Rest in Peace Pakistan (1947-1974)

Yasser,

Now that you have established that Pakistan died in 1974, let us come up with a new name for whatever remains.

I propose - Khakistan!

Named after its rulers.

Re: # 77 Agreed.

cobra,

My views on Hindus and Sikhs and their exodus are similar to those of Tahmed... all I am saying is that the whole story must be presented ... which Jang and others like him omit.

Re: # 80, Folio,

I agree with you. In fact, I wrote these posts with Paki perspective in mind. Sadly, they don`t want to understand. All of them barring a few engage in all type of divisive discussions.

Did I write sadly?

Samar

Samar,

As a newcomer u said it well..................but:

Good Riddance for us.

Had India been united, these Qadianis would have been in the forefront chanting `death to Hindus` and all that stuff.

Creation of Pakistan was a Phyrric victory for them.

Despite their sapping life they still dream to destroy us....the leftover India where the dreams of rainbow nationalism is sustained despite the occasional hits to it. However these naysayers take comfort in our poverty, which I think would be a matter of history in 20-30 years time.

Re: # 81

Good sum up Zee.

Yes, it was an act of the parliament and even if you hold a referrendum on the issue today, that act will most porbably stand. It then become a question of whether a democracy has the right to take such an action based on popular opinion. A secular democracy doesn`t but then Pakistan was never meant to be a secular democracy. Some people in Muslim League might have wanted it to be so but I haven`t seen any evidence suggesting that it was the party line.

Jamaat Ahmediyya certainly thinks that the parliament did not have the right to declare them non-Muslim but if they thought the same in 1974, they shouldn`t have taken part in the proceedings.

The 1974 amendment could not have been done in a more democratic manner. It was strictly in keeping with the same democratic principles that Jinnah envisaged and the author espouses. Nor did ZAB keel over by any pressure of the religious parties as HP states, but in fact tried his best to moderate the outcome. It was all above board and on record.

The public sentiment against mirzaees began with their belligerence exhibited after (1) the Islamic summit in Feb 1974 (during which pamphlets were distributed by opponents re mirzaee claim to khilafat); (2) the anti-Pakistan propaganda initiated by mirzaee machinery in the international press subsequent to the World Muslim Organisation`s unanimous decision (in which 140 Muslim organisations took part) at Makkah in April 1974, that ``Qadianism which calls itself a sect of Islam is a subversive movement against Islam and the Islamic world``; and came to a head with (3) the Rabwah incident of 29 May 1974.

In the Rabwah incident, fifty students from Nishter Medical College, Multan passing through Rabwah on an excursion trip were attacked and badly beaten up leaving 13 in critical condition. The Punjab Government under Hanif Ramay had set up the Justice Samdani Commission to investigate but the demonstrations continued. The demonstrators were blaming Mirza Nasir for directly instigating the attack while the mirzaees were blaming PPP.

Due to public pressure, the Government placed the entire matter before the National Assembly. One resolution was tabled by the then Law Minister, Abdul Hafeez Pirzada, while the other resolution was sponsored by the opposition and moved by Maulana Shah Ahmad Noorani, the then Secretary, Parliamentary group of the Opposition.

Both resolutions were referred by the National Assembly to the `Whole House Special Committee` comprising of leaders of various groups in the Assembly.

Mirza Nasir Ahmad Qadiani, head of Qadiani group and Sadruddin, Amir of Lahori group requested the Committee to hear them in defense. The Committee accepted their request and asked them to explain fully their point of view. Mirza Nasir submitted a written explanation of about 200 pages and was examined and cross-examined by Yahya Bukhtiar, the then Attorney General(AG) of Pakistan.

According to later interviews of the then Speaker of the National Assembly Sahibzada Farooq Ali, there was absolutely no pressure from the (Peoples) party on them and Bhutto and other members of Assembly believed Qadianis were an educated class and would put forth sound arguments in support of their position. However, Mirza Nasir Ahmad gave extremely ridiculous arguments and created a poor impression. During the cross examinations, he miserably failed to present his point of view.

As for the Lahori Jamaat, Sahibzada said:

``We were under the impression that unlike Qadianis, Lahore section of Ahmadiyyat could possibly be saved from being declared a non-Muslim minority as they did not believe in the prophethood of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. But when Sadruddin, the aged leader of Lahore Jamaat presented his point of view to the House it became evident that each Ahmadiyya sect upheld dangerous and confused ideas. During the discussion when we asked the opinion of the House, majority of MNAs strongly maintained that Lahore Jamaat deserved to be declared a non-Muslim minority in the first instance. We did try to save them but there was no scope for it. It transpired that there was little doctrinal differences between the two groups, the real difference was political in nature. It was also felt that Sadruddin himself greatly desired that Lahore Jamaat should be declared non-Muslim minority. He was convinced that his arguments run contrary to his point of view.`` (Sahibzada Farooq Ali`s interview, Jang Magazine, cited in Ahmadiyya Movement, British-Jewsih Connection by Bashir Ahmad)

The Committee accordingly submitted its unanimous verdict.

The above account establishes beyond doubt that it was mass public pressure following the Rabwah incident, and not any mullah pressure, which resulted in a due parliamentary process instituted by ZAB to constitutionally resolve the Qadiani problem in Pakistan 1974.

...dreams of rainbow nationalism are sustained despite the occasional hits.

mantolives #56 Thanks for providing some figures that were quite interesting. I am not denying that muslims in east panjab suffered in larger numbers than the hindus and sikhs in what is now Pakistan. (as you know, my own family was among those who had to flee for their lives from east panjab in 1947).

However, as Pakistanis we should be concerned with wrongs done in Pakistan to hindus and sikhs who lived here before 1947, and I think Pakistan should take some steps to officially recognize this great injustice that was done even as Pakistan was formed. Whether or not the Indian government reciprocates is immaterial, since that is not our responsibility as Pakistanis.

As for jang, while I dont always agree with him, I will say that he is right in a sense in saying that ``Jinnah`s Pakistan`` died when Pakistan was formed as a result of this injustice to hindus and sikhs, if one believes (as you and I do) that Pakistan was meant to be a state where justice prevails.

So, one cannot simply dismiss what jang says by saying he is lying (and you would know from my post interactions that I never hold back from calling a lie if I see one). We can of course say that ``jinnah`s Pakistan died`` is too strong a term - since that would mean the future is hopeless when in fact nothing could be farther from the truth. I strongly believe that Pakistan will steadily move in the direction of becoming a more just state, that islamic-fascism is doomed to be a footnote in Pakistan history (like the kali-worshipping ``thugs`` of India), and that the grass roots Pakistani culture is strong and robust and will ultimately prevail and Pakistan will emerge as the most vibrant society in the region which is the place where it rightfully belongs.

Re: # 84

It did not have to attract them. IOt was our job to kick them out.

We did not and hence all this BS.

Sanatani

Also with a Muhajir majority in Pak it would have been fun to watch the Pisser e Zameen take on the Muhajirs it would have been the peadophile murderer rapists arabia allover again after J`s death

Pakistan died in 1948 itself because it could only ``attract`` 5.5 million Muslims out of a total population of 70 million Muslims from India.........

The Muslims who chose to remain behind in India have to be commended for their foresight,
despite the rhetoric of Jinnah and the antics of Nehru and his chamchas............

Would appreciate Mantolives views on the first point.........

#47 by dost-mittar,

Good post Dost. But tahmed32 won`t be convinced. Many people here mistake the beat from their iPods for the pulse of the people.

As for me, I believe the last category of your statement to be correct. Pakistan is only ``now`` being born as per its original vision as laid down in its Objectives Resolution.

dost-mittar jee: if you think you understand Pakistan based on chowk interactions and online newspapers, then with all due respect sir I would submit that you understand the media and internet dynamics even less than you understand Pakistanis. Thus, to take one example: it is a well known phenomenon that the most timid souls in real life become obnoxious internet warriors as they live out their suppressed desires from the safety of th keyboard.

Similarly, for the media as they say, ``man bites dog`` is news while ``dog bites man`` is not news. While the jay thakerays of India may read a newspaper article titled ``man bites dog`` and use that to affirm their belief that Pakistanis do in fact bite dogs , you ought to know better than to think you understand a country by reading newspapers or watching TV. :-)

... add-on...#81

It was only ironical that Masood Mehmud, a mirzaee, was retained as Head Federal Security Force by ZAB who later became instrumental in his benefactors` judicial murder through false testimony turning state witness to save his own skin, and then fled to USA where he died in ignominy.

Re: # 104
Mantolives would appreciate if you could share the source of your data.......

Re: # 90


Prakash writes...

``and less than 10% took the bait......... ``

The ignorance and stupidity of some people continues to amaze me... despite all these years.


The total number of Indian Muslims in British India in 1947 : 100 Million.

Close to 70 million lived in Pakistan and Bangladesh.

30 million lived in India.... out of which 5.5 Million of Indian Muslims moved.

By which math is a figure of 75.5 million out 100 million ``10%``? or 5.5 million of 30 million 10%?