Fissures in the Middle #503 by majumdar

MKG's fault was that he brought bad apples in the Muslim community to the fore rather than supporting the more progressive elements.

Turns out that the "bad apples" turned out to be less harmless than the supposedly good apples. While the bad apples may have succeeded in killing a few hundred Hindus, the good applies surpassed the bad apples by killing hundreds and thousands of Hindus and Sikhs.

Fissures in the Middle #502 Posted by majumdar

Pakistan had given right to entry to IMs till 1950s so theoretically if any IM felt aggrieved, he could have migrated.

So what do you make of his comment that Indian Muslims weren't his problem?

Secondly, MAJ (pbuh) never contemplated that either India or Pakistan would maltreat their minorities or there would be such cast iron boundaries between two countries.

This is so laughable. Why then was Jinnah just a few years ago shouting from the rooftops that yoking a Muslim minority permanently under a Hindu majority was a recipe for disaster and that the subcontinent would plunge into civil war?

You can accuse MAJ of being naive but not callous.

Sure Majumdar bhai! Jinnah was as pure as fresh snow. Happy now?

Fissures in the Middle #497 by masadi

Once this was achieved, it was relatively easy to take the divide and rule to its logical conclusion and ignore the franchise of a large chunk that had been made to "trust" in him.

Masadi sahib, what you say appears to be true. When Jinnah was asked about what would happen to Muslims left behind in India (by MC Chagla I think), he is reported to have said that it wasn't his problem. How callous can one be about the people who blindly trusted him!!

Aafia Siddiqui to Appear in Court #134 by zeemax

Cockroaches must be crushed under boots, not argued with. Don't you have a can of Baygon?

That's what the US is doing to Pakistan. My only worry is that with the bad cockroaches, some good ones are also going to get crushed :-(

Fissures in the Middle #476 by masadi

Majumdar sahib if Jinnah believed in the "Brits fairness", then he was even more ignorant than I had previously assumed.

Masadi sahib, this is an argument that has come to the fore time and again. If Jinnah was this foolish, millions of Indian Muslims made a fatal mistake by trusting his judgment and putting their lives at grave risk by moving to the nation he founded. In the process, hundreds of thousands lost their lives unnecessarily.

Fissures in the Middle #473 by majumdar

Yes, but that is not MAJ's fault is it. He believed in the Brits fairness and they let him (and the sub-continent) down.

And what prevented MAJ from from taking action against his minions for making threatening statements in the build up to the DAD? Was it also "British fairness" that was to blame here?

Fissures in the Middle #471 by majumdar

I am referring to the GORAs who were still running the Govt. Lord M and the gora governors shud have put their foot down and restored order.

Majumdar bhai, I'm talking of the Goras too. And we all know what Lord M and the gora governors should have done, but unfortunately for us that is not what actually happened.

Fissures in the Middle #471 by majumdar

I am referring to the GORAs who were still running the Govt. Lord M and the gora governors shud have put their foot down and restored order.

Majumdar bhai, I'm talking of the Goras too. And we all know what Lord M and the gora governors should have done, but unfortunately for us that is not what actually happened.

Fissures in the Middle #469 by majumdar

Rioters would have been chopped down by Armymen, who would have been given orders by Govt to deal strictly with the rioters.

Really Majumdar bhai? Are you sure the government was unbiased? If you go through some of the correspondences between various government officials of that time, you will note that decisions weren't always made on the basis of merit. If that were indeed the case, the army wouldn't have twiddled its thumbs in the barracks when Calcutta was burning during the Direct Action Day violence. Are you really this naive or merely uninformed? Please go through Sadna's ilogs or Google it up.

If the Indians are basically inhuman and would have indulged in religion based rioting at the drop of a hat it is useless to blame MAJ (pbuh) for the religious divide and violence in the sub-continent.

While Jinnah may not be blamed for the divide per se, he will be blamed for exacerbating and using it for selfish ends with the sole aim to grab power.

Fissures in the Middle #467 by majumdar

The Army would have had big guns while the rioters would have lathis, swords, kirpans at most kattas maybe.

But the rioters weren't targeting armymen, were they? They were looking for unarmed men, women, and children. Surely lathis, swords, kirpans and kattas are enough for the job, don't you think?

Plus MKG would have a year long to go on fast in various nooks and corners of the country and cool down tempers, no?

As the Partition proved, fasts and non-violence work only with people who believe in basic humanity and unfortunately the majority of Indians were (and still are I think) devoid of it. Jinnah's success at appealing to peoples' baser instinct amply proves it.

Fissures in the Middle #465 by majumdar

But to the Governors of the Provinces, the civil service and the British Indian Army. They could have worked out the issue of the Princely states as well as the boundaries of Assam, Bengal and Punjab and thus give minorities on either side enuff protection or opportunity to migrate safely.

It can also be argued that mobs could have made even more elaborate preparations, isn't it? More rioters could have mobilized, more weapons made available, more targets selected etc.?

Fissures in the Middle #463 by majumdar

Had the I-day taken place in 1948, the authorities may have been better prepared. Had the notice of partition been served a year in advance of the actual date, state govts could have offered adequate to minorities on both sides and those who still felt insecure could have migrated in calmer circumstances.

Majumdar bhai, what preparations are you talking about? Granting holiday to police forces so mobs could have open season on their targets? That is precisely what happened in the Direct Action Day case when Suhrawardy granted the Bengal police leave so Muslim mobs could have free reign. When mistrust between Hindus and Muslims was at such a high thanks to Jinnah's shenanigans, what was the guarantee that there would have been a peaceful partition? And if we're arguing on hypotheses, what makes you think the time granted wouldn't have served as opportunity for mobs to be even more prepared than they were?

Fissures in the Middle #461 by majumdar

Lord M was not the father of Pakistan or Partition, but his advancement of the I-day precipitated a crisis.

Majumdar bhai, even a common cold can kill an AIDS patient but that does not mean that it is the cold that is the cause. Similarly, you're arguing that it was the advancement of the I-day that caused the violence, and not the provocations made by Jinnah and his cohorts. Now will you also blame the Direct Action Day violence on Lord M?

When did I say anything nasty?

I was kidding Majumdar bhai. Except when it comes to the G-man, you are always unfailingly polite ;-)

Fissures in the Middle #457 by majumdar

What MAJ (pbuh) could not have foreseen was Lord M's antics which caught the sub-continent unprepared. And maybe he was an inaccurate idealist on the Partition issue.

Majumdar bhai, enough of this scapegoating already! While Pakistanis like Yasser love to hail Jinnah as the father of Pakistan, you're giving credit to Lord M. Can you both discuss and please decide who is the real father of Pakistan???

Fissures in the Middle #456 by masadi

You are sadly mistaken if you feel that Pakistan was doing great or the Muslims of India were doing great with Jinnah at the helm.

Masadi sahib, you should have guessed I was being sarcastic! Anyways, thanks for asking and the new Masadi is just what is needed. As they say, diplomacy is the art of saying the nastiest thing in the nicest possible way, Majumdar bhai-ishtyle ;-)

Fissures in the Middle #449 by majumdar

The Founder of Pakistan never anticipated a complete parting of ways, nor the expulsion/brutalisation of minorities on either of the two successor states

Sorry to say this Majumdar bhai but if Jinnah really thought so, he must have been an utterly clueless fool. After ratcheting up tensions between the two communities to an extent where riots were an almost daily occurence, to have thought he could spend the rest of his life in his Mumbai mansion betrays a complete lack of understanding of such extreme politics. The alternative explanation could be that Jinnah was probably starting to become cuckoo during the movement itself which is why he was taking such bizarre positions.

Secondly, you choose to ignore the fact that religion based mobilisation was initiated in the sub-continent by people who were in favour of United India.

While you choose to ignore the fact that those who did that did so to give the movement a more mass appeal rather than confine it to the educated elite. Not once did Gandhi ever talk about separation and till the very end he tried his best to prevent it from happening.