Fall of Dacca

amin ji, dash probably, actaully, I am quite sure, means the compliment in #111 sincerely.

Sir, you came here at a time when real ideological opposition to you is absent. Not sure if that is good or bad, but one good consequence has been that people actually got to read a lot of your stuff without being drowned and distracted in irrelevant trivialities.

In welcoming you I had probably mentioned that chowk is essentially an ideological battleground. In this kind of place people use every imaginable rhetorical trick to control, failing which, gladly derail discussions.

Nevertheless, we can only benefit from your presence among us.

#116 Posted by pavocavalry:

There is indeed a tendency to act "top dog", and it is at times tempting to get into a "tu tu mein mein" seies of interacts. Nevertheless, I at times, and I can only speak about myself here, find the process humbling. And I must confess that I have learnt a lot from the interacts ... and have very often been guilty of going straight to the interacts section without reading the article.

#115 Posted by pavocavalry:

You do have a point.

Regards.

Re: # 115 to reinforce my point i give you example of M/s Nikhat 's article on Hijab.Instead of talking logic some interactors used very vulgar language while interacting with her.How do you explain this.I wrote interacts and instead of using logic i was told that i am a lowly major .What kind of intellectual discussion is this ?

Re: # 114 with utmost respect my humble submission sir is that most of the interacts on this forum are done without reading you from A to Z and just based on criticism for criticism's sake.As a matter of fact there are some self proclaimed champions on this site who think that every one else is just talking nonsense.In case anyone has to interact he can e mail me sir.

#113 Posted by pavocavalry:

Thank you for posting your articles in your i-log. If you are interested in interacting, then could you please allow for "interactions". You could do so by clicking on some button or the other.

Cheers.

Re: # 111 i dont know if the articles are wondeful at all or you are being sarcastic my Lord ! However there are some pricks not happy with my ilogs also! Thanks for the feedback sir.

further to #110
"munafqeen" = "seditionist", which is mush-talk for anyone who challenges musharraf's "right" to continue to be the unelected and illegal "president" of Pakistan!!

Re: # 56

Thank you Pavocavalry. Sir you are an extremely Honourable Man. A kind we can all do business with.

Thank you once more, for hearing us out, and doing the right thing. This case using the Ilog Space of Chowk for your wonderful articles.
Now we can all read them at leisure and not miss a cue or beat - even after these articles have gone to chowk heaven

"munafiqeen" - mullah-talk for anyone who dares to challenge the mullah's "right" to decide what is islam and what is anti-islam.

bs!!

Re: # 103 HP has been properly dealt with.All he had was unrefined shit to offer.Stinking , really constipated man.

Re: # 95 urstruly u are right , fuzair and HP and all these munafiqeen are hollow men , intellectually barren , talking bullshit , just for trying to prove that they are hell of intellectuals , men with no ideas , just barren , baanjh as they say in urdu old women .

Re: # 95

It does not matter what label one wears - communist, hindu, libral, or Islamist - as long as one is fair, objective, and be able to support his argument with evidence. It does not matter if one has an agenda because everybody does.

Au contraire what have you and your ilk has done except spewing piss and vinager and frothing at mouth day in and day out at chowk ruining totally what could have been the starting point in the rennaissance of our national intellectual discourse. Your ilk is frightened and defeated people. Deal with it.

Re: # 105 Bhai Jan ,if you read A.H Amin's article in one of the inteacts carefully he has quoted a person no less than Indian Western Command Chief in 1971 General Candeth who admitted in his book that had the Pakistanis launched a pre-emptive attack in september or october 1971 all Indian plans to attack East Pakistan would have gone to winds.I think you have a poor eyesight and limited attention span.

Re: # 36

A smart lot, these Moplas. There was this guy called Abdul Aziz Kutty in the academy. The drill ustad was a Muslim and the DS a Malyali officer. On the drill square AAK always wore a name tag "K Abdul Aziz" and where the DS was conducting a lecture it was "AA Kutty".
Many old Moplas who migrated to Pakistan have come back to India and refuse to go back because they want to become Indian citizens and live in God's Own Country.

The Pakistani army officer whose interview has been reproduced at #53 should get the whiner of the century award. He must remember that a success is a success whichever way you look at it,whereas there no justifying defeat particularly when it is so humiliating as in '71. He is also indulging in self deception when he says the ceasefire offered by India should not have been accepted and peace should have been agreed to not until territory equal to East Pakistan had been captured by Pakistani army on the western(India's) front. A large chunk of the Indian army from the Bangladesh sector had already begun to redeploy in the Punjab sector in the immediate aftermath of Dacca's fall, so any thoughts of capturing territory in the West was only wishful thinking on the part of a retired Pakistani officer who unfortunately never was a part of a winning force throughout his life. In fact Pakistan would have ended losing a large part of whatever was left on the western side had the ceasefire not been accepted.