Remembering a great Pakistani: Sir Zafrullah Khan
Yasser Latif Hamdani August 31, 2006
#461 Posted by PewResearch on September 13, 2006 3:55:12 am
Re: # 403 Manto
Thanks, but the fact that he wavered from joint to separate electorates indicates that Jinnah was not secular consistent with the standard that you set in #390. He did waver, did he not? THAT is what counts. Recall your original assertion in #390 was `Secularism means a separation of church and state and to bring together an inclusivist system... Jinnah`s entire life was a struggle to that end`. His ENTIRE life struggle was not towards that end BECAUSE he struggled for SEPARATE electorates.
Thanks, but the fact that he wavered from joint to separate electorates indicates that Jinnah was not secular consistent with the standard that you set in #390. He did waver, did he not? THAT is what counts. Recall your original assertion in #390 was `Secularism means a separation of church and state and to bring together an inclusivist system... Jinnah`s entire life was a struggle to that end`. His ENTIRE life struggle was not towards that end BECAUSE he struggled for SEPARATE electorates.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#460 Posted by MantoLives on September 13, 2006 2:30:27 am
PS:
``I won’t go into what I was doing at 25 because you will die of sheer shock, but suffice it to say that at 25, you are more than a couple of years too late compared to me. ``
Yaar ... not that I am interested... but knowing you if it was anything worthwhile... you would have spilled it out by now... so please forgive me for not believing you.
``I won’t go into what I was doing at 25 because you will die of sheer shock, but suffice it to say that at 25, you are more than a couple of years too late compared to me. ``
Yaar ... not that I am interested... but knowing you if it was anything worthwhile... you would have spilled it out by now... so please forgive me for not believing you.
#459 Posted by MantoLives on September 13, 2006 2:27:32 am
Harish hyd,
You say that inciting violence is considered an offence and people get arrested for it. Then you do an about face and declare:
`` but somehow even the British never thought he did, no?`` (About Gandhi)
Did Gandhi not get arrested? Gandhi got arrested ... and you insinuated that only those who incited violence got arrested... hence using your logic Gandhi incited violence. By the same token Jinnah never got arrested and using your logic (which is backed by facts) Jinnah never incited violence.
About my sources: So... according to you because Edolphus Towns is black.. Arthur Kemp is non-Hindu... G B Singh is a sikh and Richard Grenier ... well he is an American.. they are all dubious sources... forget that one of them was elected more times than any other african american... and others are scholars of international renown...
So- lets leave these ``dubious`` sources aside... here is another Source:
COLLECTED WORKS OF MAHATMA GANDHI
On What Gandhi wanted
The last week has been very busy. We have not had a moment`s leisure. We saw Mr. Theodore Morison of Aligarh and the well-known Mr. Stead of the Review of Reviews. Mr. Stead has boldly come out to give us all the help he can. He was therefore requested to write to the same Boer leaders that they should not consider Indians as being on the same level as Kaffirs
Indian Opinion, 15-12-1906, CWOMG Vol. 6, pg 183
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (3)
CLASSIFICATION OF ASIATICS WITH NATIVES
The cell was situated in the Native quarters and we were housed in one that was labeled `For Coloured Debtors`. It was this experience for which we were perhaps all unprepared. We had fondly imagined that we would have suitable quarters apart from the Natives. As it was, perhaps, just as well that we were classed with Natives. We would now be able to study the life of Native prisoners, their customs and manners. ...Degradation underlay the classing of Indians with natives. The Asiatic Act seemed to me to be the summit of our degradation. It did appear to me, as I think it would appear to any unprejudiced reader, that it would have been simple humanity if we were given special quarters. ...the Governor of the gaol tried to make us as comfortable as he could…But he was powerless to accommodate us beyond the horrible din and the yells of the Native prisoners throughout the day and partly at night also. Many of the native prisoners are only one degree removed from the animal and often created rows and fought amongst themselves in their cells.
Indian Opinion 7-3-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 120
Apart from whether or not this implies degradation, I must say it is rather dangerous. Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized—the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty, and live almost like animals. Each ward contains nearly 50 to 60 of them. They often started rows and fought among themselves. The reader can easily imagine the plight of the poor Indian thrown into such company
Indian Opinion, 7-3-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 135
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (2)
INDIANS ON PAR WITH KAFFIRS
There, our garments were stamped with the letter `N`, which meant that we were being classed with the Natives. We were all prepared for hardships, but not quite for this experience. We could understand not being classed with the whites, but to be placed on the same level with the Natives seemed too much to put up with. I then felt that Indians had launched on passive resistance too soon. Here was further proof that the obnoxious law was intended to emasculate the Indians.
It was, however, as well that we were classified with the Natives. It was a welcome opportunity to study the treatment meted out to the Natives, their conditions [of life in the gaol] and their habits. ...We were given a separate ward because we were sentenced to simple imprisonment; otherwise we would have been in the same ward [with the Kaffirs]. Indians sentenced to hard labour are in fact kept with the Kaffirs.
Apart from whether or not this implies degradation, I must say it is rather dangerous. Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized—the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty, and live almost like animals. Each ward contains nearly 50 to 60 of them. They often started rows and fought among themselves. The reader can easily imagine the plight of the poor Indian thrown into such company
Indian Opinion, 7-3-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 135
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (1)
I have, though, resolved in my mind on an agitation to ensure that Indian prisoners are not lodged with Kaffirs or others. When I arrived at the place, there were about 15 Indian prisoners. Except for three, all of them were satyagrahis. The three were charged with other offences. These prisoners were generally lodged with kaffirs. When I reached there, the chief warder issued an order that all of us should be lodged in a separate room. I observed with regret that some Indians were happy to sleep in the same room as the Kaffirs, the reason being that they hoped there for a secret supply of tobacco, etc. This is a matter of shame to us. We may entertain no aversion to the Kaffirs, but we cannot ignore the fact that there is no common ground between them and us in the daily affairs of life. Moreover, those who wish to sleep in the same room have ulterior motives for doing so.
Obviously, we ought to abandon such notions if we want to make progress.
Indian Opinion, 6-1-1909, CWOMG Vol. 9, pg 149
On What Gandhi wanted (9)
Gandhi`s disdain for black people continues:
It is one thing to register Natives who would not work, and whom it is very difficult to find out if they absent themselves, but it is another thing and most insulting to expect decent, hard-working, and respectable Indians, whose only fault is that they work too much, to have themselves registered
What is a Coolie, Indian Opinion 2151904, CWOMG Vol. 4, pg 193
CWOMG: Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (8)
The whole affair is as much a disgrace to the Indian community as it is to the British Empire. The British rulers take us to be so lowly and ignorant that they assume that, like the Kaffirs who can be pleased with toys and pins, we can also be fobbed off with trinkets
Indian Opinion, 29-2-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 105
CWOMG: Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (7)
More on SEPARATE AND UNEQUAL theory of Gandhiji…
His Excellency has, moreover, justified the definition of `coloured person` on the ground that it is a legacy from the old Government. But British Indians object to the definition for that very reason. Their position is this. The ordinances will not in practice apply to them. The Boer Government insulted the Indians by classing them with the Kaffirs. Now there is no occasion to perpetuate a needless insult
Indians in the O.R.C, Indian Opinion, 6-1-1906, CWOMG, Vol. 5, pg 177-178
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi: CWOMG
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (6)
More on SEPARATE AND UNEQUAL theory of Gandhiji…
His Excellency has, moreover, justified the definition of `coloured person` on the ground that it is a legacy from the old Government. But British Indians object to the definition for that very reason. Their position is this. The ordinances will not in practice apply to them. The Boer Government insulted the Indians by classing them with the Kaffirs. Now there is no occasion to perpetuate a needless insult
Indians in the O.R.C, Indian Opinion, 6-1-1906, CWOMG, Vol. 5, pg 177-178
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi: CWOMG
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (5)
It reduces British Indians to a status lower than that of the aboriginal races of South Africa and the Coloured people.
Indian Opinion 15-9-1906, CWOMG Vol. 5, pg 419-423
On What Gandhi wanted (14)
On Minority White rule in South Africa:
We, therefore, have no hesitation in agreeing with the view that in the long run assisted Asiatic immigration into the Transvaal would be disastrous to the white settlement. People will gradually accommodate themselves to relying upon Asiatic labour, and any White immigration of the special class required in the Transvaal on a large scale will be practically impossible. It would be equally unfair to the Natives of the soil. It is all very well to say that they would not work, and that, if the Asiatics were introduced, that would be a stimulus to work; but human nature is the same everywhere, and once Asiatic labour is resorted to, there would not be a sustained effort to induce the Natives to work under what would otherwise be, after all, gentle compulsion. There would be then less talk about taxing the Natives and so forth. Natives themselves, used as they are to a very simple mode of life, will always be able to command enough wages to meet their wants; and the result will be putting back their progress for an indefinite length of time. We have used the words `gentle compulsion` in the best sense of the term; we mean compulsion of the same kind that a parent exercises over children
Indian Opinion, 9-7-1903, CWOMG Vol. 3, pg 359-360
CWOMG: COLLECTED WORKS OF MAHATMA GANDHI.
private delete
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (12)
What the British Indians pray for is very little. They ask for no political power. They admit the British race should be the dominant race in South Africa. All they ask for is freedom for those that are now settled and those that may be allowed to come in future to trade, to move about, and to hold landed property without any hindrance save the ordinary legal requirements
Petition to Natal Legislature, CWOMG, vol3, pg 330
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (11)
Ah… and they said Plessey Vs Ferguson was bad…
Well here is Gandhi with his theory of ``Separate and Unequal``
...The petition dwells upon ``the co-mingling of the Coloured and white races``. May we inform the members of the conference that, so far as the British Indians are concerned, such a thing is practically unknown? If there is one thing, which the Indian cherishes more than any other, it is the purity of type. Why bring such a question into the controversy at all?
The Transvaal Chambers and British Indians, Indian Opinion 24-12-03, CWOMG Vol. 4, pg 89
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (10)
More on Gandhi`s theory of ``separate and unequal``
Why, of all places in Johannesburg, the Indian Location should be chosen for dumping down all the Kaffirs of the town passes my comprehension. ...Of course, under my suggestion, The Town Council must withdraw the Kaffirs from the Location. About this mixing of Kaffirs with the Indians, I must confess I feel most strongly
Indian Opinion, 10-4-04, CWOMG Vol. 4, pg 130-131
...
For his views on Caste system
(1) I believe that if Hindu Society has been able to stand it is because it is founded on the caste system.
(2) The seeds of swaraj are to be found in the caste system. Different castes are like different sections of miliary division. Each division is working for the good of the whole....
(3) A community which can create the caste system must be said to possess unique power of organization.
(4) Caste has a ready made means for spreading primary education. Each caste can take the responsibility for the education of the children of the caste. Caste has a political basis. It can work as an electorate for a representative body. Caste can perform judicial functions by electing persons to act as judges to decide disputes among members of the same caste. With castes it is easy to raise a defense force by requiring each caste to raise a brigade.
(5) I believe that interdining or intermarriage are not necessary for promoting national unity. That dining together creates friendship is contrary to experience. If this was true there would have been no war in Europe.... Taking food is as dirty an act as answering the call of nature. The only difference is that after answering call of nature we get peace while after eating food we get discomfort. Just as we perform the act of answering the call of nature in seclusion so also the act of taking food must also be done in seclusion.
(6) In India children of brothers do not intermarry. Do they cease to love because they do not intermarry? Among the Vaishnavas many women are so orthodox that they will not eat with members of the family nor will they drink water from a common water pot. Have they no love? The caste system cannot be said to be bad because it does not allow interdining or intermarriage between different castes.
(7) Caste is another name for control. Caste puts a limit on enjoyment. Caste does not allow a person to transgress caste limits in pursuit of his enjoyment. That is the meaning of such caste restrictions as interdining and intermarriage.
(8) To destroy caste system and adopt Western European social system means that Hindus must give up the principle of hereditary occupation which is the soul of the caste system. Hereditary principle is an eternal principle. To change it is to create disorder. I have no use for a Brahmin if I cannot call him a Brahmin for my life. It will be a chaos if every day a Brahmin is to be changed into a Shudra and a Shudra is to be changed into a Brahmin.
(9) The caste system is a natural order of society. In India it has been given a religious coating. Other countries not having understood the utility of the caste system, it existed only in a loose condition and consequently those countries have not derived from caste system the same degree of advantage which India has derived. These being my views I am opposed to all those who are out to destroy the caste system.
The latest is a view that he took when he had already proclaimed himself the Mahatma... now is this a dubious source... this is YOUR GANDHI- the racist casteist bigot exclusivist ...
And talking of sources ... still no progress on the tailor issue in which you were caught lying ?
You say that inciting violence is considered an offence and people get arrested for it. Then you do an about face and declare:
`` but somehow even the British never thought he did, no?`` (About Gandhi)
Did Gandhi not get arrested? Gandhi got arrested ... and you insinuated that only those who incited violence got arrested... hence using your logic Gandhi incited violence. By the same token Jinnah never got arrested and using your logic (which is backed by facts) Jinnah never incited violence.
About my sources: So... according to you because Edolphus Towns is black.. Arthur Kemp is non-Hindu... G B Singh is a sikh and Richard Grenier ... well he is an American.. they are all dubious sources... forget that one of them was elected more times than any other african american... and others are scholars of international renown...
So- lets leave these ``dubious`` sources aside... here is another Source:
COLLECTED WORKS OF MAHATMA GANDHI
On What Gandhi wanted
The last week has been very busy. We have not had a moment`s leisure. We saw Mr. Theodore Morison of Aligarh and the well-known Mr. Stead of the Review of Reviews. Mr. Stead has boldly come out to give us all the help he can. He was therefore requested to write to the same Boer leaders that they should not consider Indians as being on the same level as Kaffirs
Indian Opinion, 15-12-1906, CWOMG Vol. 6, pg 183
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (3)
CLASSIFICATION OF ASIATICS WITH NATIVES
The cell was situated in the Native quarters and we were housed in one that was labeled `For Coloured Debtors`. It was this experience for which we were perhaps all unprepared. We had fondly imagined that we would have suitable quarters apart from the Natives. As it was, perhaps, just as well that we were classed with Natives. We would now be able to study the life of Native prisoners, their customs and manners. ...Degradation underlay the classing of Indians with natives. The Asiatic Act seemed to me to be the summit of our degradation. It did appear to me, as I think it would appear to any unprejudiced reader, that it would have been simple humanity if we were given special quarters. ...the Governor of the gaol tried to make us as comfortable as he could…But he was powerless to accommodate us beyond the horrible din and the yells of the Native prisoners throughout the day and partly at night also. Many of the native prisoners are only one degree removed from the animal and often created rows and fought amongst themselves in their cells.
Indian Opinion 7-3-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 120
Apart from whether or not this implies degradation, I must say it is rather dangerous. Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized—the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty, and live almost like animals. Each ward contains nearly 50 to 60 of them. They often started rows and fought among themselves. The reader can easily imagine the plight of the poor Indian thrown into such company
Indian Opinion, 7-3-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 135
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (2)
INDIANS ON PAR WITH KAFFIRS
There, our garments were stamped with the letter `N`, which meant that we were being classed with the Natives. We were all prepared for hardships, but not quite for this experience. We could understand not being classed with the whites, but to be placed on the same level with the Natives seemed too much to put up with. I then felt that Indians had launched on passive resistance too soon. Here was further proof that the obnoxious law was intended to emasculate the Indians.
It was, however, as well that we were classified with the Natives. It was a welcome opportunity to study the treatment meted out to the Natives, their conditions [of life in the gaol] and their habits. ...We were given a separate ward because we were sentenced to simple imprisonment; otherwise we would have been in the same ward [with the Kaffirs]. Indians sentenced to hard labour are in fact kept with the Kaffirs.
Apart from whether or not this implies degradation, I must say it is rather dangerous. Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized—the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty, and live almost like animals. Each ward contains nearly 50 to 60 of them. They often started rows and fought among themselves. The reader can easily imagine the plight of the poor Indian thrown into such company
Indian Opinion, 7-3-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 135
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (1)
I have, though, resolved in my mind on an agitation to ensure that Indian prisoners are not lodged with Kaffirs or others. When I arrived at the place, there were about 15 Indian prisoners. Except for three, all of them were satyagrahis. The three were charged with other offences. These prisoners were generally lodged with kaffirs. When I reached there, the chief warder issued an order that all of us should be lodged in a separate room. I observed with regret that some Indians were happy to sleep in the same room as the Kaffirs, the reason being that they hoped there for a secret supply of tobacco, etc. This is a matter of shame to us. We may entertain no aversion to the Kaffirs, but we cannot ignore the fact that there is no common ground between them and us in the daily affairs of life. Moreover, those who wish to sleep in the same room have ulterior motives for doing so.
Obviously, we ought to abandon such notions if we want to make progress.
Indian Opinion, 6-1-1909, CWOMG Vol. 9, pg 149
On What Gandhi wanted (9)
Gandhi`s disdain for black people continues:
It is one thing to register Natives who would not work, and whom it is very difficult to find out if they absent themselves, but it is another thing and most insulting to expect decent, hard-working, and respectable Indians, whose only fault is that they work too much, to have themselves registered
What is a Coolie, Indian Opinion 2151904, CWOMG Vol. 4, pg 193
CWOMG: Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (8)
The whole affair is as much a disgrace to the Indian community as it is to the British Empire. The British rulers take us to be so lowly and ignorant that they assume that, like the Kaffirs who can be pleased with toys and pins, we can also be fobbed off with trinkets
Indian Opinion, 29-2-1908, CWOMG Vol. 8, pg 105
CWOMG: Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (7)
More on SEPARATE AND UNEQUAL theory of Gandhiji…
His Excellency has, moreover, justified the definition of `coloured person` on the ground that it is a legacy from the old Government. But British Indians object to the definition for that very reason. Their position is this. The ordinances will not in practice apply to them. The Boer Government insulted the Indians by classing them with the Kaffirs. Now there is no occasion to perpetuate a needless insult
Indians in the O.R.C, Indian Opinion, 6-1-1906, CWOMG, Vol. 5, pg 177-178
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi: CWOMG
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (6)
More on SEPARATE AND UNEQUAL theory of Gandhiji…
His Excellency has, moreover, justified the definition of `coloured person` on the ground that it is a legacy from the old Government. But British Indians object to the definition for that very reason. Their position is this. The ordinances will not in practice apply to them. The Boer Government insulted the Indians by classing them with the Kaffirs. Now there is no occasion to perpetuate a needless insult
Indians in the O.R.C, Indian Opinion, 6-1-1906, CWOMG, Vol. 5, pg 177-178
Collected Works of Mahatma Gandhi: CWOMG
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (5)
It reduces British Indians to a status lower than that of the aboriginal races of South Africa and the Coloured people.
Indian Opinion 15-9-1906, CWOMG Vol. 5, pg 419-423
On What Gandhi wanted (14)
On Minority White rule in South Africa:
We, therefore, have no hesitation in agreeing with the view that in the long run assisted Asiatic immigration into the Transvaal would be disastrous to the white settlement. People will gradually accommodate themselves to relying upon Asiatic labour, and any White immigration of the special class required in the Transvaal on a large scale will be practically impossible. It would be equally unfair to the Natives of the soil. It is all very well to say that they would not work, and that, if the Asiatics were introduced, that would be a stimulus to work; but human nature is the same everywhere, and once Asiatic labour is resorted to, there would not be a sustained effort to induce the Natives to work under what would otherwise be, after all, gentle compulsion. There would be then less talk about taxing the Natives and so forth. Natives themselves, used as they are to a very simple mode of life, will always be able to command enough wages to meet their wants; and the result will be putting back their progress for an indefinite length of time. We have used the words `gentle compulsion` in the best sense of the term; we mean compulsion of the same kind that a parent exercises over children
Indian Opinion, 9-7-1903, CWOMG Vol. 3, pg 359-360
CWOMG: COLLECTED WORKS OF MAHATMA GANDHI.
private delete
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (12)
What the British Indians pray for is very little. They ask for no political power. They admit the British race should be the dominant race in South Africa. All they ask for is freedom for those that are now settled and those that may be allowed to come in future to trade, to move about, and to hold landed property without any hindrance save the ordinary legal requirements
Petition to Natal Legislature, CWOMG, vol3, pg 330
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (11)
Ah… and they said Plessey Vs Ferguson was bad…
Well here is Gandhi with his theory of ``Separate and Unequal``
...The petition dwells upon ``the co-mingling of the Coloured and white races``. May we inform the members of the conference that, so far as the British Indians are concerned, such a thing is practically unknown? If there is one thing, which the Indian cherishes more than any other, it is the purity of type. Why bring such a question into the controversy at all?
The Transvaal Chambers and British Indians, Indian Opinion 24-12-03, CWOMG Vol. 4, pg 89
private delete
October 4, 2005
On What Gandhi wanted (10)
More on Gandhi`s theory of ``separate and unequal``
Why, of all places in Johannesburg, the Indian Location should be chosen for dumping down all the Kaffirs of the town passes my comprehension. ...Of course, under my suggestion, The Town Council must withdraw the Kaffirs from the Location. About this mixing of Kaffirs with the Indians, I must confess I feel most strongly
Indian Opinion, 10-4-04, CWOMG Vol. 4, pg 130-131
...
For his views on Caste system
(1) I believe that if Hindu Society has been able to stand it is because it is founded on the caste system.
(2) The seeds of swaraj are to be found in the caste system. Different castes are like different sections of miliary division. Each division is working for the good of the whole....
(3) A community which can create the caste system must be said to possess unique power of organization.
(4) Caste has a ready made means for spreading primary education. Each caste can take the responsibility for the education of the children of the caste. Caste has a political basis. It can work as an electorate for a representative body. Caste can perform judicial functions by electing persons to act as judges to decide disputes among members of the same caste. With castes it is easy to raise a defense force by requiring each caste to raise a brigade.
(5) I believe that interdining or intermarriage are not necessary for promoting national unity. That dining together creates friendship is contrary to experience. If this was true there would have been no war in Europe.... Taking food is as dirty an act as answering the call of nature. The only difference is that after answering call of nature we get peace while after eating food we get discomfort. Just as we perform the act of answering the call of nature in seclusion so also the act of taking food must also be done in seclusion.
(6) In India children of brothers do not intermarry. Do they cease to love because they do not intermarry? Among the Vaishnavas many women are so orthodox that they will not eat with members of the family nor will they drink water from a common water pot. Have they no love? The caste system cannot be said to be bad because it does not allow interdining or intermarriage between different castes.
(7) Caste is another name for control. Caste puts a limit on enjoyment. Caste does not allow a person to transgress caste limits in pursuit of his enjoyment. That is the meaning of such caste restrictions as interdining and intermarriage.
(8) To destroy caste system and adopt Western European social system means that Hindus must give up the principle of hereditary occupation which is the soul of the caste system. Hereditary principle is an eternal principle. To change it is to create disorder. I have no use for a Brahmin if I cannot call him a Brahmin for my life. It will be a chaos if every day a Brahmin is to be changed into a Shudra and a Shudra is to be changed into a Brahmin.
(9) The caste system is a natural order of society. In India it has been given a religious coating. Other countries not having understood the utility of the caste system, it existed only in a loose condition and consequently those countries have not derived from caste system the same degree of advantage which India has derived. These being my views I am opposed to all those who are out to destroy the caste system.
The latest is a view that he took when he had already proclaimed himself the Mahatma... now is this a dubious source... this is YOUR GANDHI- the racist casteist bigot exclusivist ...
And talking of sources ... still no progress on the tailor issue in which you were caught lying ?
#458 Posted by harish_hyd on September 13, 2006 2:15:35 am
#457 by Mantolives
You still haven`t produced a single reason why anticipating arrest would mean anticipating violence. ``News agency`` said he was anticipating arrest... So your point is invalid ab initio.
Because inciting violence is considered an offense and a person delivering threatening speeches can be arrested. There are many such instances when the British arrested popular leaders who they thought could create trouble through their speeches. Jinnah knew what he had done, which is why he was anticipating arrest.
The fact that Gandhi was anticipating arrests everytime should tell us that he knew he was encouraging violence.
Hilarious, but somehow even the British never thought he did, no? Maybe you know something the British didn`t? Come on genius, let us all know.
A dishonest crook can only be in mould of Gandhi. Richard Grenier indicts Gandhi in his book ``Gandhi nobody knows`` for encouraging violence in Calcutta... but even if we reject Grenier`s point of view... Patel`s glee, as a leading Congressman, is damning evidence as he was a follower of Gandhi...
After Arthur Kemp, Richard Grenier, and now Edolphus Towns, the authenticity of your sources have plunged into the depths of nadir.
What kind of a friggin leader was Gandhi who couldn`t even control his ``secular`` disciples like Patel?
I suppose Jinnah did a great job controlling his Muslim Leaguers who were issuing blood curdling statements threatening violence and destruction in the days preceding the DAD. If Patel’s obscure letter which never went public is damning, then what do we call those statements made in public talking of bloodshed and mayhem which were quietly ignored by the opportunist b@stard?
I think I finished on time. I am sure at age 25, you were still figuring out what to do with your unmarketable education which forced you to go into that call centre business.. let alone have two degrees and a job developing business for the world`s market leader in ERP solutions apart from editing the frontpage of a widely read newspaper.
Aww Yasser, you think you did? Like I said thou doth protest too much. I won’t go into what I was doing at 25 because you will die of sheer shock, but suffice it to say that at 25, you are more than a couple of years too late compared to me.
Don`t worry we have a very good idea of your ancestral profession given your propensity to abuse.
Well, I can see your less than illustrious family line speaking when you speak of defecation, stink, rearend, etc.
You still haven`t produced a single reason why anticipating arrest would mean anticipating violence. ``News agency`` said he was anticipating arrest... So your point is invalid ab initio.
Because inciting violence is considered an offense and a person delivering threatening speeches can be arrested. There are many such instances when the British arrested popular leaders who they thought could create trouble through their speeches. Jinnah knew what he had done, which is why he was anticipating arrest.
The fact that Gandhi was anticipating arrests everytime should tell us that he knew he was encouraging violence.
Hilarious, but somehow even the British never thought he did, no? Maybe you know something the British didn`t? Come on genius, let us all know.
A dishonest crook can only be in mould of Gandhi. Richard Grenier indicts Gandhi in his book ``Gandhi nobody knows`` for encouraging violence in Calcutta... but even if we reject Grenier`s point of view... Patel`s glee, as a leading Congressman, is damning evidence as he was a follower of Gandhi...
After Arthur Kemp, Richard Grenier, and now Edolphus Towns, the authenticity of your sources have plunged into the depths of nadir.
What kind of a friggin leader was Gandhi who couldn`t even control his ``secular`` disciples like Patel?
I suppose Jinnah did a great job controlling his Muslim Leaguers who were issuing blood curdling statements threatening violence and destruction in the days preceding the DAD. If Patel’s obscure letter which never went public is damning, then what do we call those statements made in public talking of bloodshed and mayhem which were quietly ignored by the opportunist b@stard?
I think I finished on time. I am sure at age 25, you were still figuring out what to do with your unmarketable education which forced you to go into that call centre business.. let alone have two degrees and a job developing business for the world`s market leader in ERP solutions apart from editing the frontpage of a widely read newspaper.
Aww Yasser, you think you did? Like I said thou doth protest too much. I won’t go into what I was doing at 25 because you will die of sheer shock, but suffice it to say that at 25, you are more than a couple of years too late compared to me.
Don`t worry we have a very good idea of your ancestral profession given your propensity to abuse.
Well, I can see your less than illustrious family line speaking when you speak of defecation, stink, rearend, etc.
#457 Posted by MantoLives on September 12, 2006 11:40:53 pm
Dear harish mian,
Back to obscenities I see...
1. You still haven`t produced a single reason why anticipating arrest would mean anticipating violence. ``News agency`` said he was anticipating arrest... So your point is invalid ab initio.
2. Somehow... there are depositions in California outstanding against Gandhi by an unbiased American woman who claimed that first Gandhi got her husband bumped off and then tried to bribe her to shut up. Those who`ve read Gandhi`s life in toto, know just how violent he could be.... he was given to breaking people`s cameras in public for simply taking his picture... and you call him non-violent. The fact that Gandhi was anticipating arrests everytime should tell us that he knew he was encouraging violence. And the Moplah Killings, a direct result of Gandhi`s call, resulted in uncontrollable insurgency and unprecedented violence in South India... try and read up on that as well.
3. A dishonest crook can only be in mould of Gandhi. Richard Grenier indicts Gandhi in his book ``Gandhi nobody knows`` for encouraging violence in Calcutta... but even if we reject Grenier`s point of view... Patel`s glee, as a leading Congressman, is damning evidence as he was a follower of Gandhi... What kind of a friggin leader was Gandhi who couldn`t even control his ``secular`` disciples like Patel?
4. Honestly compared to a call centre worker like you, I would prefer a hardworking sewerage worker ... but that is not the point. As for me being in Law school till recently... I think I finished on time. I am sure at age 25, you were still figuring out what to do with your unmarketable education which forced you to go into that call centre business.. let alone have two degrees and a job developing business for the world`s market leader in ERP solutions apart from editing the frontpage of a widely read newspaper. I can see why I cause such pangs of insecurity in you.
5. Don`t worry we have a very good idea of your ancestral profession given your propensity to abuse.
Back to obscenities I see...
1. You still haven`t produced a single reason why anticipating arrest would mean anticipating violence. ``News agency`` said he was anticipating arrest... So your point is invalid ab initio.
2. Somehow... there are depositions in California outstanding against Gandhi by an unbiased American woman who claimed that first Gandhi got her husband bumped off and then tried to bribe her to shut up. Those who`ve read Gandhi`s life in toto, know just how violent he could be.... he was given to breaking people`s cameras in public for simply taking his picture... and you call him non-violent. The fact that Gandhi was anticipating arrests everytime should tell us that he knew he was encouraging violence. And the Moplah Killings, a direct result of Gandhi`s call, resulted in uncontrollable insurgency and unprecedented violence in South India... try and read up on that as well.
3. A dishonest crook can only be in mould of Gandhi. Richard Grenier indicts Gandhi in his book ``Gandhi nobody knows`` for encouraging violence in Calcutta... but even if we reject Grenier`s point of view... Patel`s glee, as a leading Congressman, is damning evidence as he was a follower of Gandhi... What kind of a friggin leader was Gandhi who couldn`t even control his ``secular`` disciples like Patel?
4. Honestly compared to a call centre worker like you, I would prefer a hardworking sewerage worker ... but that is not the point. As for me being in Law school till recently... I think I finished on time. I am sure at age 25, you were still figuring out what to do with your unmarketable education which forced you to go into that call centre business.. let alone have two degrees and a job developing business for the world`s market leader in ERP solutions apart from editing the frontpage of a widely read newspaper. I can see why I cause such pangs of insecurity in you.
5. Don`t worry we have a very good idea of your ancestral profession given your propensity to abuse.
#456 Posted by harish_hyd on September 12, 2006 11:17:39 pm
#453 by Chutiye da Puttar
Please explain how ``anticipating`` arrest amounts to violence?
Yaar Yasser, your parents are indeed visionaries to have embedded that three-letter word in your name. They knew you would grow up to be one. Anyways, the report is from Jinnah’s own press. If he had done nothing wrong, there would have been no need for him to anticipate arrest. The brilliant lawyer that he was, he could argue his way out if he had no malicious intentions. But the man knew what he had done, and so he was smart enough to realize that he could be arrested. Only YOU (given that three letter word in your name) fail to see the obvious.
Gandhi was arrested so many times ... by your logic, he was inciting violence right?
Gandhi’s life and actions are sufficient to put to rest any doubts about his having to do with any kind of violence. But being a unique breed (a human body with an ass’ brain), you fail to understand the obvious.
And while Jinnah was condemning fratricidal violence by your own source`s admission, Patel, one of the major leaders of ``Secular Congress`` under direct orders of Gandhi, another hypocrite, was celebrating the mass murder of Muslims.
Direct orders from Gandhi? Bhai Yasser, in addition to all the other professions, you could also consider writing fiction. Out of nowhere, you come up with such gems! But please provide a direct reference, lest you be taken for a dishonest crook much in the mould of Jinnah (I’m already convinced, you can save your image at least for the other Chowkies).
.. and you say Pakistan`s creation was wrong? Thank god for Pakistan.
Of course, thank god for Pakistan. I cannot imagine having to deal with characters like you and your better half, and the other assorted crazies they produce in the Madarssas.
Don`t worry about me and my ``meagre`` income... I was after all still in law school only 11 months ago... along with my SAP and journalist job... but whatever my ``meagre`` income, it has given me enough confidence to dispense with my other jobs.
Aww Yasser, thou doth protest too much. Of course, given your low intelligence, I can understand you were in law school until very recently. I should have anticipated that. Sincere apologies!
But please tell us how is gloating an indication of involvement in the DAD violence and when and what orders did Gandhi give to Patel?
But I highly doubt you`d be giving up that outsourced 1800 mobile lavatory customer service job any time soon. Did your jaw just drop... I have my ways of finding out where you work etc.
Of course my jaw dropped. Such utter stupidity!! I vastly overrated your intelligence and now when I find that I’m grossly mistaken, it is bound to happen. But like I said, people usually use words that they can relate with, and so your references to lavatories and the like. So in addition to lawyer, SAP coordinator, journalist, writer, aspiring economist, you are actually a sewerage worker too? Goodness!!!
Please explain how ``anticipating`` arrest amounts to violence?
Yaar Yasser, your parents are indeed visionaries to have embedded that three-letter word in your name. They knew you would grow up to be one. Anyways, the report is from Jinnah’s own press. If he had done nothing wrong, there would have been no need for him to anticipate arrest. The brilliant lawyer that he was, he could argue his way out if he had no malicious intentions. But the man knew what he had done, and so he was smart enough to realize that he could be arrested. Only YOU (given that three letter word in your name) fail to see the obvious.
Gandhi was arrested so many times ... by your logic, he was inciting violence right?
Gandhi’s life and actions are sufficient to put to rest any doubts about his having to do with any kind of violence. But being a unique breed (a human body with an ass’ brain), you fail to understand the obvious.
And while Jinnah was condemning fratricidal violence by your own source`s admission, Patel, one of the major leaders of ``Secular Congress`` under direct orders of Gandhi, another hypocrite, was celebrating the mass murder of Muslims.
Direct orders from Gandhi? Bhai Yasser, in addition to all the other professions, you could also consider writing fiction. Out of nowhere, you come up with such gems! But please provide a direct reference, lest you be taken for a dishonest crook much in the mould of Jinnah (I’m already convinced, you can save your image at least for the other Chowkies).
.. and you say Pakistan`s creation was wrong? Thank god for Pakistan.
Of course, thank god for Pakistan. I cannot imagine having to deal with characters like you and your better half, and the other assorted crazies they produce in the Madarssas.
Don`t worry about me and my ``meagre`` income... I was after all still in law school only 11 months ago... along with my SAP and journalist job... but whatever my ``meagre`` income, it has given me enough confidence to dispense with my other jobs.
Aww Yasser, thou doth protest too much. Of course, given your low intelligence, I can understand you were in law school until very recently. I should have anticipated that. Sincere apologies!
But please tell us how is gloating an indication of involvement in the DAD violence and when and what orders did Gandhi give to Patel?
But I highly doubt you`d be giving up that outsourced 1800 mobile lavatory customer service job any time soon. Did your jaw just drop... I have my ways of finding out where you work etc.
Of course my jaw dropped. Such utter stupidity!! I vastly overrated your intelligence and now when I find that I’m grossly mistaken, it is bound to happen. But like I said, people usually use words that they can relate with, and so your references to lavatories and the like. So in addition to lawyer, SAP coordinator, journalist, writer, aspiring economist, you are actually a sewerage worker too? Goodness!!!
#455 Posted by MantoLives on September 12, 2006 11:11:20 pm
PPS: BTW I just read that gem of a comment by Harish hyd about my discussion with Adam Khan... we had concluded the discussion on a note that we should work towards Jinnah`s vision of Pakistan... regardless of our disagreements about history. His fundamental point of disagreement was that if Wali Khan was wrong in supporting Zia... so had Bhutto, the self proclaimed guardian of Jinnah`s Pakistan, violated Pakistan through his machivellian politics... I accepted this point of view.
Adam Khan is a first class patriot and a gentleman. In other words he is no Harish Hyd.
That you would bring up the fact that I extended a hand of friendship by giving him my email address... to somehow extrapolate that I was afraid of being humiliated... shows me just how much you want to clutch at straws to feel good about yourself.
#454 Posted by MantoLives on September 12, 2006 10:54:46 pm
PS to VRV: Read ``Richard Symonds`` ``On Margins of History``... he knew Gandhi personally and was witness to the events of aprtition.. Sir Francis Mudie and Mian Iftikharuddin ... governor and rehabilitation minister respectively... are credited with saving a lot of Hindu and Sikh lives in Lahore. Riots, equally bad, in Karachi were brought to a halt because of Jinnah`s own efforts which are well known to those who have read history.. ofcourse unlike Gandhi, Jinnah was not in the habit of making a big deal out of nothing.
#453 Posted by MantoLives on September 12, 2006 10:51:01 pm
Yaar Kakay Mannay #451
You obviously have major comprehension issues with the simplest of questions. Let m restate: Please explain how ``anticipating`` arrest amounts to violence? Gandhi was arrested so many times ... by your logic, he was inciting violence right? And while Jinnah was condemning fratricidal violence by your own source`s admission, Patel, one of the major leaders of ``Secular Congress`` under direct orders of Gandhi, another hypocrite, was celebrating the mass murder of Muslims... and you say Pakistan`s creation was wrong? Thank god for Pakistan.
For a mere call centre worker you seem to worry a lot about my meagre income. Don`t worry about me and my ``meagre`` income... I was after all still in law school only 11 months ago... along with my SAP and journalist job... but whatever my ``meagre`` income, it has given me enough confidence to dispense with my other jobs. But I highly doubt you`d be giving up that outsourced 1800 mobile lavatory customer service job any time soon. Did your jaw just drop... I have my ways of finding out where you work etc.
Dear VRV,
Repeating the same post three times will not make it true.
The two nation theory of the League was based on the concept of Muslim majority federating units... by applying the same principles to districts, Congress should have also applied the same principle to all districts of all provinces. Thus ... UP`s Muslim Majority districts should have, by Congress` warped logic, fallen into Pakistan.
Also read more about direct action day impartially. There is no evidence of Muslim League`s involvement at all. It was ruled out by a proper investigation. Please explain if it was planned by the League, why the number of Muslims killed was three times the number of Hindus? Your warped logic amounts to saying that 9/11 was an American conspiracy because Americans were in the government and F.15s were placed too far away ...
Direct Action Day was a civil disobedience campaign, which remained peaceful and effective all over India... In Calcutta, Gandhi and Patel especially planned violence to bring down the cross communal ministry led by the Muslim League. It is well known that the league was only in power because of its Hindu allies... And who was the beneficiary - The congress party... which to the exclusion of Muslim League... was asked by the viceroy to enter into the Interim government.
You obviously have major comprehension issues with the simplest of questions. Let m restate: Please explain how ``anticipating`` arrest amounts to violence? Gandhi was arrested so many times ... by your logic, he was inciting violence right? And while Jinnah was condemning fratricidal violence by your own source`s admission, Patel, one of the major leaders of ``Secular Congress`` under direct orders of Gandhi, another hypocrite, was celebrating the mass murder of Muslims... and you say Pakistan`s creation was wrong? Thank god for Pakistan.
For a mere call centre worker you seem to worry a lot about my meagre income. Don`t worry about me and my ``meagre`` income... I was after all still in law school only 11 months ago... along with my SAP and journalist job... but whatever my ``meagre`` income, it has given me enough confidence to dispense with my other jobs. But I highly doubt you`d be giving up that outsourced 1800 mobile lavatory customer service job any time soon. Did your jaw just drop... I have my ways of finding out where you work etc.
Dear VRV,
Repeating the same post three times will not make it true.
The two nation theory of the League was based on the concept of Muslim majority federating units... by applying the same principles to districts, Congress should have also applied the same principle to all districts of all provinces. Thus ... UP`s Muslim Majority districts should have, by Congress` warped logic, fallen into Pakistan.
Also read more about direct action day impartially. There is no evidence of Muslim League`s involvement at all. It was ruled out by a proper investigation. Please explain if it was planned by the League, why the number of Muslims killed was three times the number of Hindus? Your warped logic amounts to saying that 9/11 was an American conspiracy because Americans were in the government and F.15s were placed too far away ...
Direct Action Day was a civil disobedience campaign, which remained peaceful and effective all over India... In Calcutta, Gandhi and Patel especially planned violence to bring down the cross communal ministry led by the Muslim League. It is well known that the league was only in power because of its Hindu allies... And who was the beneficiary - The congress party... which to the exclusion of Muslim League... was asked by the viceroy to enter into the Interim government.
#452 Posted by MantoLives on September 12, 2006 10:32:26 pm
Pew Research,
I already answered your question which was as is based on ignorance. Please refer to 403. Thankyou.
I already answered your question which was as is based on ignorance. Please refer to 403. Thankyou.
#451 Posted by harish_hyd on September 12, 2006 10:14:29 pm
#442 by Mantolives
I`ll let you find out more about Zia Chishti... whose business models Indians are dying to follow...
Sure..go ahead. Indians are waiting with bated breath to copy Zia Chisti’s “business model”.
I`ll let you find out more about Zia Chishti... whose business models Indians are dying to follow...
Sure..go ahead. Indians are waiting with bated breath to copy Zia Chisti’s “business model”.
#450 Posted by harish_hyd on September 12, 2006 10:13:49 pm
#441 by Mantolives
So you mean to say that saying that Jinnah was anticipating arrest and therefore sleeping on the floor - according to Time Magazine... is your evidence that you wish to bring to court? Have you thought of what you are saying... So as far as being kicked out of court... looks like you have ample experience of that.
Aww Yasser, like I said you touch new heights in stupidity every time you open your mouth. Here’s what the Time magazine says:
Like other Indian leaders, Jinnah denounced the ``fratricidal war.`` But most observers wondered how Jinnah could fail to know what would happen when he called for ``direct action`` . Shortly before the riots broke out, his own news agency (Orient Press) reported that Jinnah, anticipating violence, was sleeping on the floor these nights—to toughen up for a possible sojourn in jail.
I’m sure you know what “own news agency” means, don’t you? Or do you want me to buy you a dictionary for that?
But Patel gloating over More Muslims died is a clear example of Congress` glee over the turn of events in Calcutta...
Of course, Patel was overjoyed because the Muslim League thought of striking terror in Hindu hearts but ended up achieving exactly the opposite result. So tell us how Patel gloating can be termed as evidence? Go ahead and prove your stupidity yet again for everyone to see.
As for the 5000 people who died... most of them died at the hands of Congress goons and goondas... whether you like it or not.
Bhai Yasser, going by your logic, one would sympathize with the Israelis in the recent war, because though Israel initiated the war, the Hezbollah gave as good as it got (if not better). With such sparkling logic, is it any wonder that you have to look at alternatives like SAP coordinator, journalist, aspiring economist etc.. to supplement the meager income from your chosen profession.
So you mean to say that saying that Jinnah was anticipating arrest and therefore sleeping on the floor - according to Time Magazine... is your evidence that you wish to bring to court? Have you thought of what you are saying... So as far as being kicked out of court... looks like you have ample experience of that.
Aww Yasser, like I said you touch new heights in stupidity every time you open your mouth. Here’s what the Time magazine says:
Like other Indian leaders, Jinnah denounced the ``fratricidal war.`` But most observers wondered how Jinnah could fail to know what would happen when he called for ``direct action`` . Shortly before the riots broke out, his own news agency (Orient Press) reported that Jinnah, anticipating violence, was sleeping on the floor these nights—to toughen up for a possible sojourn in jail.
I’m sure you know what “own news agency” means, don’t you? Or do you want me to buy you a dictionary for that?
But Patel gloating over More Muslims died is a clear example of Congress` glee over the turn of events in Calcutta...
Of course, Patel was overjoyed because the Muslim League thought of striking terror in Hindu hearts but ended up achieving exactly the opposite result. So tell us how Patel gloating can be termed as evidence? Go ahead and prove your stupidity yet again for everyone to see.
As for the 5000 people who died... most of them died at the hands of Congress goons and goondas... whether you like it or not.
Bhai Yasser, going by your logic, one would sympathize with the Israelis in the recent war, because though Israel initiated the war, the Hezbollah gave as good as it got (if not better). With such sparkling logic, is it any wonder that you have to look at alternatives like SAP coordinator, journalist, aspiring economist etc.. to supplement the meager income from your chosen profession.
#449 Posted by PewResearch on September 12, 2006 6:16:48 pm
Manto, YLH:
Can you please respond to my question #399? Thank you
Can you please respond to my question #399? Thank you
#448 Posted by VRV on September 12, 2006 5:59:42 pm
# Corrected post in lieu of 446 & 447:
Pl read as:
My friend,
The understanding of history is based on my reading of history of various shades. Unlike u I am not a slave of desi history.
Khilafat:
Gandhi did what anybody wud have done in the circumstances (Khilafat). Secular Muslim leadership had not evolved during Khilafat. Indians were religious people & susceptible to the urges of religious sentiments. Khalifa is supposed to the figurehead of all Muslims. When the institution of Khalifa was abolished people in India got disturbed, naturally. The feeling of Muslims being wronged weighed on the minds of Indian Muslim masses. Gandhi shared that perception. As for mullahs joining hands with Gandhi, it`s natural that people concerned come out and seek support. Mullahs got what they wanted.
Damned if u do, damned if u dont. Had Gandhi not supported the Khilafat, people wud have attributed motives to his biased anti-Muslim feelings.
Jinnah:
Stopping communal violence in Karachi??????? Are not u silly? It was in Punjab he need to stop, not in Karachi. Secondly I recollect the recent posting of Saharnapuri quoting the Time report of somebody overflying Chenab & saw the colour of the river as RED. I also recount the poem of Amrita Pritam:
Quote
(http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00005129&channel=leafyglade%20inn)
Amrita Pritam
Umair Raja
May 15, 2005
Aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN
aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN, kitoN kabraaN vichchoN bol,
te aaj kitab-e ishq daa koii aglaa varkaa phol
ik roii sii dhii punjaab dii, tuuN likh likh maare vaen,
aaj lakhaaN dhiiaaN rondiaa, tainuN waris shah nuN kahen
uTh dardmandaaN diaa dardiaa, uth takk apnaa Punjaab
aaj bele lashaaN bichhiaaN te lahu dii bharii chenab .....................
END Quote++++++++++
Human blood had no meaning and value for Jinnah. I gave u a parallel between what Jinnah did in Karachi and what Advani did in India during Gujarat riots. Both shed crocodile tears for innocents.
DAD:
The call was given by ML and the day was declared as holiday by the Bengal govt. The official telegrams of the district collector and police officials give enough clues as to who did blood-orgy. If u want close eyes to that, fine...u r free as per the mythology of ML and Pakistan`s official history.
Many in India and Pakistan fail to mention the crucial piece of history following DAD i.e Bihar killings. It was the aggrieved Hindus of Calcutta of Bihar origin who killed many innocent Muslims as a revenge for DAD in Calcutta. Since Jinnah was guilty of his DAD, he did not demand a probe into Bihar killings though he sulked.
So, u mean to say DAD is Congress plan implemented by ML???? Cant be more sillier than this!
You said:
>>>>As for your claim... Jinnah was not hardpressed to explain why Punjab and Bengal shouldn`t be divided... because it was logical (and if you don`t see the legal logic behind it its your fault) that the federating units realigned themselves around new centers instead of arbitrarily partitioning Punjab and Bengal.<<<<<<<
It was mentioned in ToP abt this. This issue of partition of Bengal and Punjab came for discussions in the personal meetings of Jinnah with the British govt officials. Jinnah was at pains to explain to Moutbatten objecting to the Congress party`s insistence on partition.
Who decides on the basic unit is not ML or Jinnah`s prerogative. It`s by common sense that contiguous villages and towns in the provinces that were taken by Ceril Radcliffe for partition. Radcliffe was short of time but did the thankless job of demarcating the Muslim areas from Hindu areas (contiguous with India and Pakistan).
Even if u take the logic of giving the whole of the federating units, how can u ignore the wishes of the Hindu + Sikh minority (who constitute abt 50%) as per the principle of self-determination? If 26% of Indian Muslims can demand partition in India, why not 50% of the people in Punjab and Bengal demand the same partition? Do you mean to say that anybody other than Muslims dont count as human beings? Who taught u history? If u r self-taught, then u have unlearn a lot.
YOU SEEK PARTITION OF INDIA ON THE BASIS ON RELIGION BUT THE SAME DOCTRINE WUDN`T APPLY TO PUNJAB AND BENGAL?
Sounds ludicrous!!!!
>>>>>1. Muslim League`s demand was based on federating units and their realignment ... not partitioning of federating units.<<<<<<<
In fact ML asked for most of India upto Delhi. Who decides on the Units is not the prerogative of Jinnah or ML. Pl dont try to invent history. They even wanted all of Assam which is a Hindu majority province though Sylhet was the only Muslim majority district. So by ur logic the whole Assam wud have gone to India? You cant have it both ways my friend!
>>>>>>>2. By partitioning these federating units... Congress defacto accepted the two nation theory`s implementation on a district level (instead of federating unit level) ... thereby opening up a pandora`s box. Please tell me why it wasn`t logical then to strip Hindu majority provinces of its Muslim districts? Thus Congress` stance amounted to hypocrisy.<<<<<<<
ML propounds the TNT and blames Congress for accepting the TNT? The shoe`s on the other foot. Sorry said that.
>>>>3. Not satisfied by the butchery the bloodthirsty Congressmen had let loose on Muslims, Muslim League and Pakistan, the Congressmen then prevailed over people like Tara Singh and sabotaged a Muslim-Sikh agreement that would have given Sikhs an autonomous republic within the Pakistan Unit. <<<<<<
Muslims kill thousands of Sikhs and convert them to Islam and ML wants to have an agreement with Sikhs? Was it lack of character or political debauchery?
>>>>>>>4. Therefore... not only the partition of 1947, but the violence of 1984, perpetrated by that daughter of Nehru`s , was also the direct result of Congress` machiavellian blood thirsty politics that it unleashed in 1947. <<<<
You are comparing apples with potatoes. That way I can question the butchery of Bengalis in East Pakistan and Balochis in Balochistan now. Lets talk abt pre-47 history. I can give u dozens of instances of Nehru walking into the troubled communal groups to question their madness and shooing away the stone throwers in communal situations (Towards Freedom edited by Sarvepalli Gopal: the compilations are not the accounts of historians but newspaper cuttings of those days).
Jinnah never descended from his ivory towers into the mud and dust of masses, for he`s a manor-born, perhaps! (I understand his psychology, OTOH. No bad feelings abt that).
Thanks my friend....ur history wud be gold standard in Pakistan!
Wish u gud luck for ur new political plans:)
Pl read as:
My friend,
The understanding of history is based on my reading of history of various shades. Unlike u I am not a slave of desi history.
Khilafat:
Gandhi did what anybody wud have done in the circumstances (Khilafat). Secular Muslim leadership had not evolved during Khilafat. Indians were religious people & susceptible to the urges of religious sentiments. Khalifa is supposed to the figurehead of all Muslims. When the institution of Khalifa was abolished people in India got disturbed, naturally. The feeling of Muslims being wronged weighed on the minds of Indian Muslim masses. Gandhi shared that perception. As for mullahs joining hands with Gandhi, it`s natural that people concerned come out and seek support. Mullahs got what they wanted.
Damned if u do, damned if u dont. Had Gandhi not supported the Khilafat, people wud have attributed motives to his biased anti-Muslim feelings.
Jinnah:
Stopping communal violence in Karachi??????? Are not u silly? It was in Punjab he need to stop, not in Karachi. Secondly I recollect the recent posting of Saharnapuri quoting the Time report of somebody overflying Chenab & saw the colour of the river as RED. I also recount the poem of Amrita Pritam:
Quote
(http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00005129&channel=leafyglade%20inn)
Amrita Pritam
Umair Raja
May 15, 2005
Aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN
aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN, kitoN kabraaN vichchoN bol,
te aaj kitab-e ishq daa koii aglaa varkaa phol
ik roii sii dhii punjaab dii, tuuN likh likh maare vaen,
aaj lakhaaN dhiiaaN rondiaa, tainuN waris shah nuN kahen
uTh dardmandaaN diaa dardiaa, uth takk apnaa Punjaab
aaj bele lashaaN bichhiaaN te lahu dii bharii chenab .....................
END Quote++++++++++
Human blood had no meaning and value for Jinnah. I gave u a parallel between what Jinnah did in Karachi and what Advani did in India during Gujarat riots. Both shed crocodile tears for innocents.
DAD:
The call was given by ML and the day was declared as holiday by the Bengal govt. The official telegrams of the district collector and police officials give enough clues as to who did blood-orgy. If u want close eyes to that, fine...u r free as per the mythology of ML and Pakistan`s official history.
Many in India and Pakistan fail to mention the crucial piece of history following DAD i.e Bihar killings. It was the aggrieved Hindus of Calcutta of Bihar origin who killed many innocent Muslims as a revenge for DAD in Calcutta. Since Jinnah was guilty of his DAD, he did not demand a probe into Bihar killings though he sulked.
So, u mean to say DAD is Congress plan implemented by ML???? Cant be more sillier than this!
You said:
>>>>As for your claim... Jinnah was not hardpressed to explain why Punjab and Bengal shouldn`t be divided... because it was logical (and if you don`t see the legal logic behind it its your fault) that the federating units realigned themselves around new centers instead of arbitrarily partitioning Punjab and Bengal.<<<<<<<
It was mentioned in ToP abt this. This issue of partition of Bengal and Punjab came for discussions in the personal meetings of Jinnah with the British govt officials. Jinnah was at pains to explain to Moutbatten objecting to the Congress party`s insistence on partition.
Who decides on the basic unit is not ML or Jinnah`s prerogative. It`s by common sense that contiguous villages and towns in the provinces that were taken by Ceril Radcliffe for partition. Radcliffe was short of time but did the thankless job of demarcating the Muslim areas from Hindu areas (contiguous with India and Pakistan).
Even if u take the logic of giving the whole of the federating units, how can u ignore the wishes of the Hindu + Sikh minority (who constitute abt 50%) as per the principle of self-determination? If 26% of Indian Muslims can demand partition in India, why not 50% of the people in Punjab and Bengal demand the same partition? Do you mean to say that anybody other than Muslims dont count as human beings? Who taught u history? If u r self-taught, then u have unlearn a lot.
YOU SEEK PARTITION OF INDIA ON THE BASIS ON RELIGION BUT THE SAME DOCTRINE WUDN`T APPLY TO PUNJAB AND BENGAL?
Sounds ludicrous!!!!
>>>>>1. Muslim League`s demand was based on federating units and their realignment ... not partitioning of federating units.<<<<<<<
In fact ML asked for most of India upto Delhi. Who decides on the Units is not the prerogative of Jinnah or ML. Pl dont try to invent history. They even wanted all of Assam which is a Hindu majority province though Sylhet was the only Muslim majority district. So by ur logic the whole Assam wud have gone to India? You cant have it both ways my friend!
>>>>>>>2. By partitioning these federating units... Congress defacto accepted the two nation theory`s implementation on a district level (instead of federating unit level) ... thereby opening up a pandora`s box. Please tell me why it wasn`t logical then to strip Hindu majority provinces of its Muslim districts? Thus Congress` stance amounted to hypocrisy.<<<<<<<
ML propounds the TNT and blames Congress for accepting the TNT? The shoe`s on the other foot. Sorry said that.
>>>>3. Not satisfied by the butchery the bloodthirsty Congressmen had let loose on Muslims, Muslim League and Pakistan, the Congressmen then prevailed over people like Tara Singh and sabotaged a Muslim-Sikh agreement that would have given Sikhs an autonomous republic within the Pakistan Unit. <<<<<<
Muslims kill thousands of Sikhs and convert them to Islam and ML wants to have an agreement with Sikhs? Was it lack of character or political debauchery?
>>>>>>>4. Therefore... not only the partition of 1947, but the violence of 1984, perpetrated by that daughter of Nehru`s , was also the direct result of Congress` machiavellian blood thirsty politics that it unleashed in 1947. <<<<
You are comparing apples with potatoes. That way I can question the butchery of Bengalis in East Pakistan and Balochis in Balochistan now. Lets talk abt pre-47 history. I can give u dozens of instances of Nehru walking into the troubled communal groups to question their madness and shooing away the stone throwers in communal situations (Towards Freedom edited by Sarvepalli Gopal: the compilations are not the accounts of historians but newspaper cuttings of those days).
Jinnah never descended from his ivory towers into the mud and dust of masses, for he`s a manor-born, perhaps! (I understand his psychology, OTOH. No bad feelings abt that).
Thanks my friend....ur history wud be gold standard in Pakistan!
Wish u gud luck for ur new political plans:)
#447 Posted by VRV on September 12, 2006 11:18:55 am
PL read as:
My friend,
My understanding of history is based on my reading s of the subject of various shades. Unlike u I am not a slave of desi history.
Gandhi did what anybody wud have done in the circumstances (Khilafat). Secular Muslim leadership had not evolved during Khilafat. Indians as such were religious people & they people are susceptible to the urges of religious sentiments. Khalifa is supposed to the figurehead of all Muslims. If such an institution was abolished then people in India get disturbed. The feeling of Muslims being wronged weighed on the minds of Indian Muslim masses. Gandhi shared that perception. As for mullahs joining hands with Gandhi, it`s natural that people concerned come out and seek support. Mullahs got what they wanted. Damned if u do, damned if u dont. Had Gandhi not supported the Khilafat, people wud have attributed motives to his biased anti-Muslim feelings.
Stopping communal violence in Karachi??????? Are not u silly? It was in Punjab he need to stop,not in Karachi. Secondly I recollect the one of the recent posting of Saharnapuri quoting the Time report of somebody overflying Chenab & saw the colour of the river as RED. I also recount the poem of Amrita Pritam:
Quote
(http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00005129&channel=leafyglade%20inn)
Amrita Pritam
Umair Raja
May 15, 2005
Aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN
aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN, kitoN kabraaN vichchoN bol,
te aaj kitab-e ishq daa koii aglaa varkaa phol
ik roii sii dhii punjaab dii, tuuN likh likh maare vaen,
aaj lakhaaN dhiiaaN rondiaa, tainuN waris shah nuN kahen
uTh dardmandaaN diaa dardiaa, uth takk apnaa Punjaab
aaj bele lashaaN bichhiaaN te lahu dii bharii chenab .....................
END Quote++++++++++
Human blood had no meaning and value for Jinnah. I gave u a parallel between what Jinnah did in Karachi and what Advani did in India during Gujarat riots. Both shed crocodile tears for innocents.
DAD: The call was given by ML and the day was declared as holiday by the Bengal govt. The official telegrams of the district collector and police officials give enough clues as to who did blood-orgy. If u want close eyes to that, fine...u r free as per the mythology of ML and Pakistan`s official history.
Many morons in India and Pakistan fail to mention the crucial piece of history following DAD i.e Bihar killings. It was the aggrieved Hindus of Calcutta of Bihar origin who killed many innocent Muslims as a revenge for DAD in Calcutta. Since Jinnah was guilty of his DAD, he did not demand a probe into Bihar killings.
So, u mean to say DAD is Congress plan implemented by ML???? Cant be more sillier than this!
You said:
>>>>As for your claim... Jinnah was not hardpressed to explain why Punjab and Bengal shouldn`t be divided... because it was logical (and if you don`t see the legal logic behind it its your fault) that the federating units realigned themselves around new centers instead of arbitrarily partitioning Punjab and Bengal.<<<<<<<
It was mentioned ToP abt this. This issue of partition of Bengal and Punjab came for discussions in the personal meetings of Jinnah with the British govt officials. Jinnah was at pains to explain to Moutbatten objecting to the Congress party`s insistence on partition of these two provinces. Who decides on the basic unit is not ML or Jinnah`s prerogative. It`s by common sense that contiguous villages and towns in the provinces that were taken by Ceril Radcliffe for partition. He was short of time but had the thankless job of demarcating the Muslim areas from Hindu areas.
Even if u take the wishes of the people of the federating units, how can u ignore the wishes of the people as per the principle of self-determination?
You mean anybody other than Muslims dont count as human beings? Who taught u history? If u r self-taught, then u have unlearn a lot.
YOU SEEK PARTITION OF INDIA ON THE BASIS ON RELIGION BUT THE SAME DOCTRINE WUDN`T APPLY TO PUNJAB AND BENGAL?
Sounds ludicrous!!!!
>>>>>1. Muslim League`s demand was based on federating units and their realignment ... not partitioning of federating units.<<<<<<<
In fact ML asked for most of India upto Delhi. Who decides on the Units is not the prerogative of Jinnah or ML. They (ML) agreed on partition as there`s logic. Pl dont try to invent history. They even wanted all of Assam which is a Hindu majority province. Only Sylhet was Muslim majority district. So by ur logic the whole Assam wud have gone to India? You cant have it both ways my friend!
>>>>>>>2. By partitioning these federating units... Congress defacto accepted the two nation theory`s implementation on a district level (instead of federating unit level) ... thereby opening up a pandora`s box. Please tell me why it wasn`t logical then to strip Hindu majority provinces of its Muslim districts? Thus Congress` stance amounted to hypocrisy.<<<<<<<
ML propounds the TNT and blames Congress for accepting the TNT? The shoe`s on the other foot. Sorry said that.
>>>>3. Not satisfied by the butchery the bloodthirsty Congressmen had let loose on Muslims, Muslim League and Pakistan, the Congressmen then prevailed over people like Tara Singh and sabotaged a Muslim-Sikh agreement that would have given Sikhs an autonomous republic within the Pakistan Unit. <<<<<<
Muslims kill thousands of Sikhs and convert them into Islam and ML want to have an agreement with Sikhs? Was it lack of character or political debauchery?
>>>>>>>4. Therefore... not only the partition of 1947, but the violence of 1984, perpetrated by that daughter of Nehru`s , was also the direct result of Congress` machiavellian blood thirsty politics that it unleashed in 1947. <<<<
You are comparing apples with potatoes. That way I can question the butchery of Bengalis in East Pakistan and Balochis in Balochistan now. Lets talk abt pre-47 history. I can give u dozens of instances of Nehru walking into the troubled communal groups to question their madness and shooing away the stone throwers in communal situations (Towards Freedom edited by Sarvepalli Gopal: the compilations are not the accounts of historians but newspaper cuttings of those days).
Jinnah never descended from his ivory towers into the mud and dust of masses, for he`s a manor-born, perhaps! (I understand his psychology, OTOH. No bad feelings abt that).
Thanks my friend....ur history wud be gold standard in Pakistan!
Wish u gud luck for ur new political plans:)
My friend,
My understanding of history is based on my reading s of the subject of various shades. Unlike u I am not a slave of desi history.
Gandhi did what anybody wud have done in the circumstances (Khilafat). Secular Muslim leadership had not evolved during Khilafat. Indians as such were religious people & they people are susceptible to the urges of religious sentiments. Khalifa is supposed to the figurehead of all Muslims. If such an institution was abolished then people in India get disturbed. The feeling of Muslims being wronged weighed on the minds of Indian Muslim masses. Gandhi shared that perception. As for mullahs joining hands with Gandhi, it`s natural that people concerned come out and seek support. Mullahs got what they wanted. Damned if u do, damned if u dont. Had Gandhi not supported the Khilafat, people wud have attributed motives to his biased anti-Muslim feelings.
Stopping communal violence in Karachi??????? Are not u silly? It was in Punjab he need to stop,not in Karachi. Secondly I recollect the one of the recent posting of Saharnapuri quoting the Time report of somebody overflying Chenab & saw the colour of the river as RED. I also recount the poem of Amrita Pritam:
Quote
(http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00005129&channel=leafyglade%20inn)
Amrita Pritam
Umair Raja
May 15, 2005
Aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN
aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN, kitoN kabraaN vichchoN bol,
te aaj kitab-e ishq daa koii aglaa varkaa phol
ik roii sii dhii punjaab dii, tuuN likh likh maare vaen,
aaj lakhaaN dhiiaaN rondiaa, tainuN waris shah nuN kahen
uTh dardmandaaN diaa dardiaa, uth takk apnaa Punjaab
aaj bele lashaaN bichhiaaN te lahu dii bharii chenab .....................
END Quote++++++++++
Human blood had no meaning and value for Jinnah. I gave u a parallel between what Jinnah did in Karachi and what Advani did in India during Gujarat riots. Both shed crocodile tears for innocents.
DAD: The call was given by ML and the day was declared as holiday by the Bengal govt. The official telegrams of the district collector and police officials give enough clues as to who did blood-orgy. If u want close eyes to that, fine...u r free as per the mythology of ML and Pakistan`s official history.
Many morons in India and Pakistan fail to mention the crucial piece of history following DAD i.e Bihar killings. It was the aggrieved Hindus of Calcutta of Bihar origin who killed many innocent Muslims as a revenge for DAD in Calcutta. Since Jinnah was guilty of his DAD, he did not demand a probe into Bihar killings.
So, u mean to say DAD is Congress plan implemented by ML???? Cant be more sillier than this!
You said:
>>>>As for your claim... Jinnah was not hardpressed to explain why Punjab and Bengal shouldn`t be divided... because it was logical (and if you don`t see the legal logic behind it its your fault) that the federating units realigned themselves around new centers instead of arbitrarily partitioning Punjab and Bengal.<<<<<<<
It was mentioned ToP abt this. This issue of partition of Bengal and Punjab came for discussions in the personal meetings of Jinnah with the British govt officials. Jinnah was at pains to explain to Moutbatten objecting to the Congress party`s insistence on partition of these two provinces. Who decides on the basic unit is not ML or Jinnah`s prerogative. It`s by common sense that contiguous villages and towns in the provinces that were taken by Ceril Radcliffe for partition. He was short of time but had the thankless job of demarcating the Muslim areas from Hindu areas.
Even if u take the wishes of the people of the federating units, how can u ignore the wishes of the people as per the principle of self-determination?
You mean anybody other than Muslims dont count as human beings? Who taught u history? If u r self-taught, then u have unlearn a lot.
YOU SEEK PARTITION OF INDIA ON THE BASIS ON RELIGION BUT THE SAME DOCTRINE WUDN`T APPLY TO PUNJAB AND BENGAL?
Sounds ludicrous!!!!
>>>>>1. Muslim League`s demand was based on federating units and their realignment ... not partitioning of federating units.<<<<<<<
In fact ML asked for most of India upto Delhi. Who decides on the Units is not the prerogative of Jinnah or ML. They (ML) agreed on partition as there`s logic. Pl dont try to invent history. They even wanted all of Assam which is a Hindu majority province. Only Sylhet was Muslim majority district. So by ur logic the whole Assam wud have gone to India? You cant have it both ways my friend!
>>>>>>>2. By partitioning these federating units... Congress defacto accepted the two nation theory`s implementation on a district level (instead of federating unit level) ... thereby opening up a pandora`s box. Please tell me why it wasn`t logical then to strip Hindu majority provinces of its Muslim districts? Thus Congress` stance amounted to hypocrisy.<<<<<<<
ML propounds the TNT and blames Congress for accepting the TNT? The shoe`s on the other foot. Sorry said that.
>>>>3. Not satisfied by the butchery the bloodthirsty Congressmen had let loose on Muslims, Muslim League and Pakistan, the Congressmen then prevailed over people like Tara Singh and sabotaged a Muslim-Sikh agreement that would have given Sikhs an autonomous republic within the Pakistan Unit. <<<<<<
Muslims kill thousands of Sikhs and convert them into Islam and ML want to have an agreement with Sikhs? Was it lack of character or political debauchery?
>>>>>>>4. Therefore... not only the partition of 1947, but the violence of 1984, perpetrated by that daughter of Nehru`s , was also the direct result of Congress` machiavellian blood thirsty politics that it unleashed in 1947. <<<<
You are comparing apples with potatoes. That way I can question the butchery of Bengalis in East Pakistan and Balochis in Balochistan now. Lets talk abt pre-47 history. I can give u dozens of instances of Nehru walking into the troubled communal groups to question their madness and shooing away the stone throwers in communal situations (Towards Freedom edited by Sarvepalli Gopal: the compilations are not the accounts of historians but newspaper cuttings of those days).
Jinnah never descended from his ivory towers into the mud and dust of masses, for he`s a manor-born, perhaps! (I understand his psychology, OTOH. No bad feelings abt that).
Thanks my friend....ur history wud be gold standard in Pakistan!
Wish u gud luck for ur new political plans:)
#446 Posted by VRV on September 12, 2006 11:06:59 am
My friend,
My understanding of history is based on my reading s of the subject of various shades. Unlike u I am not a slave of desi history.
Gandhi did what anybody wud have done in the circumstances (Khilafat). Secular Muslim leadership had not evolved during Khilafat. Indians as such was religious people, they people are susceptible to the urges of religious sentiments. Khalifa is supposed to the figurehead of all Muslims. If such an institution was abolished then people in India get disturbed. The feeling of Muslims being wronged weighed on the minds of Indian masses. Gandhi shared that perception. As for mullahs joining hands with Gandhi, it`s natural that people concerned come out and seek support. Mullahs got what they wanted. Damned if u do, damned if u dont. Had Gandhi not supported the Khilafat, people wud have attributed motives to his biased anti-Muslim feelings.
Stopping communal violence in Karachi??????? Are not u silly? It was in Punjab he need to stop,n ot in Karachi. Secondly I recollect in one of the recent posting of Saharnapuri quoting the Time report that somebody overflying Chenab saw the colour of the river as RED. I also recount the poem of Amrita Pritam:
Quote
(http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00005129&channel=leafyglade%20inn)
Amrita Pritam
Umair Raja
May 15, 2005
Aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN
aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN, kitoN kabraaN vichchoN bol,
te aaj kitab-e ishq daa koii aglaa varkaa phol
ik roii sii dhii punjaab dii, tuuN likh likh maare vaen,
aaj lakhaaN dhiiaaN rondiaa, tainuN waris shah nuN kahen
uTh dardmandaaN diaa dardiaa, uth takk apnaa Punjaab
aaj bele lashaaN bichhiaaN te lahu dii bharii chenab .....................
END Quote++++++++++
Human blood had no meaning and value for Jinnah. I gave u a parallel between what Jinnah did in Karachi and what Advani did in India during Gujarat riots. Both shed crocodile tears for innocents.
DAD: The call was given by ML and the day was declared as holiday by the Bengal govt. The official telegrams of the district collector and police officials give enough clues as to who did blood-orgy. If u want close eyes to that, fine...u r free as per the mythology of ML and Pakistan`s official history.
Many morons in India and Pakistan fail to mention the crucial piece of history following DAD i.e Bihar killings. It was the aggrieved Hindus of Calcutta of Bihar origin who killed many innocent Muslims as a revenge for DAD in Calcutta. Since Jinnah was guilty of his DAD, he did not demand a probe into Bihar killings.
So, u mean to say DAD is Congress plan implemented by ML???? Cant be more sillier than this!
You said:
>>>>As for your claim... Jinnah was not hardpressed to explain why Punjab and Bengal shouldn`t be divided... because it was logical (and if you don`t see the legal logic behind it its your fault) that the federating units realigned themselves around new centers instead of arbitrarily partitioning Punjab and Bengal.<<<<<<<
It was mentioned ToP abt this. This issue of partition of Bengal and Punjab came for discussions in the personal meetings of Jinnah with the British govt officials. Jinnah was at pains to explain to Moutbatten objecting to the Congress party`s insistence of partition of these two provinces. Who decides on the basic unit is not ML or Jinnah`s prerogative. It`s by common sense contiguous villages and town that were taken by Ceril Radcliffe. He was short of time but had thankless job of demarcating the Muslim areas from Hindu areas.
Even if u take the wishes of the people of the federating units, how can u ignore the wishes of the people as per the principle of self-determination?
You mean anybody other than Muslims dont count as human beings? Who taught u history? If u r self-taught, then u have unlearn a lot.
YOU SEEK PARTITION OF INDIA ON THE BASIS ON RELIGION BUT THE SAME DOCTRINE WUDN`T APPLY TO PUNJAB AND BENGAL?
Sounds ludicrous!!!!
>>>>>1. Muslim League`s demand was based on federating units and their realignment ... not partitioning of federating units.<<<<<<<
In fact ML asked for most of India upto Delhi. Who decides on the Units is not the prerogative of Jinnah or ML. They (ML) agreed on partition as there`s logic. Pl dont try to invent history. They even wanted all of Assam which is a Hindu majority province. Only Sylhet was Muslim majority district. So by ur logic the whole Assam wud have gone to India? You cant have it both ways my friend!
>>>>>>>2. By partitioning these federating units... Congress defacto accepted the two nation theory`s implementation on a district level (instead of federating unit level) ... thereby opening up a pandora`s box. Please tell me why it wasn`t logical then to strip Hindu majority provinces of its Muslim districts? Thus Congress` stance amounted to hypocrisy.<<<<<<<
ML propounds the TNT and blames Congress for accepting the TNT? The shoe`s on the other foot. Sorry said that.
>>>>3. Not satisfied by the butchery the bloodthirsty Congressmen had let loose on Muslims, Muslim League and Pakistan, the Congressmen then prevailed over people like Tara Singh and sabotaged a Muslim-Sikh agreement that would have given Sikhs an autonomous republic within the Pakistan Unit. <<<<<<
Muslims kill thousands of Sikhs and convert them into Islam and ML want to have an agreement with Sikhs? Was it lack of character or political debauchery?
>>>>>>>4. Therefore... not only the partition of 1947, but the violence of 1984, perpetrated by that daughter of Nehru`s , was also the direct result of Congress` machiavellian blood thirsty politics that it unleashed in 1947. <<<<
You are comparing apples with potatoes. That way I can question the butchery of Bengalis in East Pakistan and Balochis in Balochistan now. Lets talk abt pre-47 history. I can give u dozens of instances of Nehru walking into the troubled communal groups to question their madness and shooing away the stone throwers in communal situations (Towards Freedom edited by Sarvepalli Gopal: the compilations are not the accounts of historians but newspaper cuttings of those days).
Jinnah never descended from his ivory towers into the mud and dust of masses, for he`s a manor-born, perhaps! (I understand his psychology, OTOH. No bad feelings abt that).
Thanks my friend....ur history wud be gold standard in Pakistan!
Wish u gud luck for ur new political plans:)
My understanding of history is based on my reading s of the subject of various shades. Unlike u I am not a slave of desi history.
Gandhi did what anybody wud have done in the circumstances (Khilafat). Secular Muslim leadership had not evolved during Khilafat. Indians as such was religious people, they people are susceptible to the urges of religious sentiments. Khalifa is supposed to the figurehead of all Muslims. If such an institution was abolished then people in India get disturbed. The feeling of Muslims being wronged weighed on the minds of Indian masses. Gandhi shared that perception. As for mullahs joining hands with Gandhi, it`s natural that people concerned come out and seek support. Mullahs got what they wanted. Damned if u do, damned if u dont. Had Gandhi not supported the Khilafat, people wud have attributed motives to his biased anti-Muslim feelings.
Stopping communal violence in Karachi??????? Are not u silly? It was in Punjab he need to stop,n ot in Karachi. Secondly I recollect in one of the recent posting of Saharnapuri quoting the Time report that somebody overflying Chenab saw the colour of the river as RED. I also recount the poem of Amrita Pritam:
Quote
(http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00005129&channel=leafyglade%20inn)
Amrita Pritam
Umair Raja
May 15, 2005
Aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN
aaj aakhaN Waris Shah nuuN, kitoN kabraaN vichchoN bol,
te aaj kitab-e ishq daa koii aglaa varkaa phol
ik roii sii dhii punjaab dii, tuuN likh likh maare vaen,
aaj lakhaaN dhiiaaN rondiaa, tainuN waris shah nuN kahen
uTh dardmandaaN diaa dardiaa, uth takk apnaa Punjaab
aaj bele lashaaN bichhiaaN te lahu dii bharii chenab .....................
END Quote++++++++++
Human blood had no meaning and value for Jinnah. I gave u a parallel between what Jinnah did in Karachi and what Advani did in India during Gujarat riots. Both shed crocodile tears for innocents.
DAD: The call was given by ML and the day was declared as holiday by the Bengal govt. The official telegrams of the district collector and police officials give enough clues as to who did blood-orgy. If u want close eyes to that, fine...u r free as per the mythology of ML and Pakistan`s official history.
Many morons in India and Pakistan fail to mention the crucial piece of history following DAD i.e Bihar killings. It was the aggrieved Hindus of Calcutta of Bihar origin who killed many innocent Muslims as a revenge for DAD in Calcutta. Since Jinnah was guilty of his DAD, he did not demand a probe into Bihar killings.
So, u mean to say DAD is Congress plan implemented by ML???? Cant be more sillier than this!
You said:
>>>>As for your claim... Jinnah was not hardpressed to explain why Punjab and Bengal shouldn`t be divided... because it was logical (and if you don`t see the legal logic behind it its your fault) that the federating units realigned themselves around new centers instead of arbitrarily partitioning Punjab and Bengal.<<<<<<<
It was mentioned ToP abt this. This issue of partition of Bengal and Punjab came for discussions in the personal meetings of Jinnah with the British govt officials. Jinnah was at pains to explain to Moutbatten objecting to the Congress party`s insistence of partition of these two provinces. Who decides on the basic unit is not ML or Jinnah`s prerogative. It`s by common sense contiguous villages and town that were taken by Ceril Radcliffe. He was short of time but had thankless job of demarcating the Muslim areas from Hindu areas.
Even if u take the wishes of the people of the federating units, how can u ignore the wishes of the people as per the principle of self-determination?
You mean anybody other than Muslims dont count as human beings? Who taught u history? If u r self-taught, then u have unlearn a lot.
YOU SEEK PARTITION OF INDIA ON THE BASIS ON RELIGION BUT THE SAME DOCTRINE WUDN`T APPLY TO PUNJAB AND BENGAL?
Sounds ludicrous!!!!
>>>>>1. Muslim League`s demand was based on federating units and their realignment ... not partitioning of federating units.<<<<<<<
In fact ML asked for most of India upto Delhi. Who decides on the Units is not the prerogative of Jinnah or ML. They (ML) agreed on partition as there`s logic. Pl dont try to invent history. They even wanted all of Assam which is a Hindu majority province. Only Sylhet was Muslim majority district. So by ur logic the whole Assam wud have gone to India? You cant have it both ways my friend!
>>>>>>>2. By partitioning these federating units... Congress defacto accepted the two nation theory`s implementation on a district level (instead of federating unit level) ... thereby opening up a pandora`s box. Please tell me why it wasn`t logical then to strip Hindu majority provinces of its Muslim districts? Thus Congress` stance amounted to hypocrisy.<<<<<<<
ML propounds the TNT and blames Congress for accepting the TNT? The shoe`s on the other foot. Sorry said that.
>>>>3. Not satisfied by the butchery the bloodthirsty Congressmen had let loose on Muslims, Muslim League and Pakistan, the Congressmen then prevailed over people like Tara Singh and sabotaged a Muslim-Sikh agreement that would have given Sikhs an autonomous republic within the Pakistan Unit. <<<<<<
Muslims kill thousands of Sikhs and convert them into Islam and ML want to have an agreement with Sikhs? Was it lack of character or political debauchery?
>>>>>>>4. Therefore... not only the partition of 1947, but the violence of 1984, perpetrated by that daughter of Nehru`s , was also the direct result of Congress` machiavellian blood thirsty politics that it unleashed in 1947. <<<<
You are comparing apples with potatoes. That way I can question the butchery of Bengalis in East Pakistan and Balochis in Balochistan now. Lets talk abt pre-47 history. I can give u dozens of instances of Nehru walking into the troubled communal groups to question their madness and shooing away the stone throwers in communal situations (Towards Freedom edited by Sarvepalli Gopal: the compilations are not the accounts of historians but newspaper cuttings of those days).
Jinnah never descended from his ivory towers into the mud and dust of masses, for he`s a manor-born, perhaps! (I understand his psychology, OTOH. No bad feelings abt that).
Thanks my friend....ur history wud be gold standard in Pakistan!
Wish u gud luck for ur new political plans:)