The ANP Challenge

Another gem from the ANP activist

"Extremist views"

Extremism when unable to bring up evidence to back your lies and third rate claims, you started abusing me for being a Qadiani and claiming that Jinnah was a Non-muslim because he was Ismaili... and therefore I - being a Qadiani + a PPP activist- cannot comment neutrally on Deobandi fanaticism. (However you can because you are ANP + Deobandi and we all know that combination makes for most balanced specimen of humanity yet).

If this is secularism ANP style I don't want anything to do with it.

RE: Mohtarma Fatima Jinnah and Wali Khan's support

I have mentioned and lauded Wali Khan's support for Fatima Jinnah against Ayub as principed and right thing to do in this article as well as my article on "Presidential Election of 1965".

However, given the opportunist track record of the Khan crooks and their family, and their latter pandering to Zia... one can also deduce that the only reason they joined up with Fatima Jinnah was because the "Jinnah" name was the only real guarantee of winning the election. Only the "Jinnah" name had credibility in both East and West Pakistan.

So it might just be that Wali Khan etc had no choice but to accept the leadership of Fatima Jinnah because out of all of them, only she had credibility.

As for the comment by ZAKKK about political expediency. Granted. But then ANP should not claim to be infallibility like this fellow here.

Re: # 597

Dear Zakkk,

Well said. Did you read 590 by myself. It was written in this exact spirit.

This is something that is clearly lacking in the ANP discourse as displayed by Salman mian. The poor fellow took my willingness to accept these guys as part of Pakistan as a mark of weakness. Well I'll expose these ANP freaks and Bacha Khan supporters for what they are... disgusting opportunist cowards and double-crossing faggots who sell their mothers to the army and the Mullahs when they get a chance.

I shared this article with you on facebook. Please note I was nothing but respectful towards the Khan family in this article (simply because they do have followers who worship them - otherwise I have no respect for their flipflops and opportunist politics) but Salman cannot accept simple criticisms.


My points remain unimpeached:

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?

Now you may have your own interpretation of these facts but you can't deny these facts.

Salman mian here decided that since these were unimpeachable facts, it was alright to abuse the one man who did something. I have already exposed his lies on the matter below.

Re: # 592

Yes the whole forum is watching. And anyone who is honest will concur with me that you've been exposed as a liar without shame. A true follower of Wali Khan's philosophy of LIES ARE SACRED

Re: # 602

"But again Mr. Wolpert does not seem to accuse MAJ (pbuh) anywhere of personally instigating that violence. "


He is not just ghalat ... Actually Salman is a liar without shame. He has failed to produce any evidence for his claims. For example he still hasn't produced the source for his claim that Pir of Manki Sharif wanted to kill Nehru.

I am beginning to think he is a VRV reincarnate because his "strategy" is to pick up words and add his own words to it and try and present as a quote... a strange mixture of "Fact" and "Fiction" ... a faction ... the ANP faction.

I really hope a lot of people read "Shameful Flight" though because the book says that had the British listen to Jinnah (and Gandhi) instead of Nehru and the Congress, there would have been no violence. So while Salman mian makes up stuff as he goes along, if he was to actually read the book in question, it would help him get over the ANP propaganda which he is clearly a victim of.

Sallu bhai,

(KYUN MAJUMDAR BHAI: MAI NAI GHALAT TO BAHI BOLA THA NA? )

Aap kabhi galat nahin boltey!!!

Thanks for 599 that was quite informative. But again Mr. Wolpert does not seem to accuse MAJ (pbuh) anywhere of personally instigating that violence.

Regards

Re: # 596

I can never learn to accept lies as the truth. I will continue to destroy Salman's lies as I have done so in my previous post.

Dear Salman,

What you have below is not from Wolpert but your own rendering of the book. Please tell me exactly where this paragraph is. So in other words Wolpert did not use "violent action" but simply "action".

So in other words you have failed produce the quote where Wolpert accuses Jinnah of "violence" and are now taking bits and pieces and adding your own words to what Wolpert wrote.

I am going to reproduce the exact extracts that you have produced:

Congress have made it clear that they do not accept any of the terms or the fundamentals of the Scheme (cabinet Mission) but that they have agreed only to go into the Constituent Assembly .... This fact, taken together with the policy of the British Government of sacrificing the inter¬ests of the Muslim Nation ... leaves no doubt that ... participation of the Muslims in the proposed constitution-making machinery is fraught with danger

and


"Whereas the Congress is bent upon setting up Caste-Hindu Raj in India with the connivance of the British ... the time has come for the Muslim Nation to resort to Direct Action to achieve Pakistan."


and

Direct Action

and

Goodbye to Constitutionalism and passive cooperation

and

action


Where in these quotes has Wolpert accused Jinnah of violence?

As for my earlier comments... I made them to give a respectable way out of your current mess and predicament. But you have no shame. What I really think of Bacha Khan is that he was a fool who got had by Gandhi and the like. In the end he did not achieve anything for his people.

Bacha Khan was an opportunist and a pathetic specimen of a politician whose party is responsible for a lot of mess.


So let us go through from the top:


1. Even your selective quotes don't show an accusation of violence against Jinnah.

2. You've still not produce any source for your claim that Manki was trying to kill Nehru. Nor have you explained why if Manki was such a bad guy did Bacha Khan perform his last rites.

3. You've failed to prove even a single statement of mine to be untrue.


You are a shameless person. You are where you are today because of Jinnah not Bacha Khan. He got you your own province in 1930s and your own country. Instead you lie about him and abuse him and then you want us to accept ANP and thugs like Bacha Khan who cooperated with the Mullahs and the military the first chance they got?

Have some shame at long last Salman. My offer still stands:


IF YOU STOP LYING ABOUT JINNAH, I WILL STOP TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT BACHA KHAN.

SHAMEFUL FLIGHT: The Last Years of the British Empire in India
STANLEY WOLPERT

Extracts From page 118 to 148

REGARDING DIRECT ACTION HOW JINNAH STARTED VIOLENCE

the "Congress have made it clear that they do not accept any of the terms or the fundamentals of the Scheme (cabinet Mission) but that they have agreed only to go into the Constituent Assembly .... This fact, taken together with the policy of the British Government of sacrificing the inter¬ests of the Muslim Nation ... leaves no doubt that ... participation of the Muslims in the proposed constitution-making machinery is fraught with danger." So the League resolved that "Whereas the Congress is bent upon setting up Caste-Hindu Raj in India with the connivance of the British ... the time has come for the Muslim Nation to resort to Direct Action to achieve Pakistan." This "Direct Action" resolution was Jinnah's angry re¬sponse to Nehru's "treachery" and the cabinet delegation's "betrayal" of his Muslim League. He said "Goodbye to Constitutionalism and passive cooperation," and welcomed violent "Action" instead.

He said "Goodbye to Constitutionalism and passive cooperation," and welcomed violent "Action" instead. (CHECK THIS “ACTION” IS IN INVERTED COMMAS)
PAGE 118
…Jinnah, who had devoted his life to the law and never before lost faith in British justice, had now suddenly turned his League into a lethal weapon of direct action…
PAGE 119
POLICE WAS GIVEN HOLIDAY ON THAT DAY
Wavell met with his governors of Bengal, Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Sind, and the North-West Frontier Province. Governor Sir Frederick Burrows of Bengal then informed the viceroy that Muslim League Prime Minister H. S. Suhrawardy had "asked" for a public holiday on August 16 "to avoid trouble on that day," and he had approved that request. Thus all of Bengal's police were given a holiday on what became Calcutta's dark¬est day of mass murder and arson.
all hell broke loose in Calcutta's "Great Killing," while Bengal's police enjoyed their holiday, and British troops and armored Dragoon tanks remained useless, locked inside their barracks.

FIRST MUSLIMS, THEN RETALIATING HINDUS
For three days and nights, British India's former capital, still its most populous city, became a free killing field for thugs and thieves, first Mus¬lims, then retaliating Hindus, murdering, plundering, butchering whatever attracted their eyes. Thousands of dead bodies were hauled off Calcutta's blood-stained streets by martial patrols, only belatedly brought into action by the stink of decaying flesh. "It was unbridled savagery and homicidal maniacs let loose to kill and ... main and burn," reported General Francis Tuker, who finally ordered out his British troops and tanks to put an end to the butchery (PAGE 120)

SUHRAWARDY’S GOLDEN WORDS
In early September, Nehru told Wavell that Suhrawardy had just in¬formed the press that if Bengal's Muslims took to the "war path" there would "not be a single Hindu left alive in eastern Bengal." Wavell met with politically shrewd Suhrawardy to ask if he had made that statement, and stood behind it. Suhrawardy was not afraid to admit the "truth," (PAGE 122)

MUSLIM LEAGUE’S VIOLENCE IN BOMBAY
In Bombay, from late August to October, when Sir Andrew Clow be¬came acting governor, 329 people had been murdered and 983 injured in communal "stabbings and bouts of stone-throwing."56 Clow was also disturbed by the economic "attack" aimed at the Muslim community. Hindu owners were forcing many Muslim mill hands to leave their jobs in Bombay and Ahmedabad. "Muslims are by now tired of the trouble and probably sorry they started it.
"Muslims are by now tired of the trouble and probably sorry they started it. PAGE 123

HINDUS WERE FORCIBLY CONVERTED TO ISLAM
… reports of rape and conversions to Islam in East Bengal's Noakhali Dis¬trict induced Mahatma Gandhi to leave his ashram and undertake his last and most arduous foot-pilgrimage of peace, walking from one burned out and torture-filled village to the next, seeking through his faith in Ahimsa to counter violent terror with the healing powers of love.
PAG 123
MUSLIM LEAGUE VIOLENCE IN PUNJAB
In mid-March, Jenkins (Punjab’s Governor) replied to a wire from Pethick-Lawrence request¬ing casualty figures for Punjab, reporting that approximately 500 had been killed in Punjab's cities and towns, and 520 in rural areas, mostly non¬-Muslims. About 1,000 more people had been "seriously injured" in the recent Punjab riots.18 The next day, Jenkins visited Attock and Rawalpindi and found some 25,000 terrified non-Muslim refugees and another 35,000 refugee villagers. "Attacks on non-Muslims have been organized with ex¬treme savagery," he reported to Abell. "Deputy Commissioner Rawalpindi believes that in his district alone there may be 5,000 casualties including killed, injured and missing ... feeling between communities is very bad indeed." A few days after that, Punjab's Muslim League leader, Raja Ghazanfar Ali, came to see Jenkins to urge him to put a League ministry in power in Lahore. "I said I would resign sooner than see one [Muslim League ministry] in office at this juncture," Jenkins replied. "The massacre had been conducted in the name of the Muslim League, and senior Military Officers thought that it had been carefully planned and organised.
IT HAD BEEN CAREFULLY PLANNED AND ORGANISED.
PAGE 133
SECULAR JINNAH’S PARTY USING RELIGION
Punjab's Commanding General F. W. Messervy reported on those com¬munal riots to Field Marshal Auchinleck:
The Muslim League, though a political party, has been framing its main propaganda on religious lines .... Pakistan and Islam together provide an almost irresistible force on the minds of the mass of comparatively unedu¬cated Muslims. PAGE 134

MUSLIM LEAGUI VIOLENCE IN LAHORE
Punjab's Governor Jenkins reported that same May 21 (1947) from Lahore that "Muslims seem determined to burn Hindus and Sikhs out of greater Lahore and are concentrating on incendiarism.
PAGE 148

i am home now here are the extracts from that book. I have other details about the same incidents and the journalists article who was there at that time and present during Mr Jinnah making statements.

The natural process of political evolution means that your politics can be based on a fundamentally different thought but that you still co-exist within that country and seek power successfully and unsuccessfully at differing times. That people like Suhrawardy could initially live outside Pakistan and then become PM is a reflection of system that acknowledges differences.

To stretch the analogy in Ireland in the 1920's the supporters and opponents of dominion status fought a civil war at the end and yet despite that the former opponents eventually achieved high office.

My own opinion is perhaps distinctive, perhaps because I dislike the philosophy of declaring people patriots and traitors as much as I dislike the philosophy of kafirs and believers. My perspective of history is that it is usually the self righteous patriots and believers who commit the acts that they are so swift to condemn others off..

Dear Salman,

I had it with him since I joined Chowk (2006) and I still want to give him benefit of doubt it he talks sense, coz we all make mistakes.

Ejaz Gul and Zakkk gave good perspectives to this tussle (btw Jinnahites and Ghaffarites) & it shud be that way..........i.e. live for the present and the future.

Yasser never learns :(

VRV Bhai
I AM HAVING FUN. THE WAY HAMDANI IS CHANGING HIS STANCE.. HE CANNOT OPENLY ACCEPT MY CHALLENGE. AT LEAST WHEN I KNOW I AM MISTAKEN AT A POINT I SHOULD ACCEPT IT.
LOOK AT HIS VIEWS

“I did write this article in good spirit whether you believe it or not.”
WHATS THE GOOD SPIRIT IN IT?
“So make no mistake about it: The portrayal of ANP's victory NWFP as a victory for secularism and democracy in that province is perhaps too optimistic an analysis given the history.”… to suggest that ANP has historically been consistently secular or democratic is not only naive but almost criminal when it comes to history..”

He calls the Khan family as crooks and opportunists, …”the world should know that Bacha Khan types are not the saint that people try to whitewash him as.”
Then he writes
“I also feel that Bacha Khan etc were good politicians and one should respect them.”
MAKE UP YOU MIND MAN. YOU DON’T BELIVE YOURSELF

He says ANP is a separatist party and anti-Pakistan (that’s what he was telling me before) people didn’t vote for separation.

NOW HE ACCEPTS THAT WE ALSO HAVE A SHARE IN THIS COUNTRY.
“What is important is that this Pakistan is as much yours as it is mine...”

Hamdani already knows my stance about Mr Jinnah and other politicians; only Qayyum khan cannot be forgiven for his crimes. Those were not only against the opponents but also against the people and the state. I always tried to write “Mr”. Jinnah thats due to respect, which means as long as you don’t tell lies about his opponents I will not speak the truth about him. As VRV wrote Badshah Khan’s one and jinnah’s a million.

I have written before I am a supporter of Ghaffar Khan. Wali Khan and Dr Khan Sahb are different people. You can compare them but they are not one. Wali Khan was part of NAP. Which was created by an ex leagui Bhashani. It was not Ghaffar Khan’s party. So they were not following or promoting Ghaffar Khans policies. Then why to blame him for the activities of NAP?
Regarding Pashtun Nationalism: NAP even after division had all the Baloch leaders and some Sindhi in it, only Bugti was with Bhutto that means NAP was not the party of Pashtun Nationalists only. Murry Mengal Bizenjo all were there. Mengal was the CM of Balochistan Province. Bizenjo was the 2nd to Wali Khan in the parliament and party.
As Hamdani wrote Mr Jinnah wanted to hand over Muslim League to Ghaffar Khan. That was the trust he had in Ghaffar Khan. Then later the same people were behind Mohtarma Fatima Jinnah against Ayub khan. Then Mr Bhutto wanted to assassinate Wali Khan. Bhutto banned his party and with all the hatred and hostility once PPP and Benazir Bhutto became Anti-establishment the newly formed Wali Khan’s ANP was their biggest ally. This all shows those people knew the reality. They accepted eachother from time to time, unlike Hamdani who cannot digest that they are the real leaders of the people of Pakistan. Wherever he finds an audience he starts his propaganda against the Khan Family.
VRV SINCE HAMDANI RETREATED FROM HIS EARLIER EXTREMIST VIEWS. REGARDING KHAN FAMILY AND ACCEPTED US A PART OF THIS COUNTRY. YOU ASKED ME TO SHOW THE EXTRACTS FROM STANLEY WOLPERT’S BOOK WITH PAGE NUMBERS. WHEN I REACH HOME TONIGHT I WILL PASTE THEM HERE. FOR YOU GUYS BECAUSE IT IS YOUR RIGHT. I WILL ALSO SHOW HOW MUSLIM LEAGUE GOT VOTES IN PUNJAB IT WOULD BE FROM HUSSAIN HAQANI A WELL KNOWN PPP MEMBER.
KYUN MAJUMDAR BHAI: MAI NAI GHALAT TO BAHI BOLA THA NA?

Salman,

Pl quote the Wolpert's paragraph.

The truth is that Jinnah actually regretted violence (he gave press statement on the next day, I think) and that's for record and it's a way of making an alibi to avoid legal implications in the form of criminal conviction.

Even if Jinnah regretted violence, how can he absolve himself of the frenzy building up to DAD?

U can see what Muslim Leaguers said and what the mouthpoce of Muslim League said. They called it jehad and compared it with al Badr (since the DAD was declared during Ramzaan period). We cant ignore the symbolism that goes with DAD.

Nobody wud imagine that Jinnah wud say blood-curdling statements abt smashing innocnets with crowbars & iron rods. These small detals are for the AIML cadre to take care of & the SW's job to facilitate the Plan.

++

U can notice the way this lawyer thinks. He wants to DEFER the argument abt Sherpao since he's advised abt Bhutto's hand in it but wants to think that Khan family INDEED bumped him off as per the EVIDENCE HE HAD!

U can see the magic of his thinking!

Zakkk,

Though u seem 2 sympathise with KKK but u sound very balanced and that's what I expect of this young lawyer all the time. U know, he disappoints us at Chowk.

Unfortunately Yasser said again that the KHANdaan were crooks!! Why this hyperventilation??? Who's a bigger crook than Jinnah? Yasser thus brought back the debate to the starting point again.

Venkat & others,

Jinnah was the chief architect of the major developments that conributed to the formation of Pakistan (no Independence, pl note). He took each and every decision with a singular purpose of carving out Pakistan outta British India. He took all vital policy decisions and presided over such decision making processes.

If violence - actually it's Indian Holocaust - happened then Jinnah is solely responsible since he's the benefactor of those developments.

HAMDANI WROTE “For the avoidance of doubt, Salman still hasn't produced the extract that he claimed (of Wolpert accusing Jinnah”

HOW ABOUT YOU GET SOME COURAGE AND ACCEPT MY CHALLENGE I WILL PROVE TO YOU THAT STANLEY WORLPERT HAS WRITTEN IT IN HIS BOOK THAT JINNAH WELCOMED VIOLENCE. INSTEAD YOU ARE FOOLING AROUND, LYUNG AND SHOWING YOUR MENTALETY BY SWEARING AT THE GREAT PEOPLE LIKE GHAFFAR KHAN.

You are showing your ignorance telling us that since you haven’t heard of something it wouldn’t have happened.

I have already proved, you are a liar. You again lied that i said muslim league in india merged into congress and that jinnah was created by churchill. Liars like jinnah bhutto and benazir are your favourite leaeders. Some morally corrupt some morally and financially corrupt. That’s what we can expect from you. Like Benazir said I don’t have accounts in Swiss Banks then later when it was proven she had them her statement was “Having accounts in swiss Banks is not a sin ”

NOW ACCPET MY CHALLENGE I WILL PROVE TO THIS FORUM THAT JINNAH ACCEPTED VIOLECNE (ACCORDING TO STANLEY WOLPERT) THE WHOLE FORUM IS WATCHING YOU NOW. I REQUEST EVERYONE HERE TO TELL HIM TO ACCEPT MY CHALLENGE OR TO ACCEPT HIS IGNORANCE.