indomitable and hard-hitting hindoos/Indians - these folks either have run away [ e.g. ali1] or have become quite tame and reformed. Example: YLH, TAhmed [needs some more kicks on his self-righteous rear]

So it cuts both ways. But it has been fun watching the modern version of ``Taming of the Shrew`` playing out on Chowk :)

Anycase - you should control your impulse to play the role of super-nanny here. Let people be themselves [within the well-defined boundaries set by chowk] and express themselves as they seem fit.

I think asking to conform to some code or conduct based on nationality is rather silly. Aside from that I read previously that there used to be about equal number of indians & pakistanis on this site. Both numbers have grown. Maybe ana could shed some light?
Also, those who`d rate this site as not quite successful have a hard time saying away from here. That should say something.

#277 by DM,

I have seen many Pakistanis coming to chowk with a feeling of goodwill towards Indians (though somehow very rarely a kind word about hindus even though they are more than a million or two of their countrymen) and ending up quite bitter and disappointed after seeing a few interacts from the wrong side

Who said truth always makes one feel good?
Latoon ke bhoot (like Urs-falsely) batoon se nahin mante.

paki sensitivities are easy to ruffle, for urstruely a mere suspicion of hindu association is sensitive, for HP any statistics posting is hate-speech, for romair, anything secular or military criticism is hate-speech. tahmed is a true gem.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

tahmed32#279, 281

This was not about Hamid Gul. The headline of the report did not put it in quotes or attribute it to Hamid Gul even though he made that remark. If one reads the report (if it was indeed a report and not an opinion piece) it is clear that the writer/reporter is trying to prove the headline using Hamid Gul and some unknown Indian intellectual named Verma`s remarks as evidence of the fact that the hindu now thinks that there is no need to either hide his knife or seek Ram`s name to hide his vileness.

As for moderating, if the site was moderated by a proper journalist, hardly any of the posts of most of your Creips, arjun-m, sadna, alephnull, etc. will be rejected for hate/indecency.


ana,sadna:

I understand where you are coming from.

Since the discussion on chowk ownership is going on, let me add my two cents.

I think all Pakistani websites, including chowk, should welcome all Hindus regardless. But I suggest that in order to alert Pakistanis and other non-Hindus, all such websites should add an icon in their google website listing and also on the homepage of the website this icon should be posted on top along with a warning such as following``

WARNING: Hindu Alert. This website is also shared by Hindus. You are being warned of the extreme hazard of indecent interacts. Eneter at your own risk

and the icon should be something like that:

this is a paki website (note the affectionate use of the adjective paki), a great paki website, and gives indoos a zarokha into pakistan. maybe a narrow zaronka. (pakis dont need a zaronka since they already know a lot.) indoos have never been ``welcome`` anywhere in the world as far as i know, but that is irrelevent.

regarding alephs post

``Further, the well-heeled well-connected Pakistanis who I believe predominate in their national contingent on Chowk, are not a representative sample of Pakistan’s population, simply the most visible and vocal segment; just as the professional middle class Indians who seem to gather here are not a representative cross-section of India’s population. ``

so this is more of a class-struggle, not religious and therefore its not surpirsing where farzana lines-up.

dost mittar #277 What is factual, as I said, is that Hamid Gul said this. The fact that Hamid Gul said this does not make it factual. I hope you will understand the difference.

Hamid Gul has said some very silly things in his life (I remember reading a public statement from Hamid Gul before the US attacked the taliban regime saying that the ``chocolate cream soldiers`` of the US would be no match for the brave pathans!!). Some of these things Hamid Gul writes are almost as silly as much of what is written daily on chowk. :-)

dost-mittar #277

i still disagree with you limiting this to a pakistani site. and i would suggest to you that in communications i`ve received from one of the creators/staff of this website, they would refrain from calling this a pakistani website as well.

you can give all the statistics you want sir, but that still doesn`t change the fact that to have the banner express ``ideas identities of india pakistan is to obviously suggest that we go beyond this notion of labelling it one particular thing.

and it would have made more sense, if you had also suggested that ``the pakistanis`` be polite as well. or is it that you believe that ALL the rude negative responses by pakistanis are because they are duly provoked by ``the indians.``? having observed both sides for quite sometime now, i doubt that is the case. your concern for pakistani sensitivities is indeed noble, but your gentle lecturing of ``the indians`` ignores the fact that they have sensitivities as well.

it goes without saying that there are more complex issues at play here than what we see expressed on a page. issues that are too often reduced to ah, he must be in favor of repressing oppressing the dalits, or ah, this is what islam is all about. or oh, they`re just cow urine drinkers, or the statement that was indeed made by a pakistani that most of the christians in pakistan come from ``lower castes`` and many of them are bathroom cleaners.
an indian should quote and refer to this pakistani as having said that, and ``intelligent`` men accuse him of insulting christians?

political correctness and politeness are definitely lacking here. . . but the fact that a pakistani operates this site, or the majority of interactions and articles are by pakistanis does not give us license as pakistanis to act as if we own it. . . we are guests here as well, along with the indians. to borrow from a wise native american chief, chowk does not ``belong`` to us, we ``belong`` to chowk. and it would behoove ALL of us to have disagreements in which we can be passionate yes, but not kill our discussions or shut them down by name-calling, or generalizing grossly about one particular group.

the fact that one chooses not to go beyond their own limitations does not mean that one should limit what is around them. chowk goes beyond being more than a pakistani site. and those who put this together would like to see that happen. if this was described as a pakistani site. . . i don`t know that i would be here. because i came here to go beyond nationalism, and provincialism, and going beyond what i spent many years being a part of, and saw, and unfortunately in the three years that i`ve been here. . . have not found that to be possible. partially thanks to those of you who choose to limit this place to one group of people.

dost-mittar #277
Carrying your argument further, since the `sensitivities of Pakis here` are of paramount importance, ask chowk staff to take this article off as so many Pakis have protested its publishing. #1 was an offended Paki whose sensitivities are hurt. Why did you waste bandwidth disagreeing with him?

The Indian POWs should not have offended the sensitivities of Pakis, that is why their existence can not be acknowleged, forget about being found or released. Indians here can not offend the sensitivities of Pakis, so the Indians POWs can not be discussed.

The sensitivities of Pakistanis have been used to stop discussion on pretty much anything.

The sensitivities of well-to-do well-fed Pakistanis do not determine my reality and never will, thank heaven, though many are not so fortunate. As for chowk, it is upto chowk staff to decide what can or can not be said on their website.

dost mittar #277 (first part): The factual basis with which you substantiate what you wrote about this being as much a ``Pakistani website as Sulekha is an Indian website`` is impressive. I appreciate your taking note of the Pakistanis who came to chowk with good feelings towards Indians and/or hindus who have ended up embittered. I consider myself to be one of those (although I like to think of myself having become disillusioned rather than embittered), and am by no means the only one. Simply the fact that the views of Pakistanis like myself concerning Indians and hindus matter to you indicates that you give importance to these views. And I appreciate that too. Respect is mutual, and to get respect one must give it as well. It is therefore no wonder that while I may disagree with you on some things, but I consider you to be an honorable man who would not write anything on chowk that he would not be willing to say to the face of any man.

The question remains: what does one do about those for whom the thrill of posting insults and ridicule on other nationalities (obviously one the few thrills in their pathetic little lives) is more important than building a forum for intelligent discussion? (I refer to individual like arjun - whose post below is an example of the delusional mentality and empty namecalling of pakistanis). One can either ignore such individuals, or see them as an opportunity to have some fun at their expense. But that does not get rid of the problem - the only way, as I said earlier, is for chowk staff to enforce their guidelines. Moderated western websites would blacklist these fools in two minutes - and I dont see why chowk cannot do the same IF they want chowk to evolve into a forum for what their banner proclaims it to be: a true cross-roads of ideas. Otherwise, like Gresham`s law in economics, bad currency drives out the good.

To those of you who disagreed with my calling chowk a Pakistani website, you are partially correct. It is a dot.com site and not a dot.pk site. But it is still owned and operated by a Pakistani. So, it is as much a Pakistani site as Sulekha is an Indian website.

To look at some more objective indicators, I counted the authorship of the 40 most recent articles on the front page, nearly 3/4ths of them are by Pakistanis; alll three reviews on the FP are also by Pakistanis; only one ilog is by an obviously hindu name. I went to look at the list of Interactors registered and started with the letter `A`: among the first 100 names, the number of those with obvious hindu-sikh names is in the single digit. Even allowing for the fact that names are a poor determiner of religion and that muslims can be both Indian and Pakistani, it is reasonable to assume that Pakistani interactors outnumber Indians by a large margin. However, when it comes to actual interacts, Indians seem to be more active than their numbers.

I never said that Indians here are uninvited, although they, hindus in particular, are sometimes told by some Pakistanis that they are unwelcome here. Nor did I say that they should not express their opinions freely. Indeed, the best description of chowk was provided by perhaps the most hated Indian chowki, Jay, who called it a ``market place of ideas``. All I asked the Indians to do was to be polite and more considerate of the Pakistani sensitivities - I have seen many Pakistanis coming to chowk with a feeling of goodwill towards Indians (though somehow very rarely a kind word about hindus even though they are more than a million or two of their countrymen) and ending up quite bitter and disappointed after seeing a few interacts from the wrong side.


tahmed#275

It is amazing that anyone could find Abdul Qadir Hassan`s report ``factual``. Starting with the title, ``Munh mein ram nahin, aur chhuree ab haath mein`` [the hindu is no longer hiding his knife under the armpit and he doesn`t even say his god`s name], it panders to the worst stereotype of the hindu. The fact that anyone finds this report ``factual`` and not opinion shows the extent of brainwahsing that has taken place.

teshah #274 I am not familiar with the columnist, but he seems to be merely reporting on what Hamid Gul had to say. So, even if he is a third rate journalist in your view, that does not matter since all he is doing is repeating what Hamid Gul had to say, rather than presenting his own views.

While urstruly cut and paste this without comment, I notice you did not comment on what Hamid Gul had to say. Any comments from either of you would be appreciated.

dost mittar: I agree with ana - we are all guests here. All of us benefit from this free facility to express ourselves for what we are, regardless of whether we are Indian or Pakistani.

It goes to the credit of chowk owners - who do happen to be Pakistani, much as this seems to annoy some individuals on chowk to the point of denial!! - that they have put together a well-designed, well-managed site. I do think they should be more strict in enforcing their chowk guidelines, since that would probably lead to more intelligent and entertaining discussions. Nevertheless, what he have is not bad and so I enjoy sticking around.

However, the true test of success of this site will be when we are able to invite our real life friends and relations to this site without being concerned that they would find most of the discussion to be plain stupid. Right now I dont think it has reached that stage.

urstruly

You have simply copied a column in the daily Jang written by a third class professional columnist without any comments. It is not clear whether he objected to `Ram, Ram` or `Chhuri`. But in a pevious column of his he had shown great sympathy to Dallat Hindoos, who according to him were being maltreated by the high caste Hindoos. He was once a great admirer of Nawaz Shareef but seldom mentions his name now. His mental level appers to be that of a Dallat Hindu who thinks with his belly. My point is that chowk should not be made merely a show-case for just splashing the writings of the third class professional journalists.

By the way, how is it possible to transfer Urdu writings on Inpage to a chowk post?

dost-mittar #257
This is a Pakistani website but I am not a guest here. I am here to say what I think, not what some Paki wants to hear. chowk staff is always free to throw me out whenever they wish.

Ana/Mittar/others
Chowk is a meeting place for all. I will not be here had this been a Pakistani site..

dost-mittar #257

If memory serves, Chowk actively solicited participation from Indians when they launched the site (I vaguely recall them advertising in India Abroad or such – don’t quote me on it though). They bill themselves ‘Ideas and Identities of India and Pakistan’. They also describe themselves as a place to express and exchange ideas. The day the Chowk management unambiguously tells me I’m unwelcome here is the day I’ll leave never to return. I’m answerable only to them and to the laws of the country I live in – no one else.

There is a basic disagreement about what politeness or courtesy entails. Some people seem to believe that making observations, asking apposite questions, pointing to facts available in the public domain, in an way that might possibly embarrass someone on this site or cast his country, religion or social milieu in a poor light, is intolerably rude and totally unacceptable. Enforce such a standard and you’ll get the peace of the grave.

Further, the well-heeled well-connected Pakistanis who I believe predominate in their national contingent on Chowk, are not a representative sample of Pakistan’s population, simply the most visible and vocal segment; just as the professional middle class Indians who seem to gather here are not a representative cross-section of India’s population. The predominant class interests of a national contingent on Chowk may be very different from those of their parent nation’s population (or some other subgroup of that population). ‘Respect’ for a particular vocal group’s ‘sensitivities’ can be used to stifle any discussion about the way in which that group oppresses and exploits others less fortunate.

I believe that Veeresh understands the point in the last paragraph very well and has made it quite clear in his travelogues. That, more than disagreement over any specific factual claim of Veeresh’s, is what probably accounts for the fury he arouses on Chowk.

Re:dost-mittar#257

Finally a voice of reason. I had basically given up on this thread since it became too bitter and personal. Thanks for pointing out the obvious - a need for politeness and courtesy to the other side`s point of view.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Yasser,
W.r.t your reply to rsridhar...

Pakistan started its journey as a parliamentary democracy. You being a student of political science and law, certainly know better than me that in that system, directly elected representatives are in Parliament and their chosen leader, Prime Minister makes all decisions. Governor General actually is to work on advice given by Prime Minister - and is meant to act as a check - in case a PM who lost his majority tries to take important decisions.

Jinnah, while being Governer General, was also president of Muslm league, and also president of constituent assembly. Jinnah made important appointments without involving Liaqut - who was actually answerable to assembly. Was Jinnah legally answerable to any agency?

(Would you clarifiy if Jinnah was ever elected to the post of Governer General? )

dost-mittar ,

The next time when Pakistanis cry buckets of self-righteous tears of sanctimony over the killing of 1500 muslims in Gujarat and give us intolerant Indians sermons on secularism , would it be polite to remind them of their deeds in the old East Pakistan , where their army butchered 3 million of their own countrymen ?

Sadna, are you a Hindu Indian or Muslim Indian?

mittarji -- #257

sometimes you truly surprise me. with all due respect, i`m not entirely certain why i thought that you would be one of the few people that went beyond the ``this is a pakistani website`` or ``this is an indian website`` nonsense. you appear to be stuck in the same limiting this to nationality thing that more than a few people are hung up in as well.

i don`t disagree with you on the politeness part. . . however if you are referring to ``we`` in your post as indians, then please be advised that we are ALL guests here. yahaaN kisi ka koi Theka nahiN hai. and we should ALL be polite in our criticism, and more aware of our sensitivity, something most of us on this particular board have failed to do, including myself.

it`s rather ridiculous -- someone asking someone else if he hasn`t killed all of his ancestors yet, or one of our elders thumbing his nose and going : ha ha! at certain posters including the writer of this article. or calling each other liars. or talking about pakistan`s treatment of minorities using crass language. and to say that the term CREIP is a hatemongering fatwa, is going just as further overboard as accusing most indians here of being hindutva.

i don`t believe anyone is an expert here on either their own countries, or their neighboring ones. . . nor do i believe we should be limited to what we talk about. and this website gives us the space to go beyond. . . but if we continue to limit ourselves to labelling this as a pakistani website, then i don`t really see any of us going beyond boundaries, and beyond the nonsense evident on almost every board. and for some reason, i thought you had done just that.

#257 by dost-mittar
//...If we accept that, we are guests here ...//

No we are not. Chowk header says: ``ideas and identities of India Pakistan``. So we(indians) are an integral part by design - not just ``guests`` at the mercy of the ``hostgs``.

AlephNull should be hard-hitting if he wants to. This is an internet forum - not a country club.

CoolAL #148
Article quoted by you puts everything in place. It clarfies the cause of confusion that Pakistan is going through.

Jinnah`s democratic state was to be based on Islam. His concept of Minorities`s equal right was based on Jakat - charity of majority. His would be a democratic nation but based on 1300 year old concept of Islamic Democracy. His independence day speeh to Muslim elucidates this

August 15 is the birthday of the independent and sovereign State of Pakistan. It marks the fulfillment of the destiny of the Muslim nation which made great sacrifices in the past few years to have its homeland...
Muslims of India have shown to the world that they are a united nation, their cause is just and righteous which cannot be denied. .....
Let us impress the minorities by word, deed and thought that as long as they fulfill their duties and obligations as loyal citizens of Pakistan, they have nothing to fear.....
``Today is Jummat-ul-Wida, last Friday of the holy month of Ramazan, a day of rejoicing for all of us wherever we may be in this vast sub-continent and for the matter of that throughout the world. Let the Muslim congregations in their thousands, in all the mosques, bow in all humility .....
But to build it up into a country worthy of the Muslim nation, we shall require every ounce of energy that we possess and I am confident that it will come from all whole-heartedly.``..

friend...

Well there are several. I am also studying the calm cerebral responses of Mr. Jinnah in his letters, speeches, etc, and I realized that I was not setting the greatest example by reacting badly.


rsidhar...

I am afraid I must disagree with you on that one. Had Jinnah been autocratic he would have imposed the constitution that he had prepared, or prevailed over the different shades of opinion in the constituent assembly. It is true that he adopted the position of governor general instead of the Prime Minister ... but any constitutional expert will tell you that under the Government of India Act 1935, the executive authority flows from the Governor General. I don`t think comparing him, a civilian political leader of a political party and a constitutional head of state who had over riding powers over the head of government under the constitution, to a usurping military dictator is called for.

We know that politicians in South Asia have been guilty of an autocratic conduct much more so that what can legitimately held up against Jinnah. Legitimate as Nehru was, his autocratic fatherly rule was necessary for India to survive and develop as a democracy... his rule was seen at the time as one party rule and India was seen in effect as a one party state. His daughter Indira Gandhi is another example. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Mian Nawaz Sharif are also guilty of the same... Jinnah on the other hand was much more restrained than these ladies and gentlemen who ruled South Asia.

And ... what we forget is that Jinnah resigned as the party chief of the All India Muslim League after partition... which is a precedent that sadly has not been followed by our Presidents and Rulers in Pakistan... There are rumors that Musharraf might become the President of the Muslim League as well...

-YLH

There are never any victors in war, both sides lose and it is the families that have to pay the price and suffer the most. As someone once said ‘ Wars are created by politicians, compounded by bureaucrats and fought by soldiers.`

I dont think that either Pakistan or India care much about their soldiers. There is a lot of noise which is made about the great soldiers of each country but if one does a bit of filtering then one realises that there is no substance. They are nothing but cannon fodder. Caring starts with the very institutions where they come from, that is the respective armies itself. However besides the great amount of propaganda, the very institutions that the men and women belong dont care a bit. Numerous examples can be given, the most immediate one being during the Kargil conflict, one side refusing to accept its dead bodies being returned by the other side and the other side declaring its POW`s as deserters without verifying facts or bothering about it. That is why families end up going to the media in frustration to put pressure on the goverment to help them. I wonder in the Indian army how many Army Chief`s after 1971 have put any kind of pressure on the Indian Government to get answers about the forgotten 54, on whom this articles is based. I dont know the answer but I suspect that it has been a very low priority issue for them. I know that in Pakistan the army is politically very powerful, but it seems that this is at a senior level and the ordinary sepoy is not effected by it.

The last 50-60 years is over and part of history. Assigning blame to people is not going to help anyone. I personally believe that there is nothing divine about nations, that is if you call something divine in the first place. Nations are like clubs where you usually get membership by your birth. Each `club` has certain characteristics, which differentiate it according to beliefs, culture and freedom etc.

As human beings it is very difficult to differentiate between the people in our respective countries. On the positive note both countries are very good hosts, warm and friendly. On the negative our minds are primative. We are out and out racists, and believe in the superiority of our own community/ tribe and religion as against others. We have become very intolerant, and also tend to treat women very poorly.

Unless we develop as human beings (author of this post included), we are going to see people mud slinging at every available opportunity and through every meduim, including chowk. Chowk in a way reflects the state of our intellectual mind of the so called educated elite in the subcontinent. If we think in such a negative manner, imagine how the uneducated masses would think. Most people read the articles without commenting, but they are the silent majority. The `radicals` have taken over, and when the silent majority read the posts, they tend to ignore their own country`s people radical post and get agitated with the radical posts written by the other side, coming to a conclusion that the other side is full of fanatics.

The future is for each one of us to develop in our small way.

Urstruly`s #258 article`s headline reads(I`m almost sure) `Moonh mein ram-ram nahi aur cchaDi ab haath mein`

(cchaDi - big stick)

You can guess the rest. I am :)

On second thoughts, that is `cchuri` (knife) not `chhaDi`, of course.

AlephNull#255:

All said and done, this is primarily a Pakistani website, albeit a very liberal and welcoming one. If we accept that, we are guests here -some of us permanent- invited by the banner. So, perhaps we should at least be polite in our criticism, especially in the areas in which they are quite sensitive.

re: #248 by CoolAL
So, an autocratic Jinnah thought democrazy was in the muslim blood!
And listen to what the present dictator of Pak has to say about democrazy in Pak. He thinks democrazy is thriving under his benign dictatorial rule!
http://www.dawn.com/2005/01/12/top1.htm
(President Gen Pervez Musharraf has said Pakistan is moving forward on the path of sustainable democracy as firm foundations have been laid for real and participatory democracy.)
May be Pakistan should rename itself as Islamic Democratic Republic of Pakistan (IDRP, wow an impressive name). BTW, East Germany called itself German Democratic Republic before its collapse and merger with its western counterpart.
Sridhar

dost-mittar #96

The ‘CREIP’ designation is a ‘hatemongerer’ fatwa. Only the name has been updated to reflect 21st century fashions; nothing else has changed. It is fascinating to see the public consultation between various learned scholars before they issue a CREIP ruling. Apparently a fatwa backed by a consensus of the ulema has special force …

---

I just did a quick scan. No less than 22 of the first 250 interacts on this article are by tahmed32. Of these, only the first two have the slightest connection with Veeresh’s article. The rest are mostly disquisitions on CREIPs, exchange of pleasantries with various Chowkies, etc.

There are some other mashahoor pehelvans who have done likewise on this board, but tahmed stands out. Clearly the FP interacts and UP together are not enough space for his talents.

Is there any way Chowk could provide tahmed sahib with a regular column or perhaps a designated interact corner where he can hold forth on any subject, from the natural history of CREIPs to the essence of the Quran, that engages his attention? He is already a much-published Chowk author and seems to spend most of his waking hours on Chowk, so a column shouldn’t be too much of a stretch. People who agree with him could congregate there to applaud, those who disagree can throw their rotten eggs there, and other boards would be left free of total irrelevancies.

Yaseer,
Thanks. Mandal`s months were just to have a little fun but you appears to be under a good influence. You do not get triggered easily these days. Convey my congratulations to that good influence.

HP # 244:

Sorry but you disqualified yourself. I have no reason to disbelieve what you said first time about your ancestors. No need to sneak in through the back door. Next!!!

Satyamvada`s (post # 243): excellent post. Precisely my point...

Ana: Thanks for the note. Sorry to have reported your conversation on the UP here. Anytime there is a Mela on a Chowk article , all types of Chabri Wale, jugglers, sword-swallowers and hawkers show up to sell their wares. Manto has his little Jinnah dolls with two tone shoes on clay feet, TAhmed has his indignant piety, knowledge of Desmond Morris and his toy CREIP (It is my invention and mine alone) and HP has his bleeding heart for his ancestors among Indian Shudras (Not really, just kidding) to display. They are all part of the scene.

Manto: Excellent post on your contacts. No I am not Veeresh. He is a far better writer than I am or ever will be.

friend,

I have already discussed the matter with you. You know what my position is.

CoolAl,

We have had long discussions about this article. Here is the discussion

http://www.chowk.com/show_forum_topic_post_list.cgi?tid=00017334

http://www.chowk.com/show_forum_topic_post_list.cgi?tid=00017293


Gandiv...

That is a very wrong view. There is no record of Jinnah wanting to be the first Prime Minister... infact it is clear that he was going to settle with the Congress Party on the basis of the Cabinet Mission Plan. When Mountbatten brought up the first prime minister issue, Jinnah indicated that this would not solve anything to have a Muslim League Prime Minister.
He could have easily made it with the popular will, had he called Gandhi a Mahatma and started wearing khaddar kay kapray, gone along with the Khilafat movement... but he was no demagogue you see.

Netizen

Thank you for your response. Please read Ayesha Jalal`s Sole Spokesman if you can.

Anil,

Thank you for your kind words.

-YLH

Yasser/237 - thank you. Thank you very much. Some day you are going to have to deliver on that Corona . . .

Ok, to the point.

In all the other cases of contacts in Pakistan working on this matter, I have been taking things forward ``off-chowk``, I know you shall appreciate the sensitivities. At some later date I may merge some of the efforts, but I doubt if I shall ever be able to publicise them.

The first name on the list is that of Dr. Simmi Waraich`s father. She is reading this board and the interacts therein, and I am asking her to get in touch with you. The list is open domain.

I stand by my promise of the reward sum.

#215 by HP.

“So do you believe that your ancestry is living in present day India?”

Have you killed them all already?

It thought you were a stupid, but you`re a headless buffon instead.

How can anyone`s ancestry live at the same time as himself?
Hope this is not too dificult to understand for you, is it?

HP#244
Don`t be so dumb about ``a female political leader in UP insist on being called a chamaar because the society would not accept her in any other manner though she may attain some prominences due to her leadership skills or following amongst the people``

She is doing so to get votes. This political leader is being accused of keeping her mentor in illegal confinement for last two years, no one can do anything because of her using this caste trump card.

You are using ``chamaar or chora or Bhangi`` terms freely. Using these terms in India will land me you a jail.

Through out my student life in Delhi I had more than one scheduled caste family for neighbour. We fought, argued, ate and drank (only water & tea - no other drink was allowed to me at that time) together. Atleast in Delhi that was not uncommon.

This is for Manto. Enjoy!!!

---

The Messiah and The Promised Land
Excerpts from Halfway to Freedom: A Report on the New India, By Margaret Bourke-White Simon and Schuster, New York, 1949.

Pakistan was one month old. Karachi was its mushrooming capital. On the sandy fringes of the city an enormous tent colony had grown up to house the influx of minor government officials. There was only one major government official, Mahomed Ali Jinnah, and there was no need for Jinnah to take to a tent. The huge marble and sandstone Government House, vacated by British officialdom, was waiting. The Quaid-i-Azam moved in, with his sister, Fatima, as hostess. Mr. Jinnah had put on what his critics called his ``triple crown``: he had made himself Governor-General; he was retaining the presidency of the Muslim League -- now Pakistan`s only political party; and he was president of the country`s lawmaking body, the Constituent Assembly.

``We never expected to get it so soon,`` Miss Fatima said when I called. ``We never expected to get it in our lifetimes.``

If Fatima`s reaction was a glow of family pride, her brother`s was a fever of ecstasy. Jinnah`s deep-sunk eyes were pinpoints of excitement. His whole manner indicated that an almost overwhelming exaltation was racing through his veins. I had murmured some words of congratulation on his achievement in creating the world`s largest Islamic nation.

``Oh, it`s not just the largest Islamic nation. Pakistan is the fifth-largest nation in the world!``

The note of personal triumph was so unmistakable that I wondered how much thought he gave to the human cost: more Muslim lives had been sacrificed to create the new Muslim homeland than America, for example, had lost during the entire second World War. I hoped he had a constructive plan for the seventy million c