Saviour or Tinpot Dictator?

#498 Yasser

I think perhaps you DO belong in politics - you are getting better at the art of answering everything while addressing nothing! (Be careful, Mushy might start taking you seriously - and you know what happens to plotitician folks then!)

Let me repeat what I said in #495.

``He refers to a certain book “Gandhi behind the mask of divinity” and fails to mention the fact that this book in fact contains a whole chapter describing how Gandhi covered up a murder! He refers to it as a bestseller (which is quite possible in numbers – for most controversial books) instead!

He has quoted similar works by others in the past – when he claimed he did not “know” a Khalistani connection.

He has used quotes from somebody named “Arthur Kemp” in the past – who, if I remember correctly, has quite a history of revising history with a racial bias.

If I remember correctly – some of his references in the past have come from web-sites which were accused of having even jihadi links or origins!

The simple fact is the mian Manto picks and chooses his sources – he cares little for their credibility – and picks what at a particular moment fits with whatever “point” he is attempting to score. ``

Most legitimate newspaper writers try to separate personal prejudice from what they report. And virtually all of them care for the legitimacy of their sources - because when one passes off lousy sources as legitimate ones, it does not make those sources kosher - it only shoots down their own credibility.

I do not know what the standards of YOUR newspaper are. Who knows, perhaps they may even promote you to a full-fledged editor!

And, then of course - if you do get unemployed - there is always chowk.com, where quoting from Jihadi sites has perhaps never been considered big deal - especially on issues related to India!

Salim bhai,

Thanks for your eloquent post and lavish praise (:) be careful Bharath and Harish might hate you for saying anything good about myself or Jinnah)

You write: ``As far as individual characteristics are concerned, I have always admired Mohammed Ali Jinnah as a talented, intelligent, secular, fair, objective, very honest, and articulate leader - especially when he was the ``Ambassador of Hindu/Muslim unity.`` What I don`t understand is his 180 degree turnabout and haste toward the latter part of his worthy life. I think that perhaps, losing his wonderful wife, Rutti, may have taken the enthusiasm and love of life out of him.``

I believe reading H M Seervai`s book ``Partition of India: Legend or reality`` and Ayesha Jalal`s ``Sole Spokesman`` will provide you alternate answers...

You continue : ``Knowing his determination to attain goals, at great personal sacrifice, I am inclined to believe that had he lived to be 130 years old, we would see a different Pakistan``

I think he would atleast have created a constitution that would be accepted by all.

``First of all, he would not have allowed Punjabi hegemony or the loss of East Pakistan because of that selfish hegemony. He would have kept the mullahs at bay and never resorted to terrorism, fanaticism, or created the Tally Ban. Most importantly, not one little Napoleon in the entire Paki army would have dared usurp political leadership.``

Agreed again. Hence Jinnah`s continuing relevance to Pakistan and Pakistani discourse.



BJKumar,

At the end of the day- my conscience is clear. You are the person who tries and confuses many different issues. As far as I have read Ayesha Jalal - she has not commented on personalities but their politics... so I am not aware of what she feels about Gandhi... nor does it matter to me because my research on Gandhi is primarily based on his collected works... the book ``Gandhi behind the mask of divinity`` is a work that has come to similar conclusions... Richard Grenier`s ``Gandhi nobody knows`` is of the same view... but my research draws on the 90 volumes of Gandhi`s own collected works.

Other than that your personal attacks show a desperation. As for ``materials`` from websites.. I am not Harish Hyd- I don`t quote biased material. I go to the primary sources and not biased websites... the only websites I have quoted here the Hindu for example ... I am not sure how ``The Hindu`` is a ``Jehadi website``.... but please prove this new allegation of yours. ... given your track record... I feel another nose injury from falling flat on your face.



VRV...

I see your personal attack on me continues... albeit considerably mellowed down.
I maintain ...I have only quoted primary sources and have excluded biased Pakistani material... something you were unable to do quoting Mountbatten- his hatred for Jinnah is well known- as the objective truth. I have spoken of specific facts but you have jumped from argument to argument while calling me everything under the sun. This is no mature way of handling an academic debate.

May I suggest that by abusing me as you`ve done and for which you have not apologised and by calling every and any Indian who doesn`t agree with you a ``fake Indian`` - not to mention sullying the memory of H M Seervai- who is accepted by all Indian lawyers and judges as the greatest jurist produced by India- you`ve proved only yourself as outside the circle of sanity- .. a sinister insanity you accuse others of.


-YLH

#492 by kaalchakra

...in 1947 a script was replayed. And social scripts use individuals as mere excuses.

Round like a circle in a spiral like a wheel within a wheel
Never ending or beginning on an ever-spinning reel
Like a snowball down a mountain or a carnival balloon
Like a carousel that`s turning running rings around the moon
Like a clock whose hands are sweeping past the minutes of its face
And the world is like an apple whirling silently in space
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind

Like a tunnel that you follow to a tunnel of its own
Down a hollow to a cavern where the sun has never shone
Like a door that keeps revolving in a half-forgotten dream
Or the ripples from a pebble someone tosses in a stream
Like a clock whose hands are sweeping past the minutes of its face
And the world is like an apple whirling silently in space
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind

Keys that jingle in your pocket
Words that jangle in your head
Why did summer go so quickly?
Was it something that you said?
Lovers walk along a shore
And leave their footprints in the sand
Is the sound of distant drumming
Just the fingers of your hand?
Pictures hanging in a hallway
And the fragment of a song
Half-remembered names and faces
But to whom do they belong?
When you knew that it was over
You were suddenly aware
That the autumn leaves were turning
To the color of her hair?

As the images unwind
Like the circles that you find
In the windmills of your mind

Re: # 489

Correction:

Last para:

We hope they keep enjoying as long as they does not distrub our peace.

Pl read as

We hope they keep enjoying and expect them not to distrub our peace.

I also must say the following words on the credibility issue. When things of a technical nature are claimed, only technical people are the right peers to judge their merit. Then those things either get wide recognition and acclaimed as breakthrough findings – or exposed as works of fraud!

In the same way, when history is discussed – professional historians are the real peers! If one is discovering new or different history, one needs to get it evaluated by such people. (As I discussed before, most of us here do not fit that “peer” bill on this topic.)

I made that suggestion to him earlier, mian Manto – who answers every word with ten words – pretended to ignore it.

There are many other signs of deceit on his part.

Notice what mian Manto said about Prof. Jalal – who is probably highly familiar with the Indo-Pakistani political history – not having said anything on Gandhi. How credible a statement is that?! I don’t know!

He refers to a certain book “Gandhi behind the mask of divinity” and fails to mention the fact that this book in fact contains a whole chapter describing how Gandhi covered up a murder! He refers to it as a bestseller (which is quite possible in numbers – for most controversial books) instead!

He has quoted similar works by others in the past – when he claimed he did not “know” a Khalistani connection.

He has used quotes from somebody named “Arthur Kemp” in the past – who, if I remember correctly, has quite a history of revising history with a racial bias.

If I remember correctly – some of his references in the past have come from web-sites which were accused of having even jihadi links or origins!

The simple fact is the mian Manto picks and chooses his sources – he cares little for their credibility – and picks what at a particular moment fits with whatever “point” he is attempting to score.

He pretends to be a scholar on these issues – and tries to build up his case by publishing a LOT on this site! All designed to “win”!

Just like a lawyer!

Except no win is possible in a situation like this!

As said before, I applaud Yasser’s dream for Pakistan – if he sincerely feels like he claims – I also fear that his own techniques and his adopted dishonest means, added to his absolute lack of humility, are that dream’s worst enemies. I do not know whether he is sincere about his dream – he is certainly not sincere about looking at anything which contradicts his “case”.

It is quite amusing that he advices me to be more “open”!

My heartfelt wish for the Pakistani crowds here – consider it a challenge if you wish – ladies and gentlemen, can’t you come up with any better quality dreamer than THIS?!!!

#All interactors (continued)

I must disagree with the contention that the last person who is left standing somehow WINS.

First, what is there to win or lose in a forum like this – there are no awards that I am aware of – the only “reward” that I see appearing here is a lot of rancor and strong feelings and the dissipation of whatever goodwill there might have been among such participants.

Tell me how many of the opinions mian Manto has changed? True, nobody on his ``side`` has changed opinions either. Therefore, nothing is accomplished. Everybody stands exactly where they stood before.

Having said that – now tell me, who is the person who put the most of text on this board and most of his time on this board – including that in writing the article? Going by the number of interacts, in all likelihood it is mian Manto.

Therefore, in reality mian Manto comes out the loser – because like among a bunch of people competing to sink their precious possession (of time) into water – he managed to sink the most – and got exactly the same amount of return as everyone else – which was NOTHING!

He can consider himself the “winner” if it suits his fancy. To me, it does not look that way. So much time and all he has is a filled up board with a LOT of his own rantings and non-related stuff - and in a manner of speaking – it IS like killing your own baby with own hands!

#All interactors

I am sorry if any of my interacts here have sounded inflammatory or were taken as personal insult by any one. As far as I know, I have tried very hard to focus my criticism on Jinnah – and since I did not know the gentleman – my opinions of him – like my opinions of most people in real life – are formed based on what they actually do and accomplish, as explained in #391 – not on what they say, or claim, or how exotic their rationalization sounds.

For the record, my opinions of Jinnah remain highly negative. I’m sure that, in person, he had good qualities – all individuals do – I’m sure even Hitler did – but I’m highly sure that mian Mushy – even with all those skeletons in his closet – has enough good qualities and is a vast improvement over THAT man – if you honestly compare how much less is the loss of life that Mushy has caused by himself and compare it with what Jinnah wreaked.

But, I agree I should not have teased Yasser regarding Jinnah and perhaps it did become a bait for him like – as another gentleman pointed out – like waving a red flag in front of a bull! I should have confined to the topic instead of adding to the process of the discussion going astray!

However, he can not be absolved from his own role – he CHOSE to bite – in fact, with a lot of misplaced vigor!

Salim

Your views have come so close to the traditional Indian (Indian National Congress)perspective that an honorary Lucknowi citizenship is in order. It`s not nothing that we pride ourselves as the premier center of Shia civilization, next only to Tehran :)

But the traditional Indian/INC perspective is not fair to Jinnah. The only defensible conclusion seems to be that no one person was individually `at fault.` The `fault,` if any, was with the way large numbers of Hindus and Muslims viewed and approached the subject of religion, and the way these communities were structured.

Obviously, some individuals will always succeed in remaining above divisions. Yet modes of thinking and being have not dramatically changed, and may change very slowly, if ever at all. The only overwhelming difference between India of today and India of 1930s is that today India is free. Bring back the British rule, and Gandhi, Nehru, Iqbal, and Jinnah will be reincarnated working toward their same old goals, using precisely the same old arguments.

To borrow the very wise words of the great Chowkie scholar, Zeemax, in 1947 a script was replayed. And social scripts use individuals as mere excuses.

#480 by bharath

RE#473
ANY PAKISTANI TAKERS? Instead of crowing about standing tall, etc, etc.

The topic is Musharraf and his performance during the last 8 years ( and not a chapter of history that has been settled since 60 years ).
ANY TAKERS?

From the amount of wailing going about 1947, it seems it is the Indians who have an identity crisis :)

Re: # 489


``Indians wrote their own history to support their viewpoint, Pakistanis too did their own to support their viewpoint, not to forget that Bangladeshi too had some record of history that the current imposter`s stomach would churn, if he reads that. ``



`` What happened can not be changed but why it happened can have interpretations``



True......


just off the cuff....!!


Punjab committing suicide as one British officer called it



is the what perplexes me......

WHY.....???

To the saner elements (YLH excluded),

There are innumerable sources i.e government and public records (dairies and newspapers of those days) and scuh othe sources that are recognised by the historians as authentic, which we can quote as sources of the truths not a book(s), where individual opinions of the people weigh. There are books on all sides and anybody can quote any book.

Indians wrote their own history to support their viewpoint, Pakistanis too did their own to support their viewpoint, not to forget that Bangladeshi too had some record of history that the current imposter`s stomach would churn, if he reads that.

I read my desi history but I pursued it further by reading books of all shades. It`s prudent to know the history from all angles to get a unified view by merging the common points.

India is a civilisation for the last 5000 years. I dont understand why we need a father of nation in the form of Gandhi. The founding fathers of the Republic thought it that way. Pakistan is an artificial country though born out of sin (resorting to communal riots and bloodbath) it was founded by one gentleman. They want him to be the father of their nation, despite their insistence of calling that whole islamic ummah as one. It`s befuddling to see the contradiction, though.

Now parition is the area that they feel passionate about and denying the centrality of Jinnah tantamount to denying their identity. In order to consolidate their arguments they resort to maligning the leaders of India, which is unacceptable depsite our personal likes and dislikes of our leaders. The people of the new generation had a responsibility to build bridges (not for merger) than building fences.

In the last 6 decdes Pakistan underwent memorphosis into a totalitarian state. I have explained the GHQ-gene of Pakistan in my ealier posts. India`s democracy gene was not a one-man`s contribution but the whole generation of freedom fighters (that includes Hindus, Muslims and Parsis and many more commmunities) that fought for India`s independence.

In India, people with independent streak of mind have written books on Gandhi and Jinnah. Some are favourable, some or not.

The question is if I take the books that are favourable to Jinnah or Gandhi and say that they constitute truth, then it would be nothing but fooling myself (some people dont think this way, though).

This is where some of the board members and the author had differences. We are brought up in India as people with our valves of independent thinking opened. I cant say about people on the other side. However I have to admit that I met a few bright Pakistani friends in UK who are broad-mided and rational. May be it is the question of percentages.

Interpretations may differ but facts does not.

What happened can not be changed but why it happened can have interpretations. The author can blame Indians for the creation but one can not gloss over the human tragedy (Punjab committing suicide as one British officer called it). Partition however was good from India`s point of view coz India would have been Islamised by now. No offence to religion but the way Pakistan is evolving is an indication of what would have happened in a United India. Even now with 30% Muslim population Congress government in Assam appoints some ministers on the advice of Jamat-e-Islami. Since Assam is a NE state, we dont know the happenings there. Imagine at All India level, the same JEI would have been calling shots and the whole India would have been witnessing untold miseries of communal strife, riots and suicide bombers. Worse still, it would have a name not as a Secular Socialist Republic but Islamic Republic of India.

Secondly, contrary to what many in Pakistan (establishment as well) believe that India always tries to annex Pakistan. Never. It amounts to committing suicide by India. Pl see above for the explanation.

Creation of Pakistan have served this purpose that we live in relative peace. Partition has helped Muslim majority Indian states a sense of belonging and a unit that they can now live according to their wishes which they are jolly well doing. We hope they keep enjoying as long as they does not distrub our peace.

Aquaris #484, to arjun`` #482 {``and after the comment Mr Salim Chuahan made...
I think One must appreciate your effort...... ``}

Aquaris et al,
I think many of us are saying the same things. I respect Manto for his persistence, his presentation of his viewpoint, and his due diligence in gathering detailed information to support his case. Most of all, I am in agreement with him about secularism, religious tolerance, democratic institutions, egalitarianism, modernization, equal rights for all regardless of gender, race, ethnicity, language, and religion.

My point is that, if we agree on all of this, and I am sure that most of our decent Indian neighbors will agree with these principles, then what on earth was the need to partition united India?

As far as individual characteristics are concerned, I have always admired Mohammed Ali Jinnah as a talented, intelligent, secular, fair, objective, very honest, and articulate leader - especially when he was the ``Ambassador of Hindu/Muslim unity.`` What I don`t understand is his 180 degree turnabout and haste toward the latter part of his worthy life. I think that perhaps, losing his wonderful wife, Rutti, may have taken the enthusiasm and love of life out of him.

What I have against Jinnah is the haste with which he pursued and obtained this suicidal partition that never really helped anyone - except for the rapists, murderers, and plunderers in Punjab, Bengal, Bihar, and Delhi.

Not everything bad in Pakistan is really Mr. Jinnah`s fault. Knowing his determination to attain goals, at great personal sacrifice, I am inclined to believe that had he lived to be 130 years old, we would see a different Pakistan than the one that is irritating most of humanity today. After all, success is the best proof of intentions. First of all, he would not have allowed Punjabi hegemony or the loss of East Pakistan because of that selfish hegemony. He would have kept the mullahs at bay and never resorted to terrorism, fanaticism, or created the Tally Ban. Most importantly, not one little Napoleon in the entire Paki army would have dared usurp political leadership.

But then I ask again - why resort to partition in the first place? There are other human beings besides Muslims on the planet. Why can`t we solve our problems and progress WITH others? Besides, once Muslims are left alone, they invariably fight among themselves due to Shia, Sunni, Wahabbi, Ahmedi, and Ismaili differentiations. Sorry, I don`t see the logic in religion-based segregation of mankind.

Re: # 480


Actually Mr bharath.....

if you carefully go through the Response from Mr YLH....

all and similiar ........ Whys.......??

have been answered....


If and Only.... if you care to read them carefully...and with open mind...


..... yes its unfortunate .... things started off-tangent after Mr Jinnah untimely demise...
and have been getting out of hand....and too often then , one would have liked....

But ultimately.... we WILL get back.... on the RIGHT track....

So honestly forgive me for not giving a damn whether you agree or not... facts will be facts.

Right..

Zeemax, Aquaris,

Thanks.

Every time I am overwhelmed by the sheer unfairness and abuse of the this combined allied Indian alliance... I think that the Quaid-e-Azam had it much harder ... not only was he pitted against machiavellian/Chanakya Congress leadership but aiding them were our very own religious divines- the mullahs and their mother in laws- who have always opposed anyone who tries to do his or her best for the Muslims...

I do hope that they can learn to cut down on the abuse and fight fair.

Bharath mian..
Its not a Pakistani position- Pakistani position has been trying to reinvent Jinnah as some sort of religious leader.... it was your leaders, including Nehru, Gandhi and Sarojini who hailed the man for being the best ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity for 33 years and the most incorruptible politician in South Asia .. it is your newspapers who have been saying it and your politicians who have been paying homage to his vision. As for whether Indians are convinced or not is hardly my business.... you certainly don`t speak for all Indians and least of all salim mian ... he might disagree with partition but he knows his facts very well.

Your most respected jurist H M Seervai gave the verdict in favor of Jinnah in Partition of India legend and reality... the book Secular and Nationalist Jinnah was written by an Indian Congressite writer... the book Jinnah a corrective reading of Indian History was written by a committed ``Gandhian`` and its your leaders who have been fighting like dogs with historians about whether Jinnah was secular or not. The evidence I provided was completely neutral and not by any means of Pakistani origin. My conscience is clear and I think any unbiased person can see the facts for themselves... H M Seervai and many others did... which is why people like VRV and others abuse him and call him ``Non-Indian``.... even though he was by far the most patriotic Indian.

So honestly forgive me for not giving a damn whether you agree or not... facts will be facts.

Re: # 482

yes I too agree with most of what YLH stands for.....seculariazation, ruel of Law,... end of bigotry, narrow mindedness.....etc..etc..etc....and........etc...

Also.... after carefully going through some of your Cut Paste.... stuff.....

and after the comment Mr Salim Chuahan made...

I think One must appreciate your effort......

for whatever the reason you may be doing ...... But one must .... try to understand..
and correct the anomilities... that have been repeatedly pointed out .... ... through those often repeated Cut Paste stuff.....