Remembering a great Pakistani: Sir Zafrullah Khan

I suppose according to you this secret British Intelligence report ruling out any violence on part of Jinnah would did not exist either eh?

Volume 8

page 577, Enclosure to No. 360(full text)
Field Marshal Viscount Wavell to Lord Pethick-Lawrence 24 September 1946

Intelligence Bureau (Home Department)

Secretary has asked me for an appreciation of possible moves in the Muslim League field and of the consequences that might flow from them. In attempting this I necessarily base it on the assumption that Mr. Jinnah`s talks with His Excellency the Viceroy have once again ended in failure to achieve agreement. An appreciation would otherwise be unnecessary.

2. Mr. Jinnah would appear to have before him the choice of three alternatives; first, to resile with such grace as he can muster from the precipice of civil war, secondly, to stall for time in which to improve his organisation, and, thirdly, to take a plunge into direct action.

3. The reasons that might prompt him to flinch from the third alternative are:-
(a) Fear or dislike of the bloodshed and butchery and, it may be, the chaos which will result.
(b) The hesitance of some of his immediate subordinates, not all of whom are men of action or wholly irresponsible.
(c) The proof afforded by the Calcutta carnage that it is the poor, including the Muslim poor, who suffer most from the savagery and from the aftermath of disorder.

Dear VRV,

Please don`t give yourself so much credit unnecessarily. Simply putting up a citation and putting up a quote from it is not enough. Nothing you`ve quoted can be said to be conclusive evidence unlike what I have quoted. The fact remains that your own source proves that Hindus were the perpetrators and Muslims the victims...

First you are caught lying that you quoted Suhrawardy`s book... now you are making up stories about Wavell`s letter to Pethick Lawrence.

``I`ve found no evidence of muslim league involvement in calcutta killings and appreciably larger number of Muslims died than Hindus``

(Mansergh Volume IX TOPP Page 879)

Have some shame VRV. I just checked and it turns out that there is indeed a letter by Jenkins in Volume XI.... and not volume IX .... so nice try but you`ve fallen flat on your face once again.

I think I made my point backed by a wealth of quotes and info on Direct Action Day and the role of Muslim League and Suhrawardy in the communal violence that became a momentous event in the formation of Pakistan. Though what I gave as evidence is only 1/3rd of what I possess on my hand.

However the last straw our friend Manto is still holding is the quote of Transfer of Power Volume IX, page 879 purported to have been made by Wavell. I know for a good 10 days that what Manto was quoting is NOT true but I wanted him to dig deeper and let the world know where he was.

I shud paste the page 879 and the world know where he was.

The page of the volume contains a letter from Jenkins to Wavell (NOT the leter of Wavell as he wants us to believe) on the situation in Punjab on the eve of intended partition of Punjab. It has nothing to do with Direct Action Day or Suhrawardy, btw.

I think there wudn`t be any thing for Manto to hold onto, once I post the photocopy of that page.

Pl help me how to paste the jpg file here. I wish to paste the photocopy of the last straw aka the page 879 of Transfer of Power Volume IX.

Thanks for anybody who wud help me with the process, Manto included.

And ofcourse this:

Lord Wavell said:

``I`ve found no evidence of muslim league involvement in calcutta killings and appreciably larger number of Muslims died than Hindus``

(Mansergh Volume IX TOPP Page 879)

This puts to rest all controversies... clearly your assertion that viceroy`s accounts prove something else blow up in your face as easily as the rest of your clams.

As with my previous post, I pointed out that I would not bring your family into this discussion. Your ``integrity`` is quite apparent from the way you resort to abusing others` families.
Secondly, please recall that the dispute was not about the existence of the book but rather about your claim that you were quoting from it. You were not and it was proved. So there is really no vindication of your integrity there either.

Third your comparison of Suhrawardy and Modi falls flat on its face when we consider that unlike Gujurat ... Suhrawardy`s constituents lost their lives... had Suhrawardy been like Modi, his own constituents would not have been butchered in thousands... it is clear from your own source quoted below that Muslim League and Suhrawardy were the victims and not the perpetrators. This view was confirmed by the Viceroy who has been quoted below as well.

Calling me names or abusing me will not really change the facts of history. There are other differences as well... Muslim League and Suhrawardy led a cross communal government in Bengal unlike the case in Gujurat, which further weakens your accusations against Suhrawardy (who by the way became the founder of the most avowedly secular party in the subcontinent i.e. Awami League).

Ofcourse the great irony of the way Indians argue is amazing. Suhrawardy and his followers (including Mujeeb) when at the head of Muslim League were embroiled in a violent conflict in 1946 ... they were evil ``narrowminded`` communalists... but when the same followers in the Awami League is accused of provoking violence (by Sarmila Bose, an Indian author) in 1970-71 against Non-Bengalis... they were symbols of secularism and democracy.

Brilliant!!!

I agree that we shud not bring our families but when I was accused of quoting an internet source despite my affirmation of the BOOK as my source I was compelled to swear, for which I regret now that I brought my family into this to convince a congenital liar.

My concern was my integrity, nothing else. Since ur allegation of the existence of the Book was proved wrong, now I proceed with my points.

You grudgingly bring Gandhi to this notorious day of Muslim League, unconsciously, which confirms my doubts on ur pathological obsession with Gandhi.

HERE WE TALK ABT MUSLIM LEAGUE AND SUHRAWARDY AS THE ACCUSED. I wud take the boasts of Suhrawardy as an admission of guilt BUT NOT his accusation of communal nature against Hindus coz, he`s THE accused in Bengal. However, I need collateral data, records and information to buttress the words of Suhrawardy on Hindus, WITHOUT WHICH THE WORDS OF THE PREMIER DOESN’T STAND. In any case Hindus too had a right to defend their lives. Do u mean that they take the blows from Muslim Leaguers and get killed with smiles? Even law allows such action of self-defence.

Here, I quote what the Star of India published on 13.08.1946 (emphasis in capitals is mine).

“I appeal to the Mussalmans of Calcutta, Howrah and Hoogly, Matiaburz and 24-Paraganas to raise to the occasion and make the rally a massive success. We are in the midst of rainy season and Ramzan fasting. BUT THIS IS THE MONTH OF REAL JEHAD OF GOD’S grace and blessings, spiritual armament and the moral and PHYSICAL PURGE OF THE NATION. IT’S A SUPREME OCCASION OF OUR TRAIL. Let’s the Muslims brave the rains and all difficulties and make the Direct Action Day a historic MASS MOBILISATION of the Millat.

MUSLIMS MUST REMEMBER THAT IT WAS IN RAMZAN THAT THE QURAN WAS REVEALED.

IT WAS IN RAMZAN THAT THE PERMISSION FOR JEHAD WAS GRANTED BY ALLAH.

IT WAS IN THE MONTH OF RAMZAN, THE BATTLE OF BADR, THE FIRST OPEN CONFLICT BETWEEN MUSLIMS AND HEATHENISM WAS FOUGHT AND WAS WON BY 313 MUSLIMS.

AGAIN IT WAS IN RAMZAN THAT 10,000 MUSLIMS UNDER THE HOLY PROPHET CONQUERED MECCA AND ESTABLISHED THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF ISLAM IN ARABIA.

THE MUSLIM LEAGUE IS FORTUNATE THAT IT IS STARTING ITS ACTION IN THIS HOLY MONTH.”

Manto, call for Jehad was given (for Direct Action Day).

Transfer of Power Vol VIII, page 229, dated: 13.08.1946.

Wavell to Pethick Lawrence:

``Just before the Governors` Conference Mudie (Governor of Sind) had trouble with two of his ministers who made violent speeches including practically a THREAT to have ``Quisling`` Muslims MURDERED and to START A JEHAD.
......

In any other country they would have been dismissed and arrested. Here we have to content ourselves with a promise that they will not do it again - till the next time.``

Manto, Muslim League ministers are calling for the murder of Dr. Zakir Husain and Azad.

Now u say that Suhrawardy is a gentleman and Modi is not. I disagree. There`s considerable material I mentioned, has proved that Suhrawardy was like any other communalist-gangster-Home Minister. The records of the civil and military officials also confirm to this. I see many similarities between Modi and Suhrawardy. Both believe in narrow thinking of communal politics. Though elected to represent all the people they showed their true intentions by siding with their own community of the province in the hour of crisis. Do you think that Modi was a killer but Suhrawardy was an angel????.

U can keep believing in such fantasies of Pakistnis historians like for eg. Nadeem Shafiq Malik. I was compelled to quote the similarity as both oversaw the pogrom. Btw, ISI-backed Muslim fundamentalist (different from nationalist, decent Muslims) thugs in Gujarat are no innocents. They too whacked many innocents to death and I myself saw many such cases of Hindu localities which were burnt and ransacked. If u take the overall count then Hindu thugs overdid Muslim thugs in savagery. Simple as that.

THE OFT-QUOTED DATA OF MORE MUSLIMS KILLED IN CALCUTTA IS MORE OF UR IMAGINATION, NOT BACKED BY ANY CREDIBLE DATA. The newspaper reports and the reports of military and civic administration clearly mention that no authoritative count of the dead is available. It`s more of estimation. If the government headed by Suhrawardy cooked up such figures as to misinform then I need to rely on the data of the British military and independent newspaper reports. Therefore ur contention that more Muslims died wud remain a propaganda tactic of the Muslim League.

Here, I give the Surgeon General Report on the casualties handled in Calcutta.

Between 16th -20th August:

Total admissions (alive) ………. 2931
Subsequent deaths ………………….. 168
Discharged ………………………….. 569
Remaining under treatment ………. 2194
Brought-in dead …………………….. 276.

(NOWHERE DID ANYBODY MENTION THE RELIGION, NOR THE DOCTORS ARE SUPPOSED TO LOOK AT THE RELIGION as they are bound by the Hippocratic oath).

Page 302.

“…..this is a very small number of fatalities as the great majority were left lying in the streets & wrecked houses. NO APPROPRIATE FIGURE OF THE DEAD CAN YET TO BE GIVEN. It may nearly 2000 at the least (this is what the newspaper Statesman estimated) and may be substantially more.”

There were many newspaper reports of the corpses being thrown into Hoogly river, gutters and manholes. So any report of such and such number of people (either Muslims or Hindus) died is more of a conjecture than a fact.

Burroughs: (page 303)

“..at the outset, I had always to consider the susceptibilities of my (Bengal) Ministry. The dual personality of Suhrawardy (as minister in charge of Home Portfolio) and the most influential member of the Muslim League in Bengal was a constant embarrassment.”

Manto, do u need more indictment of Suhrawardy?

Let me round up:

1.

SUHRAWARDY WAS BLATANTLY COMMUNAL, THEREFORE HIS REMARKS ON HINDUS CANT BE TAKEN AS TRUTHS BUT HIS BOASTS ON HIS ACHEIVEMENTS CANT BE OVERLOOKED, SINCE HE’S THE ACCUSED (AND HIS COMMENTS ON HIS ENEMIES CANT BE TAKEN AS TRUTH unless backed by collateral evidence from independent, government sources).

2.

More Muslims died than Hindus too is an imagination as a credible count cant be given by anybody for the reasons mentioned above (backed by relevant quotes).

3.

The accounts of the Viceroy and those of Military and Police plus the accounts of the newspapers of that period – supplemented by his boasts in his book “ Memoirs of Suhrawardy” – confirm the facts abt the heinous role of Muslim League in Direct Action Day in Bengal and why in Bengal.

4.

Your consistent lie that there is no book by name “Memoirs of Shaheed Suhrawardy” had been proved wrong.

5.

The accusation that Gandhi planned murders wud now prove that u are mentally unsound and therefore unfit for any rational arguments.

Lets say I have enough family values to know when exactly a person like you swears by his family members. To me this is an academic discussion and not about my family or your family.

Your comparison of Suhrawardy (who was a gentleman politician and a great) with a thug like Modi who is not a gentleman by any definition is indicative of your own biases...

But to use your example... In Gujurat when the state machinery was used, Muslims were butchered left right and center. If the same had happened in Calcutta under Suhrawardy, why did the number of Muslims killed turned out to be three times the number of Hindus?

From your own source:

Now Hindus objected to the proclamation of a holiday and made extensive, secret preparations to attack Muslims. Neither the Intelligence Branch concerned with the activities of terrorists and revolutionaries, nor the Criminal Investigation Department, both of which were manned almost wholly by Hindus. gave the Prime Minister any information regarding these preparations and he was caught unawares.113 On 16 August at the Ochterlony Monument Maidan, whilst he was addressing a crowd, gathered from all parts of Calcutta and the suburbs, he received news that processions were being obstructed and attacked by the Hindus and anti-Muslim riots were taking place in many areas. It was the Muslim holy month of Ramadan (fasting). Suhrawardy ordered the Muslims to disperse and go back to their homes. The crowd was very large, many with children in their laps, having come from all over the city, from the neighbouring areas of Howrah and the 24-Parganas, and from the Jute and Cotton Mill areas. As the crowd was returning home they were set upon by the Hindus, provoking an anti-Muslim riot on a scale far greater than the one in 1926.

Now ... how is Suhrawardy`s comments about Sindh Muslim Leaguers taken to mean that he had violence on his mind. It is well known that Suhrawardy worked day and night to quell the rioting ... Now H V Hodson confirms that while there was a lot of rhetoric that was thrown about.... the Direct Action Day was like any other Direct Action (interestingly these two words were first used by Gandhi to explain his civil disobedience campaign in 1920) ... a campaign of civil disobedience.

The fact that violence broke out in Calcutta gave Wavell an opportunity to back out of earlier agreements and offer Congress the government on the platter... Yet despite this he was forced to conclude that there was no evidence of Muslim League`s involvement in calcutta killings....

It is reasonable to presume that Congress took the opportunity to create problems for the coalition Muslim League government.

Manto,

I think it`s how a lawyer questions his opponent. I have nothing to fear nor worry abt the book. I know that u don’t have human values, now I know that u don’t have family values as well (Inspite of my swearing by my mom). Never mind.

I.

B4 I give the paragraph I promised, I give the Recollections of Rashid Suhrawardy on the book, which I dont think u get it in the Net.

“This is what is published in its entirety as this book. Whilst they are concise, they are nevertheless, a recondite commentary of his assessment and involvement in the politics of Pakistan from its birth to the time of his death. They recount much of what not had been said before and, more surprisingly, what not had been said since.”

---

I reproduce the first para of the book, page 23:

“AT this time, betraying the Muslim cause, the Viceroy called upon Pandit Nehru to form an interim government which he did, but the Muslim League refused to participate in it. Jinnah even cancelled his talks with Lord Wavell, the Viceroy, and proclaimed 16 August as Direct Action Day. The one-member majority Muslim League government in Sind, formed after the assasination of the Congress Chief (Is it Chief or Prime?? I need to check again) Minister Allahbux, was also asked , but because it was a shaky government, its Muslim League members could not be trusted. So all the risks of DAD fell on the Bengal Government. On that day Muslims were expected to gather in large numbers to proclaim their adherence to the concept of Pakistan. Shaheed Suhrawardy declared a holiday for that day in Calcutta.

………..

………..”

THERE IS ONE AND HALF PAGE MATERIAL ON THIS DAD, WHICH I LEAVE IT TO U TO READ FROM WHICH EVER SOURCE U GET, IF U CANT GET THE BOOK FOR URSELF.

Now I question:

1.If the DAD is a peaceful event, then why Suhrawardy tells that: Since ML members of Sind cant be trusted, the job of the ‘Plan’ fell on Bengal. What’s the JOB?

2. Why only Bengal and Sind declared holiday and NI Act?





II.

Suhrawardy like Modi had helped the rioters in all possible ways. He even visited the Police Control Room (like Modi’s minister did) and spent his time there with ML supporters. Commissioner of Police even said this that it’s odd for a Minister to spend time in Police Control Room and engage in the work of police.

Wavell to Pethick Lawrence: (Page 313, 314)

There may however be a good deal of criticism of the police…..mainly owing to ministerial interference…..too much LATITUDE seems to have been allowed TO RIOTERS & LOOTERS on the first day……

Horace Alexander to Pethick Lawrence. Page 287,288)

…..But I MUST record that I have not heard of any instances of effective intervention from the police during whole of Friday and Saturday. I have heard of several stories of police looking on or refusing to intervene.

Burroughs to Wavell: (page 297)

Suhrawardy made a Laodicean speech, of which the audience naturally remembered the hot passages more clearly than the cold.

….


But the Central Intelligence officer and a reliable reporter deputed by the military authorities agree on the one most mischievous statement.

‘He had seen to police & military arrangements who would not interfere’.

ToP Volume IX, page 13:

Wavell’s Notes on his interview with Suhrawardy

Looking as much as a gangster as ever…..

(More to Follow….)

Dear VRV,

Why do you insist on being exposed for what you really are...
You did not read the memoirs and you copied a commentary on it. What you quoted was not Suhrawardy`s memoirs but a website the address of which I have produced below.

From the same source, I produced a quote which is quoted below in bold and shows how shamelessly you were twisting the facts.

Now Hindus objected to the proclamation of a holiday and made extensive, secret preparations to attack Muslims. Neither the Intelligence Branch concerned with the activities of terrorists and revolutionaries, nor the Criminal Investigation Department, both of which were manned almost wholly by Hindus. gave the Prime Minister any information regarding these preparations and he was caught unawares.113 On 16 August at the Ochterlony Monument Maidan, whilst he was addressing a crowd, gathered from all parts of Calcutta and the suburbs, he received news that processions were being obstructed and attacked by the Hindus and anti-Muslim riots were taking place in many areas. It was the Muslim holy month of Ramadan (fasting).

...


I don`t know why you are calling that one line ``truncated``. It is black and white and the context cannot change it... I am certainly not going to comply with your blackmail...

Lord Wavell said:

``I`ve found no evidence of muslim league involvement in calcutta killings and appreciably larger number of Muslims died than Hindus``

(Mansergh Volume IX TOPP Page 879)

This seems to prove the assertions made by your own source

My friend Manto,

I have indeed have been readinag the book of Memoirs of Suhrawardy (edited by Mohammed Talukdar). I wud quote the DAD paragraph for u by this evening. The info was in page 23 and 24. It`s an olive green bound, published by Dhaka University.

If a website had the info, I am not to be blamed for that. In any case, if the pages of the book and the pages of the website u mention are the same, it cant take away the fact that the Net pages were created out of the BOOK.

That shud be enough, for now.

I want u to produce the full text of Wavell`s letter, not a truncated sentence that was taken out of context.

TO SAY THAT THE BOOK DOESN`T EXIST IS ANOTHER LIE U ARE TRYING TO SELL HERE.

See u later..

Dear VRV,

I don`t have delusions... you do... from your own source:

Memoirs of
Huseyn Shaheed Suhrawardy:

Edited by: Muhammad H.R. Talukdar
University Press Limited, 1987

(We will forget for a second that you got it from here: http://www.globalwebpost.com/farooqm/study_res/suhrawardy/direct_action.html)

Direct Action Day. At this time, betraying the Muslim cause, the Viceroy called upon Pandit Nehru to form an interim government which he did, but the Muslim League refused to participate in it Jinnah even cancelled his talks with Lord Wavell, the Viceroy, and proclaimed 16 August as Direct Action Day.112 The one-member majority Muslim League government in Sind, formed after the assassination of the Congress Chief minister Allahbux, was also asked, but, because it was a shaky government, its Muslim League members could not be trusted. So, all the risks of the Direct Action Day fell on the Bengal government On that day Muslims were expected to gather in large numbers to proclaim their adherence to the concept of Pakistan Shaheed Suhrawardy declared a holiday for that day in Calcutta

On a previous occasion, when no holiday had been proclaimed, there had been disturbances between Hindus and Muslims; people were dragged out of their cars and insulted. Now Hindus objected to the proclamation of a holiday and made extensive, secret preparations to attack Muslims. Neither the Intelligence Branch concerned with the activities of terrorists and revolutionaries, nor the Criminal Investigation Department, both of which were manned almost wholly by Hindus. gave the Prime Minister any information regarding these preparations and he was caught unawares.113 On 16 August at the Ochterlony Monument Maidan, whilst he was addressing a crowd, gathered from all parts of Calcutta and the suburbs, he received news that processions were being obstructed and attacked by the Hindus and anti-Muslim riots were taking place in many areas. It was the Muslim holy month of Ramadan (fasting). Suhrawardy ordered the Muslims to disperse and go back to their homes. The crowd was very large, many with children in their laps, having come from all over the city, from the neighbouring areas of Howrah and the 24-Parganas, and from the Jute and Cotton Mill areas. As the crowd was returning home they were set upon by the Hindus, provoking an anti-Muslim riot on a scale far greater than the one in 1926.

The Commissioner of Police, a Britisher, did not know Calcutta and its problems and was unable to deal with the situation with only a small police force. The Riot Commission, which was set up by the British government as a result of the riot, reports that immediately after the riot began the Prime Minister rushed to Lalbazar Police Headquarters to attain first hand information and, being apprised of the grave situation, demanded deployment of the army on the very first day of the riot.114 But Governor Burrows rejected the demand, primarily to divert the strong anti-British sentiments, generated during the Rashid Ali Day, observed in Calcutta in June 1945 and which he hoped would worsen Hindu-Muslim relations.115 Captain Ali was a member of the Indian National Army, which had been created by Subash Chandra Bose to fight the British during the Second World War. He was caught, tried and sentenced to a seven-year jail term. Captain Ali had sought Muslim League support during his trial and Suhrawardy, defying a government ban, headed a large protest procession, along with other top League and Congress leaders.116

The Governor also turned down Suhrawardy`s suggestion to put pickets between Hindu and Muslim localities, creating a bulwark which would help to separate the two communities (a suggestion adopted much later, when the damage had already been done and a number of Muslim localities had been destroyed and thousands of Muslims massacred). Instead, Burrows heeded the advice of the Commissioner of Police that the civil power was capable of dealing with the situation and that there was no need to deploy the army. It was only when Suhrawardy threatened to resign that the Governor reluctantly pretended to agree and three or four days later merely ordered the army to stand by. Suhrawardy, accompanying the Governor and the army commander on a tour of inspection on 18 August, showed them an area of Calcutta, Suvabazaar , which was strewn with the bodies of dead Muslims. This was predominantly a Hindu area, with some Muslim houses and shops. The army had had no knowledge that this was a riot area and the Commissioner of Police, himself, had had no information that there had been riots there. It was a ``big discovery`` of ``wholesale slaughter`` of Muslims and the Governor and the General were deeply shocked.117

Appointment of Punjabi police. At that time Calcutta was a city of 6 million people but it had only a 1200-man police force of whom, only 63 were Muslims.118 Of the officers, with the exception of one Deputy Commissioner and one Officer-in-Charge, the remainder were Hindus.119 The riot had spread so far that even government officials were not beyond direct involvement. The 1200-man police force was, therefore, not only too small to cope with the situation but suspect in its loyalty as well. In this situation Suhrawardy decided to appoint 1,200 trained Muslim Punjabi Sepahis to achieve equity in the balance of the city`s police force.120 Hindu leaders protested against this to the Governor, who asked Suhrawardy to desist from recruiting Muslim Punjabi Sepahis. Instead, he suggested recruitment of the same number of trained Muslim Bengali Sepahis. Suhrawardy argued that trained Muslim Bengali Sepahis could not easily be found and that he needed trained forces immediately to contain the riots. He also argued that the police force of Calcutta was composed of Gurkhas, Sikhs, Rajputs and Jats, and there was no Hindu Bengali. He agreed to appoint an equal number of Muslim and Hindu Bengalis only after dismissing the existing force. However, the Governor did not agree to this proposal and urged him not to appoint trained Muslim Punjabi Sepahis. Burrows finally consented to his proposal only when the Prime Minister again threatened to resign on this issue.121 Suhrawardy immediately recruited 1,200 trained Muslim Punjabi Sepahis to keep a balance in the police force and ordered Muslim Officers-in-Charge to be posted in 21 of the 22 thanas. He personally took charge of the Police Control Room from one British Officer and mobilized the police force himself to quell the riots.

There were hundreds of occasions when Suhrawardy himself, often clandestinely clad in the uniform of a European military officer, drove through the affected localities to save the lives of the defenceless victims, Muslims and Hindus alike. Suhrawardy`s critic, Hassan Ispahani, while giving a pen-picture of this carnage, praises his role in bringing the riot under control. He says: ``I have not seen a man work so hard and act so swiftly to try and control a conflagration as Suhrawardy did.``122 During the riots he arranged free lodging and food for many Hindu families, including ninety-five Hindustani milkmen, his own Hindu haircutter Nogen Sheel and Hindu washerman Kunja Dhopa.123 Among Suhrawardy`s trusted personal attendants was Shibu, also a Hindu from Orissa, who served him most faithfully even during those troubled years. Peace soon returned to the riot-torn city.

Peace emissary. The riots perturbed the British government. Viceroy Lord Wavell visited Calcutta on 25 August and saw the carnage himself.124 The Muslim community of Calcutta covered the city with thousands of posters, symbolically written in red ink, charging him with the responsibility for the riot and calling upon him to leave.125 Dhaka received him with the same slogans. The Viceroy wanted to know from Prime Minister Suhrawardy how he could be held responsible for the riot.126 Suhrawardy explained that the riot was a consequence of the formation of the interim government without Muslim League representation and the deeply-held Muslim belief of a deliberate British creation of Hindu-Muslim misunderstanding as a rationale to hand over power only to the Congress Party.127 He further warned that what had happened in Calcutta would repeat itself all over India unless the British government changed its policy. Suhrawardy also convinced him that a united India was impossible and cooperation of the Muslim League was essential if India was to be saved from civil war. Before he left Bengal, Lord Wavell asked Suhrawardy to work as an emissary between himself and Jinnah.128

Suhrawardy saw Jinnah in Bombay on 6 September and Lord Wavell in Delhi two days later, and succeeded in bringing about a rapprochement between them. They first met on 16 September in Delhi. Lord Wavell assured Jinnah that he was ready to accept the Muslim League demand, and the Muslim League announced on 15 October its decision to join the interim government headed by Pandit Nehru.129 On this occasion Jinnah admitted that Suhrawardy had saved the country from a perilous situation.130



....

This when read with:

``I`ve found no evidence of muslim league involvement in calcutta killings and appreciably larger number of Muslims died than Hindus``

(Mansergh Volume IX TOPP Page 879)


Shows conclusively that Congress planned the massacres in Calcutta on 16th August 1946... which Patel considered a great achievement.

Re: # 513

My Friend Manto,

You can have ur delusions.

There’s a book called “Memoirs of Shaheed Suhrawardy, edited by Mohammaed Talukdar & published by Dhaka University, Motijheel, Dhaka. In fact I cud retype the whole passage on DAD from the book of the memoirs of Suhrawardy in a couple of days. I want u to type the whole paragraph of Wavell’s letter, which u quote as a proof of ML’s innocence when the whole world is howling abt their culpability..

The book was not written by Suhwarawrdy himself as he was dead in 1963. However his daughter gave the papers of Suhrawardy to Mohammed Talukdar, who in association with Dr. Kamal Hossain brought out this book. Since the book contained some objectionable portions on Ayub Khan, this book might have been banned in Pakistan. In fact the govt of Pakistan asked for seizure of his papers when he was dead in Beirut. However his family members managed to get all of Suhrawardy`s papers intact.

To try to push me into defence is what u are trying to do. I feel sorry for u. U look pathetic with such attempts. What else I can say, my friend? As I said u are free to ur delusions. I request anybody who read this book to make this gentleman be aware of this olive green bound book by name Memoirs of Shaheed Suhrawardy.

I also read the correspondence of Wavell during August, nowhere did he absolve Muslim League of the crime. On the other hand he said and I quote the various points:

..........
Wavell to Pethick Lawrence 21.08.1976 (within a week of the DAD):

Just b4 the Calcutta disturbances, Burroughs had to accept he recommendation of Suhrawardy that all the remaining 30 terrorist convicts except one who was convicted in 1944, should be released. Whether or not these men took part in the events of last week-end, the disturbances show clearly enough that Bengal is not a place to be handled with kid gloves and that to release the very worst of the terrorists is asking for trouble...... and that the sentimental release of terrorists is apt to be fatal to a good innocent men, women and children. (Page 276, ToP Vol XIII).

(Doesn’t he insinuating that the convicted terrorists released by Suhrawardy took part in the killings?)

++++++++

If u can read the above with this, it makes very clear:

Azad told Wavel:

Suhrawardy organised the hooligans of Calcutta`s underworld his supporters & the declaration of holiday made them believe that they had the licence of the government to act as they liked.

(Azad was worried more abt the safety of Muslims in Up and Bihar, where they are in minority).

Burroughs in his report to Wavell gave his info:

A large number of the processionists are reported to have been armed with iron bars and lathis (page 296, ToP, Vol XIII).

The Times dated 17th Aug 1946.

Looting and Stabbing:

Calcutta was in the hands of hooligans as Muslims observed Direct Action Day. From early morning Muslim mobs scoured the city, beating up Hindu shop keepers, looting and burning shops and assaulting unoffensive pedestrians.

.........

Direct Action Day called by the Muslim League in protest against the British plan for India, had been declared a holiday in Bengal and other provinces with Muslim League governments.

Crowds tonight raided the Calcutta offices of the Bengal Provincial Congress party and premises of two Congress newspapers Hindustan Standard and Anand Bazar Patrika. Demonstrators set on fire to the house of DR. B.C. Roy, a Congress party leader, who is not in the city.

++++++++

Mr. Manto, the Times reporter apart from Burroughs must be a Hindus or Congressmen (mischievous wink)?

I have loads of info and I wud give that as we go. In fact I cud retype the whole passage on DAD from the book of the memoirs of Suhrawardy in a couple of days.

May be the language give u the suspicion abt the authenticity BUT Suhrawardy confessed/narrated his version and this was given in the book (edited by Mohammed Talukdar) pages 23 & 24 of the Memoirs of Shaheed Suhrawardy.

I repeat them for ur info (As I say as `Words from horse mouth`):

---

Background to DAD:

At this time, betraying the Muslim cause, the Viceroy called upon Pandit Nehru to form an interim government which he did, but the Muslim League refused to participate in it Jinnah even cancelled his talks with Lord Wavell, the Viceroy, and proclaimed 16 August as Direct Action Day.

On Why DAD was active in Calcutta not elsewhere:

The one-member majority Muslim League government in Sind, formed after the assassination of the Congress Chief minister Allahbux, was also asked, but, because it was a shaky government, its Muslim League members could not be trusted. So, all the risks of the Direct Action Day fell on the Bengal government On that day Muslims were expected to gather in large numbers to proclaim their adherence to the concept of Pakistan Shaheed Suhrawardy declared a holiday for that day in Calcutta

Suhrawardy`s explanation to Wavell on bloodshed:

The Viceroy wanted to know from Prime Minister Suhrawardy how he could be held responsible for the riot. Suhrawardy explained that the riot was a consequence of the formation of the interim government without Muslim League representation.......

Replication of DAD in other states? Read this.....

He further warned that what had happened in Calcutta would repeat itself all over India unless the British government changed its policy.

Dear VRV,

My friend you are not quoting Suhrawardy`s memoir... you are quoting a Bangladeshi website. Please note that Suhrawardy is not speaking in first person. Secondly, your quote does not actually say what you want it to say.

Abusing me or questioning my sincerity will not change the facts... we are speaking of 16th August .... the number of Muslims dead over that period of time would be higher given the massacres of Muslims carried out in Bengal and Bihar...

Wavell said...

``I`ve found no evidence of muslim league involvement in calcutta killings and appreciably larger number of Muslims died than Hindus``

(Mansergh Volume IX TOPP Page 879)

VRV,

Abusing me will not do... you can swear, abuse, insult me all you want but you know that is not Suhrawardy`s memoirs (the comment is not in first person to begin with and I know which website you got it from) and even so the quote does not prove what you are saying.

Please recall that it was you who said that British officials` verdict matters... In any event to use the old standard... Mountbatten`s opinion doesn`t matter, his statement of fact does. Mountbatten`s statement of fact would be that Jinnah did not let him become the common GG... Mountbatten`s opinion thus is unimportant.

Wavell`s comment was very clear- It was a statement of fact-infact two:

1. I`ve found no evidence of muslim league involvement in calcutta killings

and

2.appreciably larger number of Muslims died than Hindus

Correction:

Re: # 505

My Friend,

>>>>>1. Nope. They are not. And sadly you are insisting on something that is contrary to logic.<<<<<

They are from the Memoirs of Suhrawardy. I swear by my Mother (I am sorry to say this). I am not a liar. It`s not in my blood. It`s for the readers to judge. I dont believe in ur integrity, btw.

>>>>>2. Nothing has been added to ``Freedom at Midnight`` since its original edition. If you bought it in 2004... it is a reprint. All books are reprinted... but ofcourse to someone as illogical as you, such simple truths don`t matter to you. <<<<<

You mean Jinnah and Muslim League were absolved.........Why invent History?.....pervert! For u truths mean inverting and inventing facts???????????

>>>>>>>>3. Warped logic and completely irrelevant to our discussion.<<<<<

Pl read Tarka Sastra...the ancient book of Logic, if u cant understand what is modern logic. Pl start from the beginning of Logic. For u logic is defying fatcs and truth??? Ha Ha.........

>>>>4. If only claims were actionable without evidence. Yes a few like you have... Stamping me a ``liar`` may give you or others like you some satisfaction but the truth that who ever has interacted with me knows full well that my facts and sources are true to the bone. Unlike you I don`t reaffirmation from liars of my truth. God and my conscience are enough for me. <<<<<

Need no comment.....You are a stamped liar. Ha Ha.......

>>>>Here you are caught red handed trying to pass off something you picked up from some website (inconclusive as it is) as Suhrawardy`s memoirs. <<<<<

I cant reproduce the whole book for you. You can read it. It was published by the Dhaka University. For that matter I cant produce all the books I quote from........only relevant portions matter......

Hope u best of luck and we can start on a new board.......BTW, I conrgatulate u on getting 10K hits plus 500+ posts. You manage this by diverting the topic on Gandhi and Jinnah, always...........not on the topic u write. Coz, u cant stand the heat of ur compatriots on Qadianis........Good Luck.


Best of Luck.