Rest in Peace Pakistan (1947-1974)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Re: # 2

for your kind information with regards!

do read another article .... i am adding in it in this post of mine

IN THE NAME OF ALLAH,THE MOST MERCIFUL THE MOST COMPASSIONATE


All praise is to ALLAH, the one prayer for and peace on the one after whom no prophet shall ever come as well as on his family, his companions and their followers, till the Day of Judgment.
The second half of the nineteenth century is of great significance in the history of Islam. During this period the forces antagonistic to Islam brought into being two sects who tried their utmost to mislead the Muslims under the label of Islam. These sects exerted all their energies in achieving the age-old desire of the enemies of Islam to wean aspirations and worship-Mecca and Madina-so as to restrain them with in the boundaries of their own countries. The purpose was to cut off the strong ties and connections bindings hundred of millions of Muslims-ties, which made the dwellers of deserts of Hijaz and Nejd, of the heights of the Himalayas and valleys of Kashmir feel and share one another’s pain and sorrows.
Out of such creations of the anti-Islamic forces was one Qadiyanism, a British agency and the second Bahaism, a joint venture of Russo-British imperialism.
The purpose of Qadiyanism was just this and nothing else. It was brought into being and reared by anti-Islamic and anti-Muslim forces. All such forces helped the Qadiyanis through material and other means. Huge funds were made available to them. During their regime British placed them in high offices in Government, gave their children educational stipends and provided them with all possible conveniences. The Hindus took up their cause through pen, press and platform. The Jews provided them with arguments and literature against the accepted principles and fundamentals beliefs of Islam, (however unrealistic and bristle these may have been). Even now international Jewry is fully helping the Qadiyani centers in Africa through the Qadiyani mission in Israel. All agencies and forces enemical to the prophet extended full help to the Qadiyanis in popping them and propagating their cause. Their soul aim was to break the Muslims bond of fealty to their Leader, the prophet (Peace Be Upon Him) whose very name causes creeps of fear in the hearts of the Non-Muslims and whose awe causes, as if an earthquake, in the fortress of anti-Muslim forces, even though he met his LORD nearly fourteen centuries back, due to his leaving and luminous teachings his Ummah even in this state of decline and decay is like a fish-bone choking the threats of the criminally minded and Muslim-bailers. The very idea of their resurgence is enough to bring sleepless nights to their agnostists, the polytheists and the anti-theists. They realize that they cannot live in peace of their own-desire and description unless they finish off the eternal teachings, which even today are capable of reviewing the decadent individuals and nations. They as a second alternative, think that if they cannot ends without at least changing and corrupting their meanings and purposefulness. The best course in their view is to help and succour such mislead religious groups as the Qadiyanis.

It is in this vein that Dr. Shankar Das, a well know Hindu addressed his Hindu brethren in the following words:

“The most crucial question before the country at this juncture is: how to achieve the spirit of nationalism in India. Sometimes bargaining mutual treaties and pacts are entered into with the Muslims. Sometimes resorts are taken to bribery to win them over. At other times, parts of their religious affair are made a politics and a political unity is sought to be achieved. But none of these methods succeeds. The Indian Muslims considered themselves a separate nation. They sing the praises of Arabian Prophet day in and day out. If they could they would change the name of India into Arabia… In this gloom, and despair the Indian nationalists patriots see only one ray of light and that friendly vision is the Ahmadiya movement. The larger the number of Muslims inclining towards Qadiyanism, they will consider Qadiyan as their Mecca and in the end will become nationalists and lovers of India. Only the growth of Qadiyani movement amongst the Muslims can end Arabians culture and pan Islamism. Let us then study the Qadiyani movement from the nationalism point of view.”

From the land of the Punjab rises a man Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiyani. He appeals to the Muslims:

“I am the prophet about whose advent the QURRAN speaks. Gather you under my banner, for, if you do not, God will not forgive you on the day of Resurrection and you will be placed in hell.”

Without entering the truth or the falsehood of this claim, I only wish to bring out what changes take place in a Muslims before he becomes a Qadiyani. A Qadiyani’s articles of faith are:

From time to time God creates a man for the guidance of the people. This man is the prophet of his times.
God had commissioned Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) to Arabia during the days of their moral degradation.
After Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him), God felt the necessity of sending another prophet and He commissioned the Mirza to guide the Muslims.

My nationalist brethren will ask: what have these articles of faith got to do with Indian nationalism? The answer is; just as an conversion of a Hindu to Islam, his faith and belief in Rama, Karishna the Vedas, the Gita and the Ramayana are transferred into faith in the QURRAN and the holiness of Arabia similarly on conversion of a Muslim to Qadiyanism his whole point of view undergoes a transformation. His faith in Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) declines. Besides, whereas the seat of Caliphate for him used to be in Arabia or Turkey, it shifts to Qadiyani; Mecca and Medina become only traditionally holy cities. And Qadiyani whether he lie in Arabia, Turkey, Iran or any corner of the world, turns his face towards Qadiyan for spiritual peace. The land of Qadiyan for him is land of salvation. In this lies the secret of the superiority of India. Ever Qadiyani will have love for India in his heart as Qadiyan is in India, the founder of the Qadiyani was an Indian and all his successors who are guiding this sect at the present juncture are Indians…. That is the only why Muslims view the Qadiyani movements with suspicion. They know that Qadiyanism is enemical to the Arabian civilization and Islam.

During the Khilafat movement also the Ahmadis did not side with the Muslims, for, they wished to established the Caliphate in the Qadiyan rather in Turkey or Arabia. Howsoever disappointing this may be for the common Muslims who are always dreaming of pan-Islamism and pan-Arabiaism, but it surely is very pleasing for a nationalis.

When the poet of the east, Dr. Iqbal wrote a very detailed and logical article against the Qadiyanis proving logically that they are ex-communicable from the Muslim millat, the first man to lift his pen against the article was the famed Hindu leader, Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru. Who wrote several articles in confirmation, favor and defense of the Qadiyanis. So far so, that when, after this, on 29th of May 1936, Pandit Jawahr Lal Nehru came to Lahore the Qadiyani volunteers gave him a formal reception and saluted him. When this was criticized, the Qadiyani Caliph Mirza Mahmood, said in reply:

“In the recent past, Pandit Jawaher Lal Nehru refuted the articles written by Dr. Iqbal to prove that the Ahmadis were outside the fold of Muslims and very effectively proved that the Doctor’s criticism of Qadiyanism and the question of ex-communication of Ahmadis was both unreasonable and against this own earlier attitude. So when such a person comes to province as a guest, his reception on behalf of Qadiyanis is an extremely good gesture.”

Dr. Iqbal while refuting the arguments of Nehru in favor of Qadiyanism analyzed the reasons for Nehru’s support. He wrote:

“I am inclined to think that my statement on Qadiyanism-no more than a mere exposition of a religious doctrine on modern lines-has embarrassed both the Pandit and the Qadiyanis, perhaps because both inwardly resent, for different reasons, the prospects of Muslim political and religious solidarity particularly in India. It is obvious that the Indian nationalist, whose political idealism has practically killed his sense for fact, is intolerant of the birth of a desire for self-determination in the heart of North-West Indian Islam. He thinks, wrongly in my opinion, that the only way to Indian nationalism lies in a total suppression of the cultural entities of the country through the interaction of which alone India can evolve a rich and enduring culture. A nationalism achieved by such methods can mean nothing but mutual bitterness and even oppression. It is equally obvious that the Qadiyanis, too, feel nervous by the political awakening of the Indian Muslims, because they feel that the rise in political prestige of the Indian Muslims is sure to defeat their designs to crave our from the Ummat of the Arabian prophet a new ummat for the Indian prophet. It is no small surprise to me that my effort to impress on the Indian Muslims the extreme necessity of internal cohesion in the present critical movement of their history in India; and my warning them against the forces of disintegration, masquerading as Reformist movements, should have given the pandit as occasion to sympathize with such forces.”

When a movement like Qadiyanism came into existence it was evident that all anti-Islam would support and defend it. They helped the Qadiyanis actively. The British imperialism furnished it even with some individuals so that they may shape and strengthen it. Majority of such persons was from the employees of the British imperialism or of those who had been granted estates for their desertion of the nation and Islamic cause, whose very religion was the seeking of favor from and bootlicking of imperialism. This is a fact and even the founder of Qadiyanis has admitted it:

“The majority of people who have joined my sect are those who are either holding eminent posts with the British Court, or the goodly rich men, their servants and friends or businessmen, lawyers or those educated in the modern way or of such famous scholars, servants and noblemen who have either served the British Government in the past or are serving it at present or their relations or friends who accepted the influence of their elders and the weekly holders of the office of the caretakers of some religious orders. In short this is a party which is the protégé, of the British Government from who it has earned good name and who Is worthy of the Government’s favor. Or it consists of people who are related to me or are among my servants. Besides them is a large number of ulama who have brought home to thousands of hearts the munificence of the Government.”

As far as Jewish help and support is concerned, Mirza Mubarak Ahmad, grandson of the Qadiyani prophet has himself acknowledged in his book OUR FOREIGN MISSIONS VIDE PP. 79-80 in the following words:

“The Ahmadiyya mission in Israel is situated in Haifa at Mount Karmal. We have a mosque there, a mission house, a library, a book depot and a school. The mission also brings out a montly, entitled AL-BUSHRA, which is sent out to thirty different countries accessible though medium of Arabic. Many works of the promised Messiah have been translated into Arabic through this mission.
In many ways this Ahmadiyya mission has been deeply affected by the partition of what formerly was called Palestine. The small number of Muslims left in Israel derives a great deal of strength from the presence of our mission, which never misses a chance of being of service to them. Some time ago, our missionary had an interview with the Mayor of Haifa, when during the discussion on many points, he offered to build for us a school at Kababeer, a village near Haifa, where we have a strong and well established Ahmadiyya community of Palestinian Arabs. He also promised that he would come to see your missionary at Kababeer, which he did later, accompanied by four notables from Haifa. He was duly received by members of community and by the students of our school, a meeting having been held to welcome the guests. Before his return he entered his impressions in the Visitors’ Book
Another small incident, which would give readers some idea of the position our mission in Israel occupies, is that in 1956 when our missionary, choudhry Muhammad Sharif, returned to the headquarters of the Movement of Pakistan, the president of Israel sent word that he (our missionary) should see him before embarking on the journey back, Choudhry Muhammad Sharif utilized the opportunity to present a copy of the German translation of the HOLY QURRAN to the President, which he gladly accepted. This interview and what transpired at it was widely reported in the Israeli Press, and a brief account was also broadcast on the radio.”

These reasons led me to take an intensive study of almost the entire Qadiyani literature during my student days and I contributed several articles on the subject in Indo-Pak magazines of Urdu, when in 1964, God provided me with the opportunity of joining the Islamic University at Medina, I was greatly surprised to know from the African students in particular and pilgrims and visitors from other countries in general that the Qadiyanis were creating means for misleading the people of Africa particularly, by declaring themselves to be Muslims. Unfortunately no comprehensive book is available in the Africans or the Arab countries, which could acquaint their inhabitants with the beliefs and actions of the Qadiyanis. So in obedience to the wishes of friends, the desires of the teachers of the Islamic University of Medina and to fulfill this need, I started writing articles in Arabic on Qadiyanism. I made it a point that nothing should be written which is unsupported by evidence or logic and all quotations must be duly supported with complete references to the sources.

These articles were published in different Arabic magazines from time to time. Ultimately a publisher from Medina collected them and published them in the form of a book in 1967. God be thanked that the result was extremely gratifying and the book was in great demand particularly in Africa. During the same period some African friends gave expression to the desirability of an English translation of the book, which will increase its utility in view of the fact that English is more widely spoken and understood in Africa than Arabic.

In 1969 when I returned to Pakistan, my friends here felt the same need. The book is accordingly being presented in English. I admit that due to my other occupational activities I have not had time to add to the original although I did feel such an urge and necessity. But I do hope that even this attempt will not prove to be less useful in understanding the real truth about the Qadiyanism. So far as I know till today, there is no book in English on the subject, which is as detailed and well reasoned. I shall attempt the rest of the subject of discussion regarding Qadiyanism which have been off and on appearing in Urdu in my monthly magazine, “All-Hadith”, may be published in book form.

Something is important to elaborate:

Wherever I have given any question followed by its source to be a Qadiyani daily or magazine, I have copied from the book Qadiyani Mazhab by professor Muhammad Ilyas Burny which is available in the hands of all and sundry and has seen numerous editions. No Qadiyani has dared find any mistake or omission in its source material or its quotations. Thus it is reliable in the eyes of both the Muslims and the Qadiyanis as far as quotations are concerned.
The books mentioned and pages, which I have referred to, are mostly the first editions. It is a habit with the Qadiyanis that with every fresh edition they go and changes the pages of their books. This is not on account of challenge of the press- but due to necessity felt by them. For example, in the chapter ”Qadiyanism and the belief of the promised Messiah”, quotation from the Qadiyani pretender (that Christ, Peace Be Upon Him, will over-take Anti-Christ at the page of mofassil village of Jerusalem known as Lud (Lydda) and will kill him) is found in Ghulam Ahmad’s book Izalatulaahom at the page 220 of the first edition. But the Qadiyanis has reproduced this text at page 91 in the second edition. The difference is evident.

Similarly, the Qadiyani liar, abusing Shaikhul Islam Sanaullah of Amritsar says: “O the son of wind, o traitor as will be mentioned in the chapter. “The Qadiyani prophet in the history.” This abuse is found in his book at page 43 of the first edition of his book Ijaz-I-Ahmadi. But in the 2nd edition they have put it at page 77.”

In this very chapter it has been mentioned that the pretender wrote:

“That the prophet of ALLAH asked about the Day of Resurrection, when will it occur?
He replied: Doomsday will occur within a hundred years for all the sons of Adam.”

This was copied from page 257 of his book Izalatul-auham. In the second edition however, they have put it at page 104.

There are numerous such instances. Likewise I have retained the names of the Qadiyani books, as they are where they carry meanings in Arabic. I have however, arabicised some of the names as the original ones do not carry any meanings in Arabic. As example is Ghulam of Ahamd’s book Kashti-I-Nooh. In Urdu the meanings of “Kashti” is the same as that for “Safinah” in Arabic. That explains whenever I’ve mentioned this book I’ve written Safinah-I-Nooh.

Similar is the case of his book Aina-I-Kamalat-I-Islam, “Aina” is equivalent of “Miah”. So I’ve mentioned Mirato-Kamalat-I-Islam and in place of “Aeena-I-Sadaqat Miratussidq a book by Ghulam Ahmad’s son Mahmood Ahmad. Similarly Jang-I-Muqaddas of Ghulam Ahmad has been transcribed as Alharbul-Muqaddas and Ek Ghalti ka Izala as Izalato-Ghaltah also by Ghulam”

Some people might say that I’ve cast aside all terms and titles of courtesy and respect for Ghulam Ahmad and his followers much against the habit of the “Ahl-I-Hadith” who are normally very respectful even towards their opponents.

My reply is: indeed respect is and valid for one’s adversaries in opinion and faith. Sometimes it even reaches the bounds of duty. But respect need not be shown to one who is an apostate, who lashes out with his tongue on the prophets and messenger of Gods, who abuses the Caliphs and sympathizers of the Prophet, his sons and his kind companions, who derogates from the honor of the leader of the prophets and himself claims prophet hood. Not only that for such persons showing no respect is proper but is irreligious for the Muslims to respect them. The Prophet himself, addressing people like these said:

“From Muhammad, the prophet of God to Musailma, the imposter.”

“And we have in the prophet, the paragon of virtues” The QURRAN.

As to abuse or rebuke-God forbid that we may do so to anyone- may he be the Anti-Christ indeed like Ghulam Ahmad Qadiyani was. This is because the prophet said:

“A believer should neither castigate nor curse” Tirmidhi.



this wasn`t reading by me but i took it from a book ..... hope you won`t mind reading it neither won`t mind it

I know that this article will attract a lot of attacks from all sides ... which I personally take as the validation of my point of view... but before that I want to put up a simple disclaimer..

In my personal religious view- which has evolved over time- I am quite clear that Ahmaddiya faith is simply an off-shoot of the sunni paganism which was invented in the early period of Islam by the children of Ummaya in order to usurp power ... in my estimate Ahmadis are as misguided as 80% of the rest of the Islamic world...

However... I will stand by their right to call themselves whatever they please as I will for the rights of a sunni pagan to call himself a Muslim, despite my complete antipathy for such paganism.

Masadi,

Zaban sambhal kay baat karo... I know tumhe kisi nay tameez nahi sikhai.

I have nothing to do with Chowk or Chowk staff or its editorial policies. I therefore suggest that you apologise immediately for your abusive language.

Consider: The cornerstone of Quaid-e-Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah and Muslim League`s struggle to achieve Pakistan was that a permanent majority should not, by sheer numerical weight, be allowed to dominate a permanent minority


That ``cornerstone`` is when muslims are in the minority...

wherever muslims are in the minority, they raise a stink(and more) about their right not being protected...and countries where muslims are in the majority..well, think saudi arabia...nuff said...

Yasser,

Relevant article, one which may lead to a meaningful discussion; but I must ask re #2: was it necessary to describe Ahmadi beliefs as something rooted in misguided sunni paganism aimed at usurping power invented by children of Ummaya from early Islamic history? That is a mouthful and begs to be elaborated upon … or omitted altogether. So I remain unsure of the place of your personal views in this discussion, as they come across more as demeaning and derogatory, without serving a meaningful purpose. Thanks, but no, thanks.

If demise of Pakistan continues to be caused by self-righteous Muslims, then I hope you too will join in. Welcome to the party; hope you’ll stick around for awhile.

Re: # 6 rf mian

YLH`s theory of permanent majority and minority is absurd and against common sense... as pointed out by posts below...

YLH

{The cornerstone of Quaid-e-Azam Mahomed Ali Jinnah and Muslim League`s struggle to achieve Pakistan was that a permanent majority should not, by sheer numerical weight, be allowed to dominate a permanent minority}

Absolutely beautiful, pure and simple liberal democracy. Thanks.

Dear Sattar,

If you take out the one issue on the interpretation of ``Khatim`` ... Ahmadis are for all practical purposes Sunnis following the Hanafi School of Islamic law...

My personal religious beliefs should not be an issue ... for you or for Urstruly or any other interactor... what matters is that I stand for everyone`s right to profess as they please.

The meaningful discussion ought to be around this single point alone ... or else it is as meaningless as the god awful debate about whether Jesus is dead or alive.

Is religion the sole criteron (sp?) for majority/minority decision?
A state/nation/city/country is divided into all kinds of majorities/minorities.
Why not apply ethnicity/language/sect/colour and so on?
Once you start dividing people using one criterion, there is no end to it.

Re: # 9

Shishapa is exactly right... what you have been writing in your multiple articles here is just your confusion and lack of understanding of very simple facts... you keep beating around the bush, invent theories, change your minds a bunch of times... In short - you still don`t get it... :)

+++

That pakistan died in 1974,or 1971 or whenever was not a surprise to anyone... In fact, even the impostor, as you call it, that continues to exist is a big deal in itself... shows the rare committment of a very fractitious and paranoid people to keep going despite all absurdities that militates against their cohesion... I will give pakis that much, but it remains to be seen for how long...

Mian shishapa,

I on the other hand have been favoring using all distinctions together to bring a sense of overlapping identities...

Since you participated on my article ``Citizenship and Ethnicity in Pakistan`` ... one would imagine you would know that I already addressed that issue...

Or maybe you just don`t like to read the article before commenting.

[...Absurdities abound...]

It took you this long to figure this out, huh?...

Absurdity start from the very beginning, from the cornerstone theory of of ``tyranny of majority`` that you are throwing around... hinuds and moslems were hardly homogenous in any sense of the word - so to brand them as ``permanent majority`` and ``permanent minority`` is the biggest Absurdity and stupidity to begin with... It was pegion-holing at its worst, it was complete lack of common-sense, because of the multiple fractures that runs thru these communities spread across vast landscapes of the sub-contient... and that too when the so-called ``permanent minority`` were almost one-third of the population...

What you realized today is exactly what has been foretold in 1947 and immediately after... That pakistan was not an sustainable entity, the concepts and theories are based on which it was being created is simply untenable and patently absurd...

Only thing the subcontinent needed was sustainable development, free-wheeling democracy and fundamental rigths to all... it didn`t need identity politics, there was no need to invent ``permanent`` scare-crows where none existed... there was no need to invent paranoid theories of ``domination`` where nothing was even remotely possible...

By doing so - Mahomed Jinnah unwittingly handed over power to the forces he was opposed to... in retrospect, he wasn`t really that smart a man... he was a man who was most comfortable with hinuds who he demonized while least comfortable with mullahs and fanatic abduls which he he ended up living with...

It ended up creating lands where muslims are never at peace with each other... and gave perfect opportunity for hinuds to dominate the sub-continent...

So yes, Absurdities abound...

Re: # 13 sattar

Well said... this is yet another example of absurdity and stupidity expressed by YLH...

Re: # 13sattar2
(((Minor but critical point: The word is “khatam” … and not “khatim”. Note the subtle difference, which is at the root of bulk of misunderstanding. And I can cite reference after reference to support my viewpoint on this. Not only that, I can comfortably argue in favor of continuation of prophethood from a Quranic viewpoint on basis of reason. But do you really want to start this debate? I don’t think so. So let’s not open this can of worms when it is neither the time, nor the place for it))))))

Sattar mian how many times do you want us to discuss this load of rubbish?I have seen the refrences that you have shown here but never did you bother to explain how do they support the continuation of Prophethood. I have requested you number of times to enlighten our dark souls with the `common usage` of the word `khatam` i.e. the meaning of the term prevailing in the time of Prophet[pbuh] and along with that.... a single unequivocal verse of the Quran which supports the crap of Qadianism.???Enough of this language game already....follow zeemax`s islam...get a life....in the hereafter.

Waisay BTW the person who claims to show the path to others MUST himself be able to see with both eyes.don`t you think?

I can sense the presence of abu_safwaan around. Nikil patli gali se..aur izaat bacha apni bhi aur HALF fried(kacha) messenger ki bhi.

Yasser (#7),

Minor but critical point: The word is “khatam” … and not “khatim”. Note the subtle difference, which is at the root of bulk of misunderstanding. And I can cite reference after reference to support my viewpoint on this. Not only that, I can comfortably argue in favor of continuation of prophethood from a Quranic viewpoint on basis of reason. But do you really want to start this debate? I don’t think so. So let’s not open this can of worms when it is neither the time, nor the place for it.

If you think that difference in interpretation of one word (which remains highly debatable by any standard, to say the least) makes Ahmadi-Muslim belief part of a power-usurping paganism, it says a lot about your own narrow take on Islam. Like I said, thanks, but no thanks. I can do without such narrow-minded self-righteousness. And spare me this “Hanafi School of Islamic Law” stuff … it makes you sound dangerously like Naqshbandi.

And finally, it is very naïve of you to unnecessarily make derogatory comments about Ahmadi-Muslim beliefs, while insisting that your personal views are not an issue. Imagine Lyndon Johnson supporting equal rights for African-Americans, and ending his speech by insisting that personally he has nothing but disdain for blacks. Pardon me, but that’s a load of crap. If your personal view is irrelevant, then learn to keep a lid on it.

Re: # 14

What`s the difference anyway? Pakiland is already dead or so YLH says... Bangladesh is gone, Balochis are up in arms, taliban has taken over the ``frontier``... muhajirs have taken over karachi... so what`t big deal about gurdaspur or whatever other godforsaken place you guys have been crying over for last 60 years

get over it already...

Re: # 28

I guess it would be almost the same number.

Anyway, I would like to see the actual numbers if possible. Can you refer me to some source? Or maybe someone else can?

Thanks,

Rafi

Re: # 26
What would be the numbers if they were 12% of 51% instead of 55% as you claim.

Check the following out.

The Gurdaspur district in the undivided Punjab had on the basis of 1941 census was an overall Muslim majority of 51%.

Re: # 26

In that case the third principle of Partition would have taken effect, which was, holding a plebicite.

Now we are on the speculative grounds. I think that the plebicite would have gone the Indian way because Muslims were split about Pakistan but I don`t think Sikhs were.

Re: # 25

Please do the math. The 12% of 55% of Population becomes less than 6% of the total. So even if we count the Quadianis out the ration of Muslim non-Muslim population in Gurdaspur would have tied at 1:1. In that case the third principle of Partition would have taken effect, which was, holding a plebicite.

Re: # 22

But fact of the matter is that the census of 1940 was not conducted by Muslims. It was conducted by a foreign occupation that was occupying our land for the past hundered years. It was them who categorized the people into scheduled casts and attributed religious classes. Common Muslims never considered Quadianis as one of them since even when their founder was alive.

I understand that the census was not conducted by Muslims but that is irrelevant. What I am trying to figure out is, had Ahmedies been counted as non-Muslims, would Gurdaspur be considered a Muslim-majority area? Were Muslims, minus the Ahmedies, could break the 50% barrier?

Thanks,

Rafi

Re: # 21

Yes, Quadianis were counted as Muslims in the census of 1940 since a separate category for them did not exist at the time. But keep in mind that separate categories did exist for other people in the British era government. Only the Hindus were divided into 12 scheduled casts, then there were Muslims, Parsis, Christians, martial and non-martial races, and whole plathora.

Look, Quadianis try to push the matter of ``Muslim`` in Gurdaspur to lay blame that when it suited Muslims they counted Quadianis among themselves and when it didn`t they separted them. How hypocritical. But fact of the matter is that the census of 1940 was not conducted by Muslims. It was conducted by a foreign occupation that was occupying our land for the past hundered years. It was them who categorized the people into scheduled casts and attributed religious classes. Common Muslims never considered Quadianis as one of them since even when their founder was alive.

Re: # 14
Urstruly,

You wrote: ``The fact of the matter is that the Census of 1940, which was done in lieu of coming elections after failure of Congress governemnt, put the Muslim population of Gurdaspur well above 55%.``

Can you tell me if Ahmedies were counted as Muslims in that census?

Thanks.

The claim that the District of Gordaspur had a majority of Quadianis instead of Muslims is a myth propagataed by Quadiani establishment to divert attention from the incompetence and criminal neglect of Zafarullah Khan (a Quadiani) who was representing Muslim League in the Radcliffe Award. The fact of the matter is that the Census of 1940, which was done in lieu of coming elections after failure of Congress governemnt, put the Muslim population of Gurdaspur well above 55%. So due to the two principles of partition: a. The geographical contingency principle and b. Majority principle the district of Gurdaspur was absolutely the part of Pakistan. But the fact of matter also remains that Nehru was bitterly opposed to awarding Gurdaspur to Paksitan because it was the only opperable land connection to the Kashmir, which was his birthplace and he held it dear. He made a deal with Master Tara Singh to incite violence in Gurdaspur to change the demography of the district in exchange for an autonomous Punjab. Horrendous and horrible crimes and violence were committed against Muslims there by Sikhs and Hindus from Southern Punjab to expell them.

Meanwhile, Zafarullah also wanted Quadian, which was in Kashmir to remain on Indian side where he deemed it more protected by fellow hindu pagans. During the Radcliffe Award, an uncle of mine who was very close to Quaid-e-Azam told me later that Quaid was furious at Zafarullah when he found out that despite the expectations of every Punjabi Muslim and even Hindus Radcliffe had awarded Gurdaspur to India, when whole nation was holding its breath for the expected outcome. The following conversation took place between Quaid and Zafarullah:

QA: Zafarullah! Its unbelievable. What has gone wrong with Gurdaspur.

Z: Sir! Gurdaspur was not on the agenda of todays meeting.

QA: Abbay bhootnee ke, who else was supposed to put such a sensitive issue on agenda but you?

Z: Sir! there were white people in the meeting, how could I dare to speak in front of them.

QA: Chal bhaag naalaique, aindaa shakal matt dikhaaio; qasm se naa hooi qarooli (knife)varna bhonk daita.

The proof of this factoid of history can be verified by checking the agendas of the Radcliffe Award which have been published by many authors. The rest is history.

#14 by Urstruly on June 28, 2007 12:21pm PT

stop crying over spilt milk...or a lost gurdaspur and a lost kashmir....

Re: # 16

Rafi,

The highest concentration of Quadianis per square inch in anywhere in the world is that in Chenab Nagar (formerly Rabwah) in District of Jhang. The city which according to Quadiani claims is 95% Quadiani, has a total population of 48,700 (2003 numbers) whereas the district Jhang where this city is located has a population of 387,418 inhabitants (1998 numbers). This proportion makes the population of Quadianis in a district about the same size as that of Gurdaspur at about 12%. Please keep in mind that this proportion holds true only for the district of Jhang elswhere Quadianis are negligible minority. Granted that if we take the same proportion of Qudianis in district of Gurdaspur at the time of partition, the number of Muslims would still have exceeded that of Hindus, Sikhs, Quadianis, and miscelleneous put together according to the census of 1940. Quadiani propaganda about Gurdaspur is hence as absurd as Mantolives has claimed it to be.

Yasser,

An interesting article and a good read, as usual.

You wrote: ``Forget that the Muslim majority in Gurdaspur was only a majority if Ahmadis were counted as Muslims.``

Can you substantiate that claim by number/references?

Regards,

Rafi Aamer

Re: # 19

Yes I claimed the population of Gurdaspur to be 80% because I was making an argument with a Hindu on the issue of Nehru inciting violence in Gurdaspur for the reasons cited in my post below. That was the only way to extarct the truth out of Hindus who have no morals and ettiquettes. Lying for them is as easy as releiving oneself of his excrement; kind of like you. Just as I expected, the Hindu chimed back and ``challenged`` my assertion and ``corrected`` me that the actual number was 55%. I made that very clear in the very next post. So just like them again you are now telling the half truth even though you know the truth; all in the fine Quadiani tradition.

Urstruly (#14),

Some time ago you claimed that Muslims constituted 80% of Gurdaspur population. You have now scaled it down to 55%. What gives (grin)?

Here’s a counter-point, with a reference more credible than your alleged uncle. Following is an excerpt from “Munir Report”, published by a commission to investigate anti-Ahmadi riots of 1953.

This Report suggests that in district Gurdaspur Muslims held majority by one percent, and that Qadian was one of 3 major towns where Muslims resided. If Ahamdis are declared non-Muslims, it is easy to see how Muslims are no longer the majority you make them out to be.

The Report goes on the praise Chaudhry Zafrullah Khan for his efforts to include Gurdaspur in Pakistan. FYI.

++++

“Provisional Partition had placed Qadian in Pakistan, but Muslims in the district of Gurdaspur in which Qadian was situated were only in a majority of one per cent, and the Muslim population in that district was mostly concentrated in three towns including Qadian. Apprehensions about the final location of Qadian, therefore, began to be felt, and since they could obviously not ask for its inclusion in India, the only course left for them now was to fight for its inclusion in Pakistan. Vile and unfounded charges have been levelled against the Ahmadis that the district of Gurdaspur was assigned to India by the Award of the Boundary Commission because of the attitude adopted by the Ahmadis and the arguments addressed by Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan who had been selected by the Quaid-i-Azam to present the case of the Muslim League before that Commission. But the President of this Court, who was a Member of that Commission, considers it his duty to record his gratitude to Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan for the valiant fight he put up for Gurdaspur. This is apparent from the record of the Boundary Commission which anyone who is interested may see. For the selfless services rendered by him to the Muslim community, it is shameless ingratitude for anyone to refer to Chaudhri Zafrullah Khan in the manner in which he has been referred to by certain parties before the Court of Inquiry.”

- Page 197, Report of The Court of Inquiry Constituted Under Punjab Act II of 1954 to Enquire Into The Punjab Disturbances of 1953, by M. Munir (President) and M. R. Kayani (Member)

Urstruly,

So from 80%, you moved down to 55%. Your latest post takes it further down to 50%!!! What’s up with that??

You are also claiming that this consensus was conducted by foreign occupation. What exactly are you trying to say???

+++

If I recall correctly, you retracted your 80% figure when it was challenged by others. You then cited an alleged dialogue between Jinnah and Chaudhry Zafrullah. But when pressed for references, you conceded that this is probably how a dialogue took place between Jinnah and Zafrullah. Oh well …

Your remaining references turned out to be people you had talked to. That was the sad extent of the basis of your opinion. Read #19 for details.

philosopher (#24)

This seems to be causing you much grief: I explained a reference which asks believers to accept prophets of Allah as they appear. I asked you which part of this reference did you NOT understand. But you did not respond. Rubbish is what lies between your ears; not my problem.

Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) foretold appearance of a prophet among Muslims and referred to him as Issa-ibne-Marriam. Is this enough ahadith for you?

Now, you (like Urstruly and Naqshbandi) may argue that Issa from two thousand years ago resides above clouds and will reappear in flesh and blood. If this makes sense to you, what more can I possibly say?? And we’ll deal with abu when he shows up. Any more smart comments you’d like to make?

Sahib, fatwas of kuffr have been passed against most (all?) sects by other sects of Islam. There is no end to this insanity. And that`s the point of this article, which remains lost on the faithful. What a pity ...

this article is so absurd...i mean the complete ethnic clensing of hindus and muslims from pakistan was not demise of so called ``jinnahs pakistan``? you had to wait for constitutional declaration of ahmedis as non-muslims to figure out the problem?

#32 cant argue with that. One day I hope Pakistan will officially recognize the supreme injustice that was done in 1947 when perhaps 6 million hindus and sikhs were forced to flee for their lives, leaving their property and businesses behind.

The author is a malnutritioned shrimp who is mirzayi in disguise on a mission. His sole purpose for writing this piece of sheatt is to envoke a conflict between Muslims (shias & sunnis). This moron doesnt even know a basic aspect of our creed that all sins are washed away from non-muslims past life as soon as he accepts Islam. That was the reason Umer bin Al khatab (RAW) is viewed in such high esteem, otherwise he did some mean things when he was not a muslim and thats why we dont spew venom on Abu Sufyan (RAW) for the herendous atrocities that he commited on Muslims and Prophet (PBUH) prior to conveting to Islam. He is bitter about the fact he was never treated as an equal citizen as a mirzayi, which i must admit is wrong. on social level noone should be discriminated because of their faith. But he has an agenda to incite hatred by pretending to be shia and provoking sunnis so we get in to this mud-slinging and all the mirzayis will sit on the side enjoying the brawl.

Sattar ..khush aamdayd..zara tawaquff farmaiyayy gaa..mein abhii aapkii tabyatt bhii saaf karta hoon..

Sattariyaa..

The problem with accepting every tom..dick and mirza ghulam as a prophet is that if we dont make standards of prophethood than it`ll become the easiest profession for anyone who cant earn a buck. All your khaloo would have to do to be the next prophet is just say ``listen yo all that god came to me last nite and told me that i m the new prophet now..soo follow me now and the first revelation from god is that yo all should give me money..soo pay up!``

You see it doesnt work like that. When Allah swt did in fact bestowed prophethood on people, he either gave them miracles or signs that would proove there authenticity. Problem with mirza qadiyani is that all he has is rhetoric..no substance..and he was himself confused about who he was suppose to be. First he claimed he was prophet..when masses didnt buy it he was like..ok how about ibne-mariam..can i be messiah? that didnt work either so in his later days he was like..well can i at least be a reviver? You see my friend the whole thing wreaks of insincerity..which is not prophetic trait. oh and one more thing..there is a slight issue of Quran saying ``And we have put a seal on prophethood``..other than all this stuff mirza sahab was da man.

Re: # 43
Good enuff Hamid Sahab, Shall we discuss Prophet`s(PBUH) moral charcter first? A simple yes or no will suffice. I know you will bring up the issue of Ayesha`s (RAW) marraige to Prophet (PBUH) at a very young age, you want me to start their? Make sure that you remain civil and refrain from sarcasm and insults and ill reciprocrate. So you want me to start with Prophet`s(PBUH) maraige to Ayehsa (RAW)?

Re: # 39

abu,

..... please refer to my tafseer on chapters 2,3 and 4 of the koran ......... inshallah, i will complete the tafseer by this ramadhan ......... if you still have questions, then we can talk about it ........ actually my problem is not with the message itself - which is as silly as any other conventional religion - it has more to do with the moral character of the messenger ............

Re: # 36
Hamid Masih

Listen u moron..i have told u million and a half times if u want to challenge Islam intellectually come up with specific question and issues or contradictions that u think my religion has and we`ll rap. But when u continue on with this same old rhetoric that u have..n ur supposed smart azz sarcasm and outright insults then i am forced to remind u that u still havent collected from the boys who have been sharing ur daughter`s ``Ice Cream``. Accept my challenge and ask me specific questions about Islam and contradictions or aspects that u have issues with in a civil manner, without sarcasm and insults and i`ll indulge u otherwise my advice would be to whither away when i am around...cause u know that i`ll bring the heat and u;ll retreat as always with ur tail between ur legs..so save face..or u can have a civil discourse..choice is urs.

oh, no! .......... i think it is time to have another conversation with allah mian so that he can explain the mysterious ways in which he selects prophets ............. on the other hand, the old man really doesn`t seem to have a good handle on his selection process: first there was this schizophrenic old guy who heard voices and set out to slaughter his own son; then there was this half-wit who stammered, got all shook up by instantaneous combustion, and got his people lost in the desert; then there was this sissy in sandals who was strung up by a bunch of jewish money lenders for kicking over their tills; then there was this illiterate bedouin who got his messages mixed up and whose wife couldn`t prevent domestic animals from destroying important manuscripts; then there were the two punjabis - guru nanak and mrza ghulam ahmed ! .............. have you ever seen a sikh ?..... i rest my case ! ........... and the ahmedis - what`s up with them ?....... why would anyone in their right mind want to be a muslim ? ........ i`d rather be a sikh

re . # 32

Jang please stop being a meany we even made that bhagwan daas Chief Justice, and a hindu wrote our first national anthem not to mention the annual party lahore throws for sikhs. This isnt your fight. Manto is right to be mad. Specially since he doesnt even believe in Prophethood after our Prophet PBUH. Did you hear that guys? now on what basis is Manto nonmuslim?

Re: # 38

i dont have a grief..u can call urself santa clause for all i care..i do have a problem with u selling a big-mac..when infact all u got is a veggie burger..thas false advertising. I have no issues with u eating that veggie burger and thinking that its gao-mata..all`s i am saying is that dont lie to the consumer

abu (#35),

One may accept or reject a prophet of Allah as one pleases. Heart of the matter is that a person should not be penalized if he accepts Mirza Sahib as a prophet of Allah.

And since you brought it up, I don’t think prophets performed miracles (even zeemax thinks of such beliefs as superstition). So your thesis about miracles remains meaningless in my view.

And I have seen Arabic references where “khatam” denotes a person’s high rank. So your argument does not hold water. I am comfortable with my understanding of Islam, but I fail to understand your grief …

I must go play cricket now..lights what a beautiful invention...tussii khush keetae aey eddison payi.

Re #40:

A person has the right to peacefully practice and profess Islam the way Islam makes sense to him. You can believe in flying prophets performing miracles ... and that`s your choice.

I’ll let you know when I need your approval. Till then, take a hike.

#37 wah bhai wah..so i am now a meany for taking pangas with manto? in the paki-echo chamber of delusion (copyritght arjun) such stuff may go unnoticed, but most others would see this 700 lb gorilla in the dewana khana

Araay yaar jangs , unlike countries who have been around since the dawn of time pakistan was a pact made recently (60 years ago) . The point manto is making is that had they been de-muslimized in 1947 they would never had been pakistani in the first time.
They are right in saying that Jinnah would never have pulled a fast one on them and they would never have supported Bhutto ....its fair to say that ``Pakistan`` which is an ideal ceased to be the promised land for them after 1974 this is the story of Manto not the story of Jang though you can write your own story. And it would also be valid.

BTW i humbly request ahmedi`s to refrain from insulting our Prophet PBUH which makes everyone see red. As an individual you are either muslim (and i support your right to self definition) or you are an insulter of the Prophet PBUH in which case forget it. Can`t be both.

Even if you dont personally care what society labels your belief numerous ahmedi`s are insultingly denied their right to self definition by the passive consent of people who are under the impression that all Ahmedis are vitriolic towards our Prophet PBUH and this is a truly dangerous stereotype to project, just my two cents.

Re: # 46

cobrae as it is we are so inculsive it hurts, as abu-s says we forgive everything, including those who fought against us ...dying infedels converting on the battle fields, you name it ...try getting into the jew club in comparison.

All we ask is pehla kalma after that you can eat drink screw kill and still be a muslim albeit a bad one. Is it too much to ask yaara? just respect Allah and his Prophet PBUH.

`` As an individual you are either muslim (and i support your right to self definition) or you are an insulter of the Prophet PBUH in which case forget it. Can`t be both.``

Are you dubya`s long lost sister? ``You are either with us or against us``....

Whether Pakistan died, or when, depends upon one`s perspective. If one is a Sikh or a Hindu, Jinnah`s Pakistan was still-born. If one is an Ahmadi, it died in 1974. If one is hamidm, it died when Zia ordered ban on liquor in the Cantonments. And if one belongs to the unwashed masses lured by the slogan of ``La Ilaha L`il Allah``, then Pakistan is only now being born in the Sarhadi sooba and the environs of Lal Masjid in Islamabad.

dm #47 ``unwashed masses lured by the slogan of ``La Ilaha L`il Allah``

please dont add insult to injury to the ``masses``:

First, these are not ``masses`` (as the elite of the subcontinent grandly call their lower caste compatriots), but individuals who may be poorer and less well educated than the chowk elite, but have more common sense than the average chowk dud who imagines himself to be some kind of a warrior or intellectual.

Second, they may not all have easy access to running water as you do, but most try to keep as clean as they can under the circumstances (muslims wash every time before they pray, and thus probably wash more often in one day than some of arjun`s Indian IT billionaires do in a week).

Third, you would have to be totally dumb to think that lal masjid mullah roam the streets of islamabad for any reason other than the fact that they are a convenient way for musharraf to keep the democracy movement off-balance. Blame the military, not the average Pakistani, for mullah lawlessness in Pakistan.

Thanks.

Third,

urstruly, rafi:

It is an article of faith among Paksitanis that Mountbatten changed the Radcliff recommendations re. Gurdaspur. I have never seen any mention of this in the Indian media. I am also unaware of any mention of it in the British accounts, although I have not read all the accounts and someone may have mentioned it and I would like that reference, if available.

However, this is not why I am responding to this subject. It is the mandate of the Boundary Commission. It was not supposed to go by the population distribution alone, but was also supposed to take into consideration other socio-economic-religious factors. In practice, however, demographics were almost the only consideration in the final analysis. And since the latest available figures were for 1941, various parties were also free to present their case regarding any demographic changes since 1941, which they did in marginal cases. So, while the Pakistani contention may be correct, I would wait my judgement until I find out on what basis did the Boundary Commission award Gurdaspur to India.

Re: # 52 abu_something_bin_gopinath_bin_prabhkarlaxinarayansrinivassunder

[...This in essence is what 2 nation theory is isnt it? So far so good right? How the fcuk once that land of promise is created you leave the majority of Muslims in the country with the same hindus that you originally said Muslims wouldnt....]

The goatbrain has a point... This is what I was pointing to being the mother of all absurdities in the Theatre of Absolute Absurds... Moslems of pure bedouin faith cannot live with hinuds of pagan faith... that`s TNT...

Yet only 5 million moved to pakiland - that too only when we kicked them out...

Someone needs to explain to me that how is that you a run a campaign to create a country for muslims. In that process you ask & sell it to ALL the muslims that their hindu neighbours that they have been living with for centuries are in fact so diabolically different than them that the only way we`ll be able to breathe is if we are detached from these monsters hindus and live in a paradise where we`ll be surrounded with muslims only. This in essence is what 2 nation theory is isnt it? So far so good right? How the fcuk once that land of promise is created you leave the majority of Muslims in the country with the same hindus that you originally said Muslims wouldnt..clouldnt and shouldnt live with hence needed a seperate country.

Its like me going to punjab and running a campaign for jinnahpoor (urdu speaking heaven) and asking the urdu speaking of punjab to support me in my quest so we can ALL(urdu speaking) live hapilly ever after, but once that disneyland comes to fruition i leave the majority of urdu speaking in punjab with the punjabis that i had originally declared as the biggest enemy of urdu speaking. Does any of this make sense. No wonder Maulana maudoodi and abul-kalam azad werent too hot about this. Rest assure this is an educational debate, i am proud to be a muslim first and then pakistani..but i think there was tremendous injustice done to the muslims of subcontinent, especially the majority that we left at the mercy of the same hindoos that we convinced them were there enemies.

tahmed saheb:

I seem to be rubbing you the wrong way these days. The expression ``unwashed`` was used in a figurative and not literary sense and you should have known that. As regards the Lal Masjid, I think that you underestimate the appeal of the mullahs to ordinary Pakistani; heck, even I found parts of Mullah Gazi`s response to Niloufer Bakhtiar posted by Urstruly quite persuasive, especially, the fact that he always seemed to be referring to the lady in respectable (aap) and polite terms.

Pakisanis are quick to march into the streets whenever they do not like what their rulers do, whether it is the CJ`s dismissal, the Rushdie affair or the Iraq invasion. Yet, I have yet to read any report of Pakistanis coming onto the streets against Nawaz Sharif`s Hudood attempts or against Bhutto`s measures against Ahmadis. And these were both civilian governments. Nor was there any effective opposition to the Objectives Resolution when it was debated in the Assembly.

If Pakistanis ever succeed in defeating the Mullahs (and it is entirely their business whether they want to do so or not, outsiders can only watch from a distance), it will not be because of those who deluded themselves into thinking that the ordinary Pakistani is not attracted by the khateeb and the aleem)

dm #53 I have full respect for you, sir, even if I noted my disagreement in #50 below.

While ``unwashed`` may be figurative, it nevertheless draws up an unduly negative image. On the appeal of the mullahs to the average Pakistani, let us just agree to disagree. Urstruly does not represent the average Pakistani - the average Pakistani despises, rather than looks up to like urstruly, the gun-toting mullahs in Pakistan. And if you are impressed by a mullah referring to a woman in respectable terms on a public forum, then I have a beachfront property in Islamabad to sell to you. :-)

Pakistanis are in fact not quick to march to the streets compared to other people in the subcontinent (e.g. Bangladesh, as I can vouch first hand having seen hartals in dhaka at the slightest pretext), this being another misconception on your part. What Pakistanis do is to take the scum to court - thus, in case of the hadood ordinance, it was in fact challenged in the Lahore High Court.

As for my deluding myself in not sharing your perception of Pakistanis, then all I can say is this: If you continue to think you understand Pakistanis better than someone who has lived half his life in Pakistan, has family and friends in cities, towns and villages all over Pakistan - then that is your choice. I would rather believe my eyes and ears, then what you think you learnt about Pakistan based on a couple of visits.

tahmed32:

``what you think you learnt about Pakistan based on a couple of visits.``

and, I might add, ten years of reading Pakistani newspapers, watching discussions by Pakistanis of all viewpoints at chowk and television.

And here is my opinion on this topic in one sentence. Ordinary Pakistani does not ordinarily care about the Mullahs but when the slogan of ``islam khatrei mein is raised``, all bets are off.

Re: # 56

``Therefore... liars like the person who write one sided bigoted posts like the one in #32 should take some responsibility for their nation state which is much more self righteous than ours in these issues. ``

liers like the person who write one sided bigoted posts like the one in #32 or his parents didn`t ask to be forced out of their homes in 1947 because of their religious belief either.

Tahmed,

I just want to address the issue you raised about Hindus and Sikhs. I agree with you but I`d like to add a few points so that liars like the person who posted 32 don`t get away with their distortion of history.

1. The number of Hindus and Sikhs who migrated from Pakistan to India was 3 million.

2. The number of Muslims who migrated to Pakistan was in access of 5.5 million.

3. The number of people dead at partition is between 200 000 to 500 000. If you research the issue you will find that 80% of them were Muslims.

4. The bulk of partition massacres happened because of Gurdaspur issue and the failure of Mounbatten- upon the egging of Nehru - to release award before 15th August 1947.

5. Ahmadis lost as many lives proportionally as any other Muslim sect.

Therefore... liars like the person who write one sided bigoted posts like the one in #32 should take some responsibility for their nation state which is much more self righteous than ours in these issues.

Manto writes <<< I therefore suggest that you apologise immediately for your abusive language. >>>

Look fool, you claim to be a lawyer and yet cannot read simple script! It was a question, I asked ``If you were the a-hole who......, If yes, then......`` Can you understand these statements.

And here is my apology: go to hell and take some reading lessons....maybe Jinnah can instruct you

#7 by Manto <<< what matters is that I stand for everyone`s right to profess as they please. >>>

Really? That is why my interact #1 mysteriously disappeared from here

hamid writes <<< actually my problem is not with the message itself - which is as silly as any other conventional religion - >>>

Slogans and hot air will not do, please elucidate on the ``silliness`` of the message, and its comparison with the silliness of ``other conventional religions``. You have no clue about either, you are just blowing hot air and as I showed earlier your so called ``tafseer`` bears no intellectually thought out content, your contentions are disconnected, have nothing to do with what the verse is talking about, and they reveal your ``silliness`` moreso than anything else, rather let me correct myself, they reveal not your silliness but the fact that you are a retard...

#58 by masadi on June 28, 2007 11:24pm PT
#7 by Manto <<< what matters is that I stand for everyone`s right to profess as they please. >>>

Really? That is why my interact #1 mysteriously disappeared from here

Asadi,
Yasser has nothing to do with filtering interacts.

HP <<< Asadi,
Yasser has nothing to do with filtering interacts. >>>

alright

Re: # 62


though wikipedia is an UNRELIABLE soure, yet still.... accordingly.

14.5 Million people were forced to transfer.

about 9.1 Million in Punjab.

about 3.2 Million in Bengal

about 1.2 Million in Sind.

the remaing balance from elsewhere.

the source of these figures as given there is

^ The Partition of India, Shirin Keen, 1998
^ V.D.Savarkar, Samagra Savarkar Wangmaya Hindu Rasthra Darshan (Collected works of V.D.Savarkar) Vol VI, Maharashtra Prantik Hindusabha, Poona, 1963, p 296
^ Jalal, Ayesha Jalal, The Sole Spokesman: Jinnah, The Muslim League and the Demand Pakistan, Cambridge University Press, 1985
^ Thomas RGC, Nations, States, and Secession: Lessons from the Former Yugoslavia, Mediterranean Quarterly, Volume 5 Number 4 Fall 1994, pp. 40–65, Duke University Press
^ a b c d Spate, O. H. K. 1947. ``The Partition of the Punjab and of Bengal.`` The Geographical Journal, 110(4/6):201-218.
^ Death toll in the partition
^ Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947 by S. Gurbachan Singh Talib - Chapter 1
^ Religious cleansing of the Hindus by Dr. Koenraad Elst
^ Panel 33 European Association for South Asian Studies
^ Gandhiserve Who`s Gandhi
^ K.Z. Islam, 2002, The Punjab Boundary Award, Inretrospect
^ Stanley Wolpert, 2006, Shameful Flight: The Last Years of the British Empire in India, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-515198-4
^ Richard Symonds, 1950, The Making of Pakistan, London, ASIN B0000CHMB1,


I have checked Shirin Keen artile , it gives an estimate of about 15 Million.




about death tolls ,
it has given various figures, as

India (1947): 500 000
The rioting and dislocation associated with partition cost how many lives?
1984 World Almanac: 200,000
Hammond 500,000
Eckhardt: 800,000
D.Smith 1,000,000
B&J: 1,000,000 (1945-48)
Hartman: 1,000,000
Stanley Wolpert, A New History of India (1993): 1,000,000
Collins and Lapierre, Freedom at Midnight (1975) cite these sources:
Khosla, Stern Reckoning: 500,000
Moon, Divide and Quit: 200-250,000
Hodson: The Great Divide: 200-250,000
Chanduli Trivedi, governor of Punjab: 225,000
P. Johnson puts the death toll at 200-600,000. In addition to some of the Collins and Lapierre sources, he cites these authorities:
Stephens, Pakistan (1963): 500,000
Edwardes, Last Years of British India (1963): 600,000


from

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat3.htm#India


....

without any further comments..

#56 Manto

Where do you get these imaginary figures from? They are silly and reveal your biases. And, yes, the complete extinction of hindu-buddhist culture from pakistan is an issue that does need to be emphasized and discussed.

Here is what Mushirul Hasan, distinguished indian historian, has to say:

[quote]

No one knows how many were killed during the Partition violence. No one knows how many were displaced and dispossessed. What we know is that, between 1946 and 1951, nearly nine million Hindus and Sikhs came to India, and about six million Muslims went to Pakistan. Of the said nine million, five million came from what became West Pakistan, and four million from East Pakistan. In only three months, between August and October 1947, Punjab was engulfed in a civil war. Estimates of deaths vary between 200,000 and three million. An anguished Amrita Pritam appealed to Waris Shah ``to speak from the grave`` and turn the page of the book of love.
[ quote]

http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2002/01/03/stories/2002010301241000.htm

In one of my post a few months back, I made the point that the decision in 1974 by ZAB was the most opportunistic and horrific decision ever made in the history of Pakistan. Bhutto looked at the political exigencies at that time and never paid attention to what the long term implications would be. Ahmedis are an insignificant minority. It was easy to scarify them at the political alter to appease the marauding mullah. Bhutto thought by doing what he did, the issue would just go away.

If he had taken a stand there, he probably would have punctured the Mullah balloon that was able to ride on its political success and later came back to haunt Bhutto as PNA.
Ahmedis supported Bhutto from the very beginning. They contributed to his political campaign and held some important positions in his government; still Bhutto failed to stand up for them as they never had the power to vote any one in or out of the government. Bhutto knew he could win elections without Ahmedi support but he could not keep his power base with mullah opposition.

However, I strongly disagree with Manto that that was the singular event that turned Pakistan’s ideological base upside down. Pakistan died in 1971. The ideological integral which was never there from the very beginning was formally buried on the beaches of Cox’s bazaar, Chattagaon and pultan maidan of Dhaka.

Bhutto talked about a new Pakistan. He was not talking metaphorically. He meant it. The new Pakistan should have gotten rid of its two nation theory thingamabob and should have established itself as a nationalist secular country following the Indian model.

The problem with Bhutto was that he understood what things mean but he was only interested in keeping himself in power. He wanted to stay a step ahead of the generals and he wanted to appease the groups that he perceived were close the army.

The issue was and still is that if Pakistan were to follow the Indian model, what is the point of its existence? There were several factors that justified Pakistan’s existence based on nationalism and secularism. Once the break with India was complete in 1947, the two nation theory should have buried in the hot sands of Sindh and Cholistan and smashed against the Rocky Mountains in Balochistan. 1971 gave a great opportunity to define Pakistan as a new state but Bhutto could not steer it to a pluralist, populist and secular polity. But it was wrong in the first place to expect that Bhutto would follow through on what he knew was the right thing to do.

However, in the larger scheme of things, the 1974 amendment is a minor blimp. It was not the defining moment. It was wrong and it should be condemned but Ahmedis paid a political price for being too close to throne from the early days of Pakistan. Ahmedis were the most vocal supporters of the two nation theory in Punjab and still are. The problem is that you will not find very many Ahmedi who support secularism. They are as dogmatic as their counterpart, the mullah.

HP your comments on the following statement


<<< Jinnah has a greater ``real`` role to play in the origin of the Mullah`s political inroads in Pakistani society (regardless of his secular vision/speeches) than any civilian leader thereafter >>>

Please explain your point keeping note of the history of Pakistan`s creation...

Thanks

Post-1971 Pakistan was ripe for going fundo. Absolved of a significant non-Muslim minority as well as its middle-class majority, there was little to hold back the serpents of Islam from entrenching their poisonous fangs into the heart of Pakistan.

There is nothing more shamefull than living under these legal spears of bigotry aimed at an innocent minority. The 1974 Amendment is akin to the Jim Crow laws of the South.

Re: # 67

Are you saying that the Hindus and Sikhs migrated to India out of their free will? They didn`t ask for separate country and it was their homeland. They had every right over Pakistan as any other natives and more than the momin immegrants from India.

P-Mishra,

They are not silly nor are they based out of bias. The majority of the killing happened in Gurdaspur and environs and if you honestly study case by case reports you will see how these figures are actually the safest and most accurate estimates. The figures as mentioned by historians vary from 200 000 to 600 000 and you may study individual cases to see how and why it happened.


Cobra,

Yes... I know according to Indian nationalist mythology... 5.5 million Muslims who were forced to migrate to Pakistan either migrated out of free will or did not migrate at all...

However the facts are that a situation was deliberately created by Mountbatten, possibly at the behest of Jawaharlal Nehru, to send as many refugees to Pakistan as possible to cripple the new country at birth.

These are the excerpts from a research article by Hugh Tinker in the Journal of Asian Studies (Aug 1977):

---

When Cyril Radcliffe, who had left Delhi on the eve of independence, called at
the Commonwealth Relations Office (CRO) after his arrival in London on 19 August,
it was observed that he appeared very tired. A memorandum was prepared for
the Minister of State (Arthur Henderson) to communicate to his colleagues; it gave
the observations of Radcliffe himself, and of the CRO, upon the award. In general,
Sir Cyril Radcliffe has stated that the Indian members of the Commission made no
attempt to reach compromises and the award represents his own decisions. . . . What
was difficult for them, particularly the Pakistan members, was that they were acting
under orders.

Concerning Gurdaspur, the memorandum observes:

The reason for this change is understood to be that the headwaters of the canals
which irrigate the Amritsar District lie in the Gurdaspur District and it is important
to keep as much as possible of these canals under one administration.

---

Gurdaspur was linked almost irretrievably with Amritsar by the Upper Bari Doab canal
system; but Ferozepore was equally vital to the canals of the Sutlej Valley Project,
overwhelmingly in Pakistan. Alternatively, if Radcliffe had regarded the majority
population argument as more important than the economic argument, then he ought
to have allocated Gurdaspur, less its Hindu-majority tahsil, to Pakistan. However,
Michel finds that Radcliffe`s solution was right overall, in relation to the greatest of
the canal systems (the Triple Canals Project), in preserving its unity within West
Punjab.

---

Doubtless, careful steps were taken to safeguard the secrecy of details of the award until its publication; but almost certainly Chaudhri Muhammad Ali would pass on to his chief, Liaqat Ali Khan, the news that Gurdaspur District with its bare Muslim majority would not be given to Pakistan.lo On I I August, Liaqat Ali, in an interview with Ismay, told him that if
Gurdaspur were given to India for political reasons, this would constitute a ``breach
of faith`` on the part of the British. On the Congress side, Sardar Patel-perhaps in
consequence of a ``leakage`` of information to him regarding the Bengal boundarybegan
to make it known that the award of the Chittagong Hill Tracts to Pakistan
would be resisted.

---

Radcliffe`s first award-that defining the Bengal boundary-was handed to the Viceroy`s office
late on the evening of Tuesday, 12 August. The Viceroy ``deliberately refrained
from reading it.`` He intended that, in future, no question of doubt could arise about
his influencing the decision. However, V. P. Menon did look at the award, and he
informed the Viceroy that ``Congress would blow up.`` On hearing this, Mountbatten
decided to postpone any announcement until after the I 5th. He was to depart
for the celebration in Karachi at noon next day; he would study the award after his
return to Delhi on Thursday night.

---

Hamdani ji,

A very good article with thought provoking arguments and analysis. But I agree with last two words the most which are `Absurdities abound`. Because if you stretch backwards `74 to `47 or even further to the year when the demand for Pak was first made, the absurdities become even more evident. Had India remained united it would have been a genuinely secular country (even better than what it is today) and then the Pak and the Muslims of the Indian subcontinent would not have to live in foolishness of sectarian divide which abound not only in Pak but in India too with some difference.

Can this be reversed? Just curious. If not, what you foresee about the future of Pak? I for one, see a very violent and hideous future. Really. And allow me to say, it would be for too much of religion.

Samar

dost-mittar #: ``And here is my opinion on this topic in one sentence. Ordinary Pakistani does not ordinarily care about the Mullahs but when the slogan of ``islam khatrei mein is raised``, all bets are off.``

this is an correct statement..........and is true for all religions, historically.........

the ordinary pakistanis (as well as the extraordinary ones) are not a follower of mullahs........they are a follower of religion, but not of the mullah variety.......mullahism and secularism (the only two topics on religion that get discussed on chowk) are totally alien to pakistan........

........take a look at the history of the areas of pakistan.........what was the status of mullahs in this area.........is there any significant islamic orthodoxy that appeared from here........are their tombs of famous orthodox islamic scholars here..........i certainly haven`t seen any.......do name a few........

.........the area is awash with tombs of sufis etc..........they still, till today, get millions of visitors..........the number of people who visit data darbar, alone, today is more than the combined number of people who visit any orthodoxy........data darbar is just one site.......

........the status of a mullah, rightly or wrongly, has been quite low in the geographical areas of pakistan..........read every thing from bulleh shah to heer ranjha to parveen shakir.......

the status of religion, howeve,