Islam as a political weapon in Pakistan

Re: # 440

So very well, we all are in agreement over the issue of Gurdaspur. There was no way Gurdaspur should have gone to India. So what was all that fuss about in the 25+ posts below.

Urstruly,

Here’s an excerpt from “Munir Report”, which investigated the 1953 anti-Ahmadi riots by your ullema.

The Report suggests that Muslims held majority by one percent in district Gurdaspur, and that Qadian was one of the 3 major towns where Muslims resided. If Ahamdis are declared non-Muslims, it is easy to see how Muslims are no longer a majority. The Report goes on the praise Chaudhry Zafrullah Khan for his efforts to include Gurdaspur in Pakistan.

You may want to share this with your uncle …

+++

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

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

dost mittar #418 I agree Bose is considered a hero India, whereas his counterparts in europe are despised as "quislings". The reason for this is clearly that europeans saw first hand the vicious nature of the nazis, whereas for Indians the imperialists were the brits while the japanese never got a chance to show their true colors.

Where japanese showed their true colors - China, Philippines, Indo-China, korea - their wartime atrocities are despised to this day, and the Asia nationalists leaders (ho chi minh, mao tse tung, suharto) fought AGAINST the japanese rather than collaborate with them.

So - while Indians in 1940's can perhaps be excused for considering Bose and the other traitors as heroes on the basis of their ignorance. However, there is no excuse today, 60 years later, to continue to treat Bose as a hero when it is obvious that he was a mere puppet to the Japanese.

Whould the Japanese have treated Indians any better than the Chinese and other Asians whom they killed in the tens of millions and treated as subhumans? One does not need special insights, as you seem to think, to understand that the answer to this question is a clear no. Only common sense and the willingness to acknowledge that widely held beliefs can be totally wrong.

Re: # 437 fuzair

the point is moot. Had British Raj asked Quadianis at that time whether they wanted to be counted as Muslims or not, it is anybody's guess what their answer would have been. However, if a plebicite were to held the Quadiani vote would have been with the India at the direction of their religious orthodoxy. So a similar argument of hypocrisy can also be formulated for Quadianis.

But since these issues were non existent at the time of Partition, raising them now to push your agenda is akin to an attempt at fishing bones out of penis, as the Punjabi proverb goes.

Re: HP 416,

Not to add more fuel to the fire but Pakistan's birth was through violence: the Khan of Kalat declared independence and was forcibly incorporated into Pakistan in 1948.

You are correct as to what Urstruly was referring to; I just wanted to point out the logical inconsistency with his stand. You can't have Qadianis be Muslim in 1947 because it suits you and then non-Muslims later on when it doesn't suit you.

Urstruly: Muslims had about a 1%, give or take, majority in Gurdaspur in 1941 census. IF Qadianis were more than 1% of the population, then counting them as non-Muslims makes it hard to justify including ALL of Gurdaspur in Pakistan. Pathankot, in any case, had a very large non-Muslim majority.

BTW, the Chittagong Hill Tracts and Tharparkar were both given to Pakistan despite their having a large Hindu majority. Lets face it, Partition was a disaster with, apparently, minimal logic or inherent rationale to it.

masadi (#411),

If you have issues with Ahamdis, try to make sound, well thought out statements. Merely calling them ”evangelical ignoramuses” makes you look like a bull with tits. Just a thought …

Pavo,

I am still waiting to hear your comments on “Zafrullah acting on his own accord”. Please refer to HP’s #351. Perhaps I am missing something; would appreciate your thoughts.

Urstruly (in addition to #395),

You need to move beyond your “Ahmadis should not consider themselves Muslims” line. Ground reality is that they consider themselves Muslim and make no bones about it. The question now is … how are you going to deal with this inconvenient reality. Lock them up in prisons? Attack their mosques? You decide ...

The larger issue, unfortunately, is out of your hands now. Ahmadis have moved on to become a global community, while your ullema are reduced to holding children hostage in big red buildings while themselves trying to escape wearing a burqa. How pitiful …

One may believe in Quran, as well as in following prophets. If this is a problem, it is only in your head. Be nice to others and keep your Islam to yourself … and it’ll all by ok.

And lastly … if you want to nail Zafrullah, do it by all means. But you need something more credible than the alleged word of your uncle (grin).

hey - you old coots... would you quit it?... enough with this congress, ML, partition... get over it...

Gosh - you guys insufferable, don't your kids tell that you? :)

Re: # 425

Ijaz:

my apologies if you are not a PhD -- if you are then sorry no apologies.

Re: # 419 Dost

I agree that prejudices -true and false- might have played a role in the Punjabi Muslims decision for the Partition, but I think the turning point in the psyche of Muslim Punjab was the massacare of Khaksars in Lahore in early 1940s. That turned an ordinary Punjabi Muslim against the Unionists whom they started considering not only British toadys but even worst than them, solely because of that incident. That is one of the reasons, while Allama Iqbal's moussolium and that of Sardar Shoukat Hayat's (the unionist chief minister, perpetrator of Khaksar massacre) are side by side in the courtyard of Badshahi mosque in Lahore, not a single soul stops by at Shoukat hayat's tomb to pay respect or to for a prayer to this day. While there are thousands who visit and pray at Allama Iqbal's grave and pay their respect everyday. I remeber when I was a kid my dad took me for sightseeing in that area. After we prayed at Iqbal's tomb my father wanted to head right into the mosque, while as a kid I was curious to see "that other building" too. I insisted and pulled my dad's hand towards it. My dad relented and we went to Sardar's tomb but not only did not offer a prayer there but prevented me to do so too. When we left, my dad spat towards Sardar Shoukat's grave. That was not just my dad, once I went there again with with my cousins, while an older aunt of ours was cheperoning us, she also prevented us for praying at sardars' tomb. I was so curious that a women who had absolutely no interest in politics or history whatsoever would so vehmently say "we do not pray at sardar's tomb". probably that's how the folklores are born out of truths of their times.

History has repeated itself when Islamabad school massacre happened last year. Only one incident has divided our nation into the US loyalists and Sovereinists. The chasm and division is so deep that heroes and victims of one group has become the terrorsists of the other. And now there was a Pakistan before the Islamabad school massacre and there is a Pakistan after the massacre. Do you see now, how a single event can change the course of a nation??

Re: # 430
[... ostracize all Wahaboobis from Islam forever...]

Ypu wish :)... wahaboobis are the custodians of islam, the original land of pure...

I am so sick and tired of this anti-Ahmedi nonsense. It was bad enough for that charlatan ZAB to do what even the Holy Prophet (PBUH) couldn't do - excommunicate a Muslim from Islam. If the fundos insist on dividing Muslims against each other, I will put forward a constipational amendment to ostracize all Wahaboobis from Islam forever.

nasah #422 {"Can you believe that a prime minister of a civilian run government will not be allowed to visit nuclear facility of her own country by its own army! --

And then these PhD apologistas of the Army dictatorship doing intellectual gymnastics to blame the civilian leaders for the mess in Pakistan – saying she asked for it."}

Nasah,
Yeah! If SHE announces that she will turn over A.Q. Khan and she will allow foreign troops to invade Paki territory with HER permission. So, if she was kept away from top secret sites, it was probably good foresight on the part of the military - give that man a Sitara-e-Something. :)

Re: # 415 HP

Like I told Fuzair early that I do not want to take Quadiani stance on Gurdaspur as a proof to show that how at every forum they try to undermine Pakistan's stance on Kashmir and other disputed issues of Partition but people like you take this attempt at goodwill as some kind of weakness in our position.

First of all I think that the Quadiani stance that Quadianis were a significant part or even a majority in the district of Gurdaspur is a myth. If they claim it then the burden of proof lies with them. They must show the census results or a third party evaluation to prove their point. While I have the official results of 1941 census on my side, which undoubtedly shows that the Muslims were in majority in Gurdaspur.

Here is how the Quadiani stance on their population in Gurdaspur proves to be a myth:

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

At the time of Partition not only that the Governmnt of Raj but also Radcliffe award did not count Quadianis as a sepaerate among the scheduled list of casts and religions. But now if Quadianis insist that they should be counted as separate, as I see many posts here, including yours, I welcome their stance and support it.

.. sorry zeemax is banned for the moment. Please forgive smellthecoffee.

#423 Posted by masadi,

I will remind Zeemax not to cling to false messiahs, you are running from pillar to post doing that are being let down at every turn. Get a grip on yourself man.

I hear you masadi saheb. I did get a grip on myself. If you were on UP, you would have seen that.

And yes, there's no Messiah. Neither am I seeking one.

I only seek Muhammad.

Regards.