Pakistans Permanent Revolution

Re: # 40

Firstly Stuka, whatever it is, tammans do not belong to sargoda. Secondly we never helped the british. Thirdly we are the decendants of Muhammad bin Qasim and this land has been ours for over 700 years.
It is just that people, who are not ready to face reality cannot create a democratic nation. Islam and democracy do not go together and it is time we accept it. Either dis Islam for democracy or dis democracy for islam.

Mind you, I am Tamman, and I will break you into pieces if you say a word about my family again. Correct your books and then talk!

PS: Ofcourse as the Elected Representative of Bombay Muslims for more than 3 decades, Jinnah did not seek election as Bombay`s dog catcher.

I wish he had though... he would have better luck dealing with Gandhi.

Harimau,

Once again you`ve made a tremendous fool out of yourself.

Jinnah was the elected member of the Central Legislature from Bombay continuous from 1910-1945 ... that is 35 years....

Ref ballukhan #322

You appended a long letter with the following signatures:

[Dr. Zakir Hussain
(Vice Chancellor Aligarh University)
Sir Sultan Ahmed
(Former Member of Governor General`s Executive Council)
Sir Mohd. Ahmed Syed Khan
(Nawab of Chhatari, former acting
Governor of United Provinces and
Prime Minister of Hyderabad)
Sir Mohd. Usman
(Former member of Governor
General`s Executive council and
acting Governor of Madras)
Sir Iqbal Ahmed
(Former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court)
Sir Fazal Rahimtoola
(Former Sheriff of Bombay)
Maulana Hafz-ur-Rehman M.P.
Col. B.H. Zaidi M.P.
Nawab Zain Yar Jung
(Minister Gcvernment of Hyderabad)
A.K. Kawaja
(Former President of Muslim Majlis)
T.M. Zarif
(General Secretary West Bengal Bohra Community)]

If Jinnahbhai had signed any letter, he would have had to say:

Mohammad Ali Jinnah
Unable to be elected Dogcatcher in Bombay Municipal Corporation

Ref Yasser Latif Hamdani#330

[PS: About Muslim majority districts... what about Kerala ? I am not sure about the facts but the fact that Muslim League is always in the government in Kerala means that there are Muslim majority districts there.]

Yasser, dear boy, how about Pottalpudur (Dusty New Town) in Tamil Nadu? It has a dargah where a Muslim holy man (he is reported to have been buried in some other locations too so he must have had several bodies) is buried. In addition, we have the elephant, monkey, chipmunks and assorted wildlife associated with the dargah buried there. How about claiming Pottalpudur?

How about Kayal, a sleepy little village on the coast (hey, direct shipping services to Pakistan!) with 34 mosques at last count?

And those Malayalees who had the stupidity to migrate to the Land of the Pure in 1947 have returned to Kerala and are demanding to stay back.

Just take those Butt-Fakhrs who want to move to Pakistan, such as those Biharis in Bangladesh before you talk about Malabaristan.

Re: # 335 Presently no point in talking about gone old things its useless thing no fun.
I find those brave girl students more interesting and their principal spokesman more radical and planing changes. No its is proved beyond doubt guilt of India but now no punishment to her for naked invasion. Some time we can not change things we have to endure. Too much talking of sad things and their leaders cheating demoralise people and leads to too much whining and mental disorder and too much love of history. India had cheating and beneficial things in past but pakistan has future due to its people. Any way hope Mr.Manto aka YLH will leave India and get to present Pakistan as Pakistan needs strength of uoung people. Past is past as Imam Khomeni said is absolute correct.

Re: # 334 Should human right people approach International courts for action against invading of Nizam state and Kashmir ? Is there any way one can get ruling against India in this matter ? Can Children of Nizam go to International court. May be people with leagal backj ground can put light.
But real thing is have strong army , navy and airforce , a overwhelming military is far better than just talk which leads to no where.
Indian army has bigger enemy China, B.Desh, Nepal and Pakistan so it is wide spread compared to Pakistan. Only enemy is India. So if army is raised to 1.5 Million in man power on actual battlefield will have number superiority. Then talk can lead to something , at this time talk is useless. One way to increase taxes for defence and built of of additional 600,000 strong army and give all benefits to Freedom fighter as regular army. People make choices by not increasing army strength wrong message is going to enemy which is bound to lead to big wars in near future. Indian talk of trade, movies is all meant to demoralise people and help terrorists in Pakistan.

Re: # 334 Should human right people approach International courts for action against invading of Nizam state and Kashmir ? Is there any way one can get ruling against India in this matter ? Can Children of Nizam go to International court. May be people with leagal backj ground can put light.
But real thing is have strong army , navy and airforce , a overwhelming military is far better than just talk which leads to no where.
Indian army has bigger enemy China, B.Desh, Nepal and Pakistan so it is wide spread compared to Pakistan. Only enemy is India. So if army is raised to 1.5 Million in man power on actual battlefield will have number superiority. Then talk can lead to something , at this time talk is useless. One way to increase taxes for defence and built of of additional 600,000 strong army and give all benefits to Freedom fighter as regular army. People make choices by not increasing army strength wrong message is going to enemy which is bound to lead to big wars in near future. Indian talk of trade, movies is all meant to demoralise people and help terrorists in Pakistan.

Manto, Majumdar,
To set the record straight, I believe that there were some Muslim majority districts in UP - such as Muradabad. It is possible that the city of Lucknow had a Muslim majority before partition - but I am not sure of that. They say that Delhi was 51% - 40% non-Muslim and Lahore was 51% - 49% Muslim - how convenient? No one really knows about Calcutta`s actual demographics.

All this is for historical accuracy because I don`t think that religious identity ANYWHERE was a just or even logical metric for the idiotic partition of Pak Muttahida Hindustan, Akhund Bharat, or Bharat Mata. :( It was more than evil, it was STUPID.

#332 by Mantolives on April 6, 2007 2:55am PT


but one which took for granted that the other side was honest and would play according to legal and moral norms.


Umm..what about the land of the pure sending it`s soldiers disguised as civilians to take over Kashmir? Was that homest or moral?

You`ve got the events wrong...

1. Junagadh signed a document of accession to Pakistan.

2. India invaded Junagadh.

3. India suggested plebiscite as the way out, which Pakistan accepted.

It was a masterly move by Pakistan really... but one which took for granted that the other side was honest and would play according to legal and moral norms.

Kindly read H V Hodson`s chapter on Junagadh for details.

Manto mian,

Kerala has a 25% Muslim population but did not have a single Muslim majority distt. in 1947. The only Muslim majority distt. was created in the 1970s or 1980s (Malapuram, if I am not mistaken) by the state govt for political consideration.

Yes, India had accepted the plebiscite in Junagadh but Pakistan didn`t. Grandpa Bhutto and MAJ (pbuh) tried their best to get that state into Pakistan (b4 J&K acceded to India) for no rhyme or reason- no Muslim majority nor any contiguity to W Pak.

The point is that had at the time of independence/partition ML had simply said that all princely states would go to India-Pak on the basis of whether the population was Hindu or Muslim majority INC would have accepted the principle, Pak got J&K and India had a free hand in Bhopal, Hyd and Junagadh. But Pakistan and MAJ (pbuh) (to tell you the truth both sides) played games. India laying claim to J&K and flirting with Kalat while Pakistan tried mischief in Bhopal, Hyd, Junagadh and also the Rajputana states (aided and abetted by Zubeida a fact glossed over by the pseudo-secularists who made the movie).

Regards

PS: About Muslim majority districts... what about Kerala ? I am not sure about the facts but the fact that Muslim League is always in the government in Kerala means that there are Muslim majority districts there.

Majumdar mian,

With all due respect ...Urstruly can go to hell. I don`t care. Not only are cases decided on the basis of how and what the law was then, but also the fact that Ahmadis and several Christian organisations voted unanimously for Pakistan in the said district.

You`ve got the facts wrong on JK. India had itself accepted the principle of plebiscite in Junagadh. Therefore there was no question of Hyderabad here... ofcourse Jinnah had no idea that Nehru and Patel were the original founders of land grab mafia in South Asia.


Yaar Salim mian, I am simply giving you the facts.

Ironically in 1946, Muslim League won a clean sweep in UP and Bombay (even in 1937 they won all the seats). The point is that they should not have been made to pay for the fact that they followed their conscience. However the claim of people like Sir Sultan Ahmed Khan that the Muslim League kept the demand vague etc is rather ironic given that he was a Muslim Leaguer in 1940 and was expelled from the League in 1942 for joining the Viceroy`s War Council.... and the Lahore resolution covers all possible outcomes. The ``vague part`` comes regarding other issues like whether it would be one or two or six states etc... but there was nothing vague about Muslim majority areas within or without the Indian union. Even Azad pokes fun at these people in his book... when they came to his house after partition, he asked them straight out ... what was vague about majority areas. The only valid point that there is below is the post-1949 objectives resolution situation ... and the impact it could have had on Muslim minority in India... However 60 years down the road ... Pakistan has hardly any impact on Indian Muslims and vice versa. Indian Muslims are citizens of India... just like Bhagwandas is a citizen of Pakistan. Beyond wishing them well, Pakistan should not have any role to play in their well being and/or suffering.

Manto mian,

( then according to Congress every Muslim majority district in India of today should have become a small Pakistani enclave and vice versa. )

Ideally only Muslim majority disttts. of 1947, not today. And barring J&K and one distt. in WB all Muslim majority distts. did go to Pak. Then of course there is the little matter of Gurdspur distt. But Maulana Urstruly (pbuh) would no doubt agree that Allah`s Consitution should take precedence over the law of the day.

And quite possibly JK would have been Pak`s except for MAJ (pbuh)`s insistence on Hyderabad.

Regards

``Pakistan`s Permanent Revolution?`` Hmmm..Revolutions are created in a dynamic civil society ... Sanity check is requested if somebody thinks 1947 was a revolution. A big bad hindu`s fear was the reason. The big bad baniya is not in the picture now. In present circumstances absolutely nothing is going to happen, Mushy`s power comes from GHQ and Uncle Sam. He couldn`t care less abt black coats/veils. Status quo will return in few weeks ..
Mark my prophetic words...

Manto Bhai,
Spin it any way you like, my friend. The fact remains that the poor Indian Muslims, abandoned to being fifth-columnists in their own homeland, got the short end of the stick. They never voted for Pakistan and paid for it in immeasurable misery. :(

Ballu Khan/salim chauhan,

I am afraid I completely disagree with the hogwash below with all due respect. I understand why the undersigned felt it necessary to sign the said letter.... (with the exception of Zakir Hussain) these were unrepresentative opportunist Muslims from an affluent class ... For example Sir Sultan Ahmed Khan had been expelled from the Muslim League for choosing to be on the Viceroy`s War Advisory Council, despite the fact that ML`s official policy was that British ought to contact leaders of Congress and Muslim League for nomination of a representative body during the war.... the list goes on.

Look history ought to be seen in its entirety and not just a few points of view... The partition as it occured was not Muslim League`s idea... but the Congress`. Bengal was to a free state according to the League plan (it was Nehru who did not allow that to come to pass forbidding Sarat Bose to negotiate with Suhrawardy) and there was supposed to be an over all union. To first ruin the Pakistan idea and then blaming it on the very people who warned against it simply because they came up with an idea is ridiculous.

The ridiculous argument that the plight of Muslims in India has to do with the creation of Pakistan is simply making an excuse for Hindu majority`s treatment of its Muslim minority if any.

In reality ... the leaders of the Congress had actually become convinced of the idea that India was better off without large tracts of contiguous Muslim majority areas. The Congress leadership had decided ... post its own rejection of the Cabinet Mission Plan... that

1. a safe army was better than a safe border
2. 12% Muslims were better than 29% Muslims....

In a way they were right... with the exception of Kashmir, Indians have managed to carry on nicely.... India is a Hindu Majority country with every state (with the exception of disputed territory) being a Hindu Majority sate.... this is not to say that India is not a constitutional secular state... majorities and minorities are not even a consideration in a secular state.

Furthermore... partition of India was done on the express condition that minorities in both countries would be safeguarded and there would be no exchange of populations. We can go into who did what (and believe me evidence suggests that of those killed more than 70% were Muslims heading from East Punjab to West Punjab and more than 80% of the killing also took place in Punjab - the result of Congress` insistence - using cynically the very Two Nation Theory ironically which it had condemned- on division of Punjab)... but it goes without saying that there was massive exodus both ways.

In addition to this... the complete cleansing of Muslims in East Punjab and Hindus/Sikhs in West Punjab is because of two reasons:

1. First and foremost... Congress` insistence on partition of Punjab. It was wrong because if the principle had to be applied to districts and not provinces .... then according to Congress every Muslim majority district in India of today should have become a small Pakistani enclave and vice versa.

2. Even after applying the principle to districts unconstitutionally, Congress` machinations keeping the Muslim Majority district of Gurdaspur in India (and you can`t call the Ahmadi card here because law is interpretted according to the period and not the subsequent changes thereto... and besides all Ahmadis voted in Pakistan`s favor along with Christians of Gurdaspur).

3. The deliberate dragging of feet by Dominion of India`s first Governor General, Lord Louis Dickie Mountbatten, on the Boundary force ... leaving people in Punjab caught up in a disastrous situation. This was done at the behest of the Indian Prime Minister to deliver a crushing blow to the newly formed Government of Pakistan.

These are the facts gentlemen... what you`ve posted unfortunately is emotional mumbo jumbo which does not stand the test of history...

And finally the whole issue with Bengal... if these gentlemen cared so much for Bangladesh... why didn`t they ask their ``broadminded`` leader Jawaharlal Nehru why he put his foot down disallowing an Independent Bangladesh in 1947 according to the Lahore Resolution?

And how then the undoing of Nehru`s efforts of 1947 in 1971 can be termed as a failure of the idea of Pakistan.... even though we might well have preserved Pakistan had it not been for the Punjabi shortsightedness....

All in all... Pakistan idea has still worked despite the problems.. but would have worked even better for both countries had the Indian leadership not been so obsessed with smashing Pakistan and had the UP Muslim bourgeoisie not been sidelined by the Punjabi feudal-military alliance in 1958.

#322 and #323,
Ballu Bhai,
Thank you for this very prophetic and passionate plea from the Indian Muslims. Dr. Zakir Hussain went on to become President of India. His brother, who was the Chancellor of Karachi University, always wanted his brother to come to Pakistan. The good man`s response was ``as long as there is a single Muslim left in India, I will continue to stay here.``

The precarious position of India`s Muslims, forced upon them by the selfish acts of the ML, is further proof of the power-hungry, short-sighted, greedy, and inconsiderate leaders who imposed Pakistan on all mankind - much to everyone`s loss.

Salim Saheb,

Let me again re-emphasise the concluding and prophetic remarks of the wise Indian Muslims made in 1951 that pr-empts the 1971 events in Eastern Pakistan-

``In the event of a war, it is extremely doubtful whether it will be able to protect the Muslims of East Bengal who are completely cut off from Western Pakistan. Are the Muslims of India and Eastern Pakistan who sacrifice themselves completely to enable the 25 million Muslims in Western Pakistan to embark upon mad, self-destructive and adventures? We should, therefore, like to impress upon you with all the emphasis at our command that Pakistan`s policy towards Kashmir is fraught with the gravest peril to the 40 million Muslims of
India. If the Security Council is really interested in peace human brotherhood, and international understanding, it should heed this warning while there is still time. ``



regrds,

Re: # 320

Salim Saheb,

Let me add on to your sentiments and state clearly what majority of the Indian Muslims, who did not consider the Punjabistan as their ``home land``, always felt about Pakistani (Punjabi) adventurism.

This document is a very important statement made by Indian Muslims about Pakistani (punjabi) chauvinism -

``Text of Memorandum submitted by 14 Muslim leaders of India to Dr. Frank P. Graham, United Nations Representative 14 August, 1951

It is a remarkable fact that, while the Security Council and its various agencies have devoted so much time to the study of the Kashmir dispute and made various suggestions for its resolution, none of them has tried to ascertain the views of the Indian Muslims nor the possible effect of any hasty step in Kashmir, however well-intentioned, on the interests and well- being of the Indian Muslims. We are convinced that no lasting solution for the problem can be found unless the position of Muslims in Indian society is clearly understood. Supporters of the idea of Pakistan, before this subcontinent was partitioned, discouraged any
attempt to define Pakistan clearly and did little to anticipate the conflicting problems which were bound to arise as a result of the advocacy of the two-nation theory. The concept of Pakistan, therefore, became an emotional slogan with little rationale content. It never occurred to the Muslim League or its leaders that if a minority was not prepared to live with a majority on the sub- continent, how could the majority be expected to tolerate the minority. It is, therefore, small wonder that the result of partition has been disastrous to Muslims. In
undivided India, their strength lay about 100 million. Partition split up the Muslim people, confining them to the three isolated regions. Thus, Muslims number 25 million in Western Pakistan, 35 million to 40 million in India, and the rest in Eastern Pakistan. A single undivided community has been broken into three fragments, each faced with its own problems.
Pakistan was not created on a religious basis. If it had been, our fate as well as the fate of other minorities would have been settled at that time. Nor would the division of the sub- continent for reasons of religion have left large minorities in India or Pakistan. This merely illustrates what we have said above, that the concept of Pakistan was vague, obscure, and never clearly defined, nor its likely consequences foreseen by the Muslim League, even when some of these should have been obvious.
When the partition took place, Muslims in India were left in the lurch by the Muslim League and its leaders. Most of them departed to Pakistan and a few who stayed behind stayed long enough to wind up their affairs and dispose of their property. Those who went over to Pakistan left a large number of relations and friends behind.
Having brought about a division of the country, Pakistan leaders proclaimed that they would convert Pakistan into a land where people would live a life according to the tenets of Islam. This created nervousness and alarm among the minorities living in Pakistan. Not satisfied with this, Pakistan went further and announced again and again their determination to protect and safeguard the interests of Muslims in India. This naturally aroused suspicion amongst the Hindus against us and our loyalty to India was questioned. Pakistan had made our position weaker by driving out Hindus from Western Pakistan in utter
disregard of the consequences of such a policy to us and our welfare. A similar process is in question in Eastern Pakistan from which Hindus are coming over to India in a large and large number. If the Hindus are not welcome in Pakistan, how can we, in all fairness, expect Muslims to be welcomed in India ? Such a policy must inevitably, as the past has already shown, result in the uprooting of Muslims in this country and their migration to Pakistan where, as it became clear last year, they are no longer welcome, lest their influx should destroy Pakistan`s economy.
Neither some of the Muslims who did migrate to Pakistan after partition, and following the widespread bloodshed and conflict on both sides of the Indo-Pakistan border in the north- west, have been able to find a happy asylum in what they had been told would be their homeland.
Consequently some of them have had to return to India, e.g Meos who are now being rehabilitated in their former areas. If we are living honorably in India today, it is certainly not due to Pakistan which, if anything, has by her policy and action weakened our pooition.
The credit goes to the broadminded leadership of India, to Mahatma Gandhi and Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, to the traditions of tolerance in this country and to the Constitution which ensures equal rights to all citizens of India, irrespective of their religion caste, creed, colour or
sex. We, therefore, feel that, tragically as Muslims were misled by the Muslim League and subsquently by Pakistan and the unnecessary suffering which we and our Hindu brethren have to go through
in Pakistan and in India since partition, we must be given an opportunity to settle down to a life of tolerance and understanding to the mutual benefit of Hindus and Muslims in our country - if only
Pakistan would let us do it. To us it is a matter of no smaller onsequence.
Despite continuous provocations, first from the Muslim League and since then from Pakistan, the Hindu majority in India has not thrown us or members of other minorities out of Civil Services, Armed Forces, the judiciary, trade, commerce, business and industry. There are Muslim Ministers in the Union and State cabinets, Muslim Governors, Muslim Ambassadors, representing India in foreign countries, fully enjoying the confidence of the Indian nation, Muslim members in
Parliament and state legislatures, Muslim judges serving on the Supreme Court and High Courts, high-ranking officers in the Armed Foroes and the Civil services, including the police. Muslims have large landed estates, run big business and commercial houses in various parts of the
country, notably in Bombay and Calcutta, have their shares in industrial production and enterprise in export and import trade. Our famous sacred shrines and places of cultural interest are mostly in
India.
Not that our lot is certainly happy. We wish some of the state Governments showed a little greater sympathy to us in the field of education and employment. Nevertheless, we feel we have an
honourable place in India. Under the law of the land, our religious and cultural life is protected and we shall share in the opportunities open to all citizens to ensure progress for the people of this country.
It is, therefore, clear that our interest and welfare do not coincide with Pakistan`s conception of the welfare and interests of Muslims in Pakistan.
This is clear from Pakistan`s attitude towards Kashmir. Pakistan claims Kashmir, first, on the ground of the majority of the State`s people being Muslims and, secondly, on the ground, of the state being essential to its economy and defence. To achieve its objective it has been threatening
to launch ``Jehad`` against Kashmir in India.
It is a strange commentary on political beliefs that the same Muslims of Pakistan who like the Muslims of Kashmir to join them invaded the state, in October 1947, killing and plundering Muslims in the state and dishonouring Muslim women, all in the interest of what they described as
the liberation of Muslims of the State. In its oft-proclaimed anxiety to rescue the 3 million Muslims from what it describes as the tyranny of a handful of Hindus in the State, Pakistan evidently is prepared to sacrifice the interests of 40 million Muslims in India - a strange exhibition of concern
for the welfare of fellow- Muslims. Our misguided brothers in Pakistan do not realise that if Muslims in Pakistan can wage a war against Hindus in Kashmir why should not Hindus, sooner or later, retaliate against Muslims in India. Does Pakistan seriously think that it could give us any help if such an emergency arose or that we would deserve any help thanks to its own follies ? It is incapable of providing room and livelihood to the 40 million Muslims of India, should they migrate to Pakistan. Yet its policy and action, if not changed soon, may well produce the result which it dreads. are convinced that India will never attack our interests. First of all, it would be contrary to the spirit animating the political movement in this country. Secondly, it would be opposed to the Constitution and to the sincere leadership of the Prime Minister. Thirdly, India by committing such a folly would be playing straight into the hands of Pakistan. We wish we were equally convinced of the soundness of Pakistan`s policy. So completely oblivious is it of our present problems and of our future that it is willing to sell us into slavery - if only it can secure Kashmir. It ignores the fact that Muslims in Kashmir may also have a point of view of their own, that there is a democratic movement with a democratic leadership in the State, both inspired by the progress of a broad minded, secular, democratic movement in India and both naturally being in sympathy with India. Otherwise, the Muslim raiders should have been welcomed with open arms by the Muslims of the State when the invasion took place in 1947.
Persistent propaganda about ``Jehad`` is intended, among other things, to inflame religious passions in this country. For it would, of course, be in Pakistan`s interests to promote communal rioting in India to show to Kashmiri Muslims how they can find security only in Pakistan. Such a
policy, however, can only bring untold misery and suffering to India and Pakistan generally and to Indian Muslims particularly. Pakistan never tires of asserting that it is determined to protect the interests of Muslims in Kashmir and India.
Why does not Pakistan express the same concern for Pathans who are fighting for Pakhtoonistan, an independent homeland of their own ? The freedom-loving Pathans under the leadership of Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan and Dr. Khan Sahib, both nurtured in the traditions of democratic tolerance of the Indian National Congress, are being subjected to political repression of the worst possible kind by their Muslim brethren in power in Pakistan and in the NWFP. Contradictory as Pakistan`s policy generally is, it is no surprise to us that while it insists on a fair and impartial plebiscite in Kashmir, it denies a fair and impartial plebiscite to Pathans.
Pakistan`s policy in general and her attitude towards Kashmir is particular thus tend to create conditions in this cauntry which in the long run can only bring to us Muslims widespread suffering and destruction. Its policy prevents us from settling down, from being honourable citizens of a State, free from suspicion of our fellow-countrymen and adapting ourselves to changing conditions to promote the interests and welfare of India. Its sabre-rattling interferes with its own economy and ours. It expects us to be layal to it despite its importance to give us any protection, believing at the same time that we can still claim all the rights of citizenship in a secular democracy.
In the event of a war, it is extremely doubtful whether it will be able to protect the Muslims of East Bengal who are completely cut off from Western Pakistan. Are the Muslims of India and Eastern Pakistan who sacrifice themselves completely to enable the 25 million Muslims in Western Pakistan to embark upon mad, self-destructive and adventures? We should, therefore, like to impress upon you with all the emphasis at our command that Pakistan`s policy towards Kashmir is fraught with the gravest peril to the 40 million Muslims of
India. If the Security Council is really interested in peace human brotherhood, and international understanding, it should heed this warning while there is still time.

Dr. Zakir Hussain
(Vice Chancellor Aligarh University)
Sir Sultan Ahmed
(Former Member of Governor General`s Executive Council)
Sir Mohd. Ahmed Syed Khan
(Nawab of Chhatari, former acting
Governor of United Provinces and
Prime Minister of Hyderabad)
Sir Mohd. Usman
(Former member of Governor
General`s Executive council and
acting Governor of Madras)
Sir Iqbal Ahmed
(Former Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court)
Sir Fazal Rahimtoola
(Former Sheriff of Bombay)
Maulana Hafz-ur-Rehman M.P.
Col. B.H. Zaidi M.P.
Nawab Zain Yar Jung
(Minister Gcvernment of Hyderabad)
A.K. Kawaja
(Former President of Muslim Majlis)
T.M. Zarif
(General Secretary West Bengal Bohra Community)``

#319 by majumdar on April 3, 2007 9:48pm PT


But if I am not mistaken, the 1965 war was started by Pakistan as it expected to win and wrest J&K


Whoa....you`re going against the prophet tahmed(pbuhsrr) approved version of history? you must be a hateful Indian....

#317 PewResearch {``This foolish adventure persuaded Mujibur Rehman for a greater need for regional autonomy because he correctly recognized that the Bengali had little stake in Kashmir, but the Punjabi masters would not let go of their wet dreams and would continue to drag the `nation` in an endless conflict``}

Dear PewResearch,
Very good point and clearly and succinctly stated. This is the problem that most Pakistanis fail to admit.

Tahmed sahib,

(majumdar: you my friend are stuck with the Indian disease of thinking you know something when in fact all you are doing is making emotionally satisfying assumptions.)

I am surprised that a veteran chowkie should be surprised with such behaviour on my part, when such behaviour is rampant on chowk and hardly exclusive to Indians.

(You have probably never been to Pakistan, and were probably not even born in 1965.)

Right on both counts. But then Manto mian was not born when MAJ (pbuh) was delivering his world famous Aug 11, 1947 speech, Harishbhai was not around when MKG was practising brahmacharya with his nieces. Heck, even Maulana Urstruly wasn`t around when the Koran was being composed.

(how elated I as a Pakistani felt at the magnificent manner the country came together as one.)

So, I believe it was. But if I am not mistaken, the 1965 war was started by Pakistan as it expected to win and wrest J&K. In that war it was Pak which it had a clear strategic objective- to capture J&K, India was merely trying to defend what it had. And the best that can be said about Pak`s performance was that it was on the worst end of a drawn match. Which got reflected in Tashkent, where Pak got nothing.

And that`s what started the rot. The Pak public/establishment got disillusioned with Ayub and in due course he was eased out. Do you think if Ayub had WON the war and got J&K as he expected to, he would have been thrown out in 1969?

Regards

HAHAHA....manto`s dream of a secular revolution in the land of the pure meets reality..

Seminaries plan ‘Islamic revolution’



By Inamullah Khattak


ISLAMABAD, April 2: Two religious seminaries, Jamia Faridia and Jamia Hafsa, are adamant to enforce “Shariat” in Islamabad and across the country and said they will announce their movement in the Lal Masjid on Friday.

They warned the government of serious consequences if it tried to create hurdles in implementing the “Islamic law”.

“We will start our Islamic revolution in Islamabad on Friday by launching a crackdown on CDs, DVDs and other secular activities in the G-6 sector. The exercise will be extended to the NWFP and other areas at later stages. We have full support of madressahs in various cities,” Jamia Faridia and Jamia Hafsa in-charge Maulana Abdul Aziz told Dawn on Monday.

Re: # 316 Tauheed
``...how elated I as a Pakistani felt at the magnificent manner the country came together as one....``
Your attitude sums up the West Pakistani (aka Punjabi) sentiment, and not the `national` feeling - the impact that it had on Bengali separatism eludes you to this day. Your `nation` clearly did not consider the Bengalis as part of that `nation`, as your post so eloquently demonstrates. Many Pakistani Punjabis to this day do not recognize how vulnerable East Pakistan felt at the time, and how the reckless adventure by Ayub left them completely defenseless in yet another `magnificent` example of GHQ (Rawalpindi) of `strategic, bold` thinking and that `the defence of the East lay in the West` (the precursor to the `strategic depth` theory now in vogue). You see, all of East Pakistan was defended by a grand total of a two-infantry brigade division (14 Division) without any tank support. This foolish adventure persuaded Mujibur Rehman for a greater need for regional autonomy because he correctly recognized that the Bengali had little stake in Kashmir, but the Punjabi masters would not let go of their wet dreams and would continue to drag the `nation` in an endless conflict.

``...I on the other hand was living in Pakistan at the time...``
Did you ever visit Dhaka to gauge the Bengali feeling?
CIAO

majumdar: you my friend are stuck with the Indian disease of thinking you know something when in fact all you are doing is making emotionally satisfying assumptions. Thus, you only find it emotionally satisfying to think that 1965 was seen as a defeat by pakistanis and/or it caused turmoil against Ayub Khan. You have probably never been to Pakistan, and were probably not even born in 1965. I on the other hand was living in Pakistan at the time of the 1965 war, and had the additional benefit of reading not just newspapers but also knowing how elated I as a Pakistani felt at the magnificent manner the country came together as one.

Manto mian,

It is quite interesting that neither the founders of Pakistan (ML/MAJ (pbuh)) or the founders of Israel (Zionists) were particularly religious sort, in fact to some extent Orthodox Jews as well as Deobandis often kept distance from the Isreal/Pak movement.

Regards

Majumdar,

No that is not my point of view. My point of view is simply that Gandhi`s mobilisation in the name of religion both Islam and Hinduism ... brought into politics fundamentalist elements especially Deobandis and gave them a platform The inability to rein in these freaks of the Pakistan government at first and then the Pakistan government`s encouragement in the 1980s of the same elements is what has brought us to this point.

I only bring up Gandhi in this issue, when some ignorant fools from your side try and trace this back to Pakistan movement which had nothing to do with Deobandis, which was almost entirely in the Congress pocket with the exception of one small breakaway group. Even the sunni religious group that Muslim League leaned on in Punjab in 1945-1946 was the Barelvi low church... the sort that celebrate Eid Milad un Nabi and accept Qawali and mazars and pirs as an integral part of Islam..... not the straitjacket variety you see...

That said... it was the Pakistani establishment during the Afghan War that made the straitjacket deobandi sect a hanging sword for us.

Arjunbhai,

Re: #312

(wonder how he`ll blame this on racist fascist gandhi... )

According to Manto mian, fundamentalism/religious idiocy of any kind was completely unknown to the blessed subscontinent especially the North-Western quarter of it. It was introduced there by MKG and his followers- Deobdandis, Murdoodi etc.

Manto/Tahmed,

While it is true that it was a mass movement that had removed Ayub, that mass movement would have never got any momentum nor Ayub felt sufficiently unnnerved had the unsuccessful 1965 war never happened. The unfortunate part was that power got transferred not to people but to another General Yahya. And when he did do the right thing, hold elections he failed to transfer power to the victors cuaisng the even greater tragedy of 1970-71.

Regards

wonder what manto thinks about the talibanization of the land of the pure..wonder how he`ll blame this on racist fascist gandhi...

Video shops in fear of attacks in Islamabad

By Imran Naeem Ahmad

ISLAMABAD: Shopkeepers selling CDs and DVDs in the city fear religious extremists will force them to close.

Groups of madrassa students have been going around markets, especially Aabpara Market, in recent days warning shops to shut down because they were “corrupting society”. Shaikh Adnan, who runs a shop in Aabpara Market, told Daily Times that some 10 to 15 male students from a local madrassa had asked him to shut down his business and take up something else.

“They came here a few days ago and told me quite politely to get into some other business,” he said. He in turn asked them for financial assistance. “They directed me to go see the head of the madrassa in this regard but I have not had the time to do so,” he said.

Most shop owners were reluctant to talk about the threat from madrassa students. One shop owner, asking to remain anonymous, said he had been sent a written notice by madrassa students telling him to close his business. “They have given me a one-month deadline,” he said.

He said this was the first time he had received such a threat in 25 years in the business. “I have invested about Rs 1,200,000 and I fail to understand where I can go if I have to do some other thing,” he said. A salesman at one of Islamabad’s leading CD and DVD centers also reported that three religious students had come to his shop. “They told us that this was not an appropriate business,” he said and added that the police came in shortly after they left.

Other shop owners termed the police “mere spectators”. “They came in long after the rounds of the vigilantes,” one businessman said. They said that men from the intelligence agencies also visited them.

Students of Jamia Hafsa and Jamia Fareedia recently took the law into their hands in an “anti-vice drive”, raiding an alleged brothel and kidnapping three women.

The principal of Jamia Hafsa, Umme Hassan, said on Monday that seminary students had no plans to force closures of such businesses. “No action is going to be taken against them, it is just that we are advising them to stop selling porno movies and stuff,” she told journalists. She dismissed the notion that girl students of Jamia Hafsa had threatened the traders. “This is not true, rather burqa-clad personnel from secret agencies have been going round the markets to taint our image,” she claimed. The principal said that a group of traders had been told that no action would be taken against any business.

#310 stuka can put away an entire steak while sardar dullabhatti is still struggling to swallow the first bite.

#308...but you sure run like a gidhaR at the prospect of competing with this sardarji.:-)

stuka, don`t take abu sereiously ... he sometimes passes gas through his mouth. And that`s on a day when he is at the peak of his intellectual prowess ...

Abu Safwaan:

``too orr Islam aysayy hi hein jaysayy hindoo or gosht, ``

I, a proud Hindu of the Kshatriya caste, challenge you to a gosht eating competition. The meat and method of slaughter is of your choice. I have not yet met a Pakistani Muslim who can beat me. You can also try.

PS: I know one needs to spell out the obvious for some people so pun tag suggestion accepted.

You know arju... don`t make everything an ego issue. I thought, and you may disagree civilly, that the carnal knowledge pun was perfectly humorous when combined with Yahya Khan`s nocturnal experiments with Zulfikar Ali Bhutto of which malik99 here speaks very assertively.

#300 by Mantolives on April 2, 2007 9:23am PT

that was a pun?

the humorous use of a word or phrase so as to emphasize or suggest its different meanings or applications, or the use of words that are alike or nearly alike in sound but different in meaning; a play on words.

emphasis on the humorous...Look up the definition of lame while you`re at it..


The next time you try a pun, put nice pun tags around it so we`ll know: <pun>carnal knowledge</pun>

#303 those were muslim nuns ranting, as mr. aslam has tried very patiently to explain to you. nuns will say the weirdest things, as you should well know, being weird yourself.

Umm..The jamia hafsa ranting, although nonsense, was relevant...What I posted was about the guys who`re showing the reality to manto`s dream of permanent revolution in Pakiland(after which, I`m sure, he expects Pakiland to emerge as a secular democracy that jinnah had envisioned)..

What you`ve posted is a fairy tale...it`s like a video on french military victories...

#301 nonse?

did you mean nuns? why would someone want to listen to nuns on autoplay?

Re: # 299
my point is if you post nonse i will too, may be there are people who don`t want listen to this nonse on autoplay.

Re: # 293

Rest assure It is a very deliberate pun. After all Malik99 speaks of these people`s alleged nocturnal experiments in a matter of factly way. You may want to search the dictionary for the usage of the pun. Apparently they don`t teach that in India...

#298 by aslam644 on April 2, 2007 8:56am PT

Dude..at a time when a bunch of ninja chix are standing up the paki army, a video about the paki armies valor is a bit of a joke...especially considering that they`ve never won a war they weren`t fighting against the paki junta(with the ninja chix, even that is in doubt)...

Re: # 297

Ninja Chix part 3...

ninja chix part 2

arjun: how`s business at the Indian Ministry of Propaganda today? :-)

ylh: i agree that it wasnt the 1965 war (which actually raised the nation`s spirits and united them) but the fact that people got fed up of Ayub Khan`s self-promotion that led to his downfall. i will add that yahya was never seen as anything other than an interim president, and would have left office anyway, regardless of the 1971 war. however, he did oversee the elections quite well and they were fair. meanwhile, we can all wait and see the outcome of the current crisis. i think we will either see fair elections and a civilian government taking charge, or a continuation of military rule that is even more beholden to the religious right than it has been to date....but a continuation of this ``benign dictatorship`` that musharraf would like to see is highly doubtful.

They have an article in the WP on this today...

Battle Brews Over Rule By Military In Pakistan
President Pressed to Leave Post That Helps Sustain His Power
By Griff Witte
Monday, April 2, 2007

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan -- For weeks, lawyers in black suits have paraded through the streets of Pakistan`s cities, demanding that Gen. Pervez Musharraf step down as president. But it is Musharraf`s other job -- as head of the army -- that rankles the protesters most.
...
The clash is likely to gain intensity in the coming months. Musharraf is constitutionally required to step down as army chief when elections are held later this year or early next if he wants to stay on as president. But the general is considered reluctant to cast off a uniform that brought him to power in a coup eight years ago and has helped sustain him...

#291 by Mantolives on April 2, 2007 7:23am PT


their nocturnal experiments of which you seem to have carnal knowledge.


Umm...maybe you should consult a dictionary on the appropriate use of ``carnal knowledge``...

#267 by Urstruly on April 1, 2007 7:57pm PT



scroll past the first 5 minutes of arabic gobbledygook..

Malik99,

As usual you have no point. First go clear your head. The words I quoted were from your own post. You are the one who brought up Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, Yahya and Niazi and their nocturnal experiments of which you seem to have carnal knowledge.

Either you said it... or you didn`t... but you can`t say I put words in your mouth. Your mouth spit them out autonomously.


Ferozk,

I am saying the same thing as you are. Two weeks into the ``glorious revolution`` that thrilled us.... and I am thinking these mass movement business is really to give Musharraf a way out from constitutional re-election at the end of the year which he certainly cannot contest with his uniform on.

Majumdar,

Ayub Khan did not give up power because of 1965. He went out as a result of a mass movement that was bigger than this little thing. Yet in the end... things got even worse.
I think the whole situaton needs a re-calculation... because Musharraf seems to have played a masterly hand worthy of the erstwhile British rulers...

-YLH

#283 by Mantolives on April 2, 2007 3:34am PT


``1- General Yahya - alcohol loving womanizer
2- Bhutto - alocohol loving womanizer
3- General Niazi - alcohol loving womanizer``


Maybe you need a better brand of alcohol...have you considered that?

anil #265 {``Salim bhai:
I do not know what is your position. However, to me this issue of putting a modern girl / woman (daughter, wife, sister or whoever else) inside a black tent and then letting them loose as vigilante, ranks with slavery, dastardly acts of bride burning, and sati. ...``}

Anil Bhai,
My position on the issue of burqa, hijab, and any other form of public disguise by men or women is crystal clear. I am against all of these methods of deception - primarily for security reasons. How many criminals go around covered up in a tent while authorities are looking for a tall man with a beard and a Kalashnikov?

As for the issue of female students dressed in black, waiving sugarcanes, and abducting women accused of prostituting themselves, we need to separate several conflicting elements of this very complicated situation:

Women in burqas, especially when they are taking the law into their own hands, are unacceptable to society.
Male and female lawyers, hurling bricks at police, setting fires, and acting in a very illegal manner are equally unacceptable to any civilized society.
Prostitution is illegal in Pakistan, even under its current laws, and should be stopped and punished by the law enforcement and judicial authorities. Apparently the police are too busy taking bribes and the legal system is more concerned about a corrupt CJ trying to get his son ahead.
From what I have observed, these female students are quite well educated, well informed, and have made the unfortunate decision of camouflaging their physique all on their own.
I agree with you that men have no right to dictate how women should or should not dress.
I also agree with you that ALL citizens should adhere to the normal, acceptable and legal public standards of morality, behavior, and assembly.
Having said all this, let us try to separate the burqa from the real issues of police corruption and prostitution. How many Bollywood movies have glorified ``Janta Justice`` when a town`s police, administration, and leaders are either corrupt or don`t take action against illegal conduct? How many westerns have been made about a town`s citizens taking the law into their own hands when faced with a corrupt sheriff and rule by outlaws?

So, is your issue with the fact that the misbehaving students are in burqa or that they have taken action against an illegal activity?

Reply to #283 by Mantolives:
[``1- General Yahya - alcohol loving womanizer
2- Bhutto - alocohol loving womanizer
3- General Niazi - alcohol loving womanizer``
So you think that 1971 did not happen because the Punjabi-Pathan oligarchy refused Bengalis their constitutional rights .... but because Pakistan`s leaders were not pious enough? Do you really think the alleged fondness of Yahya, Bhutto and Niazi for alcohol and women were the issue why Pakistan Army surrendered in 1971? That argument is neither here nor there.]

The root cause of the separation of East and West Pakistan was neither the “alcohol loving womanizers” nor the “Punjabi-Pathan oligarchy”. East and West Pakistan were separated by a 1000 miles of hostile Indian territory, this was the real problem. “Territorial contiguity” is an essential element of any nation state. But it is also a fact that “alcohol loving womanizers” and “Punjabi-Pathan oligarchy” compounded the problems. In 1971 it became quite obvious that East and West Pakistan can’t be kept together at least not as a quasi-Federation (in effect a unitary form of government). Had there been more able leader instead of those corrupt, inept and self-serving generals and politicians some sort of “confederate arrangement” could’ve been made, and the mismanagement and humiliation could’ve been avoided.

The song will be repeated. :)

If the situation develops, it will most likely come down to the street power and in this sense, the street power of the mullahs is highly organized. Even in Iran, in 1979, it was the street power that allowed the intelligentsia, aided by the clerics, to topple the shah, but they were then sidelined by the street power of the clergy. Same thing happened in Russia in 1917; the Bolsheviks dominated liberals. Nazi ``strassenkampfers`` - street fighters - were the key to the Nazis beating off their opponents.

Do liberals have the street power in Pakistan? Mixed marathons do not count as expressions of liberal and enlightened moderation`s street power. The simple reality is that the situation and the debate in Pakistan has moved beyond constitutional references and it has boiled down to an old fashioned muscle power.

Remember, the mullah is willing to die for his belief/believes. The issue is whether the liberals of Pakistan are willing to die for theirs? If not, then the fight is already lost even before it began. :)

The song will be repeated because the liberals, out of habit, will chose the wrong champion again. I agree with your sentiments and I agree with your hopes, but past experience of Pakistan informs me that power and rights will be elusive till we actually are prepared to pay a sacrifrice for our believes. In the end, the liberals of Pakistan have always remained a status quo society and they accept any fate that does not alter their status quo. This time around, they are worried because the status quo seems about to be changed and they see nothing for themselves in the new status quo. Give them a right in the new status quo and see how quickly consitutionalism and liberalism is forgotten.

1947 did not happen because of few liberal Muslim lawyers from Delhi or Bombay but because of the thousands who died during the train rides from India to Pakistan and the millions who walked towards Pakistan. The sacrifice for Pakistan came from the thousands of the poor and not from the Muslim liberal intelligentisia of India. Granted, the liberal Muslims provided the thought and the leadership for Pakistan, but they did not really sacrifice anything for Pakistan. They simply sought a replacement for their declining influence in India by re-creating it in Pakistan.

Idealism never wins revolution; realism of power does.

Sadly, history tells us that liberals in Pakistan have been more than happy to make deals, which secure their interests. When something different happens, then it will be a nice change of pace, but till then; all bets are and in the meantime, the song will be repeated!

Ciao

Manto mian,

Just becuase past ``mass movements`` in SA have been masterminded by the establishment as you allege is no reason to diss mass movements altogether. They have bought good elsewhere (if replacing autocracy by democratic rule is to be considered good to begin with) in Phillipines for eg. To some extent in SA too- Bdesh (1990), Nepal recently overthrowing its monarchy.

(it is about creating an excuse for perpetuating the dictator`s military rule. )

How would a mass movement perpetuate Mush`s rule. And how indeed do you overthrow military rule permanently (that is if you consider that a worthwhile aim) without a mass movement. After all, history indicates that military rulers have only been replaced only by losing wars (Ayub 65, Yahya 71) or being bumped off (Zia 88).

Regards

manto # 283 ``So you think that 1971 did not happen because the Punjabi-Pathan oligarchy refused Bengalis their constitutional rights .... but because Pakistan`s leaders were not pious enough? ``


Dear Manto, this trick of putting stupid words in people`s mouth and then charging them with stupidity is perhaps as old as the oldest profession.

No. I never suggested that east pakistan got separated because our rulers were not pious enough. What I did suggest however was that since you are so ready to attack people of religion, then why is it that you are overlooking the secularism and liberalism of the people who cost us half of Pakistan? Had Mullah Fazlur Rehman been the PM of Pakistan when we lost half of our country, we would not have seen an end to your rants.

Hence, IFFFF your rhetoric against mullahs is taken as logical, then we should be more wary of the likes who cost pakistan its biggest tragedy so far - the secession.

Yes, ignorant mullahs are an issue. But not as big as the ones who are hell bent on presiding over another 1971.

Re: # 282

Majumdar,

As with all ``mass movements`` that have come in South Asia`s history , I am beginning to think that is with the sanction of the hidden hand of the establishment...

It is not about popular aspirations really... it is about creating an excuse for perpetuating the dictator`s military rule.

Malik99,

``Wrong again``

Yes you always are.

Iran represents a legitimate revolution brought about by an intelligentsia which was hijacked by the religious class.... Iran`s own version of Orwell`s 1984.

``1- General Yahya - alcohol loving womanizer
2- Bhutto - alocohol loving womanizer
3- General Niazi - alcohol loving womanizer``

So you think that 1971 did not happen because the Punjabi-Pathan oligarchy refused Bengalis their constitutional rights .... but because Pakistan`s leaders were not pious enough? Do you really think the alleged fondness of Yahya, Bhutto and Niazi for alcohol and women were the issue why Pakistan Army surrendered in 1971? That argument is neither here nor there.

Now as you know I have till now ignored your delusions about ``west`s slaves`` (the same west where you are probably employed as a janitor or something - because your ability beyond that is hardly comprehensible), ``sympathizers`` blah blah blah ... but since you have nothing to offer, my humble suggestion: refrain from personal attacks of the kind you`ve resorted to for many years now.

I suppose you are the kind of person who encourages Jamia Hafsa and their brand of freaks to break the law and infringe upon people`s constitutional right to privacy of the home... Do you think that is what Islam stands for?

When Umer (RA) entered a woman`s house accusing her for some lewd activity or something... what did that woman say? She said ``Oh Ameer ul Momineen, how dare you enter into my house and violate my rights which are given to me by God and his Prophet``... If you don`t see the clear and present danger in those who throw acid on the faces of women who drive alone .... or who take over libraries or resort to similar illegal and unconstitutional activities.... then you are worse than all of them.

Perhaps one should be wary of freaks and their sympathizers.

Manto mian,

(It is about- if in case this develops in a mass movement- as to who leads it... the dangers outlined by HP are real. Which is why something this important cannot be left to the mullahs and the rabblerousers of the half naked fraud variety. )

If the Pakistani govt. fails to meet popular aspirations for long, a mass movement cannot be ruled out. In that case, who do you think could be the possible leader of that movement? The mullah of course is one as you have rightly suggested, is there any other alternative?

Regards

#280 ``We should learn from the events of 1979 in a city called Teheran.``

Wrong again! We should learn from the events of 1971 in a city called Dhakka. The three top characters most responsible for the rape and murder of innocent bengalis were:

1- General Yahya - alcohol loving womanizer
2- Bhutto - alocohol loving womanizer
3- General Niazi - alcohol loving womanizer

As you can see, mullahs are no where to be found in this greatest tragedy that pakisan experienced in its history. Therefore your warnings about mullahs in the current unfolding drama are based more on ignorance and bias, rather than reality.

If anything, we should be wary of the alcoholics, womanizers and their sympathizers.

Re: # 274

Iftikhar is not a hero... nor are we making Bhagwandas a hero... so no need to burst into song....

It is about- if in case this develops in a mass movement- as to who leads it... the dangers outlined by HP are real. Which is why something this important cannot be left to the mullahs and the rabblerousers of the half naked fraud variety.

We should learn from the events of 1979 in a city called Teheran.

PS: I am surprised that BJkumar is fighting with Masadi.... Masadi and I had a rather horrible exchange when he first came around on Gandhi, who Masadi admires as much as BJKumar.... for the same reasons BJKumar does.

Now either Masadi is the true Gandhi follower or BJKumar is... given that despite being a pompous ass and an extremely rude person, Masadi makes some sense, some times... for Gandhi`s sake I hope it is Masadi.

BJkumar,

If you had actually read my BBC interview, you would know that I had not refrained from anything. I had actually driven home a very important point. But then again- not only does your IQ leave a lot to be desired but you probably suffer from dyslexia as well...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6447215.stm

Do the ctrl f and search.

Just goes to show that you never bother to read anything ... and make your opinions and impressions based on what you think something or someone is saying instead of actually seeing what that someone is saying.

-YLH

hamid writes <<< it is obvious to anyone with half a brain that you have read one book (mills) and probably have a `degree` from some mail order `university` and have `taught` welfare mamas and criminals on parole at some inner city community college - not really stellar academic credentials .......... >>>

Yes, half brained people will conclude just like you, those with a little more will probably know that reading one book does not get one a lecturer position at a university much less a graduate degree, even though that ONE book that you`re talking about has more substance in it than anyone in your illustrious family from the present to five hundred years back has produced, even if we add all of their works together...... Now get back to sipping lattes like a senseless moron, enslaved in status-consumption, submitting to ghosts created by the elite to keep damn fools like you busy...

To all those interactors who have been pooh-poohing the burqa-clad Pakistani naaris.

You have just not realized the real reasons why so many of my Pakistani sisters LOVE the burqa!

Just compare:

(1) No need to change the blouse daily. (2) No need to hide from people you dislike – just pretend you are someone else. (3) Make faces at those you wish to make fun of – they can not see it. (4) No need to party dress. (5) No need to bleach (or shave). (6) A ready-made extra layer of clothing during winter. (7) Gawk at all the men you please – they will never know. (8) Just keep your mouth shut and the men will follow - thinking that underneath you look just like Waheeda Rehman in Chaudahvi ka Chand!

(1) You need a large wardrobe! (2) You can run – but can not hide! (3) You must control every facial gesture – lest people misread those gestures! (4) You need a different dress for every occasion! (5) You need regular bleaching and shaving! (6) You will freeze to death if you have to stay in this pose for another minute! (7) The gawking is strictly one-sided! (8) Just keep your mouth shut and the men will run away – intimidated because you look just like a movie star!

Romair, as you can see, this whole scenario is shot through with contradictions. Everything we can say about it is true (from somebody`s point of view).

re: Mantolives

My friend, a word of caution. First of all, please do not idealize Justice Iftikar Chaudhry and his decisions as noble for we do not know his true intentions and in fact, his intentions may be not as noble as assumed. Secondly, it has been a Pakistani tragedy that we, as a nation, idolize people only discover at our mortal peril that they had feet of clay and though they came dressed in the finest robes of liberalism, their bodies were covered with the sores of self-interest and their hearts were filled a disdain for the very people and the cause they claimed to serve and protect. All the leaders, who came to rule and preside over this halpless nation, were brought to power by own faults and when we realized our misakes, we wished them ill and hoped they would leave. Again, despite our past, we would wrongly misplace our hopes on another mirage upon a horseback and convince ourselves that we had finally found our one and true knight.

We are a morose nation, because we refuse to learn from our mistakes and instead find comfort in blaming our stars for the miseries, which periodically visit us. We as a people are a despressed lot, because we have been routinely disappointed by our leaders, who were not leaders but followers of their own vision and sadly, their visions and our hopes were two paths that never intersected. We have twisted and turned with so many hopes and promises, that we grown confused and everything we believed in; from religion to politics and everything inbetween, does not make any sense. We as a nation cannot agree on anything and have become so insecure, that we cannot tolerate any dissent. We hate dissent, because dissent only proves our own failures and inabilities. In our state of insecurity, we have become our own judge, jury and unfortunately, our own excutioners and this further, increases our insecurity but we still continue to make the same mistakes.

This situation will continue to peter out and despite talks of revolutions, none will happen because we, as a nation, are a people of the status quo. We love our social and political and religious castes and we do not want to see them end. We, as a nation, are a nation of individuals and each one of us, prides and extols the idea of being above the law and of enjoying special privilges and we have our own personalize set of laws by which we judge each other and then, when we as individuals are judged by the personal laws of another, we cry and demand justice.

The only problem is that we do not know what justice is, because we have abused justice so much that we, as a nation, are not on speaking terms with justice and this problem pales in the light of another more pressing question: whose justice do we seek?

The personality of Pervez Musharraf or the absence of this personality and for this matter, the existence of another personality, will not solve our problems. Our problem is not the failure of the leadership, but the failure of the imagination. Our problem is that we, as a nation, are like a thirsty person who when he finally comes to well, drinks heartily, but does not realize that well had run out of water a long time ago and what he is drinking and assuming as water is not water but sand. Until we learn to distinquish sand from water, we will always be fooled and as they say; fool me once, shame on you and fool me twice, shame on me!

Ciao

kaalchakra #272: I agree with the second part, i.e. the vigilantiasm......I am against it also......Having said that, I am actually only really against the vigilantiasm where they have abducted the two ladies and have beat them up.......

The second part of their vigilantiasm, in which they have taken on govt. forces, is something that, in my opinion, many people are against because these ladies represent a religious faction. Had they been been female college students of a westernised university, everyone here would be supporting them.......

Having said that, I think many of the people supporting them, only support them for their religious leanings. So this has turned into more of a religious issue than one of civil disobedience...........

I wonder whether, deep down inside, many Pakistani women are actually supporting these ladies, i.e. many Pakistani women must have wanted to go out with dandas and beat up men, but never had the courage..........

romair

There are two issues - the dress itself, and the vigilantism of people who are in that dress. Anil ji has more problems with the latter (which reminds him of kkk etc.)

Anil/Kaalchakra #: I have never been able to figure out why people are so attached or obsessed with dress. How a person dresses has never been important to me. I am not sure if it really makes a difference. If, of course, a person is forced into wearing a certain dress it is a different story...........But if someone does it voluntarily, it shouldn`t be a problem, as long as it is within some culturally defined boundary of the area.....

Sir, that would be true if religion was, for the most part, a personal thing, a private matter between (wo)man and his/her god....

Re: # 268

Kaalchakra:

There are people who were brainwashed to believe and willingly walk into the pyre also. I would rescue and deprogram the woman who though brainwashing would be ready to jump in the pyre of her dead husband. Next you might say what would you say to those suicide bombers who in there last video also uttered similar words regards how liberating and empowering their suicide bombing is. If they wear the black tent, like KKK member at their home, no one stops them. Public diplay of vigilantism is not the same, be in the black tent, or in the KKK garb.

# 265

anil ji, you obviously mean well, but that is NOT how the ladies themselves see it. A vast majority of them (ok, at least a good number of them) will tell you that the so-called `black tent` is actually quite liberating and empowering.

I am not contradicting you as such, just pointing out an alterantive view. Best regards.

ALL ABOUT JAMIA HAFSA

In this five part series Moulana Abdul Aziz Sahib explains why Muslims in Islamabad had to take action against the corrupt kafir mirzai regime of this dayyuth (pimp). The Kafir corrupt regime demolished 10 mosques and issued notice to 80 others in Islamabad. This is the challenge that either in this country either prostitutes or their pimps will rule or the Nizam-e-Mustafa. This is the turning point in history.

Part 1:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tzksOJzgijs&mode=related&search=

Please find the four other parts on youtube.