Point of View, 1971 Through Now

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