The Meaning of Pakistan

Truth

You talk about secularism etc, I hardly doubt that a nation with a Mahatma (who preached ahimsa, satyagraha, and Ram Raj) as its Bapu, and a Pandit as its Prime Minister can hardly teach others the lessons of Secularism.

These are abstract words with little meanings, Jogindranath Mandal representing Muslims on a Muslim Seat through the Muslim League, then inaugurating the Pakistan Constituent Assembley, and finally becoming a minister in the Cabinet...

who knows what ``Islamic Republics`` and ``Secularisms`` mean.

Chowkstaff,

I know you have a lot of power, to switch posts around but by censoring this post last time, you tried to create deliberate tension between myself and Sigalph, since the PS in 724 seemed like it was for him.

Kindly refrain from abusing the trust of Chowkwallahs in general, and targeting me for your malicious conspiracies. Is it not enough that you vowed never to Publish me on Chowk?

This is not the way to run ``a free internet`` Magazine.

Kindly, and I hope you will pay heed to my request, dont censor this post!

-Yasser Hamdani

I find it interesting that Bangladesh, despite being afflicted with similar economic problems as Pakistan and being similar in age, has managed to avoid becoming a Jehadi nutcase state like Pakistan. What a relief for India. Imagine having 2 Jehadi nutcases as neighbors.

Sigalph

Post 724 was not addressed to you, but Truth. The Chowk staff has a funny way of creating confusion between people..... It is very sad that they wish to do that.

What is even more sad is the fact that they censored my post to Truth, which spoke about Fake Secularism that people like him espouse.

Sigalph, it saddens me to see that people like yourself, are ready to undermine the national sovereignty of your nation.

-YLH

Re: Truth #719

[I will venture to say that India would even accept an East Bengali as Prime Minister of India.....]

Well India almost did get one. Jyoti Basu is a full blooded East Bengali.

Re: ylh

[PS And do not ever, ever again try to undermine the sovereignty of the Independent Peoples Republic of Bangladesh...... ]

Undermined indeed! And that too by a statement (probably made in half jest) from Truth!

What sort of a banana republic do you take Bangladesh to be? Or is it just the plain old patronising?

re: ylh # various

You don`t require to get hyper about insidious threat to Bengalis. They are a hardy lot and are doing very well for themselves, thank you. And they know very well what does and what does not constitute a threat to them.

And as far as Bangladeshis are concerned they are sure of themselves enough to not have to jump at every sound in the woods.

Unlike in Pakistan, a statement to `come join us` is taken in the spirit it is said and not as a grand conspiracy. Pls read sigalph`s reply (# 726) to Truth to find out exactly what I mean.

Cool down, man!

re truth

``Well, come join us and claim it. You know that India would accept Bangladesh anytime. I will venture to say that India would even accept an East Bengali as Prime Minister of India. The hesitation is all from the Bangladeshi side. ``

We will in due course. Bangladesh will be happy to accept the rest of India too and yes, we will have no objection to a non-Bengali Prime Minister in that case. After all, Orissa and Bihar do belong to the historical Bengali state which was tragically ended by the mertyrdom of Nawab Sirajuddowla. As for West Bengal, well it is like East Germany-you get the drift.

Calcutta is the eternal, undivided capital of a united Bengali state. Not in our lifetimes, but someday.

The ``Bismillah`` and ``absolute faith in the Almighty Allah`` in the Bangladesh constitution are no different from the references to the ``Endowed by their Creator`` clause in the American Declaration of Independence. Islamiyat in schools is no more compulsory for Muslim students than catechism is for Roman Catholic students. You seem to have forgotten the classical definition of secularism provided by the late Dr Ambedekar in the debates of the Indian Constitution, `not an absence of religion but...`

As for Gen Ziaur Rahman, your mentioning his `military regime` is half true. He was installed as CMLA and President by a coup that he didn`t participate in. He won a referendum and later an open multi-party election to the presidency and his party won parliamentary polls to. Not very correct in the progression of things but not worse than the one-party, four-newspaper Gestapo dictatorship that was replaced in 1975. Let us not forget that the late General Zia proclaimed Bangladesh`s independence exactly thirty years ago to date, was perhaps the most valiant freedom fighter of 1971, and the first and last honest head of state. When he was martyred, his family had no home of their own.

And Truth especially for fools like you who say the most irresponsible things ....

I have devised a new slogan list... as per Woodrow Wilson`s Doctrine of Self Determination ...

Long Live Greater Bangladesh

Long Live Independent Khalistan

Long Live Independent Nagaland

Long Live Independent Tamil Nadu

Long Live Independent Dalitstan

Long Live Independent Kashmir

Long Live Independent Hyderabad

Long Live Independent Moplistan

Long Live Independent Kerala

Long Live Independent Gujarat

If you dont want people like myself, who normally wish India a prosperous and unified future, raising these slogans, then quit openly articulating your Hinduvtastic Designs on the Sovereign states like Bangladesh.

PS And do not ever, ever again try to undermine the sovereignty of the Independent Peoples Republic of Bangladesh by your thoughts words and actions .... How dare you even suggest something like that.

Fools like you are a dime a dozen!

Pakistan Zindabad

Bangladesh Zindabad

Down with Theocratic Hindu-Hegemonic Designs under the guise of ``fake Secularism`` and fake Humanism on Sovereign States!

Sigalph,

`` Pakistan was probably the last alternative left. But indeed united Bengal`s last premier H S Suhrawardy pleaded with the powers to let Bengal become indepedent with Calcutta as its capital. Lord Mountbatten, Nehru, Patel, and Jinnah would have none of that of course``

Jinnah had agreed to a unified Bengal earlier, saying that it was much better to have a United Bengal, with Calcutta in it, because East Pakistan without Calcutta would be like a man without a heart. I think by not insisting on this course of action, Qaid made a mistake of no small proportions.

The Lahore Resolution clearly takes into account the possibility of having more than one states.

-YLH

Krashid,

It seems your dialogue has been with Harimau, not Jay. My apologies for the error.

krashid # 718

Anybody`s sexual life should be of nobody else`s concern, that include prophets` private affairs. Prophet Muhammad achieved enough in his life to earn his place in history, no matter what he did or did not do with various women. Nevertheless, if you are to counter Jay`s argument, then you have a good opportunity to explain to Jay why he is wrong. You can`t just say that he is all wrong, or that only Muslims can understand why Prophet Muhammad did what he did. That will be like saying - ``I am right because I am convinced I am right.`` Do you realize that this approach weakens your position terribly, and sends a strong, even if quite unjustified, signal to disinterested third parties that Jay may be right?

sigalph:

while you are quite correct that Bangladesh is currently the ``Peoples Repubic of Bangladesh``, the historical record of Bangladesh suggests a tussle for Bangladesh`s soul and Bangladesh`s commitment to secularism is not as clear cut as you make out. Keep in mind that Bangladesh WAS part of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for many years prior to the outbreak of secessionism. And the secessionist struggle of Bangladesh was really about language rights, secularism was secondary.

Anyway, I salute secularism wherever I find it and I salute Bangladesh for overcoming its demons.

http://www.mnet.fr/aiindex/ssamad_Bangaldesh.html

The process of using Islam for leadership legitimation purposes gathered momentum during the military regimes of General Ziaur Rahman (1975-1981) and General H.M. Ershad (1982-1990). During the regime of Zia, the Constitution was doctored, scraped secularism from the four state principles and insertion of ``Bismillahir Rahmanir Rahim`` (in the name of Allah, the beneficent, the merciful). The principle of secularism was replaced by the words, ``Absolute trust and faith in the Almighty Allah shall be the basis of all action.``

In a subtler approach Ziaur Rahman regime, the school curricula by state-owned Textbook Board came under increasing pressure from different quarters to Islamise the books. ``Islamiyat`` was introduced as compulsory from classes I to VIII with option for minority students to take similar religious courses of their own.

Between 1982 and 1990, Ershad made systematic efforts to continue the policy of Zia, rehabilitating anti-liberation elements and the parallel Islamisation culminating in the disputable Eighth amendment to the Constitution declaring ``Islam`` as a state religion. Earlier short-lived government of Mustaque Ahmed (August 1975 - November 1975) brought to power at a behest of young military officers, declared Peoples Republic of Bangladesh as ``Islamic Republic of Bangladesh`` over the state radio, which however fetched recognition of Saudi Arabia, Libya and China.

Here is some more....

http://www.dailystarnews.com/199812/17/n8121709.htm

sigalph:

``That city of joy is Bengal`s cultural and mystical capital Nothing can ever change that.``

Well, come join us and claim it. You know that India would accept Bangladesh anytime. I will venture to say that India would even accept an East Bengali as Prime Minister of India. The hesitation is all from the Bangladeshi side.

Its your call!

I know what you`re thinking - ``Thanks but no thanks.``

Harimau #697

Again you are dead wrong on both counts.

I gave the example of computer technology so that you realize that Encyclopedia Brittanica writers EXTRACT from different sources to put up a thing. It is not reference.

Sources of Islamic history are the initial sources and any writer ultimately has to refer to those sources. You don`t want to create history for which there is no basis. Only interpretation can be changed. Particularly the Islamic history so extensively written by scholars, that there is no chance of bringing anything to light through excavation etc which has been lost.

As far as Naqshbandi mentioning. I told you also, that you are on right track. Just get your facts striaght, the time period, circumstances, reaction etc. You are wrong on all counts.

re dg

As Fuzair put it kindly, you are dead wrong on the Islamic Republic thing. God forbid that Bangladesh begin it official slide into darkness. Bengali Muslims are not so insecure about their faith as to need the crutch of an empty nom de plume on their official stationery.

re harimau 712

We try though there is long way to go to the Promised Land where not just the government but society measures a man not by the ``conduct of his worship but by the content of his character`` as a recent article in Dhaka`s Daily Star put it.

You`re so right about the 1947 deal. Pakistan was probably the last alternative left. But indeed united Bengal`s last premier H S Suhrawardy pleaded with the powers to let Bengal become indepedent with Calcutta as its capital. Lord Mountbatten, Nehru, Patel, and Jinnah would have none of that of course. All for different reason, probably good ones. But that left a nation divided into two states. Yes Tagore is our icon and he was born in Bangladesh. And Calcutta is to Bengal what Lahore is to the Punjab. That city of joy is Bengal`s cultural and mystical capital Nothing can ever change that.