Understanding Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto

A thought-provoking collection of quotes. I'd say, it is better to read facts and quotations like these than to read an exaggerated and maimed version of history. Thank you.

Regards

Sana

Re: # 148

An engineered deal and Government sponsored massive welcome does not mean a thing. Without GOP support, not even one tenth people would be there. Bhutto was hanged, how many people came out then and yet they are apparently flocking to the airport today.

A sold out and corrupt woman who is not even one tenth of her illustrious father cannot deliver a progressive Pakistan.

A massive flood of people will welcome Benazir Bhutto in a few minutes.

To reduce the massive outpouring to the cult of Bhutto is a travesty of the truth.

This is the same group that had rallied around Fatima Jinnah in 1965 ... This is the same group that voted one bloc in 1946 ... Only a fraction of it supported Bhutto because of only one reason : Bhutto promised to deliver to the masses Jinnah's Pakistan, a Pakistan free of exploitation and a Pakistan truly representative of the wishes of Pakistani people. A promise that Bhutto never kept.


BB is coming to Pakistan on the same agenda: a progressive Pakistan of Jinnah's vision. She will re-affirm this at Jinnah's mausoleum.

To Understand Bhutto visit www.bhutto.org

#145 by Ras on December 11, 2006 10:23pm PT

---

taikonaut,

I think that the Pakistani people have a much more positive memory of ZAB
then what you portray here. M. Majid Ali has possibly written the best
description of this complex individual.

---

Dear Ras sahib,

Respectfully! I beg to differ.

As I mentioned in #142 “Bhutto ended up replacing free-market elite with the communist elite. That`s all. And that`s why commie elite would support Bhutto, while free-market folks would not.”

Mega-farmers lobby was too strong for Bhutto so the big farms narrowly escaped the communist wrath.

My request to the communists of Pakistan is simple. Be honest! If you are carrying Hugo Chavez`s little doll in your heart, then don’t hide it. Show it and be proud of it.

Pakistani communists cannot straddle both sides and have this so called “mixed economy”. Either you are for big government big spender or you are not. Either you want baboos to run your factories schools banks, or you are not.

So quit playing these games on commie economy. As a famous Urdu poet said so eloquently

Saaf chuptay bhi nahi
Saamnay aatay bhi nahi.
[trans: they are not open and honest. they just play hide and seek]
Bhutto and his cronies like Mubasshir Hasan and Mahboobul Haq conspired and sussessfully killed our Hyundais, Tatas, GEs, and IBMs with one big commie revolution. It was so unfortunate to see these Western trained elite gone wild on commies hashish.

Sadly, the anti-development hashish is still around, now taken the form of pan-Islamism. Look at our elite these days who are living good lives in the West. Still when they gather, their mouths are filled with Mullah garbage all in the name of Islam.

I agree that Pakistani commies sit and cry
Bhutto (or Stalin, Fidel, Nehru, and soon Hugo) tairy yaad aayee tairay jaanay kay baad.
[Bhutto we realized your value only after you were gone!]

Even when Pakistani commies clearly see the destructive impact of their misdeeds, they still want the commie days back. Well what they say:

Chut-ti nahin munh say yeh kaafir lagi huiee [Alas! I can`t put down the bottle].

Warm regards

taikonaut,

I think that the Pakistani people have a much more positive memory of ZAB
then what you portray here. M. Majid Ali has possibly written the best
description of this complex individual.
During the past 15 years I have been thinking a great deal about him and
have even attempted to write a few articles in his memory.
To call him a ``commie`` would be I believe a disservice to both commies and
his legacy.
His was the great Pakistani experiment that failed him, but not his country.
In a way he was as complex as the people he was trying to represent.
Humble he was not. But behind that ego was a brain that Pakistan could have
used to its benefit for years to come.
Bhutto was a proponent of the ``mixed economy`` model at best. His power base
was the poor and powerless. He spoke directly to them, a first by a leader of
Pakistan. It was certainly a sight to see. To this day he lives in the hearts of
millions, and his daughter Benazir still wins their votes.
I shudder to think what post 1971 Pakistan would have been like without him.
He opened the labor market of the Middle East for our poor and many were
able to jump into the middle class from there. He was certainly not perfect
in his economic vision but he gave Pakistan what it needed most, some hope.
His personal habits did a great deal to add to his demise. The Generals really
did not know what to do with him eventually except to remove him from the scene.
He drank proudly, loved women and the music of Pathanay Khan etc. He was rightfully
paranoid about a number of things, especially his own well being.

Zeemax is right. His image was tarnished both during his trial and after his
judicial assasination.

But as with everything else, what good does it do to accuse him now? He has been gone
over 25 years and some here on CHOWK still blame him for Pakistan`s current situation.
Let us remember him as someone who has made an immense contribution to the
survival of today`s Pakistan. He was not a saint but he was not an evil sinner either.
He was just someone who mattered when his country needed him.

On Bangladesh, we were all responsible. Our attitudes needed much improvement.
It is very easy to make Bhutto Sahib the fall guy. East and West Pakistan started off
on the wrong foot. The rest is now history and a movement led by someone named Mozumdar who WAS a commie lead to the impression Bengalis were all going the Naxalite way. Enter Kissinger and company ``tilt`` and all.

But getting back to the current reality, some of us still wish for a secular,
democratic Pakistan and the Bhutto legacy is I believe, important to the
country today. I could be wrong but unfortunately don`t see anything else
out there that can sustain ``enlightened moderation.``

With Respect

Ras

#142/143 by taikonaut

... We should try our level best to figure out what we can offer to the rest of the world..

Too late for that now. Ras reproduced a very relevant extract in ``Should the smaller nations ... exchanging their independence for material gains and promises of economic prosperity? The answer is an emphatic `No``.

It could be done `then` when ZAB had identified it accurately. It can`t be done now. Globalisation, in effect, is no more than a division of labour amongst nations in line with the value addition capacity of each. Capital will be distributed accordingly and the resulting prosperity or lack of it. Name of the game is `value addition`. Those who have it, will remain ahead. Those who don`t, will remain behind and keep doing the low-end jobs for the high-end nations.

Cheers!

Re: # 141 by Ras on December 11, 2006 8:31am PT

---

The question before the smaller nations of today is how they should conduct their affairs in such a manner as to safeguard their basic interests; to retain their territorial integrity and to continue to exercise independence in their relationship

---

Dear Ras, your essay is based on ``world is in a conflict`` point of view.

An alternative point of view is that every nation, big or small brings some unique set of capabilities to the table. These capabilities (or core competencies) are then traded or bartered among each other. Quality of these capabilities is usually combined with market forces and political clout to determine how many widgets would pass between the nations.

That is why it is utmost important for Pakistan or other nations to focus on the positive aspects of global relations instead of talking conflict. We should try our level best to figure out what we can offer to the rest of the world.

peace.

Re: # 136 by zeemax on December 10, 2006 10:01pm PT

---

#135 by taikonaut

What he did to all of the above was to prevent an elite from hogging

---

Dunno where you live my dear zee! Your statements about the elite are really misleading. Please try to understand that there are good elites and then not-so-good elites.

However the society needs elites just like it needs workers. In free market, elites take the form of CEOs, inventors, academics, and journalists.

In communist societies, the elite usually are the party comrades.

Bhutto ended up replacing free-market elite with the communist elite. That`s all.
And that`s why commies elite would support Bhutto, while free-market folks would not.

---

There is a clear elitist dictatorship and the education system ensures the poor can never get ahead. They can`t even go to english medium schools.

---

Bhuttos commie nationalization was an ``equal-opportunity-destroyer`` of every aspect of our society.

If you want to talk about schools. Then go back and compare the standard of government schools before commie-qazi attack, and after.

Government run schools suffered more than any other institution. So ultimately the communist dadagiri and budmashi (corruption) hit the poor the hardest. You cry about English medium schools while totally ignoring the utter destruction of urdu medium schools, colleges, and universities.

Sad indeed!

Z.A. Bhutto in The Myth of Independence (below)...

`` The question before the smaller nations of today is how they should conduct their affairs in such a manner as to safeguard their basic interests; to retain their territorial integrity and to continue to exercise independence in their relationship with the Global Powers as well as with the smaller nations. The relationship between the Global Powers and the smaller countries is on un unequal footing, whereby the former can exact a multitude on concessions without responding in sufficient, let alone equal, measure. No small nations can possibly bring a Global Power under its influence on the plea of Justice or because of the righteousness of its cause. In the ultimate analysis, it is not the virtue of the cause that becomes the determining factor, but the cold self-interest of the Global powers which shapes their policy, and this self-interest has better chances of prevailing in an endless and unequal confrontation between a Global Power and smaller nations.

Should the smaller nations therefore obediently follow the dictates of Global Powers and exchanging their independence for material gains and promises of economic prosperity? The answer is an emphatic `No``. Caught in the nutcracker of the global conflict the underdeveloped nations might in despair conclude that they can only marginally influence the status quo, that in reality they have no independent choice but to trim their policies to the requirements of one Global Power or another. This is an unnecessary pessimistic view, a negation of the struggle of man, expressed through the nation-state, to be free. The force of freedom must triumph because it is stronger than any other force for which man will lay down his life. It is still possible for the smaller nations, with adroit handling of their affairs, to maintain their independence and retain flexibility of action in their relationship with Global Powers.``

#139 by majumdar

...who would bear the remaining Rs. 8,000 p.m. for all families. Would the state be able to bear the entire cost. I think not....

And why not? The secondary level education in all civilized countries is FREE ... not even that Rs. 1,000 per family as per your estimate. And not only education, the cost of books, lunch etc as well are borne by the state. The higher education is however very expensive while it is the other way around in Pak. Higher education is cheap (and hence the quality) while secondary education is beyond reach for most people.

It is just a question of allocation of resources.

Zeemax sahib,

If the average cost of good education per child is Rs. 3000 p.m. and there are thre children per family, the total cost of good education works out to Rs. 9,000 p.m. whereas the per family education budget would work out to around Rs. 1,000 p.m. by way of your estimate. So who would bear the remaining Rs. 8,000 p.m. for all families. Would the state be able to bear the entire cost. I think not.

The goal of providing quality eduction to each and every child is laudable but it would take at least 2 generations in any country to achieve such a goal, ZAB or no ZAB.

The principle of equal opportunity that ZAB (or what any third world socliast kleptocrat like Indira Gandhi and many others) were nothing but a cloak for misgovernance, nepotism, corruption and economic waste.

Regards

#137 by majumdar

Majumdar Saheb, let`s examine this principle without the semantics of socialism etc. The principle is `equal opportunity`, which ZAB attempted. If it went wrong, that is not the issue. The issue is whether the rpinciple he fought for and died for was robust. In my opinion that principle was not only robust but the only answer for countries like us.

You ask, ``had ZAB been around, the poor would have been going to English medium schools``, the answer is a resounding YES.

As it is, the fee for an english speaking school in Pak at the primary level is Rs. 3,000 plus per month, when the average wage is about Rs.7,000 per month according to latest surveys. And that fee is for one child. The average family in Pak has three children.

That`s the future we`re talking about. How can Pak prevent children sent to Madrassahs in Quranic education alone (not that there`s anything wrong with it ... but should be only by choice) if modern education is way beyond reach?

The nationalisation of the large schools for the elite was precisely for this purpose.

Taiko sahib,

The 5-point approach that you have mentioned are not the only response to secessionism or regioanlism in the country. Besides you have still not explained why Mujib with a clear majority in the Pak Parliament was not allowed to form the govt.

Zeemax,

Nationalism of industry, banks and educational institutions does not prevent elitism, it only promotes crony capitalism, loot by netas and babus. If it is of any satsifaction to you, India`s experience with ``socialism`` is as bad probably worse than Pak`s.

(They can`t even go to english medium schools. )

Are you saying that had ZAB been around, the poor would have been going to English medium schools.

Face it ZAB was a murderer and was hanged for a crime he had actually instigated, even though the method was all wrong. He is a good example of a thrid world politican being tried and sentenced for a crime that he had actually committed. Hope a similar experience is repeated in India. Shibu Soren`s life imprisonment is a step in the right direction.

Regards

#135 by taikonaut

we can never forget what ZAB did to our industry, banks, educational institutions, and our intellectuals.

What he did to all of the above was to prevent an elite from hogging not only all the resources, but also the future through the educational system. Look what is happening now. There is a clear elitist dictatorship and the education system ensures the poor can never get ahead. They can`t even go to english medium schools.

Every crime of ZAB including murders, assassinations, torture camps, corruption, loot, bribes, private militia FSF etc. can be forgiven.

However we can never forget what ZAB did to our industry, banks, educational institutions, and our intellectuals.

This commies draped in green Islamic cloth was the biggest curse on Pakistan. May all protect us from commies. Amin.

#133 by Ras

ZAB`s portrayal as a megolomaniac was nothing but character assassination. The simple fact that he had agreed on re-election on the disputed seats speaks volumes before the military stepped in.

As I said before, Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto`s judicial murder is the biggest tragedy to befall the Pakistani nation in its history, and indeed the third world, and one whose shadow will be cast for a very long time to come in the nation`s collective psyche.

A complicated genius and certainly one of the best minds that Pakistan has ever produced.

Here is another sampling of what people have said about him:



Farhan Bokhari in The News International wrote:

“Mr Bhutto remains a memorable figure, not least because he was victim to an unpopular military regime. On the contrary, if it would have only been a matter of a tie up between two men, perhaps Pakistanis would have forgotten the tragic event of Mr Bhutto’s hanging and reconciled themselves to a new era of politics.
But to many, the clash between a towering popular politician and a harsh General was the consequence of the transition seen by Pakistan in the 1970s. Left in the ashes of Pakistan’s worst defeat after the fall of East Pakistan, all under the watch of a group of former Generals who were never made accountable for their deeds, Mr Bhutto gave Pakistanis a message of hope which brought about a badly needed healing touch.
Soon, Mr Bhutto’s rallying cry driven by previously untested notions such as ‘awamiat’ (populism) and Islamic socialism brought a large mass of Pakistanis under the banner of renewed hope. But in the process of transforming Pakistan from a defeated country to a forward moving one, was the late prime minister’s empowerment which brought upon him the wrath of the traditionally arm flexing military Generals? That compelling question lurks in the minds of many, even at a time when the country is ruled by a military figure, though one who appears much too benevolent by comparison to any of his predecessors.
It’s a matter of record that the Pakistani military which subsequently oversaw Mr Bhutto go to the gallows, owes the late prime minister a significant and perhaps still unpaid favour. Without his dose of populism meant to overcome the pain of a tragic loss, the agony of defeat and the embarrassment over the capture of the largest number of Pakistani officers and jawaans ever to be taken captive in enemy hands, would have just lingered on for years to come.”


By ALTAF AHMAD QURESHI

From The Nation Newspaper Lahore, Pakistan
“As an enthusiast student of Russell, I wrote three letters to Lord Bertrand Russell to seek clarity on some of his philosophical writings boggling my mind during my university days. It was his greatness that he responded to my questions.
In those days Mr Zulfikar Ali Bhutto had just resigned from the Ayub Cabinet and had gone to Europe and like thousands of young Pakistanis, I was also enchanted by him because of his role at the UN Security Council during the 1965 Pak-India war and the resentment he showed and the resistance he had put up at Tashkent summit.
Just out of love for Bhutto, I wrote a letter to Lord Russell requesting him for his analysis of the socio-political situation of the Subcontinent and his assessment and judgment of the role of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto.
I was sure that Russell would not make any comment on Bhutto. But to my great astonishment and pleasure, I received a letter from Lord Russell saying that his detail analysis of the socio-political situation of the Sub-continent and his assessment of Bhutto was being sent to me in a separate envelope which I never received as it might have been ``eaten up`` by the censorship authorities.
However in his letter which I received, he wrote three lines about Bhutto saying ``I know Mr. Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and had had discussions with him for more than once. He is a knowledgeable man and possesses the qualities of a national hero. He is able and brave and can act to change the fate of the people of Pakistan and the Third World countries.``
“Mr Bhutto said that the campaign of calumny instigated by the junta was a reward for all his efforts to strengthen the armed forces at great sacrifices imposed on the country.
The reason for their desire for revenge was difficult to discover, but their effort to insult and humiliate him had crossed all bounds. But the greater the slander, the more the love he got from the people. His self-respect became bound with that of the masses, because he symbolised their yearning for a better life.”


Wajid Shamsul Hassan on 25 years after Bhutto

For Pakistan Bhutto was the harbinger of colossal changes. He harnessed socio-economic forces for challenging the status quo, unshackling the masses and their empowerment. His sense of direction not only gave him the strength but also a popular support to consolidate the edifice of the state on an egalitarian program seeking for his people roti, kapra and makkan. Besides, he awakened the masses, making them realize they were the legitimate fountainhead of political power. He deeply cherished democracy and viewed military rule as a negation of the very genesis of the country that came into being as a result of a democratic process and a vote. Bhutto had believed that the army could only protect its professional competence as an institution by keeping out of politics. He said clearly: ``The Pakistan Armed Forces cannot afford a moment`s deviation from their real responsibility. For the sake of Pakistan`s integrity, they simply cannot afford to get involved or absorbed in the political life of the country. Those soldiers who leave barracks and move into Government mansions lose wars and become prisoners of war as happened in 1971.``




25 years ago today Zulfikar Ali Bhutto became history
A Nation Editorial 4-4-04


The shadow still looms

TWENTY-five years ago to this day, near dawn, Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Prime Minister and murder convict, was hanged in Adiyala Jail, Rawalpindi. The jail has since come down, a generation has passed, but Bhutto’s legacy still remains, and his shadow still looms large in our national politics. Bhutto was designed by the Almighty larger than life. In few men are mixed so many amazing virtues, so many disturbing flaws. A psychoanalyst might make much of the inner tensions which made Bhutto what he was, both good and bad, and perhaps speculate how these may have helped him achieve so much. Even his worst opponents would agree that Bhutto was a great man, if not necessarily a good one

Khalid Hasan in the Daily Times wrote on General Musharraf’s Book:
I can take issue with several things written in the book about Pakistan’s first popularly elected Prime Minister, but I will confine myself to the assertion that had Mr Bhutto not “rejected” the Polish resolution in 1971, East Pakistan may not have seceded. This absurd and baseless charge continues to be made against Mr Bhutto despite documented evidence to the contrary. I, for one, have written about this several times but to no avail it seems. Gen Musharraf should not have allowed this canard to appear under his name and, I hope, being a civilised person, he would acknowledge his mistake and express regrets for the injury caused to Mr Bhutto’s and Pakistan’s good name and reputation.


Bushra Agha in Dawn:

Here it has to be said that Bhutto as a human being had his share of weaknesses. His stubborn nature was never appreciated by anyone. Most of his policies were controversial, something that`s part of politics. However, there are some complaints against him that hardly seem logical.
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto not only lived, but also died for his country. He was a courageous man, who fought audaciously against dictatorial forces till he breathed his last. He will remain alive in our memories.

And now the Big Shocker of a finale…


Bhutto was sincere leader: Prof Ghafoor
Staff Report

KARACHI: Speakers at a seminar on the “Role of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto in political history of Pakistan” here on Tuesday paid tribute to former prime minister Z A Bhutto who was executed during the martial law regime of Gen Ziaul Haq.

Qaim Ali Shah, provincial president of the PPP and former Sindh chief minister, presided over the seminar. MMA Senator Prof Ghafoor Ahmed, Meraj Mohammed Khan, parliamentary party leader of the PPPP in the Senate Raza Rabbani, Justice Rashid A Rizvi, chief of the People’s Study Circle Prof N D Khan and divisional president of the PPPP Karachi Rashid Rabbani also spoke at the seminar.

Qaim Ali Shah clarified in his key-note address that the late Z A Bhutto had not served as civil martial law administrator on his own but the opposition had requested him in writing to do so because there had been no constitution at the time.

Prof Ghafoor of the Jamaat-e-Islami/Muttahida Majlis-e-Amal, who had been Mr Bhutto’s political opponent during his government in the 1970s, admitted that Zulfikar Ali Bhutto played a historic constitutional role. He was referring to the 1973 Constitution, which was drafted with national consensus and unanimously approved by the parliament during the Bhutto-led government.

He said Mr Bhutto was an intelligent and sincere political leader. He added that as a prime minister his attitude towards the opposition was friendly and generous. He said Mr Bhutto had listened to the opposition

Re: # 131 by majumdar on December 7, 2006 11:01pm PT

---

I am just recounting the examples of what has happened in India. Dravidian parties once supported secession and spouted anit-Hindi rhetoric. But 40 years hence, secessionism is gone

---

Well! We are talking about the same thing then!

If I understood you correctly, here is the 5 step approach (according to you and other Hindians) that was used in Democratic India.

1. Some nutcase made secessionists or anarchist noises.
2. Indian government beat the crap out of them using police, BSF, and army
3. It took years to wipe out the top level of secessionist leadership (read bhindranwalay)
4. The remaining low level leaders are rotting in jails or part of some relatively benign political group.
5. This method of beating the crap out of secessionists didn`t work on all the groups e.g. Kashmir, Nagas, Nexils etc.


Here are the 5 steps used in less than democratic Pakistan

1. Some nutcase made secessionists or anarchist noises.
2. Pakistani government beat the crap out of them using police, rangers, and army
3. It took years to wipe or Kick out the top level of secessionist leadership (read Altaf)
4. The remaining low level leaders are rotting in jails or part of some relatively benign political group (MQM, Jiay Sindh).
5. This method of beating the crap out of secessionists didn`t work on all the groups e.g. Balochis, Bengalis etc.).

So Maujumdhar sahib, Indian democracy is using the same 5 steps to deal with secessionists. We both have our successes and failures. Clearly you are in no position to give us lectures in democrazy.

Warm regards

Taiko,

(You sound more like the village mai (old woman) talking about her no-good drug-addict son. She wants to marry him off to some poor girl, hoping that family pressure will force this druggie to wisen up. )

No I am not trying to be another Mukhtaran Mai. I am just recounting the examples of what has happened in India. Dravidian parties once supported secession and spouted anit-Hindi rhetoric. But 40 years hence, secessionism is gone and the aniti-Hindi rhetoric has been toned down. Same way with Akali Dal. Now, unfortunately if the drugged boys (not that DMK/SAD can be described as junkies) have sudhrofied after getting married (years of governance, practical politics) maybe the Mai (Mother India) should be given some credit.

(Analyze impact of Indian style democrazy on Kashmir, Punjab, Nagaland, Nexal anarchy.)

India is by no means a perfect democracy, there are lot of flaws that need to sorted out, particularly securing economic freedom for people, making justice available to the weak and dispossessed, having acceptable security for its citizens from internal and external danger etc. The problems in J&K and Nagaland have in fact arisen partly becuase the democratic process there has often been perverted for short-term political gains.

And you are dead wrong about Punjab. Punjab is a fully functioning prosperous society and some tough policing as well as resumption of normal political process has made it one of the most peaceful of Indian states. A far cry from the turmoil of the 1980s.

(Look don`t try to blame Pakistan.)

Now if there is no democracy in Pakistan, who should I blame but Pakistanis themselves. But of course if your contention is that there is no need for democracy, then Pakistanis are not to be blamed anyways.

Btw, do you believe that Pakistan should not be a democracy? If that is the case what is the system of governance you have in mind.

Regards

#129 by majumdar on December 7, 2006 8:52pm PT

---

Taiko,

There was a difference between Pak situation in 1970 and what is prevailing in India.

---

Bhai Majumdar Sahib,

Obviously we can`t have exact match in this world. There was only one E. Pak and now there is one BDesh.

My comparison to 10`s of other situation is not enough for you. The reason is that most people live in ``main na maanoo`` (I am not going to accept whatever you say) world. That`s OK if you are living in a world that wants to reduce anarchy, instability, and ethno-religious chauvinism.

---

First, you have to consider what led to the situation in the first place an almost continuous denial of democracy to the people of Pakistan since independence.

---

Look don`t try to blame Pakistan. Analyze impact of Indian style democrazy on Kashmir, Punjab, Nagaland, Nexal anarchy. This clearly points out that demo-crazy based analysis is not valid for South Asian region.

It boggles my mind that you guys talk about Mujib`s love of democracy while completely ignoring his 6-points. The summary is given below for your quick review.

---

had Mujib been allowed to form the government, practical considerations of forming and running the government would have forced him to mellow down.

---

You sound more like the village mai (old woman) talking about her no-good drug-addict son. She wants to marry him off to some poor girl, hoping that family pressure will force this druggie to wisen up.

That may be true, and some dalit girl gets dragged into this scheme.

However the mai should not expect that a brahmin will marry his educated girl off to this druggy.

---

(Islamic brotherhood gets a lot of seats in Egypt, would you give them the helm of Egypt? )

If they get a majority of seats, they should certainly be allowed to form the government.

---

I beg to differ. Hitler and Nazis were elected. I hope that German army had guts to kick this midget out of Germany. That one action may have hurt the democrazy a bit, but it would certainly have saved 35 million deaths.

Hindians love to parrot ``democracy`` as some new incarnation of Krishna or Lakshami etc. The new ``moorty`` (beautiful idol) is good for pooja (worship), but it does not bring food to the table for millions of Dalits. Recent burning and looting by Dalits is a clear indication that the goddess of democracy is not helping out.

The real issue is to implement free market policies and allow people to go after opportunities. Ideally democracy helps in this sort. However leftist anarchist democracy would never allow free market. This particular aspect has been addressed much better by dictatorships of Sout Korea, Singapore (early on), and China. While democrazy of Iran has been horrible for its people as well the whole region.

Whatever you and say, democracy is for true democrats (small D) and Mujib was no democrat. In fact Bengalis are smarter than you Hindians. They got rid of the whole Mujib clan pretty quick. The leftover daughter is creating so much anti-democratic trouble these days.

If Bengalis can butcher their Bhudoo, then praise W. Pakistanis to keep Mujib safe and turn him into a leader. Learn from Bengalis! Learn from Bengalis! They knew the druggie boy Mujib was no good.

Taiko,

There was a difference between Pak situation in 1970 and what is prevailing in India.

First, you have to consider what led to the situation in the first place an almost continuous denial of democracy to the people of Pakistan since independence. Had Pakistan remained a democracy, Mujib may never have had to put forward a 6 point agenda.
Secondly, unlike J&K and Nagaland E Pak was non continguous and made up over half of Pakistan`s population. The situations cannot really be compared.

Finally, had Mujib been allowed to form the government, practical considerations of forming and running the government would have forced him to mellow down. In India, the Akali Dal (SAD) had come up with something called the Anandpur Sahib resoultion, I don`t remember the exact details (you may page the resident constitutionalist Manto mian on this) which envisaged very extensive state autonomy, later during the Khalistan phase actually many Akalis recommended secession. But later the same SAD formed Punjab Govt 2-3 times and also part of the Central Govt. and no one has heard of the said Resolution anymore.

(Islamic brotherhood gets a lot of seats in Egypt, would you give them the helm of Egypt? )

If they get a majority of seats, they should certainly be allowed to form the government.

Regards

Re: # 127 by CoolAL on December 7, 2006 3:38pm PT

---

Re: # 126
What part of Awami league won 169 seats out of 310 in united Pakistan are you having difficulty comprehending? Once that happened, Mujib should have been made the PM. No ifs,ands or buts. Get it?

---

Mujib used 6 points plat farm to win 169 out of 170 E. Pak seats. 0 (big fat zero) in the W. Pak. .

Six points of Mujib clearly show that he was secessionist rather than a uniter. Here is how:

1. Change the constitution (to achieve the following)
2. Feds deal with only Defense and foreign affairs
3. Separate currencies and or separate reserve banks
4. Separate taxes for E. Pak
5. Affirmative action (i.e. more money) for E. Pak than W. Pak.
6. Separate military force for E. Pak.

Tell me O! democratic Mullah would you ever classify any Hindian as democrat if he puts forward 6 points like Mujib?

If so, why won`t you implement the likes of 6 points in Kashmir, Nagaland, and for Nexalites.

The answer is simple. You can`t talk democracy from your mouth, and and shoot 6-pointed f@arts from your behind unless you are Fundoo.

Get it?


If you are still not convinced here is the stuff straight from horse`s (Mujib`s) mouth.


1. Mujib is reported to have said that the six Points “charted a path where Bengalis had to break the bondage of Pakistan”. {Safdar Mahmood has listed some of Mujib’s statements in his book: “Pakistan Divided” (Pages 72-72)}

2. Mujib also confessed in a TV interview with David Frost that he had been “working for Bangladesh since 1948”.

3. Mr. Sultan M. Khan, a former foreign secretary of Pakistan, has disclosed in an article that during an RCD meeting in Dhaka soon after the 1970 elections, foreign ministers of Turkey and Iran called on Mujib, with our government’s approval, and he told them that he would “rather be the Founding Father of Bangladesh than the Prime Minister of Pakistan”.

4. Mujib said: “Budruddin Bhai, Suhrawardy Sahib was a great man. He was an all-India leader of the Muslims, and later an All-Pakistan leader. I am a very small man, I can only be a Bangladesh leader”. {Dr Aftab Ahmed, Joint secretary of the central ministry of information in Dhaka, 1969}

If someone talks like a separatist, walks like one, then most likely Sh. Mujib.

Get it?


****E. Pak in the 1950s had 46% budget as that of W. Pak
****BDesh in 2005 has 41% budget as that of Pakistan (but BDesh has 1.5 times the deficit).

So Mujib`s shouting about money to W. Pak was all hoax as well.

Get it?

Re: # 126

We are not talking about Egypt. However, The Islamic brotherhood may win a lot of the seats, but does it have a majority in the National Assembly in Egypt? Nor are we talking about Sri Lanka. Tamil Tigers win big in the the North but do not control the National Assembly.

What part of Awami league won 169 seats out of 310 in united Pakistan are you having difficulty comprehending? Once that happened, Mujib should have been made the PM. No ifs,ands or buts. Get it?

Re: # 124 by CoolAL on December 7, 2006 3:08pm PT

---

Re: # 50

The point everyone can`t see is that if Mujib was allowed to become PM of united Pakistan, why would he need to truncate it? He would have addressed the bengalis` grivences. It would have given some backbone to Pakistani democratic institutions. After all, the only way to kick Mujib out would have been to defeat him at the ballot box.

---

Islamic brotherhood gets a lot of seats in Egypt, would you give them the helm of Egypt?
Hindu Tamil tigers win majority in their areas, go tell Sinhala Bhuddists to give a Tamil the top job.

Man you all hindooi fundoois live in a la la land, just like the Islamist fundoois across the border.

Re: # 51

Indeed, just remember Mujib and the awami league won 169 seats in the national assembly and had absolute majority.

Why do you guys lie to yourselves like this? Can it somehow alter reality? I am simply amazed at this.

Re: # 50

If the Kashmiris win 273+ seats in the Lok Sabha, then there is nothing anybody can do to prevent them from legally getting what they want. That is effectively what Mujib and the Awami League achieved in 1971.

The point everyone can`t see is that if Mujib was allowed to become PM of united Pakistan, why would he need to truncate it? He would have addressed the bengalis` grivences. It would have given some backbone to Pakistani democratic institutions. After all, the only way to kick Mujib out would have been to defeat him at the ballot box.

Fat Nazi???

Regards

Re: # 121

``And you know my views on both the old goat and JLN to believe me capable of belitttling anyone just bcos he had a few nasty things to say about the duo. ``

That is true... but wanted to put it on record for the fat nazi lurking about.

Manto mian,

(It is quite sad to see you belittling the achievement of H M Seervai. Not only is he revered by the Indian legal fraternity (hardly anyone knows him in Pakistan) but his magnum opus on Indian Constitutional Law is ranked amongst the finest in the world. )

(which pointedly tainted Gandhi and Nehru with the real responsibility of partition is no reason to belittle his legal achievements.

Chill. I caught the article on HMS on TOI this morning and just wanted to have some harmless fun at your expense.

I do not intend to belittle any one, it is just that on chowk, you are the only one ( and certainly not me) who has any interest or any understanding of Constitutional Law beyond what is taught in Class X civics textbook.

And you know my views on both the old goat and JLN to believe me capable of belitttling anyone just bcos he had a few nasty things to say about the duo.

Regards

PS: As the saying goes....

The greatest misfortune of the subcontinent was that the Hindu casteist racist fascist Gandhi was born in it... and the greatest fortune of the subcontinent might just be that if another like him is born, good people of India Pakistan or Bangladesh burn him alive.

Stuka

I was referring to the fact to your comments about Pakistan Movement introducing communalism ... You may read comments again in that light.


Majumdar,

It is quite sad to see you belittling the achievement of H M Seervai. Not only is he revered by the Indian legal fraternity (hardly anyone knows him in Pakistan) but his magnum opus on Indian Constitutional Law is ranked amongst the finest in the world.

Just because H M Seervai dared to speak the truth and expose the truth about partition of India which pointedly tainted Gandhi and Nehru with the real responsibility of partition (something which is now accepted by most historians studying that period impartially) is no reason to belittle his legal achievements.


BJKumar,

Come on man. You know Mohandas Karamchand ``Mahatma`` Gandhi was a lawyer in the very American sense of the word and on top of that Hindu bigot that he was he was a lawyer without scruples. There is no comparison with Jinnah, who was a legal practitioner in the very victorian sense of the word, Jinnah who stood for justice and fairplay... values that Gandhi pointedly rejected as unHindu (I for one believe Hinduism is a much better religion than Gandhi made it out to be...)

That you have taken to abusing Jinnah`s mother shows that deep down you know that you are defending a Hindu fascist racist casteist bigot i.e. ``Mahatma`` Gandhi who was the biggest fraud known to mankind.

I just wish you give up this drama of abusing people and just accept facts for what they are: Mohandas Gandhi was an exclusivist Hindu fascist racist casteist bigot who believed caste system was god`s gift to humanity and the natives of Africa were subhuman.


Here is a picture of the biggest fraud in human history (aka Gandhi)

#110 by taikonaut

One is mad due to Hindian nationalism, and the other is mad that he got bitten by Hindutva.

But what about you, yaar Taiko? All your pent up anger at being denied your democratic rights is perhaps causing you to hyperventilate on Chowk. Calm down a bit yaar!

Manto mian,

A small piece of trivia for you. Dec 5, 2006 was the 100th anniversary of HM Seervai. Remember him- the great jurist- World Famous in Pakistan. And incidentally this gentleman shares his b`day with yours truly.

And let poor MKG be. We Indians have already forgotten him and got on with our lives, its time you too did the same.

Regards

I really am trying to comprehend your angle of calling Bhutto a fascinating character... Yes, he had certain strong characteristics but did it help Pakistan in a long run? He was intelligent, YES... what else? Was he ethical?

#114

[Those SOB`s can be rather charming, when it suits them!]

The ZAB was not a lawyer, by any chance?!

#113 Zee

Kya kiya jaye, yaar!

Those SOB`s can be rather charming, when it suits them!

Mrs. Gandhi at the time was perhaps anxious to send back the 90,000 mehmaans who had recently arrived from Bangladesh - wearing khaki with chains.

The truth is - had the man seen the folly of his ways at that point in time - the only point when the khakis had shown a bit of sense and were a bit less arrogant than they usually are - it could have been a very different country today!

Therefore, if anybody should have been hung in addition to Jinnah - it would have to be that man, not so much for precipitating the events that caused Bangladesh to be born but for taking the remainder where it is today!

#112 by bjkumar

But BJ, wasn`t it the same `pygmy` who charmed your `Indra` to the extent that she agreed to everything he said against the pursuations of her own cabinet at Simla??????

In deference to Zeemax`s sensitivity to spelling mistakes, here is a ``spelling mistakes corrected`` version of an earlier interact.

#33 by bjkumar on December 1, 2006 8:06am PT

Those Pakistanis who are cursing their hearts out at the ZAB are well-advised to recall in whose image that man molded himself.

They should remember the character from whom the ZAB learnt his guile and his fraudulent “art” of divisiveness – and his utter contempt for others and his absolute intolerance of other sects and religions – and most importantly, his dictatorial streak!

Yup, that ZAB was merely a little pygmy!

A tiny no-consequence insignificant trivial little pygmy!

Compared to his master and his mentor!

The SON OF A BITCCH vamp himself!

The Little Pygmy

The Big Creep

Manto: Not sure I understand what you mean? We are not discussing Gandhi here on this thread, far from it.

You Harish and you Shaitani! One is mad due to Hindian nationalism, and the other is mad that he got bitten by Hindutva.

You two deserve each other for sure.

---

#104 by harish_hyd on December 6, 2006 4:53am PT
#103 by sanatani

Harish are you mad

Bhai Sanatani, you are entitled to your opinion and I am to mine. I find your views a bit too radical and disagree with them, but I respect your right to express them.

Regards!


#103 by sanatani on December 6, 2006 4:49am PT
Re: # 101

Harish are you mad,

---

Re: # 108

Manto ji,

I do not get this ``Behind all the caustic sarcasm, there seems to be an appreciation of history even if through a blighted colored lens``.

What sarcasm, what appreciation of history and what blighted coloured lens.

Maybe I was wrong to suspect you earlier. Doesn`t matter what you have failed to realise or appreciate is Gandhi is our cross to bear not yours. Whats even worse (though very good from a Paki point of view) people do not realise that madar das is our worst point and the huge majority of scumbag fellow countrymen try to represent him [as] the best. Put yourself in my shoes you will realise how much of a fight this is.

In fact between us actually I find your criticism of Gandhi very amusing. Amusing because you have not even remotely touched on madar das`s real flaws and bad qualities you could get a clue if you have the ability to read between my lines esp in my posts to beej bhai and can make 1 and 1 53 with the mind of a mathematician and the finesse of a lawyer, but trust me you will never get this (to be fair neither will anyonede of my scum madar das loving countrymen and I am not about to tell you state secrets)

Anyway thank you for all the help I am sure you give my co-religionists in your country. Now just wish I could get my own countrymen to do the same to a certain set of my co-religionists her that would be gr8. And Manto while gandhu did get the wrong end of the stick 1 thing is clear there is nothing wrong with the caste system. I wish that you independently arrive to this conclusion.

Regards
Sanatani

If by coloured glasses you meant by description of Shrimant J`s `secular` allies then I think this time like beej bhai you are being economical with the truth.

Re: # 89

Sanatani,

Behind all the caustic sarcasm, there seems to be an appreciation of history even if through a blighted colored lens.

Maybe I was wrong to suspect you earlier.

Stuka,

Unfortunately the facts of history now read and re read after declassification of classified documents lend themselves to the very opposite conclusion to what Indian Nationalists and Hindu fascists have been peddaling for 60 years.

Just goes to prove that you can`t fool all the people all the time.

Re: # 33


And the BIGGEST CREEP OF THEM ALL- THE RACIST CASTEIST EXCLUSIVIST HINDU BIGOT MOHANDAS KARAMCHAND GANDHI

Re: # 20

For once even Harish Hyd makes sense.

Well done.

#103 by sanatani

Harish are you mad

Bhai Sanatani, you are entitled to your opinion and I am to mine. I find your views a bit too radical and disagree with them, but I respect your right to express them.

Regards!

Re: # 101

Harish are you mad,

You have named 3 of the biggest scum vermin of our country in the same sentence as Paki dictators.

3 simple questions to demolish your reverence for these bastarrrrrrds:

1) Ask Manu Singh about the HDW tapes.
2) Ask Kallu Madrasi about the weapons he designed as head of DRDO
3) Ask bajju pai about how Parmod Mahajan and Ranjan Bhatta made his millions.

India is gr8 despite and in spite these MadurChoooodss because of the 2nd rung of leaders around them. Bakistan exists because of Ayub, Yahya, Zia and Parbej Muhajir.

Laloo and Rabri are infinitely superior to the scumbags like manu, kallu and bajju.

No Regards
Sanatani

You know it is just damn right disappointing to return to chowk after an absence and find BJKumar, the Hindu equivalent akin to the fat Nazi from American History X, still trying to impose on chowk populace his regurgitation of Gandhian defaecation.

I suppose when you are the follower of the Exclusivist Racist Casteist Hindu fascist bigot Gandhi ... that truly bigoted little Hindu fanatic who believed that black people were subhuman and caste system was the true expression of humanity.... you need to repeat your hogwash again and again.

Somethings will never change.

#93 by taikonaut

No wonder these vermin deserve the likes of Lallu Parsad, Rabri mata, and the abject poverty + hunger.

Arey yaar, at least the vermin have the choice and consciously and democratically elected these leaders unlike you guys, who`re destined to remain under the jackboots forever. So while we have a Laloo, we also have Manmohan, Abdul Kalam, Vajpayee, who are any day better than both Paki leaders and dictators.

In grief I write:

Sad demise of Anwar Shaikh, illustrious son of Akhand Bharat

We learn with great regret and grief of the tragic death of one of 20th century’s greatest authority on reality about Islam, Dr. Anwar Shaikh, in Wales, Great Britain on November 25, 2006. He will be mourned by millions who read his books and articles over several decades. Anwar, was ailing and in considerable pain for some time. Because of threats from Islamic fundamentalists, he was living in a high security home in Cardiff, Wales. Those privileged to know him personally or through his writings admired him for his originality and courage of conviction.

His death has taken away an intellectual giant from our midst. He stood for an era, for a century. His greatest achievement was to demolish Islam with the sword of logic and reason. He exposed it as the cult of brutal conquerors and the destroyer of civilisations.

His legacy is all the books and articles that he wrote and published. He will live through his word.

Anwar Shaikh (Converted to Hinduism called Aniruddha Gyan Shikha). After his conversion to Hinduism, he wrote many books to expose Islam as religion. His death is mourned across the whole world, especially in Bharat.

Hun mera Jyesth Bhrata (Vadda Prah) Zeemax jida nawan naa Jeet Singh Max Sikhi hai, Aniruddha Gyan Shikha da avtar banuga aur jang jari rakhuga

Sanatani

Re: # 95

Stuke Mraaj,

You may find it irritating my prefixing all these terms like Maharajadhiraj, Navameshwar, Guru Shiromani, Shrimant etc but I think it is a vast improvement in terms of using suffixes` lik SAW, PbUH, Wali Wassallam.

Ke kende ho
Parnam
Snatni
Like a true blue Panjoo I have cut the a`s

Re: # 92

Zee bhaiya,

Jai Shri Ram. Of course they did. But then you know their favourite sports was bride hunting. Taking an innovation from the Yahoods (``500 rupye main yahoodi nahin bikta tum musalman ko kharid rahe ho``) we hereby declare that every child born to a Hindu Women and a non Hindu father is a Hindu so by that all their descendants are Hindus. Next we will take an innovation from the Muslims that ``era of tolerance is over and.... you know what``.

See pls tell takanot that while I may not be secular (``la diniyat lahaul villakhawat``) at least I am syncretic 1 from Yahood 1 from Musla.

So Bade Bhaiya yeh bataaye aap ghar vapsi kab kar rahe hai. (And please I am not baiting or ridiculing you it is a genuine sentiment to getting back you and the rest of the bretheren back to the fold). And brother a majority of the Panjabi Muslims are Rajput, Jat and Gujjar and there is a high probability you are one of the 3 now compare these castes in their behaviour with Bedous, Turks and Central Asians and I am sure you will decide what is the right choice for you meaning to say `` ki mai kiski aulad hu``.

Regards
Brotherly Love
Encomiums
Salutations
Best Wishes

Ghar Vapas aa jao
Aapka Anuj (Younger Brother)
Sanatani

Re: # 95

Stuke mere prah,

Tusan aakhar H shabd keh hi ditta. Lakh lakh vadhaiyan. Parnam de nal mai tvanu Paire Paana karda aa.

See I have been impressed by your knowledge and writings (not to mean I agree with what you write), so I baited you initially hoping for an intellectual response but got abuse in return (and vile abuse at that). My aim was never to insult you or demean you just to change your views (It hurts when intelligent and astute people like you refuse to see and read the writing on the wall).

In another post you had written that Punjabi Hindus had traded their Punjabi identity for a Hindu one this is the charge my Khalsa friends also make. I only ask you one thing why dont the Khalsa have a Hindu identity any more. According to me without being a Hindu one cant be a Sikh and without a Sikh not a Khalsa. I illustrate this with a story.

Guru Gobind Singhji of Bihar was born in Patna when his illustrious father was assisting Mirza Raja Ram Singh on an expidition to Asom. The valiant Asomiyas under Maharajadhiraj Lachit Barkhupan inflicted a stinging defeat on them, following which Navameshwar Guru Shiromani Shri Tegh Bahadurji brokered a peace between them. As soon as the peace was brokered Maharaj Lachit taunted the Mirza Raja that why despite being a Hindu he was allied with the turks and instead of Maharaj whya was he Mirza Raja. Hearing this Shiromani gently told Maharaj Lachit that since he had brokered the peace an insult to the Mirza Raja was an insult to him. Maharaj fell on the Guru`s feet begged forgiveness said that he could not even dream of insulting such a Saint of our Dharam and offered his head in penance which the Guru declined and embraced him. My question to those Khalsa who deny their Hinduness is the Dharam mentioned here is what and where does any of the Gurus` repudiate that he is a Hindu indeed Dashameshwar Guru Shiromani Maharaj Gobind Singh ji has said This is confirmed by one of the following lines in Govind’s poem about his father’s martyrdom: “He suffered martyrdom for the sake of his faith.” Punjabi is our identity no doubt but this comes after our Hindu and Bhartiya identities.

Anyway welcome back (I know I am being presumptiousness and sanctimonious here but let it be allow me a small victory). Look forward to welcoming back a lot of the Khalsa`s to the Hindu fold heres wishing that you the following words become a part of your life ``Let the path of the pure [khâlsâ panth] prevail all over the world, let the Hindu dharma dawn and all delusion disappear. (…) May I spread dharma and prestige of the Veda in the world and erase from it the sin of cow-slaughter.”

Warm Regards and Best Wishes
Salutations
Sanatani

Re: # 87

Beej Bhai,

Kai baar main aapko katu vachan bolto hu is ke liye Kshama. But since I see you have the shades of a patriot (what shades aaap Desh Bhakt ho) but not complete, since that is why I try to convert you unlike the Mehul Kamdar and other commie types.

Let me digress in kamdars article manto with whom some time ago I was in agreement with on many issues (I like him and even respect him and would do Pranam to him because he is genuinely concerned over the plight of Pakistani Hindus {and were he is a position of power he would help them and I am sure in his own small ways wherever and whenever he can he helps our brother Pakistani Hindus} which a lot of my own countrymen bastards are not) insulted me and called me names of the worst kind. First I was very angry (angry enough that if I could have ordered a hit on him in Lahore I would have) but then I thought Manto se agar mein jeetu bhi to meri haar hai matalab usse jeetna vyarth hai. Parr apse jeetna avashyak. I will state the reason later.

You say ``The problem with many Pakistanis is they think that repeating untruths endlessly will transform those into truths``. Let us dissect the word Pakistani. If you say Pakistani who are you referring to all Pakis Muslims, Xtians, Hindus, Parsis etc. Also since all the others are not hindus and we have not come across any Paki Hindus we take it to mean Pakis minus Paki Hindus. Now dissect the Pakis futhers Punjabi`s, Muhajirs (we will use the term Bhaiyas for them), Sindhi`s, Pathans and Balochis. There is a hindu equivalent of 4 of these 5 i.e. there are not Pathan Hindus. Pathans are 8% of Paks population so in case you are accusing the Pakistanis of being Liars and Obfuscators you are including their Hindu equivalent also (including me) WHICH is most certainly not the case. If anything is the case it is the opposite the Hindus try to whitewash the sins of the mozzies due to their mental dhimmitude. This trait of lying and obfucation has kuranic and mohhamedic sanction and is called Takiyah and you see these scum indulge in takiyah all the time including that queen of this trait called farzana warsi (she spells it versey so that some dhimmi hindus might think she is well versed) another trait of takiyah.

Fact is even if we include Xtians Bharat Mata ka vibhajan mussalman aur gair mussalman bhagon mein hua tha to tub agar Bharat desh ko secular hona hai to mussalmano ko is secularism ka bhag hone ka koi hak nahin hai. The way Hindus were cleansed from Pakistan and those who stayed have become 3rd class citizens the same must apply to India for it is the muslims of truncated India who were in the forefront of this demand

Beej Bhai tell me why should we be secular (as the dictionary defines the word). If anything the muslims should be forced to adopt secularism and at least moderate to some extent the wrethced behaiour they exhibit as members of this murderous cult. Why should we give up Dharma as how conduct should be defined in society it is because of our Dharma that Jew, Christians (yes those some murderous snakes before Constantine become Holy Roman emperor) Parsis and Tibetans have got Sharan from persecution and freedom to practise their faith under Sanatan Dharam, Bharat Mata and the Bhagwa Dhwaj. (BTW Hindu Hriday Samrat Shri Balasaheb Thackreyji`s Father had led a delegation to Babasaheb with that revered flag and requested him to lead a movement for making the Bhagwa Dhwaj the national flag as reccomended by the Congress flag commitee under the able leadership of Master Tara Singhji. Babasaheb thanked Shri Prabhodankarji Thackrey for bestowing this honour on him but declined due to his pre-occupation with writing the constitution) Sorry for the digression.

To Beej bhai when you say that you wish to that you do not wish to tar the whole community with one brush then you are being economical with the truth. Fact is if the whole f***ing community was not supporting the same how could a few people do it. It is not for nothing that Behenji (Behen Mayawati) said that Muslims support kattarpanthis.

To paraphrase a great son of America (Shri Stuka you have to name this person) ``Extremism in the pursuit of Truth, Libery and Justice is not a vice, Moderation in the pursuit of the same no virtue``. So Beej bhai jo main takanoteya nu aaakhyae ohi tvanu aakhda aa Satyamev Jayte.

Regards
Truly
Sanatani

In addition to my previous post, I am one of those ``secularsits`` who people like Sanatani despises. Inspite of that, I am clear about my primary identity of being a Hindu. That does not take away from being a Punjabi.

``OK OK, If you are a true Punjabi, here is a test for you!
``

Punjabi is an ethnicity, not a state of mind or an ideology or a religion. All of us born of Punjabi ethnicity are Punjabis. You are not some daddyji of Punjabis that u will go around gfiving certificates of Punjabiyat.

Punjabi as a primary identiy died on August 14, 1947. We are now Hindus, Muslims and Sikhs first, Punjabis second.

#91 by sanatani on December 5, 2006 7:43am PT

---

I support the right of the Hindus and Sikhs to reclaim their property in the West Punjab

---

No brainer!

---

but the Muslims coming to East should be allowed if and only if they revert back to either of the true religions (I`ll be generous well allow you two more religions Jains and Baudh to reconvert two. Also if you become Hindu argh<<<.... we will also not dissuade you from following the Arya Samaji branch of Hindusim

---

One word for you! FUNDOO.

See these illegitimate Hindooi Bindooi kids do not understand Pakistan. These shudras from Putna never learn to respect others.

No wonder these vermin deserve the likes of Lallu Parsad, Rabri mata, and the abject poverty + hunger.

---

I`ll be generous

---

Hahahah! see the generosity of a hindooi fundooi.

O! you the symbol of fairness and generosity!
O! you who mock other people`s ancestors. What was the religion of your forefathers. Oh these Hindooi fundoois never had forefathers. They just drop from the trees. Head first!

sanatani,

It appears your argument is based upon the entire Muslim populations of Pakistan/India being originally Hindu, and either forcefully converted or converted voluntarily for prudential reasons during Muslim rule.

Do you believe that the successive hoardes of Muslim Arab, Afghan, Central Asian or Persian invaders in a thousand years never procreated or multiplied?

Re: # 90

I support the right of the Hindus and Sikhs to reclaim their property in the West Punjab but the Muslims coming to East should be allowed if and only if they revert back to either of the true religions (I`ll be generous well allow you two more religions Jains and Baudh to reconvert two. Also if you become Hindu argh<<<.... we will also not dissuade you from following the Arya Samaji branch of Hindusim and futhermore if you choose to be Sikh we shall not allow any diffrentiation between Sehajdhari and Keshdhari, SImilarly Digambar and Shwetambar for Jains and Hinayana and Mahayana for Buddhists absolutely equal).

Also Hindus and Sikhs of West Punjab will have unfetterred right to reconvert the muslas back to the parent faith 4 options with 2 variations each. However a slight thing he will have to do before the formal or informal (as the case may be) conversion he/she will have to read the reverse/anti kalma. After reconversion you can choose various other options e,g, Dhirmalias and Bidhi Chandi`s in case of the Sikhs and so on hope you get the picture.

Later we will have our own version of Mo`s actions against the unbelievers (here muslims) by ending the era of tolerance i.e. conversion, expulsion or death.

BTW any choice you make is OK as you can freely move about these true faiths whenever and wherever you want.

Here`s wishing you all the best for making the correct choice. Arise takanot become Crore take se bhe adhik (zyada). Leave the path of asatya (untruth) walk on any of the paths of Satya (truth)
Regards
Sanatani

Post 89 da hor koi juab nain milya tenu

#89 by sanatani on December 5, 2006 5:59am PT

---

You have used the word `furmaatay` Are a true blue blooded tight ayse Panjabi using `furmaatay` what about Kehnde, Dasde, Akhde

---

OK OK, If you are a true Punjabi, here is a test for you!

Do you support the ``right to return`` of E. Punjabi Muslims and W. Punjabi non-Muslims back to their ancestral lands?

No ifs no buts. Simple yes or no would do.

Re: # 88

You are even more foolish than I thought. You say:

``Re: # 86 Sanatani sahib furmaatay hain

---

If you read my post clearly here and elsewher on chowk you will find that I am from the west Punjab. For the record my family belongs to Mandi Bhauddin, Pind Dadan Khan, Sialkot, Bhera, Lahore, Icchhra and Emnabad,

---

Sure you are! hahah!

Wonder why every Hindi Bindi on this board wants to be a Punjabi, Sindhi, or Khan etc.
But nobody wants to be even remotely connected to Bihari-Jannat or the UP-their-heaven.

Remember, if it quacks like a Bihari, $hites in public like a Bihari, walks like a Bihari, then it is a Punjabi-wanna-be i.e. Bihari.``

You have used the word `furmaatay` Are a true blue blooded tight ayse Panjabi using `furmaatay` what about Kehnde, Dasde, Akhde or are you liked those `Kashmiris` shown to the world in PoK who say ``enna zullom hoiya ke asi pasha hi pul gaye`` (we were so cruelly treated that we forgot our language) for the record these are Kami Panjoos taken to be settled in PoK for show and altering the demographics hint Shia Sunni again. Pakis are masters at this demographic change ethnic cleansing etc There is a lesson here for us.

Futher this liar has written, ``The RSS was born in 1925 (but)

---

You know we have our Wahhabi terrorist outfits who change names on daily basis. Like one day it is lashkare-jhngvi, then LeT, and then Dawa.
The same thing is true with Hindu terrorists as well. Fundoo Hedgewar was right hand man of another fundoo Savarkar. Since the early 1900s they all got rupia from same fundoo textile mill owners. The same mill owners fired Tilak and hired + funded Gandhi. As the money came from the same fundoo pot, they all had Hindu religion totally enmeshed with politics. It is the lack of separation of Mundir and politics that destroyed unity of British-India.``

My god Accusing Doctorji to be an acolyte of Veer Savarkar. No see how easily much of liar is he. Savarkar was not Anti Muslim to begin with. In fact in 1907 he had written a book and was the First man to Call the 1857 uprising the first war of Independence and not use mutiny or ghadar (which even Indians used) and celebrate it as a glorious chapter of Hindu Muslim unity of 2 sons of the same mother fighting an alien ususrper of their motherland (a point I emphatically disagree with as brought about so well by william darlymple in his latest book). Savarkar was in England that time and thrashed by the Indian Students League for being the only person to dissent in condemning the murder of Curzon Wylie (I hope I have the name right) by Shrimant Madan Lal Dhingra. Savarkar was later arrested and sent to stand trial in India he escaped from his ship in Marsielle stood for trial and was sentenced to 50 years hard labour in Kala pani it is here he said the famous and patriotic words do you think British rule will last in India for 50 years. It is in Kala pani that he developed his anti Muslim bias due to three reasons:

1) The attitude of the Pathan Jailors. Who were brutal, cruel and sodomistic towards the Hindus. They were guided in this by their Imams.

2) This attitude was forcing conversion to Islam and to ensure this was not nominal the converts had to be brutal towrds the Hindus and eat beef. Savarkar through his efforts got this to stop and reconverted many back to the Dharam. Due to the rigidity of the Hindus they were not fully acepeted and were subject to some amount of abuse and ridicule but it to Veer`s credit that the promises he had extracted from them that they did not reconvert.

3) The attitude of the Muslims during Khilafat and the large scale murder and other henious crimes against Hindus by muslims post Khilafat.

It was the crimes committed against Hindus that prompted Doctorji to set up the RSS. He reasoned that the Muslims worshipped communally and after coming out of the mosque attacked Hindus killed some injured many looted and burnt from still more and by the time the police came the vast majority dispersed (this he was talking about mind you Hindu majority areas) and while the police did arrest and shoot a few and the Hindus took sporadic revenge the fact was due to their disorganisation they were soft targets. Those muslims who were jailed got support from the rest of the community (primarily by providing them a portion of the funds/goods looted from Hindus) and those who were hanged hailed as Ghazis.

Coming back to Doctorji. Despite being a Maratha Brahmin he had studied medicine in Kolkatta and his chief source of inspiration was the Bengali revolutionaries and he was most greatly influenced by Shri Aurobindo. This was the time when the Bengali revolutionaries primary source of motivation was the Bhagvad Gita and Maa Mahakali and indeed all those who went o to the gallows did so cheerfully carrying a copy of that great and holy book. Doctorji was also inspired by Shrimant Madan Lal Dhingra and Veer. Inspired as he had read their acolytes but never met them. Doctorji just evaded arrest many times and after the outbreak of WWI returned to Nagpur and became a medical practioner no doubt a bit disillusioned by the overwhelming Indian response to the British cause in 1914.

Lets come to lie number (whatever but plain lies) that ``Since the early 1900s they all got rupia from same fundoo textile mill owners. The same mill owners fired Tilak and hired + funded Gandhi. As the money came from the same fundoo pot, they all had Hindu religion totally enmeshed with politics. It is the lack of separation of Mundir and politics that destroyed unity of British-India``. The mill owners were if anything pro British. Indeed one of Veer`s contemproaries was Shyamji Krishan Verma a Gujarati Scion of a rich textile baron family who was disowned by his family for his pro revolutionary and anti British views, (Shyamji was such a patriot that he said that his ashes were to be brought only to a free India and since he was not a Nehru Gandhi nobody bothered with the same till Shrimant Narendrabhai Modi got them back in 2003).

Coming back to Lokmanya and Madar Das. When madar das came back to India it was on the request of one Gopal Krishan Gokhale an arch rival of Shri Tilak (some say even enemy) who possibly saw in Gandhi a person who could counter the fieriness and to an extent the Hindutva rheotric (not my words but used by commies in reference to the great Lokmanya) and actions of his (remember it was the Lokmanya who revived the Ganpati festival in Pune after a gap of almost 70-80 years). The greatest disciple of Gokhale was one Shri Mohammed Ali Jinnah who was curious and even excited (though so unemotional and disciplined a person was Shri J that one hesitates to use this adjective for him) about the person his leader had asked to come from Saouth Africa to India. That madar das with his antics (to be charitable to the f**kr they COULD and a big could at that it could have been unintentional or corrupt and power hungry bastAAAArd he was he recognised in J the iron will and discipline which he lacked and true qualities of leadership). Even after madar das returned the Lokmanya was the undisputed boss of the congress till his death in 1917. A measure of his power was the reunification of the Congress under his tutelage and leadership entirely at his terms with a few crumbs thrown to Gokhale and the moderates to give them straws to clutch on. What is interesting is that at that time madar das was behaving as a recruiting sargeant of the British army and was on Bharat darshan to in his own words get to know the country better and was very peripherally involved in all this. Shri J despite being a Gokhale follower was at that time in a much more powerful position and amongst those who facilitated this reunification as he was on excellent terms with the Lokmanya (in fact he had defended the Lokmanya during his trial and subsequent incarceration in Kala pani the same incarceration that broke his health and prematurely caused his death in 1917). Indeed Shri J`s eloquent arguements and logical thinking swayed Gokhale to come about and Gokhale like a true Guru accepeted the greatness of his disciple and the fact that the Shishya had outdone the Guru. Mind you even Tilak while talking of Swarajya was not talking of gandhugiri but a constituional movement to achieve the goals. Indeed when he had clasehd with Shri J in the CLA over the Sarda act he told him Mohammed Ali after we get Swarajy pilot this bill and I will have it passed unanimously. It was only in post WWI environment when expecting more powers to Indians and instead getting Rowlatt that they turned to Gandhi which lead to the disastrous thing called Khilafat and subsequently partition. But a caveat must be added Gandhi was just the catalyst this pernicious and hateful philosophy which led to among other things the killing of 3,000 Hindus in the Malabar was being perfected in Deoband since the 1860’s by the same scumbags who are today called ‘nationalist’ and ‘patriotic’ Muslims by the secularists and the media. Gandhi did what he did (probably) to get more muslims into the freedom struggle, by getting involved in an issue though purely religious and of the muslims he hoped to counter the anti-congress propaganda of people like Sayyad Ahmad Khan who though dead had sown the seed of muslim separatism, checkmate people like Shri J and become the undisputed leader of the Indians both Hindu and Muslim.

Taka not (a very true name since he is not even worth ek taka you have to hand it to him his foundation that is his name is true but the building he has made false) further says “As the money came from the same fundoo pot, they all had Hindu religion totally enmeshed with politics. It is the lack of separation of Mundir and politics that destroyed unity of British-India” but this time I am lying since Khilafat was a Hindu issue and not a muslim one. No muslim ever felt for turkey and the khalia it is the Hindus who did. Also the area of concern of Muslims was cow slaughter since the muslims strongly opposed cow slaughter but since madar das dealt with only Hindu issues and sentiments he failed to appease the muslims on the issue of cow slaughter. So enraged were the muslims by cow slaughter that they wreaked vengeance on the Hindus all over India and that lead to partition.

Lies continued but we will make them truth “So Hindu fundoos hire and fund Muslim fundoos. Then the Hindu fundoos turn around and blame secular Muslims. What else is new in the La La land of Lala Ji?” So Shri J’s namesake Mohamed Ali Chotani was a Hindu and the principle funder of the congress indeed the first merchant or industrialist of any standing who funded the congress (congress membership till madar das made it 4 annas was 10 rupees a substantial amount in those days and was entirely self supporting). So this Hindu fundoo named Mohammed as in Mohamed Ali Chotani hired the Muslim fundoo also named Mohammed as in Maulana Mohamed Ali and then I a mere Hindu a kaffir have the guts to blame secular Muslims. Shri J was secular no doubt but so were his Barelvi, Shia and Ahmadi supporters. In fact the Shias and Barelvis strongly resisted any effort by the Deobandis led by Maudoodi to have the Ahmadi’s declared non muslims but could not prevail in the end as Shri Bhutto (about whom this article is) was a Deobandi. Also all subsequent rulers have been deobandi so that is why they have not been able to revert to Muslim status despite the herpic efforts of Shias and Barelvis. Oh in this I have forgotten the other secular luminaries like the founder of that paragon of secularism the Muslim league the Aga Khan and his Ismailis and the other secular muslims like Bohras and Khojas who funded the Muslim league in its pursuit of secularism and Pakistan oops sorry I mean Secularistan.

“True that Jinnah and other secular Muslims condemned lifafa movement. However it was not the first time that Jinnah challenged Mullahs/Hindus not to mix Masjid/Mundir and politics.

Muslims leaders like Ch. Fazal Hussain and Jinnah tried to stop Hindu fundoos before this lifafa (khilafa) movement was being midwifed by fundoo gandhi and other Muslim fundoos like Johars.

So beta Ji read first instead of showing your ignorance on the chowk”.

The other secular muslims are presumably those like the Barelvis et all discussed earlier. It matters little that Jinnah never used the Mandir word at any time while condemning the Khilafat movement (since these people having forever being putting words in that great mans mouth and denying some of his unIslamic sorry unsecular habbits like eating pork drinking whisky and collecting interest) and the fact that J was critical and accused madar das of the foisting a mullahocracy on the Muslims never said anything about a panditocarcy or a mandirocracy matter little to them. Even on the vexed issue of cow slaughter he advised to sort the issue by mutual resolve unlike his secular allies the Barelvis who led by the redoubtable Ahmed Riza Khan called cow slaughter a great Islamic Institution in India. Later while calling the congress a Hindu party he did accuse them of attempting to foster Hindu Raj but never a hindu theocracy. Again takanot has used a UP/Bihari word Betaji to show my ignorance instead of the Punjabi Puttar or Putra.

of course Shri Jinnah was head and shoulders above everyone else save Sardar, Bababasaheb and Veer.


A true Hindian would never put a secular Jinnah in the same sentence as Hindu fundoos. Yes of course Jinnah was secular and Pak sorry Secularistan movement was secular so what if Pakistan is an Islamic Republic and was made one by its founders hand picked successor two of the three Sardar, Bababasaheb and Veer despite never having advocated a Hindu Rashtra are Hindu Fundoos well because all Hindus are Fundoos and India is not secular because it is NOT an Islamic republic.

“Make sure you tell every Hindian that Jinnah helped reduce tension and brought the warring parties together. This is all the while Gandhi`s right-hand Muslim fundoos were flaming the sectarian fires.” Yes in 1935 J helped reduce the tension between Sikhs and Muslims but how was madar das fanning the flames. Well at this time the muslim fundoos were against Gandhi however to assuage their feelings and forever willing to sacrifice the interests of Hindus (Sikhs were considered a part of us despite stray voices to the contrary) told them to give up his claim. Oops but your so called secular neta Mian (not Ch which I take as an abbreviation of Chaudhury) Fazl-e-Hussain warned the Sikhs and Hindus of dire consequences including invasion by Afghans till any angry look by the British turned this paper tiger into a mouse. (This is the Islamic version of secularism we will have peace with other communities where we are in a majority we will give them the eternal peace of the graveyard)

And finally “And here comes the gem! drum roll please. Sanatani sahib furmatay [Again notice the use of UP Bihari language instead of Panjabi akhde/dasde etc] hain

A Hindu cannot be a fundamentalist.

hahaha! Man did you come out of a cave or something? Your retort is the same as this Mullah Bakri (goat bearded) who says ``A Muslim cannot be fundamentalist``. What is with you all fundoos? Be proud and honest of who you are! FUNDOOS. Off course fundoo and honesty are two things that are poles apart.

So learn about your history Mr. Santani. Don`t be a kana Raja sahib among history-blind (my word) Hindians.”

Ok takanot tell us how can a Hindu be a fundamentalist when there are no fundamentals he has to follow. It just cannot go into that One book to end all books abrahamic faith following brain of your that a fundamentalist one