The ANP Challenge

"If one talks of Saifullahs one points out that two brothers are in PML-Q and one in the PPP. Does it mean we should not mention one side of the family altogether"

please don't insult the khan family by comparing them with these corrupt drug smugglers.

"Look Salman, my friend, I have already responded to your "proofs"
haha this is funny. what was his response? you have added words to mr Woplerts text. haha. anyone cn go and check the book, where have I added words. and am I stupid to add words to a well known book commonly available to prove my point? Not Really. what can we belive of him?

Since Yasser made a chargesheet against the Ghaffar Khan and his legacy, I am constrained to reply the chragesheet seriatim:

#737 Posted by MantoLives on March 26, 2008 6:30:59 am

////////Jinnah leaving constitutional means and ways doesn't mean he was calling on people to kill Hindus. No honest person will accuse him of it. Name one opponent of Jinnah... Gandhi, Nehru, Patel or Azad .. who opposed Jinnah of violence. Not a single one. Not even your Bacha Khan. Nor have you been able to produce a single statement from Jinnah calling for violence./////////

Yasser is using lawyerly tricks here. Jinnah was indeed resposnible for the violence everywhere. If Gandhi, Nehru didnt name im coz they're hoping against hope abt the partition of India and Jinnah was the key person who can stall it.

Yasser is plain moron to say that nobody accused Jinnah of DAD violence.

Patel did it. Nehru did it. Maulana Azad did it. Gandhi was busy touring the country against the tide of communal virus
spread by Jinnah the Serpent. Even Wavell sought clarification on the violence. This pro-ML GG sought explantionas from Jinnah, Suhrawardy abt the DAD violence but never from Gandhi, Nehru or Azad.

/////////1. Bacha Khan and his family have a history of flip flops on the issue of whether they are part of Pakistan or whether they are separatists. ///////////

Jinnah did a lot of them. Jinnah was a staunch nationalist and later a staunch secessionist. That the mother of all flipflops.

//////////2. The "Secular" Bacha Khan Family has been closely allied to Maulana Mufti Mahmood and the anti-Pakistan Deobandi Fanatics (the forerunner of the taliban).//////////

Deobandis were not fanatics. The Deobandis were not anti-Pakistani (which is a loaded point coz they knew that it's impossible to relocate every Muslim in India to an Utopia promised by Jinnah coz there're Muslims in every village of India) but staunch nationalists, lest they be seen as gaddaars.

The vital point I forgot to mention was that Deobandi school of Islam came into being after the famous book of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan on the reasons for the failure of 1857 Uprising. One of his points was that Islam lost its true essence in India and Deobandi School of Islam was supposed to reinvigorate it. So Deobandis were not religious extermists but a School of puritanical Islam.

Btw, Yasser had no answer to the question of Jinnah's promise abt Sharia in Pakistan.

///////3. The banned NAP's leaders were part of the Nizam-e-Mustafa movement in 1977 which brought down the Bhutto government in the name of Islam. This included Bacha Khan's daughter in law: Begum Nasim Wali Khan./////////

Bhutto himself hobobbed with fundoos and he's infact the progenitor of funddoism in Pakistan.

///////4. Wali Khan and his family were released by General Zia. Ghani Khan proudly received Sitara-e-Imtiaz from General Zia. So much for being principled and anti-dictatorship. ////////

I dont see any wrong in receiving a civilian honour. If they had refused it, Yasser wud have branded them as anti-nationals. Cant have it both ways, khotey!


/////////5. The ANP collaborated with ISI-engineered IJI of Nawaz Sharif in 1990 and then was part of the army-backed extreme right-wing anti-PPP foces of the 1990s.////////

The implication is that ANP was cohoot with ISI an IJI? How does that sound khotey lawyer? ISI is a staunch Pakistani body and ANP are supposed to be anti-national. How can they join hands together (in theory)? Why opposition to PPP is called anti-national?

Political alignments take place every country in this world. U r stacking canards against ANP leaders.

///////6. Bacha Khan was in touch with Fakir of Ipi and his insurgency against Pakistan. Bacha Khan himself said on several occasions that Pakistan would not be based on Sharia and pathans should rise up against Pakistan. He promised that Pathanistan would be based on Pukhtun traditions and Sharia.////////

Bachu Yasser, Ipi was againt Jinnah. Seond point is that Jinnah himself did several flipflops in his mothered life.

///////7. Hayat Sherpao or not - ANP has been involved in high profile assassinations and feuds.////////

Sherpao murder acusation is a dud. What other assisinations do u have in the hat?

///////8. Dr. Khan Saheb was a leader in his own right. He is listed as a great leader by the ANP... and his cause was taken up by Wali Khan in his book LIES ARE SACRED. So why do you get upset when I point out his establishment contacts and his role in the Republican Party? If one talks of Saifullahs one points out that two brothers are in PML-Q and one in the PPP. Does it mean we should not mention one side of the family altogether?///////


Salman can answer this better.


//////Also I don't understand why people like you try and equate Bacha Khan, a small regional leader with a national leader like Jinnah who in effect introduced your Bacha Khan as a leader.///////

This concept of small and big is in ur mind khotey lawyer. Ghafar Khan was a popular leader who's known all over Indian subcontinent. It's laughable that Jinnah introduced Ghaffar Khan.

As what?


//////(On the issue of direct action day, I already demolished this accusation in several other posts and you can go and see them.)///////

Jinnah stood as accused even to this very moment. How come u exonerate that Serpent??

#737 Posted by MantoLives on March 26, 2008 6:30:59 am

//Jinnah leaving constitutional means and ways doesn't mean he was calling on people to kill Hindus. No honest person will accuse him of it. Name one opponent of Jinnah... Gandhi, Nehru, Patel or Azad .. who opposed Jinnah of violence. Not a single one. Not even your Bacha Khan. Nor have you been able to produce a single statement from Jinnah calling for violence.//

Yasser is using lawyerly tricks here. Jinnah was indeed resposnible for the violence everywhere. If Gandhi, Nehru didnt name im coz they're hoping against hope abt the partition of India and Jinnah was the key person who can stall it.

Yasser is plain moron to say that nobody accused him of DAD violence.

Patel did it. Nehru did it. Maulana Azad did it. Gandhi was busy touring the country against the tide of communal virus
spread by Jinnah the Serpent.


//1. Bacha Khan and his family have a history of flip flops on the issue of whether they are part of Pakistan or whether they are separatists. //

Jinnah did a lot of them. Jinnah was a staunch nationalist and later a secessionist. That the mother of all flipflops.

///2. The "Secular" Bacha Khan Family has been closely allied to Maulana Mufti Mahmood and the anti-Pakistan Deobandi Fanatics (the forerunner of the taliban).///

Deobandi were not fanatics. The Deobandis were not anti-Pakistani (which is a loaded point coz they knew that it's impossible to relocate every Muslim in India to an Utopia promised by Jinnah coz there're Muslims in every village of India) but staunch nationalists, lest they be seen as gaddaars.

Btw, Yaser had no answer to the question of Jinnah's promise abt Sharis in Pakistan.

//3. The banned NAP's leaders were part of the Nizam-e-Mustafa movement in 1977 which brought down the Bhutto government in the name of Islam. This included Bacha Khan's daughter in law: Begum Nasim Wali Khan.///

Bhutto himself hobobbed with fundoos and he's infact the progenitor of funddosim in Pakistan.

///4. Wali Khan and his family were released by General Zia. Ghani Khan proudly received Sitara-e-Imtiaz from General Zia. So much for being principled and anti-dictatorship. ///

I dont see any wrong in receiving a civilian honour. If they had refused it, Yasser wud have branded them as anti-nationals. Cant have it both ways, khotey!

///5. The ANP collaborated with ISI-engineered IJI of Nawaz Sharif in 1990 and then was part of the army-backed extreme right-wing anti-PPP foces of the 1990s.///

The implication is that ANP was cohoot with ISI an IJI? How does that sound khotey lawyer. ISI is a staunch Pakistani boy and ANP are supposed to be anti-national.

Political alignments take place every country in this world. U r stacking canards against ANP leaders.

//6. Bacha Khan was in touch with Fakir of Ipi and his insurgency against Pakistan. Bacha Khan himself said on several occasions that Pakistan would not be based on Sharia and pathans should rise up against Pakistan. He promised that Pathanistan would be based on Pukhtun traditions and Sharia.///

Bachu Yasser, Ipi was againt Jinnah. Seond point is that Jinnah himself did several flipflops in his mothered life.

//7. Hayat Sherpao or not - ANP has been involved in high profile assassinations and feuds.///

Sherpao murder acusation is a dud. What other assisinations u have?

///8. Dr. Khan Saheb was a leader in his own right. He is listed as a great leader by the ANP... and his cause was taken up by Wali Khan in his book LIES ARE SACRED. So why do you get upset when I point out his establishment contacts and his role in the Republican Party? If one talks of Saifullahs one points out that two brothers are in PML-Q and one in the PPP. Does it mean we should not mention one side of the family altogether?//

Salman can answer this better.


///Also I don't understand why people like you try and equate Bacha Khan, a small regional leader with a national leader like Jinnah who in effect introduced your Bacha Khan as a leader.//

This concept of small and big is in ur mind khotey lawyer. Ghafar Khan was a popular leader known all over the Indian subcontinent. It's laughable that Jinnah introduced Ghaffar Khan?? As what?


///(On the issue of direct action day, I already demolished this accusation in several other posts and you can go and see them.)///

Jinnah stood as accused evern to this very moment. How come u exonerate that Serpent??

#725 Posted by MantoLives on March 26, 2008 5:15:07 am
Re: # 721

///As for Bhabra Sharif "massacre"... according to you it took place on August 12, 1947. Jinnah was already on his deathbed by then barely even able to move.///

Was Mantolives drunk when he wrote this?? How come Jinnah was on deathbed on 12th Aug 1947?? WHo raised the flag of Pakistan on 14th and 15th Aug then?

Look Salman, my friend, I have already responded to your "proofs". I don't agree with the spin you are putting on these so-called "proofs".

Let us agree to disagree. If you are serious in understanding why Pakistan was created ... you should read Indian jurist H M Seervai's "Partition of India: Legend and Reality" which shows that Jinnah tried to keep India united till the very end.

As for Bacha Khan - my criticisms are based in fact. I did not disrespect him till you started abuse Jinnah without any basis. So let us learn to accept that you have the right to dislike Jinnah and I have the right to dislike Bacha Khan.

You have the right to have your own point of view. but point of view doesn't mean that you insult someone. Calling them crooks opportunists corrupt.
I have proved MLs violence and I have more to show about Mr Jinnah and ML. I have showed you that they were conservative and used Islam for their goals.
ML’s opportunism is well known. It was shown in 1943 when they formed a Ministry under NWFP Governor Cunningham without having members in the assembly. His letter shows their corruption and horse-trading. So this horse-trading is not something new for them
These are things you blame Bacha Khan for.

"I accused Bacha Khan of colluding with Fakir of Ipi. That is all. So I can't give you evidence for something I did not claim."

People can have friendships with anyone, can be with opponents too. I stated before fakir was Hero he fought the British. Eve they have praised him. Called him a brave principled enemy. Its part of Pashtun culture they have high regard for enemies too. When they meet they give full respect to each other. Qayyum Khan’s problem was he was not Pashtun. So having kind of friendship is understandable. As you said Pir of Manki became Bacha Khan’s good friend later. They forgot about what happened in 1946-47. Pir was the main guy who created such a situation in NWFP which gave a reason to the British to conduct referendum in NWFP instead of asking the assembly as was part of the formula. Their regard of each other was clear that they were old “babas” they had fought the same war from different fronts. They were sincere in whatever their beliefs were. Some used violence against military some used against people and some remained non-violent.
If Bacha khan had helped fakir in anyways either financially or militarily then it would have been said that He wanted to topple the “unislamic” government of Pakistan otherwise there is no problem in it. He had friendship with Gandhi Nehru Family and Kabul government. They also didn’t have good relations with Pakistan government.

I don’t see any problem in it. If someone else feels something wrong in it he can tell us.

"If you try to compare Bacha Khan with some angels then I would have to accept that. Angels cannot go against the will of God. But human beings can."

The basic issue here that Salman seems to be suffering from is his inability to accept that I might have a differing point of view- which I have the right to entertain. Apparently I don't have the right to be alive even if I don't agree with the hagiographic one sided representation that Salman ascribes to.

I have my own reading of history and I think I have the right to that.

Mufti Mahmood was an old ally of Bacha Khan in NWFP against the Muslim League:

"When you are dipped in shit you cannot call someone dirty for having a particle of dust on his shirt."

Yes and that is essentially what your abuse against Jinnah amounts to given the history of the Khan family's flip flops.

Bacha khan was not involved with Mufti Mehmud. so stick to Bacha khan for once. we will talk abouut Wali Khan later.

...how is abusing Jinnah going to absolve your Bacha Khan of his misdeeds?

When you are dipped in shit you cannot call someone dirty for having a particle of dust on his shirt.

You cannot speak of Bacha Khan in a vacuum. He was there with all those opponents. Nobody could reach the height of his character. After all that abuse and persecutions. He still didn’t lose hope. He was still a Pakistani. When a lot less than that happened to one of your guys, he fled to India saying I will be back riding Indian tank. So if you tell me Mr Jinnah was good Bacha Khan was bad. Then I will show you Jinnah was one of the worst and the biggest flip-flop. If you try to compare Bacha Khan with some angels then I would have to accept that. Angels cannot go against the will of God. But human beings can.

Re: # 738

I accused Bacha Khan of colluding with Fakir of Ipi. That is all. So I can't give you evidence for something I did not claim.

Re: # 736

If you insist on misinterpreting what I am saying I can't help it.

You kept claiming that Qayyum was the mainstay of the Muslim League. I merely pointed out that Qayyum was till 1946 not even a member and later wasn't even on the Executive committee.

you have not given any evidence that Bacha khan or his KK was involved in "violent action" to bring down the "unislamic government" of Pakistan

Here is my response again:

Salman mian,

Instead of going in circles lets stick to the facts. Even if we accept your quotes as they are, they don't show that Jinnah was inciting violence. Jinnah leaving constitutional means and ways doesn't mean he was calling on people to kill Hindus. No honest person will accuse him of it. Name one opponent of Jinnah... Gandhi, Nehru, Patel or Azad .. who opposed Jinnah of violence. Not a single one. Not even your Bacha Khan. Nor have you been able to produce a single statement from Jinnah calling for violence.

But forget that (you are obviously not very objective)... how is abusing Jinnah going to absolve your Bacha Khan of his misdeeds?

1. Bacha Khan and his family have a history of flip flops on the issue of whether they are part of Pakistan or whether they are separatists.

2. The "Secular" Bacha Khan Family has been closely allied to Maulana Mufti Mahmood and the anti-Pakistan Deobandi Fanatics (the forerunner of the taliban).


3. The banned NAP's leaders were part of the Nizam-e-Mustafa movement in 1977 which brought down the Bhutto government in the name of Islam. This included Bacha Khan's daughter in law: Begum Nasim Wali Khan.

4. Wali Khan and his family were released by General Zia. Ghani Khan proudly received Sitara-e-Imtiaz from General Zia. So much for being principled and anti-dictatorship.

5. The ANP collaborated with ISI-engineered IJI of Nawaz Sharif in 1990 and then was part of the army-backed extreme right-wing anti-PPP foces of the 1990s.

6. Bacha Khan was in touch with Fakir of Ipi and his insurgency against Pakistan. Bacha Khan himself said on several occasions that Pakistan would not be based on Sharia and pathans should rise up against Pakistan. He promised that Pathanistan would be based on Pukhtun traditions and Sharia.

7. Hayat Sherpao or not - ANP has been involved in high profile assassinations and feuds.

8. Dr. Khan Saheb was a leader in his own right. He is listed as a great leader by the ANP... and his cause was taken up by Wali Khan in his book LIES ARE SACRED. So why do you get upset when I point out his establishment contacts and his role in the Republican Party? If one talks of Saifullahs one points out that two brothers are in PML-Q and one in the PPP. Does it mean we should not mention one side of the family altogether?

On another note:

Also I don't understand why people like you try and equate Bacha Khan, a small regional leader with a national leader like Jinnah who in effect introduced your Bacha Khan as a leader. I already quoted the facts on that. So instead of abusing the one man (Jinnah) who did something for Pushtuns, try and defend Bacha Khan on his own merits.

And please... don't resort to inane arguments that you've used so far "you are not objective because you are Punjabi" ... "you are not neutral because you are an Ahamdi" ... "you are not neutral because you are from the PPP". That has nothing to do with it.

Just stick with the programme.

As for "Shameful Flight" I think this line sums up the entire message of the book:

(on Mountbatten)

"Nor did he have the humility or good sense to listen to India's two wisest political leaders, Mahatma Gandhi and Quaid-e-Azam Jinnah, both of whom tried their frail best to warn him to stop the runaway juggernaut to Partition"

Page 10 Shameful Flight


In other words... had Mountbatten listened to Jinnah and Gandhi, lives would have been saved. Since you are basing everything on one adjective ... surely this black and white statement of who the "wisest" leaders of the Subcontinent should tell you where Jinnah stands.


(On the issue of direct action day, I already demolished this accusation in several other posts and you can go and see them.)

regarding babarda massacre

"And the main architect was none other than Bacha Khan's old Congress comrade Qayyum"

you mean he joined ML in 1946 then Qayyum Khan was CM of NWFP and member of ML a staunch supporter of Jinnah. when he ordered that Massacre. it was the fault of Congress becasue before he was a member of that party? my question to all fiends is.
who else belives in hamdani's argument?