The ANP Challenge

Re: # 686

Majumdar,

Don't get into the pipe logic. There are lateral roads. MKG, Nehru and Azad chose political expediency over anything else you can fill in here. Now don't try to describe all the above mentioned leaders in the plane of a religious zealot, who would have sought religious scriptures' guidance for his decisions, these leaders were intelligent and they had their own convictions.

Harishbhai,

(1. If you claim they were dishonest and if they had implicated Jinnah, you would have argued that the accusers weren't credible so we can't go by their word.)

Yes!!!

(2. And if we accept your claim of their dishonesty, since they didn't accuse Jinnah, doesn't it logically follow that they were being dishonest by not doing so? )

A dishonest man does not indulge in dishonesty all the time. He is dishonest only to service some ulterior motive. These guys may not have been dishonest when they did not accuse MAJ (pbuh) becuase they may have realised that their claims wud fall flat.

Harishbhai, Now since u believe that MKG and JLN were honest men shud you not accept that they were honest in not implicating MAJ (pbuh)

Regards

Re: # 683

Agreed bhai but I wasn't referring to you nor did you egg him on. :)

Re: # 681

Harish bhai

May I interject.

I think what Majumdar is trying to say is that since in his view they were dishonest, they would have jumped to the opportunity to denounce Jinnah at the first opportunity. The fact that even they didn't accuse Jinnah amounts to something.

#680 by MantoLives

Yaar Yasser, what is this term "Indian supporter"? What if one of your fellow Pakis, say Salman mian, accuse you of being egged on by your "Indian supporter" (Majumdar bhai)? What exactly are you trying to prove by saying that Salman has Indian supporters?

For the record, none of my posts have been in support of Salman and I have been asking these questions long before he even appeared on Chowk.

HP,

I haven't defined patriotism. Don't take my tit for tat responses to Salman mian as indicative of my definition of patriotism. You may visit #590 (for which I was abused by this brilliant ANP worker) and see for yourself that my definition is hardly based on taking any prisoners of conscience.

Anyone... be it Bacha Khan's grandson or GM Syed's nephew ..
who works for a democratic social welfare state and a strong Pakistani federation based on provincial autonomy and respect for diversity is a patriot of Pakistan i my view.

I do hope though that the followers of these gentlemen will not allow their illustrious forerunners to become symbolic tools in the hands of those who want to see Pakistan fail.

#637 by majumdar

Indeed I wud have argued just that. But the fact that they did not even bother pointing a finger at MAJ suggests that MAJ was not guilty.

Majumdar bhai, please clarify this for me.

1. If you claim they were dishonest and if they had implicated Jinnah, you would have argued that the accusers weren't credible so we can't go by their word.

2. And if we accept your claim of their dishonesty, since they didn't accuse Jinnah, doesn't it logically follow that they were being dishonest by not doing so?

Salman mian

Refer to 676 and 633. As for the sentence that you asked for. HP - who is Bacha Khan's biggest fan and supporter - has given you a sentence:

Salman is clearly is an unintelligent ANP supporter and has no idea what he is talking about

Adam Khan,

That is a very well written post and you know where I actually stand. However, it is better addressed to Salman. You may go to the begining of his posts on this board and see for yourself how he started this nonsense.

If a self-professed ANP worker comes up and starts levelling baseless allegations against Jinnah for example simply because of my very mild criticism of Bacha Khan in the article- none of which was untrue and we went through it point by point earlier in more civil times, I reserve the right to dig up with potentially disastrous stuff about Bacha Khan and others.

For the record... Zeemax was not the only person who claimed this. I was actually acting on the claims of Mr. Pavocavalry. However you may consider #580 when I voluntarily dropped this issue given the contradictory nature of the claims. Even that was taken to be sign of weakness as was my post # 590 where I once again tried to speak sense to Mr. Salman0902. He- irked on by his newfound Indian supporters- attacked me for even doing that.

To top it all off - this self professed ANP supporter declared that 1. I was not objective because I was an Ahmadi. 2. I was not objective because I was a PPP supporter and finally 3. He accused me of being a typical Punjabi chauvinist who wanted to build Kalabagh Dam. If this is the way secular ANP activists deal with criticism then it is a grave issue for NWFP.

You know that even Jinnah had great personal regard for Bacha Khan... and whatever negativity and misunderstanding was was created between the two in 1948 was well washed away by Bacha Khan and Wali Khan's wholehearted support for Fatima Jinnah in her quest against Ayubian dictatorship.
The fact of the matter is that I have never heard any ANP wallah abuse Jinnah except for this fellow here. Disagree with his politics but I have found ANP wallahs always properly respectful and this should be mutual.

-YLH

Mr Hamdani
do you mean that Jinnah didn't ask Muslim League to do it OR that Muslim League wasn't involved in violence.
please explain to us?

Please give us plain and short answer. in your post you can write whatever you make up later

SHORT AN DBRIEF ONE SENTENCE ANSWER WHAT IS YOUR POINT?

Majumdar,

While you are correct to point out that the Khans did sup with the Islamists but at least they had a reason. They were making deals with them to take on a 800 lb gorilla (Brits, ZAB, Army etc) But if that makes them unsecular, what do you say about the PPP which cut deals with the some forces (Excommunicating Ahmedis, setting up the Taliban in 1995) when there was no pressing need to do so?

You are right as usual but I don't hold the brief for the PPP either. To PPP's credit though, it has never claimed to be secular or non-violent. (I am guessing though that PPP will claim similar expediencies- national interest, democracy and what not. The history of Ahmaddiya issue is full of establishment's conspiracy to destabilize governments starting from the attempt to bring down the Muslim League government by creating the anti-Ahmaddiya riots... in 1953 when Nazimuddin was sent packing. Bhutto just chickened out in 1974).

Salman mian,

I have answered this question several times. You may read my last response to Harish Bhai on the matter which is 633.
The issue here is not Jinnah in any event but your inability to defend Bacha Khan on his merits.

As for "doobtay ko tinkay ka sahara" bit, I voluntarily deferred the matter of Hayat Khan Sherpao assassination given that I was given two very contradictory views - each of which claimed with absolute certainty. It is therefore my inability to ascertain both claims that I have washed my hands off the matter.

Zeemax however has made a claim which I have neither accepted nor denied. He has every right to give his point of view.

Sallu bhai,

(do you mean that Jinnah didn't ask Muslim League to do it OR that Muslim League wasn't involved in violence. )

The picture that seems to emerge is that the ML was defo involved in violence but without MAJ's support or concurrence, possibly even in defiance of his instructions.

There was a lot of violence on both sides but it is more likely out of the inexperience, incompetence and laziness on both sides rather than a diabolical conspiracy on part of either leadership.

Yasser,

While you are correct to point out that the Khans did sup with the Islamists but at least they had a reason. They were making deals with them to take on a 800 lb gorilla (Brits, ZAB, Army etc) But if that makes them unsecular, what do you say about the PPP which cut deals with the some forces (Excommunicating Ahmedis, setting up the Taliban in 1995) when there was no pressing need to do so?

Regards

Adam khan
"Manto my friend, I am disappointed in you, of all the people on this website, YOU should be the last person to quote anything from Zeemax as credible!"

Its called "doobtay ko tinkay ka sahara." haha
no one believes him so whatever support he finds he exaggerates it. poor Hamdani :(

Mr Hamdani
do you mean that Jinnah didn't ask Muslim League to do it OR that Muslim League wasn't involved in violence.
please explain to us?

Please give us plain and short answer. in your post you can write whatever you make up later.

Quoting Rafi Razas book

Rafi writes: "A few months before his death he
seriously considered leaving the Party altogether ... Of all those around ZAB, Sherpao's personal devotion had been the greatest and his subsequent disillusionment was consequently the most profound."