Jinnah and the Islamic State – Setting the Record Straight

Re: # 270
This is partially true. In West Bengal, moslems are basically descendents of lower caste people and are looked down upon due to the economic /social class. This is not particular to moslems. With time, due to good governence, the social disparity has almost disappeared and thus, large section of OBC and significant number of SC/ST has joined the so called mainstream middle class. Furthermore, those who has migrated from East Bengal, were the cream of the society there. To compete, in any field with them is not mean task.They are who's who of the world ( Pandit Ravisankar, Satyajit Ray , Amartya Sen, Dr. Satyen Bose etc...) . Anywhere in the world, moslems are not that advanced to compete with these people educationally/culturally.So, without any specific discrimination, for pure academic reason, moslems are the most backward people after the tribals in western bengal.

Re: # 360

jameel

You say:

"It’s a fashion these days to pass sweeping statements concerning Islam by looking at the muslims. The gap is very wide."

There is no gap dear. Can you define the 'Muslim' in term of Quran. Munir had failed to do that. 'Muslim' simply means one who surrenders, not necessarily to God alone.

It’s a fashion these days to pass sweeping statements concerning Islam by looking at the muslims. The gap is very wide. Writer would have known this if he ever read Quran with an intention to understand it.
Be it Zia Ahmed’s Linguistic Imperialism or what ever Khalid Suhail writes and even from Beena Sarwar, they are all meant to divide the people as us and you. Us the intelligent and you the stupid. If God is an illusion for them there is no point in talking about illusions. Islam has always been a soft target. It is often ridiculed by those born in muslim homes. These and many more writers try to philosophy simple issues and present it as a revolutionary thought and most essential to the world. Editors should not allow Chowk to become instrumental in spreading their delusions.

Re: # 358

Woh to Lal Qille pih Jhanda lehrana chahte the magar hua kia. Bengali aksariat ne Musalmani aksariat ke khilaf vote de dia(vote hi nahein dia balkih lakhon jaanoon ki qurbaani di) aur yoon Quide Azam ke Pakistan ko hi torh ke rakh dia. Aur aaj jisko Pakistan kaha jata he wahaan musalmanon ka kia hashar ho raha he.

What a homeland for muslims it has come out to be that they are trying every mean to run away from lt.

Why Pakistan was created? I don't understand what was the need by the professor to waste so much of his time and energy in finding the answer rather than paying more attention to his own filed of study ?


The simple answer is:

The unarguable fact is that the Muslims of India wanted a separate homeland of theirs and they struggled for it until they succeeded in creating such a homeland in the shape of Pakistan!

Twisting and distorting the Quaids speeches such as follows is just to appease the mentally upset people who unfortunately call them as 'liberal muslims'' instead of hypocrites, that what they are. They often refer to Quaid's foll apeeches:

“You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed – that has nothing to do with the business of the State…. You will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.” [Aug 11, 1947, Jinnah’s address to the First Constituent Assembly]



Similarly, Jinnah had indeed come out forcefully against theocracy:

"Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims-Hindus, Christians and Parsis – but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan." [Feb. 1948, Jinnah’s broadcast address to the people of the United States of America]


It is clear from these speeches that:
1. A land of the Muslims has to be governed by the laws of Islam otherwise, as a matter of common sense, one can ask as to why did the Muslim's aspire for a separate homeland of theirs??

The writer and many of his like conceal the fact that minorities have complete rights in a Muslim or Islamic state except that which is not permitted by the injunctions of faith. It's nonsense to say that minorities are not enjoying equal social rights in Pakistan. On the contrary they are better off than many Muslims! If observing Namaz,roza, zakat, zakat,jihad, hajj are mechanisms of Talibansm then let us stop calling us Muslims. The writer is just trying to confuse and confound Islamic teachings with some of the wrong interpretations made by the Taliban or so called fundamentals. Let us join hands to bring those people in line with our faith rather than demean it through unscrupulous propagands , especially that relating to the rights of minorities and influencing governance.

Re: # 354

More little knowledge. The GOI did not declare Jinnah's house enemy property and it was not confiscated.

The legal status is quite clear.

Re: # 346

Again Harimau... little knowledge is very dangerous and you never cease to amaze me with how little you actually know.

Gandhi agreed and put his john hancock to an agreement:


The Congress does not challenge but accepts that the Muslim League now is the authoritative representative of an overwhelming majority of the Muslims of India. As such and in accordance with democratic principles they alone have today an unquestionable right to represent the Muslims of India. But the Congress does not agree that any restriction or limitation should be put upon the Congress to choose such representatives as they think proper from amongst the members of the Congress.

Gandhi agreed to it and signed it. So did Jinnah. This meant that both parties moved fundamentally from their extreme positions? Gandhi accepted that Jinnah had the right to speak for Muslims alone and Jinnah accepted that Congress could nominate Muslim members from their own party to the government.


Now coming to your comment about Mandal... even if we accept your notion about the interim government... one wonders why Jinnah agreed to make him the Law Minister though... your claim falls flat on its face as usual.

Re: # 345

Isn't it ironic that you claim that Jinnah - the middle class hero - was a facilitator but the greatest benefactor of feudals - archetypal feudal ZAB- was a hero...Wow. Amazing logic

Ref mohar11 #138

[But then J-man was already dead... too bad, the guy didn't live to see the cr@p unfold - it would have been quite a spectacle - both J-man and his "law minister" high-tailing together out of pakiland via wagah border :) ]

Jinnah-bhai was already planning to leave the Land of the Pure and retire in his palatial home in Bombay... except that India declared his house to be Enemy Property and confiscated it. So, Jinnah-bhai had no choice but to live and die in the Land of the Pure.

When Altaf Hussain of the MQM says that the partition of India was the biggest blunder, many Pakistanis scoff at him even calling him a traitor. But the fact is he is dead right.
Even the renowned and respected Islamic scholar Dr Rafiq Zakaria, father of Newsweek editor Fareed Zakaria, Minister in the state of Bombay and then Maharashtra, till the end of his life maintained that the partition of India was the biggest tragedy for it baecame the source of untold misery for Muslims of India.
MAJ in his speeches trying to justify his folly often referred to Muslims in India as a minority who faced a bleak future in undivided India. This is proving to be quite a misleading statement. If India were undivided today, of the population of 135 crore, Muslims would be approximately 50 Crore and Hindus would be 85 crore. That makes a ratio of 5:8. The ratio would have been ideal to ensure that Hindus would not been a overwhelming majority while the Muslims would not be a pushoverable minority. Just the right balance to ensure a happy secular state.
Surely crores of people would not have had to leave their hearths, the only expenditure on defence would have been in facing Chinese monster , the old Hindustani culture would have been preserved, in short, there would have been a lot of harmony and much less misery in the subcontinent.
But as fate would have it, a whisky guzzling, pork eating Muslim grandson of a Hindu parent managed to sway an undecided part of the population to separate, and there we are, two poor countries ready to go at each other's throats at the slightest excuse.
Wah re Quaid!

Ref Mullah32 #156

[Urstruly #153.... have you edited the Quran to take out inconvenient references to being honest in order to make room for maudoodism?]

How about editing the Koran to take out all references to killing the kaffirs put in by the Prophet to End All Prophets, viz. Mohammad bin Camel?

Ref anil #189

[What I have not been able to find is once the decline of the Mughals had set in, why Hindus could not come in to fill it?]

Read the history books again.

The Mahrattas were knocking at the doors of Delhi. Look at a 1855 map of India.

Who ruled Gwalior? Here is a clue: it was not a Muslim.

Ref diarrhea-i-dil #203

[By seeing the reports which borivilli_express..sent ...i wonder ..how cheap ..a human ..can fall to...by rapping innocent girls..and women..andsd then burning them alive...LANAT on all those..and all who support them even in heart...]

Ask that of Indonesian Muslims who, when they rioted against Suharto, raped Chinese women.

Exactly what was the complicity of Chinese women in the misrule of Suharto?

Ref borivili_express #205

I notice you have nothing to say about the burning of 60+ Hindu pilgrims at Godhra which PRECEDED this retaliation by Hindus.

Understand one thing: the Moguls are not in power in India for Muslim atrocities against Hindus to go unpunished.

Notice how the Muslims of Gujarat haven't attacked any Hindu pilgrims again. At least you people are fast learners.

Ref harish_hyd # 225

[Sure..the ML which campaigned for a separate nation on the basis of religious differences was non-communal and the Congress which called for a united India was communal. So what else is new?]

Isn't that the view in India too today? That the Muslim League is a non-communal party fit to be included in the UPA but the BJP is a communal party?

Don't blame rozaiba or any other Pakistani when Jwahirullah Nehru and his followers hold the identical opinion.

Ref zeemax #232

[I don't subscribe to this common ancestry theory. Hamidm2 does. We are a different people altogether, genetically.]

Most humanity is 98% chimpanzee in that that is the amount of DNA common to both species.

Maybe you are claiming Muslims have the additional 2% chimp DNA.

Ref Yasser Latif Hamdani #244

[Jogindranath Mandal's appointment as a law minister indicates one of the two things below:

1. Either Jinnah did not intend to Islamise the laws or else he would have chosen an Islamic scholar to head the law ministry but he didn't. He chose a Hindu.

or

2. Jinnah believed even qualified Non-muslims could interpret and vet bills trying to introduce Islamic law.

Given that Mandal was a lawyer and not a scholar of Islam or Islamic laws (unlike say the Parsi D F Mulla) ... it can be said that it was not a decision made because Jinnah thought Mandal was the best suited scholar for Islam even if Hindu... Remember Mandal was before this chosen to represent the Muslims at the interim government in United India by Jinnah.


Add to this the fact that during all Powerful Jinnah's government, not a single piece of legislation was enacted that sought to Islamise Pakistan... we can safely conclude that Jinnah's choice of Mandal as the law minister was a strong message sent to his followers.]

Yasser, dear boy, Jogendra Nath Mondal was a prototype of what Pakistan is today: a condom which is to be discarded after its usefulness is over.

Don't read anything more than that into Jinnah-bhai's use of Mondal.

And Jinnah-bhai did NOT appoint Mondal to represent the Muslims at the interim government in United India. Jinnah-bhai, failing in his claim that only he represented all the Muslims and that Congress had no right to appoint Muslim members of the Interim Government even if they were members of the Congress (particularly IF they were members of the Congress) then claimed that he was the representative of the Backward Castes too and to prove that gave up one valuable Muslim League appointment to install Mondal in the government.

When Mondal realized exactly what he was up against in the real world of Pakistan, he figured being a Backward Caste person India at least guaranteed him his life whereas being a non-Muslim in Pakistan deprived him of even this basic right and decided to return to India.

Do not attempt to whitewash the genocidal crimes of one of the guiltiest criminals of the modern world.

The greatest facilitator of the feudals and the colonials was MAJ who using the excuse of Muslims of India, using them as scapegoats and killing over a million of them, worked to protect the landed aristocracy of West Pakistan from the rural uprisings in India that were capitalized by Gandhi. ZAB was the one that challenged those feudal elite for the first time ever representing the rural masses.

With all respect and appreciation for Qaaide Aazam, I wonder why should he be taken as the final authority. He did his job as a leader, but he was not the last prophet. Whatever might have been his views, he has to be measured by the yardstick and on the touchstone of the Quran and Hadeeth. In fact he was not the Qaaide Aazam (the paramount leader), he was a Qaaid. Qaaide Aazam is none bu Muhammad PBUH.

ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN (Just the name)

Please do not get fooled by the name. The name is there to fool only the non-english speaking and illiterate mullahs and pro talibans in the Pakland.

Regardless of what one calls Pakistan, it is certainly secular in nature. Pakistan is free-er than USA and India combined.

This is why:

1) One is free to do the five pillars of Islam and even preach the religion.

2) Alcohol is available through the permit shops.

3) Prostitution is rampant.

4) Jirga and sardari system is also rampant, basically running a parallel legal system.

5) One is free to do honor killings

6) One can marry his daughter or sister to Quran.

7) You can even give your daughter or sister to your enemy if for some reason you have committed murder and now you are shitting in your shalwar and trying to save your life.

8) Build your house anywhere you like on anyone’s land.

9) Want to keep a weapon, no problem, keep any thing you want. Stingers are also available if you got the dough.

10) Bribes are now the law of the land.

11) Instead of hiring a lawyer, you can hire a judge thus making sure you get the outcome you want out of a case.

12) If you are fed up with the interest based system, no problem, we have profit and loss sharing accounts available.

13) Like to have more than one wife, you are free to have up to four at a time.

So why is Hoodbhoy is still caught up with this discussion about Islamic Pakistan or Secular Pakistan is beyond my comprehension. We are by any means SECULAR and beyond. In fact we should start calling Pakistan THE SECUALR COUNTRY in the world.

Asfand Siddiqui
Sacramento CA

Re: # 341

montolives

You are right that I have not read much either about Gandhi or Jinnah. As a young boy I had seen Jinnah very close by so much so that I could have touched him, but I had got too overwhelmed by his transcendent personality to do so. In fact I never saw another leader like him all my life. As regards opposition against him and the Pakistan movement by the so called Islamists who can know better than my generation.

I will read your article at leisure. Meanwhile I would like you to read an interesting article by Ehjaz Haider which appeared in the Daily Times a few days back:

"THE OTHER COLUMN: Not enough — Ejaz Haider
What does one do when an entire people decide to become grumpy or Thornapplesque. It is difficult to send millions on a vacation, except perhaps to Antarctica; they can’t all be sent to shrinks either

Growing up, life was simple.

Bhutto Sahib had emerged as a Messiah, Punjabi cinema was trying to be erotic and failing only because of lousy production and the size of heroines, people generally considered it bad form to blow themselves up, the Ahmadiyya were still Muslims and bootleggers were unheard of.

In other words, God was in His Heaven and all was right with this country and we didn’t need a Browning to tell us this.

This was also the time when we were confident of being Muslim. In any case, it was easy enough to be one. It didn’t prevent us from smiling, laughing and enjoying all that makes life worth living. The elders would pray for us while we did our own thing; the chidings, when they came, were begotten of affection, and we all said our little prayers at night to a benign and understanding God while smoking on the sly, truanting and generally being naughty.

Then at some point we decided that we were not Muslim-enough, a vexing thought that has since snowballed into an avalanche under which we all lie buried and asphyxiated.

One doesn’t need to be a shrink to know how debilitating the feeling of inadequacy can be. If we are supposed to be Muslim but aren’t Muslim-enough, it must make us irritable and mad.

Indeed, the feeling of not being anything-enough can be killing as Brutus Thornapple, the born loser, will tell anyone. My personal favourite is the one in which Thornapple is on a shrink’s couch and the shrink asks: “So, you think you suffer from feelings of inadequacy. How severe would you say they are?”

Thornapple replies: “They’re so severe... Even my inferiority complex is inadequate!”

Not being enough-anything no one wants to be. Women who think they are not endowed-enough want to change that and are, in most cases, prepared to go through much trouble and pain. For what: to be enough, adequate.

From the emails I get despite all the firewalls and filters, it seems to me that even men have been afflicted with the I-ain’t-adequate syndrome. There are ways and means to enhance the sense of manhood and from the traffic of unwanted mail it appears there is a market for this fraud. Clearly, some men are prepared to take all sorts of risks to become man-enough, adequate. The mind boggles.

But imagine. If the feeling of being not-enough in the secular — by which I mean biological — domain can make people accept so much risk and absorb so much pain, what might man not be capable of doing unto himself and others if he were struck by the thought one day, as we seem to have been, that he is not Muslim-enough?

Such then has been our plight. Add to this the fact that every time we think we are now Muslim-enough, someone stands up and warns, “Damned be him who says enough!”

Such a one is also normally a gentleman who has taken it upon himself to tell us that all our troubles are owed to our remaining inadequate and because there is not enough Islam in this land. If empirical evidence is anything to go by, and by this I mean the legislation, the increased and increasing pieties, the number of mosques and seminaries, the rhetoric, the extremism and a host of other indicators, then I would take the presumption of saying that at no time in this land has there been more Islam than there is now and I include the period right up to the time of Mohammad bin Qasim to which our history textbooks retrace the Two-Nation theory.

And yet, we contest our quantification of how much Islam there already is and how much more of it is needed, an exercise whose absurdity reminds me of the two Sardars on a motorbike fighting for the window seat.

It seems like we have reached a point where God is either not in Heaven or all is not right with us. Since I am not aware of the current position of the Lord, I suspect the trouble is more imminent than transcendent which, translated into plain English means all’s not right with us.

In normal life when someone is agitated or frustrated or unhappy with the state of affairs, we advise him to relax, go on a vacation, let his hair down and so on. But what does one do when an entire people decide to become grumpy or Thornapplesque. It is difficult to send millions on a vacation, except of the kind that was available to people in the former Soviet Union; neither can millions be sent to shrinks. What to do?

It’s a tough one. Those who have brought us to this pass insist that we are suffering because we are inadequate; but the more we try to be adequate the more inadequate we become. The equation is insoluble. Small wonder that some of us have decided to blow themselves and others up than to live with such a great feeling of inadequacy.

Life, downhill, is not simple anymore.

Ejaz Haider is Consulting Editor of The Friday Times and Op-Ed Editor of Daily Times. He can be reached at sapper@dailytimes.com.pk"

"The way to hell is paved with good intentions" as GBS had said.

Teshah,

Then you've obviously not read much about Jinnah. Jinnah was for 30 years completely committed to Hindu Muslim Unity.
He was more interested in British giving India to Indians than Gandhi ever was. Please read my article here:http://pakistaniat.com/2006/12/25/pakistan-jinnah-legislative-career/

I hope you know Gandhi was a loyal British recruiter and was probably planted to give British an excuse not to give responsible dominion status to India in 1925.

And Jinnah's Two Nation Theory- if you can call it that since it was hardly his- a theory aiming at consociationalism- has nothing to do with the extremist Islamists. Remember they were his biggest opponents calling him Kafir-e-Azam and Pakistan "Kafiristan".

Re: # 336

montolives

He may be, but he was interested more in his TNT than in 'Quit India' by the British. In cosequence; what happened as a result of all this was a carnage unprecedented in history; first, in 1947 and again in 1971.

The history of Pakistan
can be summed up in a single line:
'Jinnah's English created Pakistan and his ill-advised and undemocratic insistence on Urdu to be treated as a national language broke it'.

Where we stand today: the 'TNT', a political weapon for advocating Partition of India used by Jinnah, is being used by the extremists to day as a murderous weapon to kill people indiscriminately all over the world.

So, what had started with Gandhi's 'Aahinsa' (Non-violence) and Jinnah's TNT has brought us virtually to the brink of a war against civilization.

May God help us!

Regards

to partition each and every village of India i.e creating Pakistn in every village and town of India.

I already said that Jinnah talked abt population exchange.
Either Jinnah must be a moron or it must be u.

Re: # 334

I've already responded to this Folio.

There was really no locus standi for the Congress to insist on the partition of Punjab and Bengal and if it did , every province of India should have similarly partitioned.

Re: # 335

Dear Teshah,

If you look at the time line, Jinnah was on the scene way before Gandhi.

Re: # 325
Montolives

Thank you for your generous remarks about me. 'Man aanum kih man daanam' (I am what I know I am). All else is a myth. Gandhi was a myth and Jinnah was a myth. All passing shows. 'Rahe naam Allah ka'. 'Saancha naam uska, baaqi sab jhoot'.

I belong to the generation which saw all this passing show in the history of the subcontinent in their conscious lives. We saw the majestic power of the British Imperialism when dogs and Indians were not allowed in railway restaurants. It was that 'Dhoti Badshah' Gandhi who dared to stand up against that disgraceful position to which the Indians had been submissively subjected to by the awe of the British Raj. It was he who restored the dignity of the Indians and gave them courage to rise up against the imperialism. Jinnah came later on the scene and served as a good and sincere lawyer for the Muslim community of India. Later on he was also disappointed with the way Pakistan was actually established. In my view it would have been better if Pakistan, an unprecedented new State, was established via the Cabinet Plan.

Btw, I would suggest you to read Gandhi's book 'My experiment with the truth' wherein he himself talks humorously about his 'Mahatamai' also, which according to him was thrust upon him.

OK, lemme put it this way:

U keep saying the permanent majority in India has right to oppress the permanent minority but when it came to the Pakistan provinces the permanent majority had unfettered rights to eff the minorities.

Is that what u want to say?......how can u speak from both sides, bratha?

1937 to 1946 Muslim League's share increased and the Congress' share decreased...

in Pak provinces, thanks 2 vicious communal propaganda. That's correct.

U keep saying the permanent majority in Pak provinces had unfettered right to oppress the permanent minority but when it came to the whole of India, the Golden Rule need to to be set aside.

Is that what u want to say?......how can u speak from both sides, bratha?

Mian Folio,

This is a pathetic argument. The Congress electorate was based on the same franchise. By questioning the credentials of the electorate, you are challenging Congress' representative status more ... Congress by that logic was as unrepresentative as any other party.

Of the electorate... Muslim League won 87% of the vote. So what is your point?

And besides...as the electorate expanded from 1937 to 1946 Muslim League's share increased and the Congress' share decreased...

All evidence points towards this trend. So please atleast try and get your arguments straight.

Manto,

How can an electorate of less than 13% who votes a party i.e Muslim League can decide the fate of more than 90% of the people? You think this is the democratic principle?

You mean that ML has unfettered right to treat the unwilling 47%+ Muslims who haven't voted for ML as sheep?

Rubbish, even to propose such idea!

Granted ur victorious ML as the arbiter of justice then why the same was not conceded in NWFP where the elected Congress govt was in power?

This is typical Muslim bania (Jinnah) mentality i.e always seeking 17 annas for a rupee.

As for ALL the districts going to Pakistan, Jinnah had proposed migration of Muslims from other parts of India and migration of non-Muslims to Hindustan. U think Jinnah was stupid or lacked commonsense?

It's Jinnah and his pocketborough i.e Muslim League that was cynical.

No Folio mian that does not follow. Please consider the following:

The demand for Pakistan was couched in constituent units re-formulating a new center. Remember since the Two Nation Theory was Muslim League's slogan and Muslim League won the election on its basis not the Congress, Muslim League alone had the locus standi to explain it.

Now consider what Congress did. It said it did not believe in the two nation theory but then insisted on dividing Punjab and Bengal on its basis. Now if we say this was fair... then by that logic all Muslim districts everywhere in India should have gone to Pakistan. Then you have small ghettos of Pakistan in India... and small ghettos of India in Pakistan.

That was only logical conclusion to Congress' cynical use of the two nation theory.

that a permanent majority ought not to by its sheer numeric majority dominate a permanent minority.

Mantolives,

By the same logic the partition of Punjab and Bengal was well justified.

Thanks.

Re: # 322

And this one too... my response to this post is also based on a collossal misreading of your post.

I apologise.

Re: # 184

Teshah,

I might have misread this post and I agree with your general sentiment in it.

Re: # 307

This is absolute nonsense. Gandhi the politician had no humanity whatsoever let alone one which challenged British imperialism. This is just a repetition of a lie.

Besides... anyone who seeks guidance for politics from a dogma and "an ancient wisdom" for 3000 years ago for a modern society and nation-making... is the real Abu jehl... Gandhi did all that. He indeed was the Abu-Jehl of the modern times.


I have spent some time reading Gandhi's collected works and I don't see any evidence or cause of optimism for such naivety of changing a racist casteist hindu fascist bigot like Gandhi into some sort of a symbol of humanity.

Time will vindicate me on this issue.... once this dust settles.

Teshah,

Jinnah never said Hindus and Muslims could not live together... what he said clearly was that a permanent majority ought not to by its sheer numeric majority dominate a permanent minority. People like Harish etc simplify the argument in order to distort it.

Here is Gandhi himself acknowledging that Jinnah's vision of Pakistan was inclusive. After Gandhi Jinnah talks in 1944... Gandhi wrote as under: “Jinnah drew a very alluring picture of the Government of Pakistan. It would be a perfect democracy. I asked him what would happen to the other minorities in Pakistan: Sikhs, Christians, etc. He said they would be part of Pakistan. I asked him if he meant joint electorates. He said, yes, he would like them to be part of the whole.(The collected works of Mahatama Gandhi Volume-78).


Furthermore... historical evidence shows that Muslim League had support in UP before the Pakistan idea. In 1937's elections where Muslim League lost out Unionist Party in Punjab etc... in UP Muslim League won all the Muslim seats. It was after an offer for coalition was rejected that Muslim League realised the importance of majority provinces.

Pakistan slogan was raised not to mobilise Muslims of UP who were already in the Muslim League ... but to mobilise Muslims of this region ... who had been clamoring for a separate state atleast 50 years prior to 1940's resolution.
I suggest you read K K Aziz's views on this.

I know that you were in your youth involved with Pakistan Movement and supported Quaid-e-Azam. It is far more important for you to shed light on the topic at hand then re-visiting and trying to re-open a debate on whether partition was right or wrong because it is an established fact of history, which people like me will never allow to be subverted inshallah.

Rashid_s,

We've discussed the reality of Gandhi many times and I can discuss it again if people wish to.

I hope that one day humanity will sift through the hoopla and discover the real Gandhi for itself. That day I am sure, I would be remembered as someone who dared to go against mass hysteria gripping some people regarding this fellow they've taken to call Mahatma.

Teshah @307
No, I did not blame Gandhi Ji for 'bad blood'. Only that he as a prominent political figure introduced the dichotomy of “religiosity” and “politics” which gave an impetus to religious fanatics on both sides.
Where as, I believe, Mr Nehru and Mr Jinnah were on par.
As I said , there is nothing wrong in two siblings living in their separate houses, even in the same compound.
Rashid

Re: # 206

Harish

But ironically Pakistan was established in the regions where Muslims could live with Hindus but the latter could not do so.

After Gandhi Jinnah talks in 1944... Gandhi wrote as under: “Jinnah drew a very alluring picture of the Government of Pakistan. It would be a perfect democracy. I asked him what would happen to the other minorities in Pakistan: Sikhs, Christians, etc. He said they would be part of Pakistan. I asked him if he meant joint electorates. He said, yes, he would like them to be part of the whole.(The collected works of Mahatama Gandhi Volume-78).

And

In the interview to Weldon James of the Collier’s Weekly magazine, on or about 25th August, 1947 the Quaid said:

“We expect to evolve a progressive, democratic government, in line with the Muslim belief in the equality of all men, and to work for international peace. As I have said many times before, Pakistan guarantees the just and equal treatment of all citizens, Muslim or non-Muslim, with freedom of worship, speech, press and assembly...

“There are fanatics in all countries; and of course we have some. But the present ‘troubles’ are a hangover from old political alignments and quarrels, stirred up from the outside, and I do not expect any great internal difficulties anywhere in Pakistan. At last Pakistan has been established and now we are free and independent nation to mould, build and reconstruct and in this great task we need goodwill and friendship of all great nations”. (Quaid-e-Azam papers F. 135-GG/5-10).

Re: # 312

Harish mian,

I did not term zeemax Islamist. I was commenting on your description of Islamists.Even the biggest weasel comment was addressed to someone else.

#307 Posted by teshah on August 16, 2007 8:52:43 pm

Sir, Let me thank u for this ack.

"they dont dance shamelessly ..as indian girls.."

Hey, dancing is beautiful. Ther is nothing shaeful about dancing. Those who do not dance are full of supressed emotions. They sit tightly with their constipated look all the time.

Dancers have alovely glow on their face- they look so happy and contented.

OTOH, these hijabins look like tied up goats about to be slaughtered.

# 316thanks hraish hyderabadai accepted pakistan as a nuclear soveriegn state....

are all indians also agree with me ????????

plz..all indians ..i want your answer...

do you laso agree with harish...

#315 by diarrhea-i-dil

OK.

and for god sake ...forget about the


cocept of


Akhand Bharat


in the sugar caoting of


we were same....

lets unite again


lets open the borders


lets have joint films industry


lets have joint holi and rakhi


lets have joint commerce and trade



as they know...


we are now nuclear power...so instead of war....

kill muslims by joint culture dramai bazi...


mind it....


we have nothing common in culture....


muslims girls are pearls..in hijaab....


they dont dance shamelessly ..as indian girls..


our nothing is common....


forget about that ...pakistan ..will ver ..be in the colours of indian..culturally...


just forget about taht...

Re: # 313

Muslims can sacrifice the whole indian land on one sand grain of Medina ....

we can left india..even our life ...not Islam..mind it...


who the hell anyone to suggest that muslims should take off thier islam...

who the hell you are to suggest " Mixing" of inter faith...


we are different

we were different...


and we will remain as different..

there is nothing common between you and us...

no matter that if hese indians muslims live with you...for 1000 years...


there is nothing common ....

our faith and ideology..is far far most important thing to us....


we send LANAT to Dharti Mata concept...

#310 Posted by echoboom

[But Ajeya lately the way the neighborhoods are getting segregated in certain cities on communal basis is really frightening. It bodes a future for muslims like Palestinians in Israel.]

I can tell you as a Hindu that your fears are 100% unfounded. Yes, 100%.

Hindus are not out to convert anyone, so there is no question of "hating" anyone unless there is a perceived threat. The common Hindus are rather cowlike in their tolerance.

I think if Muslims stopped wearing their religion on their sleeve, it would help things a lot. You can't tell a person if he is Hindu or Christian - but you can say if he is Muslim by the way many Muslims choose to dress. It is not only freedom to wear anything you want - some people also do it as a defiant statement of their religiosity. Of course, some people will always dress in the traditional religious way, but the majority should blend in.

There should also be a general awakening in the Muslim community - and people speaking up against things like terrorism. They should stop talking about "root cause" and "muslim anger" and just concentrate on the here and now.

None of this would be permanent without a major edit of the koran and your prophet's life story.

None of this will probably ever happen, but one can always wish.

# various by Yasser and Rozaiba

The very fact that you're so eager to agree with zeemax, whom you termed an Islamist just a few posts earlier, just shows how well you've turned taking U-turns into an art in itself.

#248 Posted by zeemax

It was the Muslim Sub-Continent and later the British-Subcontinent in over a thousand years, and pagan before that. There was never any Bharat Maata. So what's the problem if Muslims chose to just take the North West for themselves as Pakistan?

Sorry, but I beg to disagree. Muslims controlled India for almost 800 years just as the British ruled it for a couple of hundred years later. But a large part of Muslim have roots in India going back several centuries which is why for all pratical purposes, they ARE Indians. And yes, we're OK with NW India being called Pakistan, we're all better off for it.

Why can't you accept it and work as S. Asians together with Islamists or whoever controls Pakistan?

Just what makes you think we haven't accepted it? The proponents of the "Akhand Bharat" theory are a few loonies whom nobody, not even a diehard Hindu, would take seriously. On Chowk, only Pakis seem to take it seriously. Have you noticed any Indian advocate it?

What's your problem with Pakistan when it isn't even a 'theocracy' nor likely to become one?

So long as Pakistan leaves India alone, we would have absolutely no problem with it. India's problems with Pakistan arise because of Pakistan's support to Kashmiri terrorists.

Ayeja:

When I read this I too was surprised. If it was in Mumbai or Delhi it would not be "newsy" for me. West Bengal, Calcutta & Jyoti Basu mean a lot to me..and so does Kerala & generally the whole Tamil-Naad.

It is nice that you spoke up.

I myself posted a report by Dr. Israr Ahmed, a very fundamentalist mullah maulana and Aalim who has a very large
following in Pakistan, about his joy and appreciation for the non-muslims in Panjab whop went out of their way to help him have his jalsaas in the open. If I find it I'll post it again. He was very well received by the BJP government the & there was no sham Ooons photo-op type because Dr. Israr Ahmed is not in politics. The Ooons despise him because his Tanzeem-i-Islami organisation is immensely successful. I, like many others, learn a lot from his Quraan exegesis recorded on video. This should not let you think that I subscribe to him or his party in any way or form.


But Ajeya lately the way the neighborhoods are getting segregated in certain cities on communal basis is really frightening. It bodes a future for muslims like Palestinians in Israel. I have seen Exclusively Urdu-real estate sign boards just to hint that who should buy in those new sub-divisions. Similarly Exclusively Hindi sign boards steer
are meant to steer only hindus there. Only the Cosmopolitan areas , where the westoxicated KanjarRs congregate, are the signs only in english..to spit both on Hindus & muslims & with subtleness advising them to to go ahead & flaunt their maader-Rate & Maader-RUNS with impunity.

Clifton bi,

On June 28, 2001, the Supreme Court ruled that non-Muslims may vote for any candidate at the Union Council level for seats reserved for mayor, deputy mayor, laborers, farmers, and women. However, non-Muslims still are barred from voting for Muslim candidates who run for general seats. Three of the five rounds of elections already had occurred prior to this ruling. Few non-Muslims are active in the country's mainstream political parties. Christian and Hindu leaders conducted a boycott to protest against the system of separate electorates during the local elections.

#270 Posted by echoboom

[In India, many members of religious minority hide the signs of their faith to escape discrimination]

The job of Islamic communalists is to spread lies and hatred for the "other", i.e. non-muslims.

EVERYTHING this perverted liar says is untrue.

I have stayed in Calcutta for many years. It would be difficult to find a bunch of Indians who are less communal. Even today, every year, they celebrate the birthday of the famous Bengali Muslim poet Kazi Nazrul Islam. Bengali programs are sprinkled with themes and characters drawn from the Muslim community. There are several highly respected Muslim politicians in West Bengal, like A.G. Khan Chowdhury.

What this Islamist fails to mention are the following facts:

1) All the people he talks about are IMMIGRANTS from Bangladesh.

2) For the last several decades, the Communist Party has won its elections with the collusion of these people who, for the promise of a ration-card, were willing to do ANYTHING for the Communist Party. They would go around in bus-loads and vote for different politicians in different districts many times over.

3) Some of these thugs are so strong today, that they terrorize whom they want, when they want. Recently, even Buddhadeb Bhattacharya admitted that "something has to be done about this".

4) These illegal immigrants have taken over huge areas of land, and in a country that is short of resources, they are looked upon as intruders.

5) Combine with that the fact that these SAME people who are coming across now were the people who killed Hindus by the thousands during Partition, just because they were Hindus.

Put all of this together, and it is easy to see why there is a strong dislike for them in the state.

Last time I went to Calcutta, I remember, in the middle of a previously quiet middle-class educated neighbourhood, some Muslim immigrants had erected a pale-green monstrosity of a Mosque, with the usual loudspeakers attached at the top. It looked as out-of-place as the monstrous and alien ideology it represented.

Re: # 202

Rashid

I fully agree with the following statement of yours:

"His statement of "Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests” is very significant, particularly when one notes the words -theocracy and priests -which is a clear reference to church (Iqbal also calls it a church), and its operatives who we know are shackled to the centuries old Sharia and believe it to be divine.
Significantly he differentiated between “Religion” and Islam where the dignity of mankind is supreme. And the State is charged with the responsibility of maintaining it."

But I don't agree with you when you hold Gandhi Ji responsible for bad blood among the Hindus and Muslims. It was in fact the humanity of Gandhi Ji which shook the very foundations of British Imperialism. Gandhi Ji, on his part, strived all his life for creating brotherly relations among Hindus and Muslim and gave his life even for that very cause.

Re: # 301

Echo ji,

thanks for the nasihat. You are a respected maulavi of the chowk. You daily sermons get unfortunately filtered by chowk, yet your persistence is remarkable and I admire you for that.
But Sir, your faith has been responsbile for the murder and genocide of my fore fathers. Whether it was your Ghazanavi or Akbar killing of idolators and destroying my temples was always extolled and mentioned with great pride in their own Namas and auto biographies. They all loved to butcher and behead my idolator fore fathers. They stopped only because they agreed to submit to your sword and paid the tax.
I am greatful to those Qazis and maulavis who showed mercy and declared us as Dhimmis. That allowed my fore fathers to survive. albeit as slaves.
No problem, at least the remnants of the idolator civilzation remained.
It would have been completely lost were it not for the coming of the Britishers and the occurence of 1857. The mullahs rejected the idolator Vedic Gods. The Britishers at least tried to appreciate them.
The difference between the muslim appreciation of idoaltors and that of the British was glaring.
Even in terms of law, the common law made every thing same-same. Now muslims cannot kill indiscriminately any idolator for propagating of for showing dis obefdience. All the nawabs lost their zimmas. They becamse servants of British who turned their Hadith prescribed Zimmas into Land-ownership.
1857 was a death blow for mullsh. Because they lost the control over idolators.
1947 was a resurgence of the mullah power. And it has taken 60 years for MMA to become a reality in Pakistan. The history of Islamic India is history of mullahs. Dara was killed at the behest of mullahs. Aurangzeb became a devil because of mullahs. Just as history of erstwhile Christian West was the history moulded by the Pope and Churches.

Bristishers certainly 'reformed' the hindusim. OUR LAWS were actually regressive. The common law is certainly a product of British mind - who drew a great amount from Roman law. I am proud to be associated with the Roman and call it MY OWN.
On the other hand I consider the Islamic law to be regressive and deserving contempt.
I have rejected the regressive parts of Smritis as out dated. However, it is time you also did the same with Quran and Hadiths.
The consequences of not doing so is glaring. Forget your FALSE pride. See the evil in what you call your OWN.
Reject Hudood laws!! Forget Shariah as a basis of modern nation state. Only when respected maulavi sahebs like you openly come forward and reject the hate verses of Quran and Hadith can we see the fasaad-e-momen turn into a mard-e-momeen.
I earnestly appeal to you to do this and then proudly claim to be a real muslim who does not keep on living in eternal conflict with the rest of the world.

Re: # 304

Hey arjun,

Nobody asked you if you were from Communist Party of Pakistan or not.

I know you are an atheist, probably meaning that you have hardly read and understood your own scriptures.

#301 Posted by echoboom on August 16, 2007 11:39:35 am

laddu is a troll...just like this dimag-i-rog guy...

Clifton: There is more affirmative justice for scheduled casts in India compared to Blacks in America. Try bringing about 50% reservation quota for blacks here in the US.

PS:
the prison population in US is overwhelmingly black due to bias in justice system - not so in case of dalits... dalits have the voting rights from the beginning where as blacks got that only recently...

Now, let's see what you pakis have done for your minorities and dalits - how about squat, nada :)... heck you guys don't even get to vote, with militart guy calling shots[ by proxy for Uncle Sam], not even a constitution... so what the heck!!!

Laddu:

Usualy your posts do not deserve a response but it is for orher's sake, for your fellow hindus especially that this reply is getting posted.

So the pride you are excuding is the pride of exchanging one master for the other? When was the last time you had your own laws? Or are you proud of the fact that it always takes an outsider to drill come sense in your head. Learning from outsiders on one's own terms, & arriving at conclusions to bring about change as a internal discussion, is way way different than being taught by dandaa & being forced to agree & then getting used to & then flaunting such slavery.
So did you WIN freedom, or were AWARDED freedom/Independance, or did you SNATCH freedom?...OR , as you so proudly emote, did you really choose your master this time by adopting:
1) their legal-system
their dress
their language
their Ideoalogy [otherwise called RELIGIONS..the OONS]
their food
their fashion

and then you extol your "heritage" as if you are a tourist, foriegn tourist, in your own backyard. You visit your own backwaters & backyard with the eye & ear of a FOREIGNER! & admire & shower praise on what is your own to begin with.
It is as if you visit tour children as a Heritage to be ovseved as a cultural practice & NOT as a give.

Those who rule & conquer never dance for the amusement of others..never bring out their family treasures to appreciated & approved by strangers. You guys do it always to get a nod of approval by a whiteskin & want to "attract" whiteskins so that you can pimp your motherland better. Ever ssen the Master trying to attract the Ba Ba Blacksheep to visit his homeland? No the Master knows how much the slave drools to be back in the kennels of England.

If your ancestors had fought the Huns, the greeks, the aryans, the Musalmaans & not fallen for the corrupt riches & good-life , & not considered material wealth as the sole measure of success today we would have been discussing hindu contribution to law..there is Zilch.

Notice the language on radio, tv, newspapers that despite the snskritisation almost all the words for Law are still arabie/farsi...How can you ever have the equivalent of Talaaque when you had no clue..you just "left" ( chhore diyaa)

You better learn a little bit more about yourself from your hindu compatriots ..right here on CHOWK.

of course - it is not "the same" level as in US... consideration has to be made for fact of much less resources, to be used on much larger number of people... admittedly it will take a while... it took US 100+ years of democracy... we don't have that many years, we have to do it sooner....much sooner

clifton

Blacks do not have job reservations, reserved seats in congress, senate, ministries... dalits do... black governors are rare... Dalits CMs are not... mayawait may even end up being the PM... a black president is still far away [ no - obama has no chance]

abusing a dalit is a felony, buying dalit property without govt permission is an offence...

The result is less pronounced because of the fact the pie itself has been so small oweing to commiesm and socialism... lack of efficient law enforcement has blunted the effort to completely eliminate abuses against the dalits... third worldism has blunted the entire effort... but neverthless...

you pakis simply cannot imagine the level of official and societal effort that has been made since independence... going forward - it has accelerated further, now that more resources and technology is there....

zee

your exclusion of "dalits" is completely disingenous... the entire society at every level has made enromus effort to life the dalits and other backward communities and tribes out of their historical predicament... from job reservations to reservation in political representation... progres made by the traditionally depressed sections of hinud society is tremendous - considering the point where they started from... they are not where they should be yet - but nevertheless...

I do not usuallly trumpet for indian progress - but the numbers are remarkable - but since independence, the equivalent of entire europe out of colonial-era poverty... of course - the fast population growth has made sure that still more poor are there... last 15 years of growht reduced poverty cutting across class lines...

dont try to ape to the liberaloon... do not be envious of the neigbor's success... :)

mohar its good to see that all sides of the debate believe the debate should be honest.
So honestly then , you are saying social justice for dalits in india is the same as blacks in america? economic justice for them is the same? Religious justice is the same?
Or are you going to admit that this is really the most shocking way any country has treated a whole 1/6th of its population in the modern day and age?

BTW i think your judiciary has made all the right noises regarding dalit rights , the conctitution has been duly ammended ...now its just a question of indian society to change.

zee

US is not monolithic - ask the blacks, they will tell you.... in china - it's even worse - villagers cannot even travel to their own cities without permits... there has been 84000 riots last year - yes, 84 thousand...

Mutltiple economic realities exist in every country... the income disparity in china I think worse than that of india...

You are once again displaying traits of the liberaloon you hate - lying and fudging... that's a shame...

Kaal:

I think you may be right ... Gandhi used religious symbols to get the unwashed masses politicized .... in the process he put off the upper class Muslims. Masses, at least in India, have always been politicized through religious symbols and myths ... the communists tried otherwise and failed .... the maoists, though, in Andhra, Orissa, Chattisgarh etc. liberally use religious symbols and myths. Of course, the oons do not like it. But who cares .. the ultimate goal of politicization is democracy and not necessarily constitution framing. The hindutva hordes of the early 90s do not all vote for the BJP today.

But the BIGGEST or most IMPORTANT question plaguing us today is : Where is hamidm2?

laddu you should really be called chicken little. JI has already got its ass handed to it in karachi on a platter they dont even whimper too loudly now, . It never wins against PPP in sindh or PML in punjab , ANP is reemerging in the frontier (six parties coalesced last month).... there are many islamists in pakistan but most of them would never vote MMA. Apparently the only person scared of the political might of the MMA is you.
I am not in politics and dont want to be. Even the harshest islamic state i could forsee ever coming to pakistan would be ala zia ulhaq lines ....HE NEVER REPEALED THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION OF MINORITIES.

JI is part of the MMA that is an alliance composed of 4 powerful religious parties: Jamaat Islami (JI), Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (F), Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (S), and Jamiat Ulema-e-Pakistan (N).

Most of them desire the pre 1857 fantasy of enslaved hindu workers and living off zimmi-daris.

They are part of this pan Islamic terror movement that is now emerging out of PAkistan.
They are the ones who are hiding Osama.
They have the support of millions.
Your ba ba black sheep education cannot stop them from taking over Pakistan now!!!
Echo ji is right!!

laddu are you aware of how many illiterates are in pakistan? lemme give you a hint ...its more than 4.5 million.

You know what Allama Iqbal said about mullahs like these ? he called them vultures. Islamists like echo/zee are not in the MMA/IJI my friend.

Re: # 289

Clifton bi ji,

I think you better ask echoji if JI and Maulana Qazi Ahmed are revered or not??
In 1997 Qazi Sahib launched a nationwide campaign to expand the party membership. His open membership campaign brought 4.5 million new members to the Jamaat.

4.5 million??!!!!!!!!!


Come on, how can you call them 'jahil'.??

laddu, that Imam is perfect example of TNT. he too like some muslim leaders of the past suggests Hindus and Muslims can never live together.

laddu the same party also decreed immunization a crime. These people are not reverred as islamists they are popularly called jahil even by the most observant literate muslims.
Remind me again how many times has this leader "of mine" has been elected to head of state? And how many times has a pakistani head of state ever said that? Even Zia never changed the constitution in re. to minority rights ....he did go after muslim rights pretty bad though. Do you know that nonmuslims can legally buy etoh in paksitan and even did so under Zia ?
Do you know that the islamist party of turkey is democratically elected and also secular?
I really think you have a lot of confusion regarding pakistan islam minoritiy rights and the islamist school of thought.

The clash of civilizations began right from beginning, the very concepts propounded by Islam were against rest of world. So says the ex-muslim lady in this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wPglHZQf-0

clifton bi ji,

let me quote from your popoular leader from Pakistan Nawabzadaa Nabiullah Khanin of Jamaat-e-Islamia.

He is really EXPLICIT in his statement that he wants Hindus as slaves of Pakistanis. Sure, after all that is what Hadiths want do to do with dhimmi hindus.

"
JAMAT WILL BRING SLAVERY BACK TO PAKISTAN Arabians own slaves. Though Allah says that the slaves should be treated in a nice manner, he did not advocate the abolition of slavery. If slavery is bad as considered in today's world, Allah certainly would have said that slavery is wrong. Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) also said that the slaves should be treated in a good manner and the slaves should be released often. But if there is no slavery, how can anyone release slaves? Hence the re-introduction of slavery in Pakistan is one of the future plans of the Jamaat.
ALL CAPTURED HINDUS WILL BE MADE SLAVES
All the captured Hindu Indians and Srilankans will be made slaves to work for Pakistani Muslims. Every God-abiding Pakistani Muslim will get slaves once we conquer India. All the slaves who embrace Islam will be set free. Slavery is Islamic. Jamaat is the only political party, which does not voice any opposition to the slavery in Pakistan. We went around all over Arabia. We were surprised to know that there are some Hindus in Yemen. These ancient Yemeni Hindus are not Indians. In my opinion, these Hindus are traders from India in the ancient times. I was also surprised to know that they have a Shiva temple in Yemen. Qazi was very unhappy over this. When he talked to the Yemen leaders, he broached this subject. But the Yemeni leaders refused Qazi's suggestion of forced conversion of these people to Islam. I don't know why they refused. I think it may be due to the large population of Hindus from India who work in Yemen and Arabia. He disliked the current leadership of Arabia for this reason.
In his opinion, Arabia should not allow any non-Muslim into the holy lands of Arabia. Arabia should be 100% pure. A large number of Hindus in Arabia is corrupting the Arabians. Though they live as contractors, they have the potential to corrupt the minds of the Arabians. "

this is from "Jamhooria Islamia", a monthly Baluchi magazine published from Panj-gar, published an interview with Maulana Nawabzadaa Nabiullah Khanin Feb 1999, a confidant of and adviser to the Amir of leading Pakistani Islamic party, Jamaat-e-Islami, Maulana Qazi Ahmed, which was conducted by Jalil Amir.

Re: # 281

Hey echo ji,

1857 was the day of liberation of the hindu idolators.

That is the year when hindu idolators no longer remained the dhimmis.
Shariat was out and British common law took over.

Hindus and muslims were now at level.

The doors of modern education was opened to hindus.

and muslims went back into their shell of depression , and are till day fantasizing about those days when they had hundreds of hindu idolators working free for them as slaves in their house holds and lands.

Thanks to Britishers hindu idolators could start throwing away the humiliating status of dhimmis that was confereed on them officially for a 1000 years.

Thanks to Britishers!!

echodada, well one thing I have learned to my misery is that language is the source of most of our common miseries. English seems singularly ill-equipped to capture our (yours and mine) key concepts, ideas, and dreams, even :(

Laddu you have surpassed yourself..."It is just a matter of time before idol breaking and kafir beheading would become an EXPLICIT law in Pakistan" ....so you admit you have to look into a crystal ball to find evidence of your contention that pakistani muslim majority are out to make dhimmis and crush idols :) ....because none exists today.

hudood ordinance also applies to muslims and nonmuslims so although i disgree with hudood how is this discriminating?

cobra the blasphemy law punishes all pakistani blasphemers....no special pass for any creed .

Kaalchakra:

What I am trying to point out that LABELLING one's ideals as Secularism,. Liberalism, or any other Oonism will never change the ground-realities.

Those who think that weraing a suit, eating double-roti, and distancing themselves fro "red-Indians" or "red-Pakians"
and acting westoxicated would make them somehow more tehzeeb-yaafta ( not civilised which is a Darwinian word, ugly word, westoxicated word)

We must set the calendar back to 1857 & make sure the clock never strikes 12noon or 12midnight again. Once the unfinished business of rtemoving the Britto-monkey from our backs & exorcised & expiated from our minds & stomacks respectively only THEN we together ( Un-divided India when Hindu-Muslims hated the Britto baboons with a vengeance) will easily be the most formidable power to in the world.

English or any other language must be learned so that we understand our enemies & destroy them ..rather than become Ba Ba Blacksheep , trying to white-wash ourselves & pretend to look smart.

No other country except the enslaved of minds like ours use a language different than their own. India & Pakistan are bigger than Europe & if there can be different languages in countries like postage stamps what prevents us from having
individual major languages & still be one...like the European Union?

What about the blasphemy law? isn't that state sanctioned discrimination?

What about the blasphemy law? isn't that state sanctioned discrimination?

[#270 Posted by echoboom on August 16, 2007 7:41:04 am ]

Discrimination is rampant in west bengal not only against Muslims but also against other non-bengalis as well. Chowk's resident bangalis and bangalans brag about how fair minded and ethnicity blind they are but that is all talk. But special position of Muslims in this is also because of historical memory how these Muslims talked about violence during independence struggle. Bengalis do not forget such bad behaviour easily.

Re: # 275

Sorry clifton bi,

Pakistan does not have Islamic Law in entirety and that is why mullahs want complete Shariat.

Pakistan has Hudood which is indeed a part of the hate legacy of Islam.
Your constitution has pledged putting all things in Islamic mode.
The complete coherence with Islamic sharia is already part of the Pakistani constitution's agenda.
It is just a matter of time before idol breaking and kafir beheading would become an EXPLICIT law in Pakistan.
This is the logic of Islamization bibi.

think this interview reveals a side unknown to us.... his favorite book was "Count of Monte Christo". Ironically to me the two fictional characters Jinnah comes closest to are the Count ... and Jay Gatsby.

http://www.dailyindia.com/show/166157.php/1916-Gujarati-interview-reveals-Ji nnahs-attributes
1916 Gujarati interview reveals Jinnah's attributes
From our ANI Correspondent

Washington, Aug 16: Pakistan's founder Muhammad Ali Jinnah followed the principle of "never be depressed" according to an interview he gave to a Gujarati journal way back in May 1916.

In the interview given in Gujarati, which was made available to the Daily Times from the back files of literary journal Visami Sadi (the 20th Century), when asked what qualities a man should be admired for, Jinnah said "Independence".

And about a woman, he said, "Taking care of the elderly".

He termed "to be admired and loved by people," as true success in life.

His favourite pastime was horse-riding, while among the flowers he admired lilly.

Shakespeare was Jinnah's preferred writer and his favourite book was 'The Count of Monte Cristo' by Alexander Dumas.

The journal also features a picture of Rutti Jinnah, taken a year after their marriage.

He signed his name 'Mahmad Ali Jhina'.


Copyright Dailyindia.com/ANI

laddu dhimmitude and idol crushing is alre