Islam as a political weapon in Pakistan

A correction:

Please read 'of the Constitution' in place of the word 'thereof' occurring in the first line of my post at #472.

To wind up, I think Islam can also be used positively by making Art.6 thereof as a part of the 'Fatwa' so that it can also survive and implemented like the Fatwa punishing those who rape the Islamic Constitution of Pakistan with impunity off and on.

Re: # 469

I don't know how this issue of patriotism on the part of Qadianies came in. As far as I am concerned I was talking about the 'Half Nama' which only the one who claims to be a Muslim citizen of Pakistan has to submit to the state functionaries off and on to be accepted as such.

Interestingly this HN originally mentioned even the name of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad though derogatively as an impostor. His name was thus unwittingly made famous though negatively all over the world which the Qadianies claimed to be, in away, a fulfillment of the promise made to the Mirza by God that his name would be made famous.

Of late, somebody taking care of Pakies' faith, realized the absurdity and removed the name of Mirza from the HN'. May be some Chowky friend can enlighten us about the evolution of the HN and how it came about. Sattar2 can perhaps do this amicably.

majumdar (#462),

I am not much familiar with the politics of it all (shrugging icon) … but gathered that baniyya is a Paki term for every vegetarian across the border. So I remain unsure of its connotation … as well as that of the old goat reference (or maybe I should ask my uncle who swears by the Jinnah-Radcliff dialogue - ahem)

… but if there is any truth to Nehru nailing Edwina, it lets the desis have the last laugh, in a jeering sort of a way …

Qadiani issue is religious and political.
I don't think I will doubt the patriotism of Qadianis. In my experience they were contributing a lot to Pakistani society, particularly since they were educated.
Apart from Sir Zafarullah two other names which comes to mind are (Brigadier)or (General) Akhtar Malik (I think) was a hero of 1965 war. And famous AbdusSalam who is a product of Pakistan.
On religious side it is a fight between fundamentalist and qadianis and its extension to all spheres of society.
I will keep my opinion to this. "I am taught by a very great teacher and even a greater human being. Later on I came to know that he was Qadiani. It does not in any decrease his prestige"

Re: # 63

masadi

You say:

"That "half nama" is a non issue that does not affect the lives of the very vast majority of Pakistanis and those that it does affect it does not take away from their social standing whatsoever."

Yes, it is so if you are a Paki Hindu or Sikh and even a Qadiani but it is certainly very disgraceful and humiliating for a Paki Muslims who could claim to be Muslims as of right before the bloody 'Fatwa' but now have to submit a 'Half Nama' of being a Muslim for getting registered as a voter even. For me as an ethnic Muslim (a Syed) it is all the more disgraceful to submit an 'HN' to an 'Ummati' to be treated as a Muslim.

#462 Posted by majumdar on January 9, 2008 7:08:12 pm

Dada,

For them, every Indian is a heeng-smelling bania.
Hope that clarifies.

DM Sahib,

You are correct that history is writen by the victors but in this case, the Japanese were much, much worse than the Allies. My cousin's grandfather was a Japanese POW and as far as he was concerned, you couldn't drop enough A-bombs on the Japanese (though most camp guards were actually Korean and a few Taiwanese IIRC). He also didn't join the INA.

DM sahib,

(If they had been victors, it would be the Americans who would have been called the worst human beings for using atomic weapons indiscriminately on humans)

I hope u have noticed the contradiction in ur statement- Japs cud never have won once USA had got nukes.

(History is written by victors and so the Japanese are today "accepted" by us all as horrible beasts who committed unspeakable atrocities.)

South East Asians and Chinks consider Japs as beasts even without reading the Yank version of history.

Regards

dostmittar: In adopting the democratic Constitution given to them by the US, the Japanese themselves acknowledge what you find so difficult to acknowledge - namely, that WWII was an existentialist struggle between two different kinds of societies - dictatorships vs democracy.

The Germans acknowledged the same in Europe, and under the leadership of Konrad Adenauer and subsequent chancellors, have consistently and willingly followed the democratic path shown to them by the US.

But..if you refuse to recognize this World War II for what it was (a struggle to decide whether the world would be ruled by the Germans and Japanese or by free nations) then dont let me interfere with your line of thought. As for Bose - if you wish to consider him a hero despite all evidence to the contrary, then that is fine. Never mind Logic (which is crying its heart out at being ignored by you) and Facts (which is beating its head against the wall in frustration) - these two critters are no doubt highly overrated.

tahmed32:

Bose is hero not only to Indians but also to many Pakistanis (see Ladgasht's post), he was an Indian and not a Hindu patriot. History is written by victors and so the Japanese are today "accepted" by us all as horrible beasts who committed unspeakable atrocities. If they had been victors, it would be the Americans who would have been called the worst human beings for using atomic weapons indiscriminately on humans while Japanese would have been thought of as the heroes who disproved the superiority of the white race. No, I do not believe the Americans are satans or the Japs angels (although they do seem to be very decent and docile people, which you would no doubt credit to General McArthur), just that both of them fighting a war and following the dictum that everything was fair in love and war.

Sattar bhai,

(Radcliff: She was last seen sneaking in Nehru’s bedroom. You poor sod, the baniyya has beaten you to it. What are you going to do about it?)

JLN was a Brahmin, not a Baniya, it was the old goat who was the baniya.

Regards

How's the whole let's use islam as a weapon to bleed india thing going?

Looks like the indigenous freedom fighters of the JeM are whacking pakis..

Second Editorial: A retired major and terrorism

The big news on Wednesday was that the man who masterminded the attack on the bus of air force officers at the Sargodha air base, on November 1 last year, has been caught. The man is a retired army officer who works for Al Qaeda and organised the attack with the help of an “outlawed militant group”. The attack had killed eight and crippled 40 for life.

The retired major, Ahsanul Haq, had six associates with him, most probably belonging to Jaish-e Muhammad or Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, organisations that have grown out of the mother jihadi organisation called Sipah-e-Sahaba. The Sipah supplied a chunk of the warriors that fought Pakistan’s covert jihad in Afghanistan and Kashmir. Their Pakistani intelligence “handlers” allowed them to into the tutelage of Al Qaeda because of their faith in what Al Qaeda was doing but also because of the Arab money that flowed liberally in the wake of Osama bin Laden. Most of the suicide bombings in Pakistan are organised by these “outlawed” militias that are allowed by the Pakistani state to operate freely in Pakistan’s civil society under changed names. *

Salim,

… heck, this is what my uncle told me. This conversation took place between Jinnah and Radcliff:

+++

Jinnah: Radcliff, you (expletive) Brit; in Gurdaspur, did you keep separate record of Ahmadis?

Radcliff: No Mr. Jinnah, I did not. Zafrullah specifically instructed me not to. BTW, I reckon that Mirzai is planning to give Gurdaspur to India.

Jinnah (under his breath): That (expeltive) Qadiani; he is once again conspiring with the Jews; damn it … wait till I get my hands around his (expletive) neck. (Turns to Radcliff) Ok, don’t worry ... I’ll take care of it. BTW, have you seen Edwina?

Radcliff: She was last seen sneaking in Nehru’s bedroom. You poor sod, the baniyya has beaten you to it. What are you going to do about it?

Jinnah: Ok, ok, don’t rub it in. First I get a moth-eaten Pakistan. Then Nehru gets to nail Edwina before I could. Pour me a Scotch, will you please? (takes a sip, turns towards the window, gazes outward, and speaks with a certain tone of optimism) But I like this Maudoodi guy ... he is willing to give his life for Pakistan. Allah willing, we will create Pakistan and impose Nizam-e-Mustafa once for all. It will be a country for Muslims alone. If you are not one, get out. Oh, I think I hear azaan. May be I should stop drinking and become a pious Muslim (pours his drink on the floor, recites kalima, and goes on to curse Qadianis).

Fuzair,

... yes, I think this is what Urstruly is implying (that Ahmadis in Gurdaspur numbered less than 13k). And he is putting the burden on Ahmadis to prove otherwise.

And if Ahmadis fail to disprove his contention, it can only mean that Zafrullah betrayed Pakistan, Gurdaspur going to India opened gates of hell - costing 1 million lives and displacing 20+ million people. Somehow Jesus buried in Kashmir also ties into all this … which further proves that Kashmir too is an Ahmadi conspiracy.

And he can prove all this … based on the word of his uncle. Takbeer …

(Urstruly, what’s next? Jews are conspiring with aliens? What does your uncle think? Or may be you can quote your doodhwalla to support your point. No??)

+++

Salim,

If Radcliff was suppoed to take that into account … and he didn’t … this further proves an Ahamdi conspiracy. My uncle thinks so. Can you prove him wrong??

Fuzair and company,
There is no point arguing about the percentage of Muslims in Guradspur. While Radcliff was supposed to take that into account he was not obligated to do so. Such was the nonsensical and utterly stupid basis for the Partition of India.
If you check carefully, you might find that the percentage of Muslims in Delhi, Muradabad, and Lucknow was also very high - if not a majority. But who cares? Partition along religious lines was stupid and its results are clearly available for all to see. :(

#454 {"BTW I liked you succinct usage of 'beatification of Bhutto'...How BB supporters don't see flaws in her political charater!"}

Kamath Sahib,
I appreciate your feedback. :) BB supporters have their focus on the ethnic politics of Pakistan. With Zardari at the helm, it's going to be even worse than under BB. PPP will eventually decline into a regional Sindhu Desh party much like the former Awami League that represented a majority of Pakistan at one time. :(

Yaar, Ladgasht, I am NOT saying the Qadianis are unpatriotic; I agree 100% that they are and they have proven it over and over. I was merely pointing out the logical inconsistencies in Urstruly's arguments.

Urstruly: I haven't been able to find the breakdown for the number of Qadianis in Gurdaspur as per the 1941 census, but here is some interesting information from http://punjabrevenue.nic.in/gaz_gdr4.htm.

In 1941 the population of Gurdaspur was 854,866, of which 440,323 were Muslims, so 51.5% Muslim. Are you seriously going to argue that there were fewer than 12,823 Qadianis in the entire district? If so, what is your source?

BTW, this source (http://paa2004.princeton.edu/download.asp?submissionId=41274) gives only 50.2% Muslim in Gurdaspur.

Urstruly #441:

”There was no way Gurdaspur should have gone to India.”

Your assertion is correct … (1) but only in a perfect world, and (2) if “Muslim majority” was the sole criterion of partition. If either condition is compromised, all you have left is an axe to grind.

Read the excerpt in #440; it adequately addresses the issue. Feel free to share it with your uncle.

Anyway, by insisting that Ahmadis are not Muslims, you have relinquished your claim to Gurdaspur. You are now crying over spilt milk. Fuzair is correct in wondering why didn’t the ullema happily relinquish Gurdaspur to India. Least they could have done was to object to definition of “Muslim” in the 1940 census.

(PS: I am glad you are no longer claiming that Gurdaspur was 80% Muslim. Now, this is what I call progress ...)

Re: # 430
Salim Chauhan:

BTW I liked you succinct usage of 'beatification of Bhutto'
How BB supporters don't see flaws in her political charater!

Kamath

Re: # 443 ur line of thought is absolute BS.The Qadianis were patriotic Pakistanis.They raised Al Furqan Brigade to fight in Kashmir in 1947-48.At that time in 1947 it was not their question of being non Muslim.

Re: # 415 HP , u have an ants brain.A man of a very low calibre with little education.Zafrullah had no business signing SEATO.He attended it as a guest as pavo stated.I think that he was promised the slot of ICJ judge as bribe to sign this treaty.

Pakis... Gurdaspur stayed with india, so did hyderbad, kashmir (the good part), junagarh ... did I miss anything else that pakis whine about all the time?... There is nothing you can do about that...

Where the heck is Gurdaspur anyway?

Anycase - If things go the way they are - you would be hard pressed to keep together what you have now... why don't you focus on that?... I m hearing sindh is pretty upset and restive these days...

Besides - there is no indication that Bose sold his soul to japs or nazis... he sure used them for his purpose...

Re: # 447

good one... even though I think Bose is over-rated as a hero - his attempts to fight against brits with released POWs is indeed coomendable... at the least - he secured the release of those POW indian soldiers from captivity and suffering...

And like you said - had the japs converted millions to shinto, Ahmed32 would be probably one of them and would now be named Amasaki and would be worshipping Hirohito(or whoever the japanese emperor was at that time) as his prophet, PUBH(it's japanese equivalent)

Just like today he worships Mo and praises Abdali or whoever was the islamic invader who pillaged and converted to produce the present day pakis...:)

#447 jang: You say because the japs didnt actually come to india, one can assume they would have treated indians any better than the other asians (chinese, koreans, philipino's, vietnamese, malays, burmese)?

If you are looking for a stupid argument - THAT is one stupid argument. I know it is hard to acknowledge that your national hero was a japanese puppet, but be brave and face facts. You can do it.

tahmd your argument is stupid at best. bose used the japanese in his patriotic quest, why should indians disown him as a puppet of the japanese? IF japs had come to india, raped and pillaged and later caused millions to convert to shinto .. maybe i can see your point..but the converted shinto still may not see it your way.

jury is still out on Zafarullah khan

Re: # 443

Yes the right answer to the Gudaspur debacle lies somewhere between cupidity and stupidity of Zafarullah and zafarullah alone since he was the empowered delegate on ML side. One thing is certain that he kept QA in dark about Gurdaspur until the last moment. That at least is confirmed by third party sources including my uncle, QA's dismay as reported by almost every historian, and especially his comment of the "moth eaten Pakistan".

Your argument about Quadiani population in Gurdaspur is irrelevant since you have no proof to support your claim the fact that there was a significant Quadiani presence in the distric other than your word of mouth. You cannot prove their number conclusively and neither you can prove that had they been not recognized as Muslims it would have had any effect on the outcome of Partition formula if brokered honestly. Au contraire I have the census of 1941 on my side, which was also agreed by all parties involved in Radcliffe Award.

So my honest advise to Quadianis is that they shouldn't even raise the question of 'had the Quadianis not recognized as Muslims....." because it nullifies or at least weaken their own argument that "we are Muslims". You cannot eat the cake...

#443 fuzair: Poor urstruly has been hoist by his own petard. :-(

The 'fuss' was your inane argument that Ch. Zafrulla, at best out of stupidity and worst out of cupidity, gave Gurdaspur to India. My point was that if Qadianis are non-Muslims, Gurdaspur should have gone to India, and vice-versa. It is irrelevant if Qadianis call themselves Muslims, 'real' Muslims would have rejected this assertion in 1947 and insisted that as a non-Muslim majority district, it should legally have stayed in India. Of course, we'd be happy to steal it from India if we could, but we have no 'moral' claim on it.

Urstruly#441:

So very well, we all are in agreement over the issue of Gurdaspur. There was no way Gurdaspur should have gone to India."

You mean, all Pakistanis.;)

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.

Re: # 422
nasah,
I take exception.
Read my full post that HP alluded to.

#423 read "you are running from pillar to post doing that are being let down at every turn.."

as "you are running from pillar to post doing that and are being let down at every turn...

Zeemax “I appeal to HP to accept pavocavalry as the 'Master', and pay tribute.

Otherwise, HP, your grand name will be mud. Pavo will grind you into the ground."

Newbies with the power of copy-paste in their hands, with bits detached from institutional roots, with posts relying on "authority based" knowledge the hallmark of darul ulooms or the PMA cannot claim to be masters at anything. When Mr. Pavo composes a piece in which his own thought comes forward (and I mean more than a line or two, which are characteristics of Manto's posts- another fake claimant to being the "master"), then maybe we can spend some time with his posts. In the meantime 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.

Re: # 416
"You make a bad call!
I guess you just can’t figure out what the army role had been and still is in Pakistan. This is a typical army supporter tactics to blame every one for the problems as if the army was “Just one of those”. Ignoring the fact that since 1951 and starting in 1954, the army brazenly interfered in the civilian affair and it was the only force that forced petty civilian politicians to stand on the army side." (HP)

I would add that some were congenitally petty politicians -- and some were forced to become petty -- and those who rebelled against becoming pets or pettys of the army were kicked out unceremoniously at gunpoint.

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 can you believe that a dumb ass COAS fired from his job for not obeying civilian orders given by the PM of the country will rather topple the elected government than leave the job as ordered gracefully!

Just think of it if every soldier started doing that -- imagine anybody fired from the job will fire his or her boss with a gun pointed at his or her head! And then become the boss himself -- and this is supposed to be rule of law country -- or rule of the jungle country?

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.

fuzair#409:

I believe it was the state of Jodhpur.

pov#406:

I have read a slight variant of this. It is that the British had asked both the Congress and the ML for their opinions on how to handle the princely states. The Congress wanted the political parties in the princely states also to have a say in the final decision (the Congress had its affliates in most States!) while Jinnah wanted the Prince to have the sole power. The British accepted Jinnah's position, who was eyeing Hyderabad and, maybe, Bhopal while he thought that Kashmir would have no option but to fall in Pakistan's lap like a ripe apple. To give Nehru some credit, he did seek the concurrence of the largest political party in Kashmir, Sheikh Abdullah's National Conference, before accepting Kashmir's accession.

Urstruly#376:

I think that you are confusing UP with Punjab. The Unionist govt. of Punjab could never be accused ot being pro-Hindu. I think our "geo-neighbour", T.E.Shah would confirm that most govt. posts at the senior level were filled by Muslims, at least in West Punjab. In govt. recruitments, such as Railway, a quota system was used which reserved 50% seats for Muslims, 25% for scheduled castes and the remainder were in the general category open to all, in other words they too were not exclusively for Hindus and Sikhs.
On the other hand, if you had said that the Hindu Shah Gumashtas were hated by their Muslim borrowers, you may have a point.

On Gurdaspur, while I am not knowlegeable about what happened in the secret talks between various actors, please note that population figures in the 1940 Census were not to be the sole determinant of whether a district were to go to India or Pakistan. The other factors that the Commission was to take into consideration were:
- geographical contiguity
- any demographic movements since 1940 census
- land ownership
- economic property ownership

tahmned32:

You may have a greater insight into "what would have been" and will not argue that point with you. But I would like to remind you that Bose was a well-respected leader of the progressive wing of the Congress and had, indeed, defeated Gandhi's candidate for the post of the Congress President in 1938, (for which Gandhi never forgave him). And I also know that while the quislings in Europe are now discredited in their homelands, Bose's name is among the most honoured in India. Many people (foolishly) believed that the Indian govt. was complicit in hiding the true whereabout of Bose because Nehru was afraid that he would lose elections to Bose. While this was nonsense, it shows the magic spell that Bose cast on his compatriots. Some quisling!

Fuzair:

Sorry, I missed responding to you earlier. Regardless of the proportion of defecting pows, the fact is that the British realised that the soldiers were no longer immune to the freedom 'virus' as they were at the time of the jalianwala bagh. Please note the following quote from my BBC paste to pav.
"With the British now aware that the Indian army could no longer be relied upon by the Raj to do its bidding, independence followed soon after."
The situation was, I think, somewhat similar to the one facing Pak army in curbing islamist insurgency in the Northwest as its army, while quite disciplined, is also not immune from the islamist virus.
I agree with you re. the discipline of the Indian army in general. I believe that, against Nehru's advice, Patel refused to reinstate rebels into the Indian army and navy as he thought that this would compromise future discipline of the army.
Regards.

#358 Posted by ijaz_gul

“I call this entire group of conspirators that include the politicians, bureaucrats, agencies and top military men, who tasted power as the mindset who have successfully bred generations into the present state of affairs.”

You make a bad call!
I guess you just can’t figure out what the army role had been and still is in Pakistan. This is a typical army supporter tactics to blame every one for the problems as if the army was “Just one of those”. Ignoring the fact that since 1951 and starting in 1954, the army brazenly interfered in the civilian affair and it was the only force that forced petty civilian politicians to stand on the army side.

The army had been actively killing Pakistanis and there is no need to document that again but still I would do that so that you have a clear idea of what I am talking about.
1958-59 Balochistan
1964-65 Balochistan
1971 East Pakistan
1973-76 Balochistan
1979-83 Sindh
2005 Balochistan

Here we have any army which has attacked Pakistanis with impunity and you are talking about the security situation? Sorry to burst your bubble but the East Pakistan struggle was against the army. In Baluchistan, it was against the army and in Sindh, the struggle was against the army. And as I see it, we are headed for another confrontation in Sindh.

Pakistan army has become the enemy of Pakistan and should be treated as such. The army is conspiring against the people of Pakistan to preserve its own status and privileges. And I have yet to find a conscientious objector in the officers’ class.
It should be disbanded. All army officers, junior or senior should be reoriented and reeducated!

Your romanticism notwithstanding!

#410 Posted by Urstruly
Re: # 398 Fuzair

Isn’t urstruly suggesting that Since Qadianis were Muslim in 1947, Gurdaspur should have been part of Pakistan? But he never tells what was he going to do in 1974 when Qadianis became non muslim….Give Gurdaspur back to India?

Poohnchi waheen pay khak Jehan ka Khameer tha!

#364 Posted by zeemax

“I appeal to HP to accept pavocavalry as the 'Master', and pay tribute.

Otherwise, HP, your grand name will be mud. Pavo will grind you into the ground.

Pavo is full of schit and I have shown it many times. Jihadi supporters in my books get no corner.
Btw, read my post #351 again and again.

“From your own quote it is apparent that he did not sign the treaty but signed an advisory note that does not amount to signing the treaty as you had alleged in your post that I had challenged. Clearly you don't understand the difference in an advisory note and the actually signing of the treaty.”

I am still waiting for Pavo to respond to #351 where I proved from his on quotes that Zaffarullah never signed the treaty because he was not the Foreign Minister at the time of the signing the treaty.

I read him calling every one on this board, Qadiani. Typical mullah behavior!

Zafarullah being a Qadiani had nothing to with the treaty and it is just pathetic to hide behind the religion when facts don’t support your arguments.

#412 masadi: I know. I know. I have a heart of stone. I love to see people suffer. But...your pathetic condition melts even my cold heart.

pav:

I was not referring to the INA but to the India Legion. Here is the full BBC report that I was alluding to:

Hitler's secret Indian army
By Mike Thomson
BBC News


"In the closing stages of World War II, as Allied and French resistance forces were driving Hitler's now demoralised forces from France, three senior German officers defected.

Legionnaires were recruited from German POW camps
The information they gave British intelligence was considered so sensitive that in 1945 it was locked away, not due to be released until the year 2021.

Now, 17 years early, the BBC's Document programme has been given special access to this secret file.

It reveals how thousands of Indian soldiers who had joined Britain in the fight against fascism swapped their oaths to the British king for others to Adolf Hitler - an astonishing tale of loyalty, despair and betrayal that threatened to rock British rule in India, known as the Raj.

The story the German officers told their interrogators began in Berlin on 3 April 1941. This was the date that the left-wing Indian revolutionary leader, Subhas Chandra Bose, arrived in the German capital.

Bose, who had been arrested 11 times by the British in India, had fled the Raj with one mission in mind. That was to seek Hitler's help in pushing the British out of India.

He wanted 500 volunteers who would be trained in Germany and then parachuted into India. Everyone raised their hands. Thousands of us volunteered

Lieutenant Barwant Singh
Six months later, with the help of the German foreign ministry, he had set up what he called "The Free India Centre", from where he published leaflets, wrote speeches and organised broadcasts in support of his cause.

By the end of 1941, Hitler's regime officially recognised his provisional "Free India Government" in exile, and even agreed to help Chandra Bose raise an army to fight for his cause. It was to be called "The Free India Legion".

Bose hoped to raise a force of about 100,000 men which, when armed and kitted out by the Germans, could be used to invade British India.

He decided to raise them by going on recruiting visits to Prisoner-of-War camps in Germany which, at that time, were home to tens of thousands of Indian soldiers captured by Rommel in North Africa.

Volunteers

Finally, by August 1942, Bose's recruitment drive got fully into swing. Mass ceremonies were held in which dozens of Indian POWs joined in mass oaths of allegiance to Adolf Hitler.


Chandra Bose did not live to see Indian independence
These are the words that were used by men that had formally sworn an oath to the British king: "I swear by God this holy oath that I will obey the leader of the German race and state, Adolf Hitler, as the commander of the German armed forces in the fight for India, whose leader is Subhas Chandra Bose."

I managed to track down one of Bose's former recruits, Lieutenant Barwant Singh, who can still remember the Indian revolutionary arriving at his prisoner of war camp.

"He was introduced to us as a leader from our country who wanted to talk to us," he said.

"He wanted 500 volunteers who would be trained in Germany and then parachuted into India. Everyone raised their hands. Thousands of us volunteered."

Demoralised

In all 3,000 Indian prisoners of war signed up for the Free India Legion.

But instead of being delighted, Bose was worried. A left-wing admirer of Russia, he was devastated when Hitler's tanks rolled across the Soviet border.

Matters were made even worse by the fact that after Stalingrad it became clear that the now-retreating German army would be in no position to offer Bose help in driving the British from faraway India.

When the Indian revolutionary met Hitler in May 1942 his suspicions were confirmed, and he came to believe that the Nazi leader was more interested in using his men to win propaganda victories than military ones.

So, in February 1943, Bose turned his back on his legionnaires and slipped secretly away aboard a submarine bound for Japan.


Rudolf Hartog remembers parting with his Indian friends
There, with Japanese help, he was to raise a force of 60,000 men to march on India.

Back in Germany the men he had recruited were left leaderless and demoralised. After much dissent and even a mutiny, the German High Command despatched them first to Holland and then south-west France, where they were told to help fortify the coast for an expected allied landing.

After D-Day, the Free India Legion, which had now been drafted into Himmler's Waffen SS, were in headlong retreat through France, along with regular German units.

It was during this time that they gained a wild and loathsome reputation amongst the civilian population.

The former French Resistance fighter, Henri Gendreaux, remembers the Legion passing through his home town of Ruffec: "I do remember several cases of rape. A lady and her two daughters were raped and in another case they even shot dead a little two-year-old girl."

Finally, instead of driving the British from India, the Free India Legion were themselves driven from France and then Germany.

Their German military translator at the time was Private Rudolf Hartog, who is now 80.

"The last day we were together an armoured tank appeared. I thought, my goodness, what can I do? I'm finished," he said."

"But he only wanted to collect the Indians. We embraced each other and cried. You see that was the end."

Mutinies

A year later the Indian legionnaires were sent back to India, where all were released after short jail sentences.

But when the British put three of their senior officers on trial near Delhi there were mutinies in the army and protests on the streets.

With the British now aware that the Indian army could no longer be relied upon by the Raj to do its bidding, independence followed soon after.

Not that Subhas Chandra Bose was to see the day he had fought so hard for. He died in 1945.

Since then little has been heard of Lieutenant Barwant Singh and his fellow legionnaires.

At the end of the war the BBC was forbidden from broadcasting their story and this remarkable saga was locked away in the archives, until now. Not that Lieutenant Singh has ever forgotten those dramatic days.

"In front of my eyes I can see how we all looked, how we would all sing and how we all talked about what eventually would happen to us all," he said.

tahmed writes "masadi: I am a kind man at heart..."

No one who supports British colonization of India, was rallying for the US Iraq war of 2003, blamed the Hizbullah for the Israeli Lebanon carnage in 2006, and spares not a moment to advocate our slavery to the US elite can be "a kind man at heart". With loose morals you eventually lose your ability to seperate truth from falsehood and comprehend simple facts and thus you pretend not to understand my quite simple posts...

sattar 2 writes "So much anger against Ahmadis?"

No anger whatsoever, just trying to counter the claims of the peon of the West tahmed who was comparing apples and oranges by ignoring the social/political context in which the two groups operate, and the IF is of paramount importance in understanding social phenomena, has nothing to do with a bull having tits or not, but evangelicals of the Ahmadi group like all evangelical ignoramuses wouldn't know, all they are concerned about is pushing their narrow agenda and beliefs....

Re: # 398 Fuzair

And I can call your post as Exhibit A to show how Quadianis always undermine the Pakistani cause for Kashmir and other disputed issues of Partition. But that contradicts my agenda. So a simple answer to your query regarding logical consistency is that that we are examining the circumstances of an era 6 decades ago, so must apply the logic which is consistent with that era. In that era there existed no such inconsistency.

I believe that MAJ is on record as having told one of the rulers of the Rajput states (Alwar? pretty sure it wasn't Bikaner) that he could write his own terms of accession if he acceded to Pakistan. I think, the story goes, Mountbatten and Patel 'persuaded' the ruler to accede to India.

Kaal, for most part I can handle ignorant people alright – even though they are an insufferable lot with little sense of what to say, when.

But don’t be in a hurry to change - I don’t want you to feel pressured in any way. That would be rude on my part :)

#406 pavocavalry: Your knowledge of partition politics is truly impressive. Is Mountbatten on record as having made this proposal, and what is the source of this information?

While Mountbatten may have made such a proposal, I dont see though how could you know what Mr. Jinnah was thinking and so this is speculation. Please advise if otherwise.

Re: # 388 Mountbatten wanted a formula that Hindu/Sikh majority princely states join India and Muslim majority states join Pakistan.However Mr Jinnah did not agree to it thinking that may be Pakistan could get Hyderabad or Bikaner.Thus the Kashmir problem.

masadi: I am a kind man at heart, and have taken pity at the several unanswered posts you have addressed to me. So, I made an honest attempt at reading your post. I really did. I didnt understand it at first. Then I held the laptop upside down and tried again to see that perhaps you write upside down. No luck. I tried standing on my head while holding the laptop upside down, but alas - I never did figure out how to stand on my head (despite numerous attempts). :-(

So - sadly, I must leave you blubbering like one of those inmates at the funny farm and pray for your early recovery.

Zafrullah was member of Radcliffe Award Boundary Commission from Pakistan side also.

Gurdaspur had a large number of Muslims.Gurdaspur Tehsil was non Muslim majority while Shakargarh and Patahnkot were Muslim majority although not Qadiani majority.In census Qadianis were not regarded as separate religion.Shakargarh was transferred to Pakistan.

urstruly: You are entitled to your religious views which includes considering someone a non-muslim on account of his beliefs. You have chosen, for reasons best known to you, to not respond to my questions on why you feel so much more strongly about Ahmedis who have not engaged in any violence or killings in Pakistan, than you do about those who have actually killed thousands of people in Pakistan in the name of religion.

As for Zafrullah Khan, by all means discuss his actions. But shouldnt the buck stop with the top man - Mr. Jinnah himself?

Thank you sattar bhai. So long as you don't mind my ignorant opinions, we are all friends. :)

Re: # 391

Asadi,

"...You cannot manage the control of two areas with one enemy in the middle,.."

When did India become an enemy in 1947......so do you subscribe to this view that Indians (esp Idolators like me) were the 'enemy' even before the partition took place??

It appears you also subscribe to the view that idolators are by default the 'enemies' of muslims.

Kaal bhai, there’s a lot you don’t follow, but you give your opinion anyway (not that there’s anything wrong with it).

I was only pointing out what Urstruly’s obsession has in common with yours. Sorry, didn’t mean to upset you. I hope you both will continue to outdo each other. May the best man win …

Urstruly:

I think you have a logical inconsistency in your logic:

If the Qadianis are not Muslims, then Gurdaspur should have gone to India.

If the Qadianis are Muslims, then Gurdaspur should have gone to Pakistan.

However, your contention is that Qadianis are not Muslims and Gurdaspur should have gone to Pakistan.

You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Pavo (#348):

Your contention that "Zafrullah signed SEATO pact regardless of what he was told” seems to be undermined by HP’s post (#351). Or did I miss something? Please do explain when you get a chance. Luqman (#344) you too … if it is not too much to ask for …

+++

masadi (#390):

“… If Qadiyanis were not an insignificant minority and were vested in the political process by none other than the Pakistan Army acting under directives from the objects of your worship, yes the US elite, they would have partaken in similar sectarian violence and killings, guaranteed...”

One can say almost anything by simply starting with an “IF”. For example, if a bull had tits, it would be a cow. Yes, indeed. But so what??

So much anger against Ahmadis? (scratching my head)

sattar bhai, I am not following this thread very closely. Please do go ahead and use my name in whatever manner most helpful to your cause.

Like you, urstruly too is a good fellow. I am sure we can all work together, should you not mind much. Best.

Urstruly,

What you suggest as your opinion in #384, you go on to cite as a fact in #389 (”The fact of the matter is that that the incompetence of this person has cost 1 million Muslims their lives …”). Ahem, ahem.

Can you distinguish opinion from facts? Your investigation is a little more than a farce!

And your opinion is based upon ”what your uncle told you”!!! Did he witness this alleged dialogue between Quaid and Zafrullah? Or should one believe a third-hand (no pun intended) account?

Once you even suggested that Gurdaspur had 80% Muslim population (grin). Now you are back to a more realistic number of 51%. Did this 51% include Ahamdis?

Your obsession with Ahmadis is matched only by that of Kaal (hee hee hee). Perhaps you should make a side-project out of this issue … and have him investigate. He’ll google, find nothing, but will tell you what you want to hear anyway. Then he’ll insist that … “faith should have no regard for facts”. Hey, it has worked for you all this time!

(Kaal bhai, … am not being presumptuous; simply basing my comment on what you wrote. There's nothing wrong with your view - but it's kinda nice to revisit it every now and then)

And now you are soliciting cyber-strangers for "proof" of your opinion. What a pity ...

More later …

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#389 Posted by Urstruly on January 7, 2008 9:25:45 am


My only problem with Quadiyanis is that that they should stop calling themselves Muslims and their religion as Islam.


Sorry...you live in the US of A and US laws say the ahmedis can call themselves muslim if they want to and there's nothing you can do about it..

suck it up..

#384 Posted by Urstruly on January 7, 2008 7:35:55 am


2. Both Nehru and Mountabten did not want Pakistan to have control over Kashmir


suck to be you...kashmir ain't gonna banega pakiland..

#342 "ZAB manipulated the secession of the Bengalis and set a precedent that Pakistan is divisible"

Once again SC is historically confused. MAJ was not very interested in Bangladesh. Further it was an unviable setup that was from the beginning setup for seperation. You cannot manage the control of two areas with one enemy in the middle, and especially when representation of the two is entirely different and can be manipulated by one to dominate the other. Further ZAB had nothing to do with that, the Pakistan Army had everything to do with it. If you put the blame on ZAB because he did not lie down flat in front of Mujib who had no representation in the West and was not willing to negotiate, then you are a fool. Political representatives have a right to fight for their people whom they represent and this "lying down flat" would have usurped the rights of the people of West Pakistan and aliented them further, causing the Pakistan Army to step in and aborting this great work regarding democracy tha ZAB was doing. As usual you superficial surface knowledge is BS.

Tahmed peon of the West writes "#386

How many Pakistanis have been killed since Pakistan was formed by Qadiyanis? Zero.
How many Pakistanis have been killed by "Sunni" maulvis? "

The guy is just as ignorant as the average hill billy living like a cockroach in the gutter yet singing the praises of America as the "greatest place on earth". If Qadiyanis were not an insignificant minority and were vested in the political process by none other than the Pakistan Army acting under directives from the objects of your worship, yes the US elite, they would have partaken in similar sectarian violence and killings, guaranteed. There is nothing inherently "pious" in the Qadiyani compared to the Sunni or the Shia, as you are trying to insinuate, it is the strength of numbers and vesting in the political process that makes a difference. But you, as ignorant as you are in your worship of all things American, whom the Qadiyanis in their leech like manner have been milking giving all kinds of horse and bull stories about Pakistan, you wouldn't know that. Now you do, so feel free as you always do with my writings, affaix your damn name to it and use it as if it were your own.....you misearble plagirist.

Re: # 387

My only problem with Quadiyanis is that that they should stop calling themselves Muslims and their religion as Islam. Because Islam is the religion that Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) revived for us. If we believe that islam then we cannot believe another prophet after him. They should not call themselves Ahamadi either, because Ahmad was one of the name of Holy Prophet (pbuh). So not even in inuendo they must relate themselves to Holy prophet (pbuh). I don't understand why they are so ahamed of calling themselves just Quadiani or Mirzai. But just to offend us and to anatgonize us they unnecessarily create this tension and then whine. They are the most intolerant of all religious sects for they openly insult our ideals and beliefs and when responded to, whine.

Having said that, isn't it a fact that they have turned Zafarullah Khan into some kind of Allah ka tohfa that cannot be questioned. The fact of the matter is that that the incompetence of this person has cost 1 million Muslims their lives and a Kashmir issue that plagues this region to this day. Why can't the actions of this public official be examined??

RadCliffe Award-Why Gurdaspur went to India?
This is what I posted on another board.

"The Radcliff Award Favoured whom? The divide lines that Radcliff reccomended were never followed. MB instead drew an arbitary line that sliced the entire river system of Punjab, depriving Pakistan the control of eastern rivers. Raja of Bikaner was on record saying that he would join the country that controls these rivers. Also Bikaner had the biggest post WW2 Ordinance Dumps. Therefore who gained and who lost is anyone`s guess. This is where the Nehru-MB connect becomes obvious".
http://www.chowk.com/interacts/11501/1/0/560#305982

It was that Justice Munir who was a member of the commission and informed Zafar over what had happened. There are some serious questions.

One is why did Qaid E Azam accept Partition before the award of boundries.

The second is why MB over ruled the recommendations of the commission? Was Britain already looking forward to containment of communism and wanted to create a buffer state. After all, the Berlin Airlift had taken place, so had Bretton Woods and some sort of geo strategic map had beed redrawn.

#386

How many Pakistanis have been killed since Pakistan was formed by Qadiyanis? Zero.
How many Pakistanis have been killed by "Sunni" maulvis? Thousands in sectarian killings!! Thousands more in other politically motivated killings!!

So, what is your problem with Qadiyanis that you are so much against them while ignoring the real enemies of the Pakistani people? Dont tell me it is on religious issues - since religious issues are none of your business (per the Quran).

Or do you just enjoy harrassing a minority community in Pakistan that has already been disgracefully treated by Pakistani governments for political reasons?

Re: # 385

I am not changing my story; I just listed what many other people believe. My "story" is included as #4. And at the end I wrote "My personal theory is that it was a combination of all of the above,"

Urstruly #364: I think you are changing your story (from gurdaspur being an ahmedi conspiracy to gurdaspur being a british conspiracy) after seeing fuzair's post #383 to try and hold on to your attempt at blaming Zafrullah.

Reminds me of Brig. Cheema and his "benazir got killed because she ducked and hit the handle" story...

Re: # 383

Almost every historian finds the Gurdaspur debacle as mind boggling. Despite the availability of Radcliffe proceedings the matter why Zafarullah did not even insist on Gurdaspur, while whole Muslim Punjab was convulsing with anticipation of inclusion of Gurdaspur in Pakistan is still shrouded in mystery. Gurdaspur qualified the mutually agreed criterion of Radcliffe award. It was contageous to Pakistan geographically and it had a 51% Muslim population according to the census of 1940.

The unanswered questions have compelled historians and ordinary people propound theories such as;

1. gross incompetence of Zafarullah.

2. Both Nehru and Mountabten did not want Pakistan to have control over Kashmir and Gurdaspur was the only key. This fact is documented and is beyond doubt. Radcliffe award wass under severe pressure from Mountabatten, which probably prevented it from being an honest broker.

3. Mountabaten and/or Nehru influenced Zafarullah.

4. The inclusion of Kashmir into Pakistan either nullifies or cast serious doubt on some of the Quadiani scriptures that they beleive in; especially those related to the Jesus Christ (pbuh) being burried in India/kashmir had Kashmir been a part of Pakistan.

My personal theory is that it was a combination of all of the above, with special emphasis on the fact that Zafarullah was the humble and obedient servant of the empire.

Ummm, isn't Qadian in Gurdaspur? Why would Zafrullah give it to India? If he was a traitor to Pakistan, as is implied in these posts, why would he give Qadian to India? Unless he was going to settle in India himself, which he didn't.

Message to all chowkies and chowkstaff: This place has been infested with cockroaches

Pavocavlary:

Your post about Zafarullah Khan signing the SEATO treaty on its own was quite revealing. An older family member who was very close to Quaid-e-Azam during the time when Radcliffe Award was being deliberated told me that QA had appointed Zafarullah as an empowered representative on behalf of ML. When Radcliffe awarded Gurdaspur to India, QA was extremely infuriated at Zafarullah and took him to the task. According to him the following dialogue took place between the two.

QA: What happened with the Gurdaspur today.

Zafaullah: Gurdaspur was not on tofday's agenda and issue never came up.

QA: (Gujrati expletive) who the (expletive) was supposed to put Gurdaspur on agenda; you or me (expletive)?

Pavo- almost every history book that I have read, especially The Emergence of Pakistan by Ch Mohammad Ali, and "Partition of India: Legend and Reality” by HM Seervai lays the balme of Gurdaspur debacle on the incompetence of Muslim delegate in the Radcliffe Award, without naming the name. But this converastaion between QA and Zafarullah shows where the blame should be placed squarely. Can you elaborate on this further, possibly with some references.

This is something extremely important to me because in my opinion Gurdaspur is the key th