The need for De-Bhuttofication of the Pakistan People's Party

I fully endorse your views although I am sceptic whether actually de Bhuttofication can materialize. Mind you in India also the Nehru dynasty, though more open compared to Bhuttos, continues to rule. The problem is that our culture is personality oriented as people have a tendency to be swayed by chrismatic personalities. Once these personalities have attained a sufficent clout, cult of personality is built in order to retain the following. Party and leader become one. This is most unfortunate

Read my post again Masadi.

High Priest of Church of MAJ - ZAB seems to be delivering a stinging slap on your ignorant face.

My guess is that you haven't read "Myth of Independence" to actually know what you are talking about.

I am willing to bet your ass in bannu that the only books you've read are your own.

Manto wrote in his 1000th ilog " remember reading a passionate letter by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to the Time Magazine in 1948 as a young student at University of Southern California .... in which he defended Jinnah tooth and nail... Similarly his book "Myth of Independence" and his speeches to the National Assembly in with his bitter attacks against those who he suspected of being abusive against Jinnah... all reveal Bhutto's intense devotion to Jinnah"

Here is someone who does not have a clue about what he is writing. The Bhutto that was in 1948 was not the same Bhutto that wrote the "Myth of Independence", and the Bhutto that wrote the "Myth of Independence" (the title of the Book meaning that what Jinnah achieved was a myth and therefore a failure in the real sense but it could be salvaged now that the deal was done by breaking away from the major powers), was not the same Bhutto writing his final testimony from the gallows facing death.

In his final verdict the ZAB reflecting skepticism on the Pakistan experiment and acknowledging his failure to defeat the powers that be who have been the only beneficiaries of this experiment wrote, and I quote (read carefully) "This is not a letter on Pakistan. If it were, I could have written a small book entitled “Glimpses of Pakistan’s history”. Time does not
permit it. The nation is gripped in her worst crisis, standing in the
middle of the road between survival and disintegration. Since the birth
of Pakistan, crisis has followed crisis in rapid escalation. Millions of
lives were sacrificed to create this country. Pakistan is said to be the
dream of Mohammad Iqbal and the creation of Mohammad Ali
Jinnah, the Quaid-e-Azam. Was anything wrong with the dream or
with the one who made the dream come true? Opinions have differed
and continue to differ. The next few years will most probably decide
the issue, perhaps once and for all, and not without bloodshed. This
process is not inevitable but the present policies of the ruling junta
are driving this country towards a sad inevitability.(Letter to his Daughter)

Note: Those who cannot derive the conclusion from the highlighted portion of the paragraph, please tear up your high school diplomas and other useless pieces of paper you got thereafter. Also note what followed after these words, the dictatorship of the Zia ul Fcuk and America's proxy cold war, the sad inevitability that will soon see the end of this experiment with the Muslims of Pakistan entering the Union in a much weaker state than they ever were as one block, unless we see a leader of the calibre of the ZAB who tries to salvage the mess we were put in by you know who.

P.S: By the way I don't have any "idols" as Manto suggests based on his own experience of being a worshipper and the High Priest of the now defunct Church of the MAJ. I support those who support the people, I support those who sacrifice their lives by challenging the elite the enemies of the people.

Masadi is a classic case of someone who doesn't bother to actually read something but resorts to second guessing and third rate patch work. Hardly the academic.

The poor guy probably hasn't read a single one of ZAB's books... certainly not "Myth of Independence". Had he actually read the book, he would have come across the chapter where ZAB quotes Beverley Nichols' famous "Interview with a Giant"... Suffice to say it is a slap on the face of Masadi and his abuse directed as Jinnah by none other than Masadi's own idol of worship the Raja of Larkana.

It is the finest defence of Jinnah, by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. Whatever his faults, and ZAB was after all a Wadera above all else so there were many many many least of all his absolute contempt for people... but no one can fault Bhutto for his honest devotion to Mahomed Ali Jinnah (though it was never enough for him to actually emulate the great man's honesty and integrity and courage)

To quote (Ghulam Ahmed Parwez's) Tolu-e-Islam's website (Bhutto could have been addressing freaks like Masadi):

On December 21, 1976, the then Prime Minister of Pakistan, late Mr. Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto addressed a joint session of the National Assembly and Senate of the federation held to commemorate the centenary of birth of Quaid-e-Azam. Addressing Quaid-e-Azam's portrait hanging on the wall, he said in a most dramatic fashion: -

"Quaid-eAzam!

I know what arrows pierced your heart (during struggle for Pakistan). The British said you were arrogant. This was understandable, because you had refused to bow before them. The Congress leaders and their henchmen called you stubborn. That too was to be expected, because they had failed to trick you. What is not understandable, and what must have certainly bewildered and distressed you is, that the nation, for whose sake you were putting up with all this, was in forefront of your tormentors!"

Then he went on to give details of what people from one province or the other had done against the Quaid-e-Azam. After this detail, he remarked about the irony that the Maulvis and Maulanas had also pounced upon him. He followed with an observation that among his critics, a certain person, although saying things similar to others, couched them in a comparatively fancy language. Then he started quoting in English, excerpts from the book by Mr. Maudoodi titled "Muslims and the Present Political Turmoil" Volume 3. He quoted so extensively, that the text covered two columns and a half of Pakistan Times of December 23, 1976.

'what a pucca Gujju baniya he was, miserly even with tears'

Harish,

Lol!!

Re: # 375

Dear Borivili,

Well said. And not just privately but in public as well... like for example the time Dina came to see him after the assassination attempt on his life.

Contrary to the claims made... Jinnah was a perfectly practising Khoja Shia Muslim. In the shia faith, while all dietary observations exist on cards, the main crux is never dietary observation... but the martyrdom of Hussain and celebration of the family of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). The mainstream orthodoxy gets even more diluted when it comes to offshoots like Ismaili Shiism (in which Jinnah was born) and Khoja Shiism (to which Jinnah converted).

As with all smaller and tightly knit communities ... including Parsis, marriage outside the faith is a no no. Similarly in Heterodox and other smaller Islamic sects like Bohri, Agha Khani, Alavis, Druze and Ahmadis etc marriage outside the faith is an absolute no no... though Agha Khan recently made an exception for his daughter. Even the Shia community at large forbids even the man marrying outside the Islamic faith be it to people of the book (Sunni Islam allows men and women to marry outside the faith but for women it is considered highly undesirable and juristically "irregular").

However this was not the only reason Jinnah opposed Dina's marriage to Neville Wadia. Neville Wadia was a womanizer and Jinnah proved right when a few years later when Dina divorced Neville on grounds that Neville was unfaithful.

Jinnah's opposition to Dina's wedding however was simply that - an opposition. Unlike Gandhi who hit the roof when he found out that his son had become a Muslim and married a Muslim woman subsequently having to make his positions clear by holding a press conference on the issue... Jinnah did not indulge in dramatics nor did he try to stop Dina from doing as she pleased.

-YLH

VRV and Zee,

Why is Yasser mian silent on this one? On numerous occasions in the past, he has told us his tear-jerker tale of how Jinnah asked the servant to bring Dina's suitcase and open it, gazing at it for eternity and then wiping away a tear (what a pucca Gujju baniya he was, miserly even with tears) from his eye. Yasser mian also told us that he continued to have warm relations with his daughter till the very end, all this to refute Jinnah's double-standards WRT to his daughter's marriage to a Parsi, a "crime" he too was guilty of.

Tahmed sahib,

(indian politicians - most of whom have served their country with honor.)

This has to go down with Naqshbandi sahib's "Tale of the Dead Parrot" as one of the genuine gems of Chowk.

Regards

Another thing to add to #380 that this ignoramus does not get, lack of activity (i.e. avoiding something) is also a deed (action) as much as positive activity is.

tahmed writes "avoiding daru and pork does not entail any real cost"

Of course it does ask those who utlilze the two in their lifestyle. Once again a dimwitted narrow culturally confused response by an ignoramus

Then he writes"daru and pork are also not sins that are of the same category as the real show-stoppers, namely actions"

More BS, daru is linked with aggression, violence, a factor in crimes of many varieties and domestic violence. How do those things amount to "lack of action". Regarding pork, it certainly does "Stop" the action due to its unhealthy nature, believe it or not it is linked to cirrohsis, trichinosis as well as a very high internal fat content.

Then he writes "thus, muslims, like water, take the path of least resistance - i.e. do things that are easy to do (avoid liquor, pig) and dont do things that are hard to do."

Once again more BS, ask those who are genetically predisposed to alcohol, and there are many such, how "easy" it is to avoid it, also given the cultural component of it in Western society, it is anything but easy to avoid it. It seems like you call it "easy" because you don't want to avoid it. Don't try to justify your perversions using Islam.

Then he says "The Quran does say that if you do the right actions, you have nothing to fear."

Doing the right thing signifies one is sincere and is careful of God in the unseen. Indeed the Quran says that those who accept the truth, and do the right things, no fear will come on them nor will they grieve.....think about this you ignoramus

#376 borilivi: gujerat is one state, and granted your point is valid there. but Modi is hardly representative of indian politicians and military people - most of whom have served their country with honor.

Which is more than can be said about our politiians and military generals.

avoiding daru and pork does not entail any real cost. the first too often makes you act like a fool anyway, is bad for your health (even taking into account the cardio-vascular benefits), the latter is easily substituted with much better kinds of food.

daru and pork are also not sins that are of the same category as the real show-stoppers, namely actions.

avoiding wrong actions entails a real cost.

thus, muslims, like water, take the path of least resistance - i.e. do things that are easy to do (avoid liquor, pig) and dont do things that are hard to do.

trouble is - in the Quran nowhere does it say that if you dont drink or eat pig or do the hajj you have nothing to fear. The Quran does say that if you do the right actions, you have nothing to fear.

something to think about i think.

Zeemax writes "Daaru is merely undesirable, but pork is haram. Check your Islam 101 ! "

No mian you are dead wrong on this one.

When Allah says in the Quran, "Allah ho harama ismun" (Allah has made haraam all ism- commonly translated as sin) and then says that in your daaru is "ismun kabeer"- what does 2+2 tell you?

but the greatness of secular democratic hindu india lies in relecting a mass murderer and rapist like modi with a huge majority

zeemax Jinnah was not religious, pork and whisky were just symptoms not the cause. according to most accunts he continued meetng Dina in private both before and after creation of pakistan. if he had not disowned her he would not have survived as aleader of muslims, he was already being called kafir-e-azam by muslim ulema.

and yes Bhutto was guilty, evn hitler was never tried by due process of law neither has been Modi or pol pot but they were guilty enough evidence exists including murder and torture of political opponents, Kasuri was just one.

#372 Posted by VRV,

Wrong!

Daaru is merely undesirable, but pork is haram. Check your Islam 101 !