Preventing More Lal Masjids

The biggest lie that Harish mian keeps spinning is that Chaura Chauri was the first incident of violence in the Non-Cooperation movement. Gandhi-led Khilafat Movement was full of rioting and religious violence...



``Last weekend has seen dreadful riots in Calcutta. The estimates of casualties is 3000 dead and 17000 injured. The Bengal Congress are convinced that all the trouble was deliberately engineered by the Muslim League Ministry, but no satisfactory evidence to that effect has reached me yet. It is said that the decision to have a public holiday on 16th August was the cause of trouble, but I think this is very far-fetched. There was a public holiday in Sind and there was no trouble there. At any rate, whatever the causes of the outbreak, when it started, the Hindus and Sikhs were every bit as fierce as Muslims. The present estimate is that appreciably more Muslims were killed than the Hindus``


As for Statesman... if you had seen I had quoted the editorial of Blitz, the Congress Mouthpiece... which holds a diametrically opposite view:


Meanwhile the Congress Mouthpiece ``Blitz`` wrote this about the direct action day:

The worst enemies of the Muslim League cannot help envying the leadership of Mr Jinnah. Last week`s cataclysmic transformation of the League from the reactionary racket of the Muslim Nawabs, Noons, and Knights into a revolutionary mass organisation dedicated, by word if not be deed, to an anti-Imperialist struggle, compels us to express the sneaking national wish that a diplomat and strategist of Jinnah`s proven calibre were at the held of the Indian National Congress. There is no denying the fact that by his latest master-stroke of diplomacy Jinnah has outbid, outwitted and outmaneuvered the British and Congress alike and confounded the common national indictment that the Muslim League is a parasite of British Imperialism

Now why would a Congress Newspaper praise Jinnah if Direct Action Day was all that you are making it out to be...

The fact is that Calcutta was an exception... a well thought out plan by the Congress which sabotaged the League`s programme for temporary political gain....


More on Direct Action

It is funny how Indians here use the word `Direct Action` as if it means some kind of violence in of itself... Infact in the examples of `Direct Action` ... this website speaks of `Non-violent Direct Action` by Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr....

http://www.free-definition.com/Direct-action.html

Direct Action simply means civil disobedience... as Dr. King put it:

``Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored.``


Now consider H V Hodson`s description of the League Programme:

``The working committee followed up by calling on Muslims through out India to observe 16th August as direct action day. On that Day meeting would be held all over the country to explain League`s resolution. These meetings and processions passed of- as was manifestly the Central league leaders` intention- without more than commonplace and limited disturbance with one vast and tragic exception... what happened was more than anyone could have foreseen.``

(Page 166 `The Great Divide`)


Explaining Direct Action Jinnah made it clear that the direct Action will not be in any form but in peaceful form...


``16th August is not for the purpose of resorting to Direct Action in any form or shape, Therefore I enjoin upon the Muslims to carry our the instructions and abide by them strictly and conduct themselves peacefuly and in a disciplined manner.``

Press Release Jinnah 14th August 1946

The second paragraph should start with:

``Now coming to Harish mian`s lies about the Direct Action Day:``

Dear Dr. ``Peace``,

There are many questions that are unanswered in my view regarding the whole Lal Masjid saga and operation ``silence`` - which has been the bloodiest and noisiest of all operations! I fail to understand the liberal stand on this affair as well as the civil society perspective on the whole issue. You have been part of many protests to promote peace where were you and the Citizen`s Peace Commission when the operation was being carried out? I hate this liberal stance where you silently watch so many innocent people being killed because you know that one day you will be rid of all militants and those outfits that are self-proclaimed moral brigades, just so that a certain kind of liberalism prevails for your benefit. You and others like you could have arranged for a massive protest outside the G-6 area to ward off the stance the government took in the end. Where was your idea of peace? Where is our sense of humanity ? Do such militants deserve to die in this manner just because they are promoting an ideology that you fear might curb your personal freedom? In my humble opinion, this operation which the government has termed ``silence`` has further bared many `open secrets`` of the government - this is an opportunity for the civil society to highligh the complete and utter failure of the government, register a case against the military government that is now responsible for many deaths (including May 12, Karachi) and pressure it to accept its failure and open up the whole process for further scrutiny.

You will agree that this case CAN NOT be understood in isloation - there is whole history of total government support (especially Ejaz ul Haq) to Abdur Rashid and his followers. In my view the total and utmost repsonsibility of what happened has to be borne by the government and I believe that a certain pressure has to be maintained for this whole bloody episode to be kept alive. There are too many unanswered questions, the death toll for instance is hidden - figures just don`t match up, no reporter or media person is allowed to access hospitals or the area near the Masjid. The way the government conducted the whole operation in secrecy bears testimony to the possible human rights abuses inside the complex. As I write this, the news is that media persons will be taken on a tour of the masjid - what do they expect to capture on this disaster tourism when all the bodies would have been removed and what probably remains are the remains of a dying building.

I believe that we have to pick up the pieces and protest the lack of information provided, the utter and sheer use of military force against its own people (a bourgeoning trend in Pakistan - Waziristan, Balochistan) and especially in this particular case against its own project of talibinisation to make a case of extremism in Pakistan - Musharraf`s only and last resort to staying in control and to show people that he is all for curbing extremism but at the same time keeping it alive.

What do you say? Shall we arrange a protest to have a full enquiry into this whole thing or would you run away from even the humanistic elements of something that you may never want to be associated with. Dr. Hoodbhoy (liberal element) siding with the militants on humanitarian priniciples sounds scary, but think about it and let me know.

As for Gandhi`s KM and NM...

The incredible violence that broke out with Moplahs killing the Non-muslims... was the direct result of the encouragement by Gandhi...

Did Gandhi call off the Khilafat Movement or his flirtation with Islamic fundamentalists? No. He declared that they were true freedom fighters...

In other words gandhi could do it... but Pakistan Army can`t.

According to Harish mian... the fact that Jinnah had taken to sleeping on the floors anticipating arrest is the smoking gun...

The World of Masadi finally has another member.

#127 by Yasser

Now Yasser mian expects us to believe that after the Leaguers issued one call after the other inciting Muslims to shed their blood and if opportunity arose, Hindus` blood, raging Muslims were expected to calm down by Jinnah issuing a piddly statement that too in ENGLISH. It would be downright hilarious if it weren`t so pathetic.

If such is the dishonesty of the self-appointed defenders of Jinnah, is it any wonder that the TB-ridden crook is not known outside of the subcontinent, while Gandhi is worshipped everywhere?


For Majumdar bhai, here are a few statements by Muslim Leaguers in the days preceding the Direct Action Day:

Jinnah: ``To-day we have forged a pistol and are in a position to use it``.

Jinnah: ``Direct Action by Muslims would lead to one hundred times more destruction than the Direct Action of the Hindus``.

Nawabzada Liaqat Ali Khan: ``Direct Action means resort to non-constitutional methods, and that can take any form which may suit the conditions under which we live. We cannot eliminate any methods. Direct Action means any action against the Law.``

Sardar Abdur Rab Nishtar: ``Pakistan can only be achieved through shedding blood of ourselves, and if need be, and if opportunity arose, by shedding blood of others. Muslims are no believers in Ahimsa.``

Ghulam Mustafa Shah Gilani: ``Any attempt to prevent the establishment of Pakistan would lead to bloodshed.``

Sardar Shaukat Hyat Khan: ``The Punjab Muslims do not believe in non-violence and should not, therefore, be given cause for grievance because once the Muslim lion is infuriated it would become difficult to subdue him.``

Sir Feroze Khan Noon: ``I tell you this much that if we find that we have to fight Great Britain for placing us under one Central Hindu Raj, then the havoc which Muslims will plays will put to shame what Jenghez and Halaku Khan did.``

And just what did Jinnah do to shut them up? NOTHING.

#131 by Yasser

You`re living up to your name, Yasser mian!

1. Why would a man used to the cushy comforts of his mansion suddenly take to sleeping on the floors, unless he was trying to get used to a prison?

2. This was reported by his very own Orient Press, so maybe they knew better than you, or probably were simply more honest than you?

Re: # 132

Harish mian,

First of all you don`t have primary source evidence for any of these statements. All these statements are taken from a third rate website article... For example... The statement attributed to Sir Feroze Khan Noon ise entirely false. Similarly it is highly unlikely that Abdul Rab Nishtar said what is attributed to him... Liaqat Ali Khan`s comment is hardly offensive (unless Congress` entire policy was offensive)... and this Ghulam Mustafa Gelani seems like a small fish from Multan side perhaps... whose statement I have not found on record.


But assuming that all these statements were indeed made... did you miss this bit:

16th August is not for the purpose of resorting to Direct Action in any form or shape, Therefore I enjoin upon the Muslims to carry our the instructions and abide by them strictly and conduct themselves peacefuly and in a disciplined manner. by Jinnah...

Incidentally ... none of these leaders that you now quote were ever implicated in any violence... since Direct Action Day was peaceful in all parts of India... Suhrawardy who is held responsible by many Indians does not seem to have made any of those statements.


Essentially you have no argument...

Here is the official record:

``Last weekend has seen dreadful riots in Calcutta. The estimates of casualties is 3000 dead and 17000 injured. The Bengal Congress are convinced that all the trouble was deliberately engineered by the Muslim League Ministry, but no satisfactory evidence to that effect has reached me yet. It is said that the decision to have a public holiday on 16th August was the cause of trouble, but I think this is very far-fetched. There was a public holiday in Sind and there was no trouble there. At any rate, whatever the causes of the outbreak, when it started, the Hindus and Sikhs were every bit as fierce as Muslims. The present estimate is that appreciably more Muslims were killed than the Hindus``


Now coming to your stupid comment about sleeping on the floor... so assuming that Jinnah was apprehensive of going to prison... and given that Gandhi and Nehru were in and out of prisons many time... how exactly are you tryng to make it relevant the issue at hand?

Seems like you`ve been signing your name in bold letters...

Mr. Hoodbhoy:

Not confronting Lal Masjid administration until July 3rd was actually a wise decision on the govt`s part. Aunty Shamim was beaten up, Chinese massage therapists were abducted then released, a children`s library was occupied. But no loss of life occured. Maulana Abdur Rasheed Ghazi was hawkish one day, and mellow the next day. During negotiations with Chaudhry Shujaat from March till July, this man rarely spoke about Shariah imposition. Some of the demands he made in those talks were quite specific and not entirely unreasonable e.g. reconstruction of mosques that were demolished in Islamabad.

However, despite his posturing Ghazi failed to win the support of major political parties including MMA and leading religious scholars. Justice Iftikhar Chaudhry`s campaign dwarfed the Maulana`s stature for a few months. Some people even blamed Musharraf for propping up Ghazi, but recent developments have proven these allegations wrong.

There are also fundamental differences between Ghazi`s position on Shariah and that of MMA or conservative PML(Q) members. The latter are campaigning for the espousal of Shariah through elections and parliament. A Hasba or Shariah bill passed into law by the Parliament enjoys legitimacy and sanction of the people. Once passed into law, the civil bureaucracy would be tasked with its implementation, and the judiciary would be responsible for oversight. Unless you are a hardcore Islamophobe, there is really no reason to oppose a Shariah bill passed by the parliament, in a country where 95% of the population is Muslim anyway.

But Ghazi favors Mullah Umar-style Shariah imposed through force, circumventing the parliament, judiciary and civil bureaucracy. Ghazi`s Shariah has no penal codes, no legislation and no checks & balances. His Shariah is a vehicle of personal glory.

The killing of police personnel on July 3rd revealed Ghazi`s true intentions. With hindsight, we can conclude that this man was a clever tactician. He used the dialogue with govt to gain time, and prepare for the military operation. Perhaps he was being propped by foreign jihadis inside the mosque. By blowing hot and cold, he disguised his true intentions even from the govt for almost 3 months. And finally, he picked a fight with the govt when he thought the govt would be unable to respond because of floods in Baluchistan, the Justice Chaudhry challenge and pressure from political opponents gathered in London.

This time he miscalculated.

Lal Masjid is the story of one man`s unbridled quest for power. It is not representative of the average mosques or madrassas in Pakistan, which has neither the resources nor the temerity to fight the govt.

If we want to prevent more Lal Masjids, we need to ensure that mosques are run by either Auqaf Department or Wafaq-ul-Madaris, not by individuals. Maulanas should only be appointed as caretakers by these institutions.

#134 by Yasser

First of all you don`t have primary source evidence for any of these statements. All these statements are taken from a third rate website article.

Yasser playing clairvoyant here? Now why don`t you even tell us which ``third-rate`` website it is from?

The statement attributed to Sir Feroze Khan Noon ise entirely false.

And what`s the evidence to back your statement up?

Similarly it is highly unlikely that Abdul Rab Nishtar said what is attributed to him... Liaqat Ali Khan`s comment is hardly offensive (unless Congress` entire policy was offensive)... and this Ghulam Mustafa Gelani seems like a small fish from Multan side perhaps... whose statement I have not found on record.

Looks like once again, you`re confused between opinion and fact. We don`t need your opinion, you can keep it to yourself, thank you very much. If you have any evidence, share it with us.

But assuming that all these statements were indeed made... did you miss this bit:

In case you didn`t notice it, my argument was that after all those bloodcurdling statements Leaguers made and then issuing a statement in ENGLISH calling for a peaceful DAD, only morons like you are likely to be fooled by Jinnah`s gimmickry. But the vast majority of Muslim masses weren`t too educated to understand what he`d said, which is why what followed was exactly what he intended.

Incidentally ... none of these leaders that you now quote were ever implicated in any violence...

Nor was Jinnah, but since when did conviction become THE basis for proving someone innocent or guilty? Are you really a lawyer? The way you put forth stupid arguments, I`m having serious doubts.

Now coming to your stupid comment about sleeping on the floor... so assuming that Jinnah was apprehensive of going to prison... and given that Gandhi and Nehru were in and out of prisons many time... how exactly are you tryng to make it relevant the issue at hand?

Yasser mian, you can try this trick elsewhere. Gandhi and Nehru being in and out of prison is out of context here. The fact is that Jinnah, who never experienced a single day in prison all his life, knew that he could be arrested for having incited violence, which is why he was sleeping on the floors.

Re: # 70

neembu

((((They do not consider as immoral such things as exploiting workers, cheating customers, bribing officials,
((( beating their wives)))))]

neembu ....I am heeeeeeeeeere........

Dear Harish mian,

As far as I can see you`ve not produce a single statement that proves your point. Your claim that Jinnah was sleeping on the floor and was anticipating arrest blah blah and hence he planned violence is just laughable...

On the other hand I have quoted Jinnah asking Muslims to remain peaceful... which historians say they remained ... and then you have a secretive government report/correspondence that says that there was no evidence of Muslim League`s involvement....Given that by all primary source accounts more many many more Muslims were killed, it is quite clear to anyone with some grey matter what went down in Calcutta.
People like you believe that if you repeat a lie long enough it might just become the truth ... well truth shall remain the truth.. this is my conviction.

Given that not even a single FIR was lodged against any of the ML leaders in this respect, it is quite that even the Congressites didn`t believe their own claims and knew full well how Calcutta got bloody. So instead of arguing pigheadedly... come up with something substantial because I am done responding to inane and stupid baseless arguments that oly you are capable of.

majumdar #114, harish_hyd #121:

I think that the legitimator in chief was Hazrat Allama Sir Mohammad Iqbal Lahori (patron saint of Pakistan) and the facilitator in chief was QA MA Jinnah (pbuh). At least that seems the most obvious interpretation.

#138 by Yasser

As far as I can see you`ve not produce a single statement that proves your point. Your claim that Jinnah was sleeping on the floor and was anticipating arrest blah blah and hence he planned violence is just laughable...

Here is the Time reporting that Muslims started the violence:

Direct Action

``Rioting Moslems went after Hindus with guns, knives and clubs, looted shops, stoned newspaper offices, set fire to Calcutta`s British business district. Hindus retaliated by firing Moslem mosques and miles of Moslem slums.``

I`m sure you know the meaning of the word RETALIATE, don`t you?

Here`s another excerpt:

``Like other Indian leaders, Jinnah denounced the ``fratricidal war.`` But most observers wondered how Jinnah could fail to know what would happen when he called for ``direct action``. Shortly before the riots broke out, his own news agency (Orient Press) reported that Jinnah, anticipating violence, was sleeping on the floor these nights—to toughen up for a possible sojourn in jail.``

So tell us, when most observers (I have more of them which I shall produce) could anticipate violence, Jinnah didn`t. Was he a fool or was he high on something?

On the other hand I have quoted Jinnah asking Muslims to remain peaceful... which historians say they remained ...

Aww really? Which historian said Muslims remained peaceful? Can you please quote that historian?

Given that not even a single FIR was lodged against any of the ML leaders in this respect, it is quite that even the Congressites didn`t believe their own claims and knew full well how Calcutta got bloody.

Again, how is conviction the basis for establishing someone`s innocence/guilt?

BTW, you also claimed ``The statement attributed to Sir Feroze Khan Noon ise entirely false``. I asked you to prove it. Don`t talk out of your a$$, prove it.

#139 by AlephNull

Yep..seems plausible to me..thanks!

Faruk: Thanks. Since Hoodbhoy is too good to engage in discussions on chowk, I dont waste time reading his articles anymore. If I want to merely read serious stuff, there are plenty of other things outside chowk that I can read. So, I just participate in the posts that are exchanged using his thread as a forum.

:-)