Small Spies Must be Hanged , While Bigger Ones Prosper

#124 Posted by vengatramanan
"I am sorry Saab, to see you still thinking on the lines of nationality and religion."


You are again jumping to conclusions. Where did I mention religion or Nation in my post? The issue was that guy was flat out lying so I asked him to speak for himself.

Cheema sahib appears to be mentally unstable. On one board he is an atheist-Muslim, on the other he is a British citizen, and on the third board he starts speaking for all Pakistanis.

"Cheemaji was not because he was wrong but he chose to speak at a place where Indians frequented regularly"

You don't know me enough to come to this conclusion. Only Kaal or Eklavya can suggest such a thing! That kind of stupid nationalism is very popular amongst Indians on this site! I have been posting here for four years now. Go check my previous posts and only then you will learn how stupid your "presupposition" is!


I am beginning to think you are just cheema's jodidar or something.

Re: # 120

HP Saab,


"I am sorry but what is posted on this forum suggest to me that hate is institutionalized in your system...,oh...That maybe my perception!"

Its not your perception rather your presupposition...Anyway you have the freedom to presuppose on what I could be...Don't be surprised if it turns otherwise :)

I am sorry Saab, to see you still thinking on the lines of nationality and religion. I believe your anger towards Cheemaji was not because he was wrong but he chose to speak at a place where Indians frequented regularly. I was contemplating, to ask Cheema Saab to take back his words because prejudice transcends nationality or religion. Don't you think it is time for people of common values get together?

Re: # 112
Thus while the other parts of the world intellectually as well as materially made great progress during the period 1850-1950 all the energies of the Indians at all levels were increasingly diverted into communalism;
Ans: This is not true...
I can refer to hundreds of positive developments in Bengal, Maharashtra and Punjab. Those who had access to modern/British education system, they prospered. The amount of progress made by Bengalis in field of literature, science, engineering, medical science during 1850-1940 is immense....

Re: # 113
Btw, nowhere in any school system school going children are taught 5-6000 years of history. If that were to happen, kids will only read history. They are given pertinent information and at the school level that is good enough!

Ans: Basic information about Ancient/Golden Age, Mideaval/Dark Age and Modern Age is part of any curriculla of the respective countries....

Re: # 110
as far as i know gandhi , jinnah and nehru were almost similar people ..

Ans: This is oversimplification. Jinnah and Nehru may be comparable, Gandhi is somebody who had brought entire India together...Gandhi has not used any negative agenda/hatred towards anybody/even British...

#117 Posted by vengatramanan
"Cheemaji perceives as blatant hate propoganda could very much come across a regular thing for you. We all see the same colour differently, I guess."

Your guess is just plain ridiculous. What you are implying is perhaps not only a figment of your imagination but also a reflection of what you have been taught in your school system!

You seem to be a nice guy and I suggest don't jump to conclusions as you have no knowledge of what goes on in Pakistani school system.

I am sorry but what is posted on this forum suggest to me that hate is institutionalized in your system...,oh...That maybe my perception!

#116 Posted by pavocavalry
"no one has commented on use of torture and death in custody of many people in pakistan by the intelligence agencies"

Pavo, we lament many deaths. I had some close friends and political friends murdered in the army custody and that was late 70s and early 80s.

Both India and Pakistan are unable to unshackle the colonial mindset.
These countries and their leaders have still not been able to change the Indian panel code. They are still running the same judicial system keeping the populations in slave like conditions.
Regards

Kahaan tak sonno gay
Kahan tak sunaoon
Hazaroon hain shikway
Kiya kiya Bataoon!

Btw, I am not into reading Ilogs.

#98 Vengat

Colonial rule was more a racial thing of white supremacy. When Japan could defeat in a lightening speed the colonial powers in Asia…. That aura of white supremacy …was gone for ever.

And with nearly 3 million Indians who fought for the English.. and were key in defeating the Germans in North africa and Italy… it sure was difficult for the British to hold on to India any longer.

HP Saab,

Cheemaji could not be speaking for all of the Pakistanis, probably for the people with whom he shares values. It is very much possible what Cheemaji perceives as blatant hate propoganda could very much come across a regular thing for you. We all see the same colour differently, I guess.

You know better than me...

HP Sain , thanks for the feedback .its an excerpt from my article stray reflections on commencement of writing pakistan army since 1965 in the ilogs . i am surprised that no one has commented on use of torture and death in custody of many people in pakistan by the intelligence agencies.at least two contemporaries of mine from quetta have disappeared like this.a rather sad conclusion to what jinnah may have visualised.also the death sentence in spying cases is not challenged or reversed by any superior court.this is the unwritten rule of business in india and pakistan both.also the trial by court martial in these cases is very faulty.best regards HP Sain.

Pavo,


"In a more advanced Indian society Nehru and Jinnah may have been leaders of all Indians rather than only Hindu Indians or Muslim Indians! "

Thanks,

Very true...indeed it boils down to the ability of the people to identify their leaders, which often leads to leaders representing the qualities of the masses.


Nkg,

Nayak Kings were both peasants and fighters. You should be happy, inspite all of the gory incidents, we have no more kings to lord over us...

#112 Posted by pavocavalry

Pavo,
You summed it up very well. I pretty much agree with what you wrote.

This is really unfortunate that all major political leaders in the undivided subcontinent were never able to rise above their own ambitions. Basically, they were all toadies and did not do anything without first getting approval from the British.

#110 Posted by pavocavalry

“as i understand from studying in about 15 schools in pakistan in 10 years no pakistani curriculum books propagated hatred against gandhi.”

Thanks Pavo.

akcheema

Did you not write this?

#105 Posted by akcheema
"speaking as a Pakistani, hatred for Ghandhiji is part of our upbringing."

All I asked to not to speak for all Pakistanis. You can speak for yourself because perhaps hate was part of your upbringing! Maybe you should ask your parents why they taught you to hate people!

As far as School books are concerned, my living in Pakistan or outside of Pakistan does not really matter. Please tell me in what grade/Class they teach hate Gandhi? I will make sure that the history book from that grade is delivered to your home.

“Are you trying to tell me that children now are taught their history for the last 5-6000 years of civilisation’

Where did I say or even implied that? Aren’t we talking about Gandhi which is fairly recent history?

Btw, nowhere in any school system school going children are taught 5-6000 years of history. If that were to happen, kids will only read history. They are given pertinent information and at the school level that is good enough!

Just for your info: Moenjodaro is not 5-6000 years old(2600 BC)!


Pavo,
you are right they were politicians like anyone else now or in the past.

The fathers of communalism as an idea in Indian politics were Syed Ahmad Khan, Lala Lajpat Rai, Gandhi and the Jauhar brothers! The British on the other hand right from 1858 followed a subtle but brilliant policy, introducing parliamentary democracy as bait to divert the energies of the more prominent Indians! A bait, which aroused ambition, whether based on ego, lust for glory, social recognition or material rewards! Peaceful yet heroic! Safe yet glorious! The double advantage of pursuing a prosperous law practice or business career or wielding feudal power while at the same time also being leaders of the subject Indians and the possible successors of the British Viceroys! Parliamentary democracy or its prospects once the British finally left India produced two distinct kinds of reactions, both of which helped the British and went against the people of the Indo-Pak Sub-continent! The leaders of the Hindu majority saw themselves as successors of the British Viceroys while the principal leaders of the Indian Muslims hypothesised that parliamentary democracy in independent India would mean Hindu ascendancy and Muslim subservience or more correctly all power in the hands of the Hindu politicians! The Hindu-Muslim question in reality was a 'Hindu-Muslim leaders clash of ego' question! It all started once the British introduced local self-government based on elections from the 1860s and aggravated more and more as leaders who were Hindu by accident of birth tried to sideline other leaders who were Muslim by accident of birth! Initially leaders from both the communities talked in terms of high sounding slogans like 'Nationalism' 'Liberty' 'Democracy' etc but became more narrow in approach once their religion became a psychological disqualification in being leaders of all Indians! The fact that the vast majority of Indians whether Muslim or Hindu would remain poor as they were before 1947 and are in the year 2000 was not important for these men. The Congress and League were essentially bourgeois parties with a larger feudal presence in the league and a larger urban business presence in the Congress. Both these parties employed religion as a tool to further their party agendas, middle class business class or feudal on the whole and egoistic at the higher level!

Nehru was an atheist and a socialist, Mr Jinnah was a highly Westernised man, and yet both were great Hindu and Muslim leaders. Both the parties were instruments of business professional and feudal classes to achieve maximum power and both increasingly divided Indian society on communal lines simply because their leaders were essentially highly egotistical men! The irony of Indo-Pak history is the fact that modern Indo-Pak history is a story of clash of great men like Nehru and Jinnah who employed religion as a tool simply because they correctly albeit ironically realised that the people of the Indo-Pak were too naive to understand vague slogans like liberty or democracy and could only be galvanised or mobilised by raising religious slogans! In a more advanced Indian society Nehru and Jinnah may have been leaders of all Indians rather than only Hindu Indians or Muslim Indians! India, however, was like Europe around the time of the 30 years war and thus both these great men were forced by historical circumstances to be only communal leaders! Both wanted to be leaders of all Indians regardless of race or religion, but both were forced, thanks to the fire of religious communalism lit by glorified agitators or complex and outwardly impressive hypocrites like Gandhi to be communal leaders! Nehru was too sophisticated a man to be a Hindu and Jinnah was too enlightened a man to be only a leader of Indian Muslims. It was a twist of fate that both are today remembered albeit rightly as leaders of Hindu or Muslim India.

Thus while the other parts of the world intellectually as well as materially made great progress during the period 1850-1950 all the energies of the Indians at all levels were increasingly diverted into communalism; thereby ensuring that intellectually as well as materially the Indo-Pak Sub-Continent remained backward! History was written as Muslim or Hindu history, politics was practised as Hindu or Muslim politics and while Europe was experimenting with radical social legislation, all the energies of Indian constitutionalist were absorbed in debating representation on basis of religion! College or University education was important because it was a pre-requisite for government jobs or to practise in the law courts! Research teaching and writing were unproductive jobs since they did not enable a man to be a deputy collector or barrister or doctor! It was a mad race made further mad by frequent outbursts of communal frenzy, which increased as population increased during the period 1890-1940. All this helped the Britishers who had been traumatically shaken by the Sepoy Rebellion of 1857 when a largely Hindu majority army had rebelled under Muslim leaders! The British were thus happier playing the role of judges resolving Hindu Muslim disputes rather than performing the more unpleasant task of facing a combined political movement of all Indians regardless of race or religion as in 1857, 1919 or 1922 ! This is the basis of anti-intellectualism in the Indo-Pak Sub-continent. It is more true for Pakistan since the Muslims were educationally more backward and relatively less true, yet still true and applicable to India too!

Re: # 102
Vengat....
(Mpolahs and all other Muslims who chose to stay back... )

Why Mpolahs will leave, when the greater society is not creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation?
South Indian ruling class is deeply influenced by jainism and no military strength/will left within these peoples. Furthermore, they have failed to create an alternate military class from lower caste people (rather, they have exploited them to keep them poor and vulnerable. Shivaji created military class from peasants. When required use plaugh, otherwise use sword and bow & arrow. He was thus very successful against Mughals).So, Moplahs had sensed no danger from staying in India. It is the deviation of Kshatriyas in Southern India, that allowed the Moplah Jihad to be successful.

i am surprised at obsession of some on this site with gandhi.as far as i know gandhi , jinnah and nehru were almost similar people , all ambitious in their own way,gandhi's style being highly unorthodox.all were great actors and all used religion or religious symbols for their political elevation.gandhi aimed at something more vague or what some may call sublime , nehru and jinnah were more worldly.

i remember one conversation of jinnah reported in FRUS in which he invited US Ambassador to his governor general's yatch and then asked him if united states government would buy his house for the planned new states embassy in karachi.the ambassador politely declined saying he had selected another place.

as i understand from studying in about 15 schools in pakistan in 10 years no pakistani curriculum books propagated hatred against gandhi.yes nehru was projected as the political villain.

as i see for me there is no difference between chaudhry shujaat or any pakistani politician as compared to any indian politician.its all a farce . india was divided because of british policy and class interests and clash of ego.