Saving Pakistan with the Constitution

Ama Manto, you KNOW you are a fake AND a liar! You have been exposed countless times!

Let me repeat for YOUR benefit - one more time:

Dear Nasah sahib (in #180),

[Gandhi was a great soul who with his sureme sacrifice that his very life -- saved million Muslim lives and protected their dignity and civil rights at the lowest ebb of the Muslim existence in divided India. ]

Manto, read it carefully. Feel it. Let the significance sink in!

Nasah sahib, I can not repeat this often enough!!

You are a good man who is not afraid to tell it like it is!

Unlike this unemployed lawyer Yasser!

(Note: ``Unemployed`` is not to be considered a derogatory term - only a state of being!)

Re: # 218

Well said!

Chowk is probably the only place where one gets branded a ``serial liar`` for telling the truth and nothing but the truth.

This poor Harish hyd (hereinafter the gandhist) really is in trouble these days... given that many of the lies and myths he believed in all his life as a true Gandhist follower of that racist, casteist, misogynist, dishonest, hindu fanatic liar called Gandhi! ... The Gandhist is thus hardpressed to clutch at any and every straw to prove facts as lies and those telling the truth as liars, even if it means quoting anonymous and highly unreliable sources.

Re: # 215

I think you are too impressed by modern-day Gandhi-ists who cannot stand it when religion and politics are not shown as the poisonous mix that they are.

Other than the token reps mentioned, there was not a single supporter of the religious parties. I don`t know, maybe it was because there was no Gandhi to lead the religious freaks on.

BJkumar,

The significance of Nasah`s post is that it is wholely untrue... and nothing else.

Calling me names, pipsqeak, liar etc etc, might temporarily be effective, but at the end of the day ... it comes down to this- what I say is true... you know it, Harish hyd knows and Atif2 knows it.

Ah poor Harish mian,

Clutching on straws to get out of the hole.

It is a well known fact that MMA was not present at the 10th September ARD rally... Atif2 feels they were because two of their speakers spoke at the meeting. Even though Rozaiba and others who were there at the meeting... testified that the MMA was not present, Atif2 keeps calling me a liar. When asked for evidence... Atif2 failed to produce a single picture of an MMA flag at the rally.

Liars, crooks, cranks... are not the sole possession of just one country. Like you - Atif2 is an old truth offender.

Yaar Yasser, I will respond to your post later, but this one caught my attention on Dr. Sohail`s board. When your compatriots have such high opinion of you, please excuse us if we think of you as a congenital liar. Recall a post by another interactor hamzaad. You have quite a colorful reputation by any standards.

#34 by atif2

M-Lives is a serial liar and has recently been convicted in the court of chowk opinion.

In addition to his rampant lying, he also has developed some acute personality disorders.

And Nasah sahib,

Feel free to beat up on GWB as much as you like.

I won`t even squeak.

Because I understand that you are a good man - a courageous man!

Unlike this pipsqueak Manto!

#various Manto

Ama foolish yaar, read Nasah sahib’s #180.

[Gandhi was a great soul who with his sureme sacrifice that his very life -- saved million Muslim lives and protected their dignity and civil rights at the lowest ebb of the Muslim existence in divided India. ]

Manto, read it carefully. Feel it. Let the significance sink in!

Nasah sahib, I can not repeat this often enough!!

You are a good man who is not afraid to tell it like it is!

Unlike this unemployed lawyer Yasser!

Dear Harish pai,

First of all, I know you have access to the said speech because you quoted it a year or so ago ... I know because I went and corrected you on some parts of it. I am sure that you have by now checked the original speech and know full well what I am saying.

As for Margaret Bourke-White... if indeed you manage to prove that it was a first hand account, then by extrapolation from the contents of speech, it would be reasonable to presume that Margaret Bourke-White was not telling the truth.... however - the poor woman has not claimed any such thing ... to say that she knew that Jinnah wore a Sherwani at the meeting and that is why you are claiming that it was a first hand account ... is worst than saying that she must be telling the truth because Simon and Schuster published her book (in that case- you might as well take Musharraf to be the gospel because they paid him a million dollars already and the rest will follow- but I won`t)...

Consider...

1. It is highly unlikely ``Fezzes`` were thrown up into the sky... because for one thing Fez was replaced by the Karakul cap and hats... if you see the pictures Muslim League meetings from 1940s onwards... you will hardly find any fez wearing leaguer... clearly like a good writer, Bourke-White was adding twist and masala to what had been narrated to her... her story sounds more like a high school graduation in the Mid West... then a meeting of the League... which was ... as is not a ``jalsa`` but a meeting of the working committee in a board room under a roof. ...

2. Also... another discrepancy that you`ve produced is that there were ``large`` pictures of Jinnah on the ``stage``. Once again I ask you to produce a single meeting of the Muslim League with these large Jinnah portraits ... Again... since Margaret Bourke-White was writing this much later... her memory seems to be playing tricks on her. None of the Muslim League meetings ever had Jinnah`s posters or portraits... nor was it the normal politicking style at the time.

3. There was no ``stage`` as there was no ``public meeting``. It was the meeting of the Central Working Committee .. in a boardroom on a large table.



I think when all these inconsistencies of the account are taken together ... there is incontrovertible proof that:

a- Either it isn`t a first hand account (which the writer doesn`t claim it is)

or

b- the writer is embellishing the account by her own fertile imagination.

This I believe impugns her entire account and lays bare the dishonesty with which she allowed her personal attachment to Gandhi to come in the way of impartiality of journalism.


...

As for winning over people to my camp... I think those who have studied Gandhi`s racist pronouncements know full well what Gandhi was made of... even on this board... Rozaiba is not a family member... but he has very articulately put to words the main objections to Gandhi`s racism in one of the earlier posts.

However Gandhi`s racism is just one of the many issues...

The following is Gandhi`s vision of an independent India- direct from his own ``Niya Jawan`` and collected works of Mahatma Gandhi:

(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.

...


Gandhi could not accept that Brahmins may be equal to Shudras... he could not accept that a son of lowly latrine worker could become a priest and vice versa... he discriminated on the basis of a person`s social status in society and he refused to allow people the liberty to move across castes... and you call this akin to a sexily dressed woman? If anything Gandhi`s nudity shows that showing flesh isn`t always a good thing for those subjected to its sight... The Sergei Bubka example seems more appropriate for your view that Gandhi was an angel...

Is it any wonder that Muslims, given that his views even on his own co-religionists were so regressive and oppressive- even his staunchest followers like Ali Brothers- came to mistrust Gandhi.... and those like Jinnah, who had always been staunch Indian nationalists, were isolated to the point of no return?

#210 by Mantolives

Look for Jinnah`s July 29th 1946 speech and corroborate.. the reason you won`t, is because I suspect you already have and found this statement to be false. British historian Patrick French discussed this ``statement`` in detail in his book ``Liberty or Death`` and concluded that the statement was completely unsourced.

Dear Yasser, once again you`re trying to act smart. Like a one act clown, you have been beating this drum of Gandhi`s racism for too long, but looks like you haven`t won anyone over to your camp, except perhaps your own family. Looks like you don`t have anything else against him. Gandhi`s great deeds far overweigh anything that he might have done earlier in his life, which is why no one talks about it, except sickos obsessed with his sex life.

That aside, if I had access to Jinnah`s speeh, why would I rely on Margaret Bourke-White`s book? But since you claimed you had a great library, why don`t you do it for us? Let`s see if you have the balls to do that.

Your insistence that this is a first hand account can at best prove that Margaret Bourke-White was being dishonest... but as I see it, Ms. Bourke-White has not claimed that it is a first hand account...

Since she claims to have been present the previous day at Jinnah`s house, and the next day`s account was in continuation of that, it is quite clear that she was there as well. If she hadn`t been there, do you think she could describe how he was dressed and how the stage was decorated with his portraits, and how Leaguers jumped and tossed their caps in their air? Common sense, my dear Yasser!

And while... this metaphorical statement is probably false and without basis (Even if it were true- it just goes to show how antagonising an influence that racist casteist Mahatma Gandhi was so as to drive even the staunchest Indian nationalist Muslim into the hands of separatists)...

Aww...this is like that rapist who claimed that the girl was provocatively dressed and that he was tempted into the act. With your pathetic excuses, you`re climbing new heights in idiocy with every post. If stupidity were a sport, you`d be its Sergei Bubka.

Dear Harish pai..

There is nothing in that paragraph that suggests that it is a first hand account. Please look at it again. Also ... there is an easier test for it. Look for Jinnah`s July 29th 1946 speech and corroborate.. the reason you won`t, is because I suspect you already have and found this statement to be false. British historian Patrick French discussed this ``statement`` in detail in his book ``Liberty or Death`` and concluded that the statement was completely unsourced. Your insistence that this is a first hand account can at best prove that Margaret Bourke-White was being dishonest... but as I see it, Ms. Bourke-White has not claimed that it is a first hand account...

And while... this metaphorical statement is probably false and without basis (Even if it were true- it just goes to show how antagonising an influence that racist casteist Mahatma Gandhi was so as to drive even the staunchest Indian nationalist Muslim into the hands of separatists) we know for a fact what Gandhi said is there in Gandhi`s collected works:


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

....

As for your accusations against Jinnah:

On Direct Action Day, you`ve run away from the debate on my board, where I adequately burst your bubble when it was proved that Congress had planned the Calcutta Killings...

On Partition and the violence that resulted... any historian will tell you that it was specific act of partitioning federating units .... Punjab and Bengal ... which was responsible for the violence and that was a Congress demand not Jinnah`s...

On the issue of dividing mass of humanity... In response to one indivisible defacto Hindu dominated India, Jinnah asked for Muslim majority provinces- which included large Non-muslim minorities- to be grouped together in a federation.... it was the Congress that divided the mass of humanity into Muslim and Hindu by partitioning existing federating units... had it been as simple as you put it... Jinnah would not choose a Hindu to represent Muslims at the interim government.

#204 by Mantolives

All I am saying is that the speech she is erroneously referring to is there in full text and easily available... as it is the famous ``we bid good bye to constitutional means`` speech and to the best of my knowledge it doesn`t have any reference to India being destroyed... Nor has Margaret Bourke-White said that it was a first hand account... she was present a day earlier at Jinnah`s house... and not at the event.

So Yasser decides where Margaret Bourke-White was almost 60 years ago!!! LOL! If you think the following paragraph is not a first hand account, then you are a disgrace to the journalistic profession, of which you claim you are a part.

For other Chowkies, you can read this and reach your own conclusions. If at all Yasser feels Jinnah didn`t say that, why doesn`t he put up that speech? After all, in addition to various other things, he claims to be an expert on South Asian history as well. So come on genius, we`re waiting for it.

``Next day the Quaid-i-Azam changed out of his double-breasted suit and put on Muslim dress and fez for the Muslim masses. Standing on a platform liberally decorated with enlargements of his portrait, he announced that the sixteenth of August, two and a half weeks hence, would be ``Direct Action Day.`` His vituperation against the Congress was acidly explicit. ``If you want peace, we do not want war,`` he declared. ``If you want war we accept your offer unhesitatingly. We will either have a divided India or a destroyed India.`` And the Muslim Leaguers jumped up on their seats and tossed their fezzes in the air.``

In any event... I still don`t understand what this has to do with Gandhi`s sterling credentials as a racist, casteist, hindu exclusivist, misogynist bigot unless you feel that since Jinnah allegedly said something... it is a blanket ratification for all of Gandhi`s exclusivist, racist, casteist, bigoted, Hindu fundamentalist views that antagonised Jinnah in the first place?

The point dear Yasser is that compared the crimes Jinnah committed, including the DAD violence, the Partition, and the division of a whole mass of humanity into Hindu and Muslims, Gandhi appears like an angel. It is like letting off a murderer for a pickpocket. Gandhi`s actions may have hurt Harijans, but they didn`t kill them, unlike Jinnah`s actions which caused death and destruction to Hindus and Muslims alike. Deservedly, Jinnah continues to languish in obscurity, having been consigned to the dustbin of history, while Gandhi is remembered and revered across the world.

BTW, this article is about Pakistan and its constitution. If Gandhi can be brought in, why not Jinnah?

Dear BJkumar,

The problem is that deep down in your dark black Hindu exclusivist Gandhian heart you know very well... that it is I who has the courage to tell it like it is in the face of abuse, insults and jeers.... while Nasah is merely being economical with the truth...

Gandhi was the original sin of the subcontinent... the most miserable day in the 5000-year history of the subcontinent was when Gandhi trickled down his mother`s leg.. the racist, casteist, bigot Gandhi, the misogynist Hindu fundamentalist... and Gandhi was also the spiritual great Grandfather of the taliban ... not only because Gandhian ideology mirrors Talibanism in full measure for its hatred for the west and modernity.... but because it was Gandhi who unleashed the Mullahs in form of the Khilafat movement.... Moplah terrorism owed everything to Gandhi... Maulana Fazlurrahman- the daddy of terror in Pakistan- acknowledges Gandhi as his leader and his father`s leader... while denouncing Jinnah...

Subcontinent`s first RELIGIOUS TERRORIST was GANDHI- only in TERRORISM could Gandhi become inclusive- thus a conservative Hindu fanatic... he was nonetheless an Islamic terrorist, Hindu Terrorist and Christian terrorist equally...


And as if terrorism was not enough- Gandhi sought to subjugate people with the caste system... here are his views on Caste:

(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.

...


To Gandhi it was unthinkable that a Brahmin could be equal to Shudra... let alone a lowly Muslim to a Hindu.. so the Subcontinent`s first taliban the MAHATMA GANDHI said:

``I am a Hindu first- therefore a true Indian``

#206 VRV

[I think that Yasser & family suffers from Gandhi and India phobia]

In my opinion, they are just jealous!

After all, just look at it from his POV. Here was this ``high class`` lawyer Jinnah - representing everything our dear Manto aspires for - the Jinnah who started out so grandly (``ambassador of unity`` and all that Jazz!) - yet ended up in pits - not to mention his whole population that ended up right there, with him!

And then Manto compares with Gandhi - a lawyer whose lawyerly accomplishments do not seem to rate anywhere near, who apparently held a lot of old-fashioned biases from the society to which he belonged - biases he grew out of as he identified more and more with the common man.

The brown-skinned underdog bested the ``great white hope``!

The Jinnah went to the dogs while Gandhi soared.

The world knows Gandhi, the word itself has come to mean what appeals to the world`s heart!

And the world says: ``Jinnah who?``

And if anybody mentions Pakistan - the world immediately makes the association.

Not with Jinnah of course, but with terrorism!

Which is poetic justice - for the country created by the subcontinent`s first Islamic terrorist!

It is enough to drive certain Pakistani lawyers to the looney lot!

BJ,

I think that Yasser & family suffers from Gandhi and India phobia. Both dig alternative histories and articles on Gandhi and India for promotion & publication of their world-views.

Frankenstein`s (Jinnah`s) moster (Pakistan) is what I wud like to promote as my alternative world-view to counter to their missionary zeal for alternative world-views.

You need a diamond to cut another diamond!

Btw, I admire Harish`s tenacity though he`s not a student of history.

#180 Nasah

[Gandhi was a great soul who with his sureme sacrifice that his very life -- saved million Muslim lives and protected their dignity and civil rights at the lowest ebb of the Muslim existence in divided India. ]

Nasah sahib,

You are a good man who is not afraid to tell it like it is!

Unlike Yasser.