Group Captain Cecil Chaudhry, SJ

This was not my only interview with a war hero.I interviewed Naseerullah Babar,Tajammul Hussain Malik, and some others who I do not recognise as war heroes like Shamim Manto,Ali Kuli Khan,Imtiaz Warraich,Syed Wajahat Hussain,Z.A Khan etc.

A wonderful interview with one of PAF`s best. Thank you, Gp. Capt. Chaudhry, for your honest appraisal of many things, not the least of which was your uninhibited account of Air Marshal Anwar Shamim`s and his wife`s damaging `contributions` to a solid institution. Even for Pakistan, they stuck out like a sore thumb. Even for a country where nepotism and sycophancy is the norm, they were head and shoulders above the rest. They were frightening.

Also, I get really frustrated when I see that so many articles on Chowk result in petty infighting among Indian and Pakistani readers (through their Interact posts). Pleeeeeeeeeease, let`s grow up.

Reply #: 326

Shah,

``You sir,have the luxury of pontification.Have you ever been oppressed,occupied,emasculated,violated,lost everything ,most of all your dignity,honour & selfrespect ,grew up in refugee camp like shabra shatilla,....?``.

Agreed, my friend. Still, violence is not justified. Violence begets violence. Everyone is hurt in the process. The original purpose, however genuine or justified,gets diluted. Need i repeat the eg of LTTE?

sridhar

Shah 326

[You sir,have the luxury of pontification.Have you ever been oppressed,occupied,emasculated,violated,lost everything ,most of all your dignity,honour & selfrespect ,grew up in refugee camp like shabra shatilla,....?]

I have seen Bihari Pakistanis left in Bangladeshi camps by Pakistan.

Re:Reply #: 286

Shah,

Human bombs are also a sign of desperation. I am surprised that educated people like you and some others in Chowk should support terrorism. Is it something in muslim psyche that they get attracted to terrorism.

I am strictly against any kind of terrorism however justified the cause may be. This includes terrorism as practised by Hamas, LTTE or Jehadists in Kashmir. States do not succumb to terrorism. Tell me one instance where terrorism has been successful in its objective. IRA in Ireland have not succeeded for many decades. LTTE has failed to win sympathies of the world even though their grievances are genuine. Assasination of Rajiv Gandhi brought only revulsion to Indians in general and Tamilians in particular, so much so that nobody speaks of supporting them in India (before this,some political parties use to openly associate with LTTE,not anymore).

Terrorism as a means of achieving political objective is a bad policy. Israel will use all its power to defeat the terrorists. Same goes for GOI. It will never succumb to Jehadists, however high the price may be.

Reply Bapu #318

Bapu

I have answered your posting on the ``Indian james Bond`` board where for some reason you also posted it.

Zafar

Bapu,

Please make note of the fact that I am not an Indian but a Pakistani.

-YLH

re soysauce

``You seem to be arguing for the sake of it. ``

And, I guess you`re arguing for the greater good of humanity.

``It is convenient to lump everything together so the other side is the one to blame always.``

Reading your posts, I agree 100 per cent.

``I think you are being more catholic than the pope in trying to defend israel.``

If you have followed Chowk for a while, you`ll surely know that I am a strong defender of the right of Israel to exist within safe and secure frontiers with Jerusalem as its capital. The proverb you mention aside, the Roman pontiff is actually quite friendly with Arafat.

But to your thrust of argument. ACtually the settlements never ceased because random terror (even before this latest surge of organized violence) never ceased. How could Barak convince his countrymen to give settlements to keep OSlo when Arafst could not keep his side of the bargain in reining in Hamas (jailing Sheikh Yasin in a villa doen`t count).

I mention the Arab countries only because those who routinely castigate Israeli abuse of Palestinians conveniently forget how the ARab bretheren treat the Palestinians. People tend to forget that the second genocide at Sabra and Shatila and Bruj al Brajneh was perpetrated by the Amal under guidance from the SYrians.

#317 sigalph

You seem to be arguing for the sake of it. The second intifada did not start until the israelis kept reneging on the settlement issue. It is convenient to lump everything together so the other side is the one to blame always. If you look at the chronology, the palestinians were griping about the israelis not sticking to the terms of the Oslo Accord (no violence yet) and the dispute Jerusalem let all hell break loose. I think you are being more catholic than the pope in trying to defend israel. There are many, many israelis (not the majority obviously) who objected to Barak`s footdragging on the peace process (he was hemmed in by the Right) and felt he should go further.

I myself mentioned that the rest of the arabs have abandoned the palestinians. What is the point of mentioning the syrians and jordanias in this context? Are you arguing that the palestinians can be abused by israelis so long as other arabs have abused them also? If so, you live in a very strange world.

#318 Bapu

Just another mean-spirited idiot who conveniently quotes Gandhiji.

Reply Bapu #318

Bapu

If you want to ask me a question, please ask and I will do my best to reply.

All I could tell from your posting was that you didn`t like what I said, and you didn`t like the way I said it, and this had something to do with Israel, and you did like Gandhi (of course - your name!), and you doubted if I was a good Muslim (?), and maybe (I`m not sure) you just didn`t like the present generation of Indians in general, and you didn`t like Hindutva also. Poor YLH also came into this somehow.

What is your question? Have I missed it?

Best wishes,

Zafar

PS You wrote ``Bande Matram`` - are you Bengali?

#: 311

Zafar Al-Talib

All you present generation Indians ,brought up on fortified hindutva diet of` Bande Matram`& selfishly basking in the international good will brought aboput by Gandhi`s Non violence,puritymjustice & saintliness,are now only paying lip service to him.

Gandhi ,your Father,whose inheritence you so proudly posess yet disobeid Gandhi`s opinion of Israel .Gandhi thaught down right unjust,barbaric & nepotism ,of Balfour declaration,to give someone elses land to third party israelis.

The present day Indians have been turned against Gandhi by the Sangh arivar,Hindu or Muslim.YLH,dont forget many muslims are Sanghi like Sikander Bakht,Naqvi & loks like some indian muslims on this board.By including Naqvi & Bakht ,Sanghi have not become less comunal but these muslims credentials are in doubt.

re soysauce

``You seem not to have kept abreast of the events in the middle east. In case you didn`t know Sharon is now the prime minister.``

I am quite aware of it. Please don`t consider yourself the CNN here. I mentioned `General` SHaron, because it is a mark of respect for someone who`s been in the services. Perhaps you`re unaware of polite protocol.

``The palestinians are supposed to have self rule in their territories after they signed the Oslo Accord. The Accord stipulated freezing and dismantling of jewish settlements from palestinian areas.``

Yes, provided that Palestinian self rule authorities took `full and concrete measures to stop terror directed against Israeli territory and citizens`. Obviously the Arafat clique have not assured that at all.

`` That did not happen.``

No, kidding.

`` Abu Nidal is long dead``

...bless his soul and that of the rest of his terror gang. May they get their just due for Rome and Vienna and Achille Lauro.

``... and Yasser Arafat has given up violence.``

Yeah, and the Pope is a Baptist.

``You can find all this just about anywhere you look. Even Arafat seems to agree that violence is a bad means for a good end but the israelis apparently haven`t got over their siege mentality. ``

I must need powerful eyeglasses because only thing I see is Arafat`s continued refusal to rein in his Tanzim and other terror outfits. Why should Isreael get over the seige mentality? Remember Syria and Lebanon, along with a majority of the Arab states are still technically at war with Israel, committed to driving the Jewish people to the sea. And that will be tough. In 1948, recalling the earlier part of the decade, the Jews pledged themselves and their posterity, `never again`.

#309 sigalph

You seem not to have kept abreast of the events in the middle east. In case you didn`t know Sharon is now the prime minister. The palestinians are supposed to have self rule in their territories after they signed the Oslo Accord. The Accord stipulated freezing and dismantling of jewish settlements from palestinian areas. That did not happen. Abu Nidal is long dead and Yasser Arafat has given up violence. You can find all this just about anywhere you look. Even Arafat seems to agree that violence is a bad means for a good end but the israelis apparently haven`t got over their siege mentality.

Anyway, the report today is that the US has agreed with the other G8 nations that outside observers are necessary and the Mitchell Plan must be implemented for there to be peace. This is the only silver lining in the horizon for the palestinians.

Re: Romair`s phony concerns for Indian Muslims

In case you didn`t read it, let me repost what Zafar (an Indian Muslim) has said about India purchasing weapons from Israel:

``As for how Indian Muslim feel about India buying Israeli arms - probably not thrilled, but not heart broken either. If India needs them, and Israel is selling them, well...Who should India have bought them from, Afghanistan?``

Now if I were you I would either just keep my trap shut or admit a mistake and move on. This is like that TiE thing you got caught with and never bothered responding to.

Upman,

Never have I met a person more taken by bigoted Doordarshan propaganda than you...I know you being

self delusional think I am intellectually lacking, but it wont hurt to read this post.

`..here is how Indian muslims are important to the Kashmir debate...since the BASIC INTELLECTUAL PRINCIPLE for kashmir acceding to pakistan is TNT (``unfinished agenda of partition`` et al), the presence in India of a greater number of muslims than pakistan, as also the breakup of unified pakistan, have all demolished that half-baked concept. Its gone kaput, you cant milk it no more.`

1) No the Intellectual principle for Kashmir going either way is not TNT or lack there of, but the `Right of self determination` as given Pres Woodrow Wilson. The territory of Kashmir never signed a permanent document of accession but a temporary one. Surely you know better than that, after all you read `Freedom at Midnight` which to you is the most important book on Partition (Crowd laughter). And then Mr Upman speaks of Intellectual mediocrity.

2) There are not a greater number of Muslims in India. 150 million Muslims in Pakistan. 130 Million in India.

3) Pakistan and Bangladesh together make up 340 Million Muslims.

4) At partition it was decided that Hindus and Muslims of Pakistan will be Pakistanis and Hindus and Muslims of India will be Indians.

5)Lahore Resolution which is true basis of Pakistan, speaks of Muslim Majority Provinces as Pakistan, and hence is the true basis of Pakistan.

TNT is not the basis of Pakistan, it was the basis of AIML`s India wide support. Like Dr Ayesha Jalal put it so well, TNT could only exist in an all India framework.

6)TNT in itself did not talk of seperate states. TNT is a valid political science theory and a dormant nationalism which was awakened by popular discontent. As long as Muslims in India will be discriminated against, and as long as they keep grouping themselves as a Minority group fighting for their rights in India (India without Kashmir ofcourse) TNT will be valid.

7) The breakup of Pakistan undid the TNT- agreed!

It proved what I call the MNT, MultiNational theory... it also proved basic Political science definition right : A national group can be formed on the basis of Language, common religious customs and common education, and the national group which will have all three is the strongest national group of them all. Kindly tell me where India fits on this definition of nation?

8) Break up of Pakistan ratified the creation of Pakistan. Combining theory of Political science with History gives us the following conclusion. Popular discontent leads to rise of nationalism. Popular Discontent in India led to the rise of Indo-Muslim Nationalism, which ultimately led to the creation of Pakistan. Popular discontent in Pakistan led to the rise of a narrower Bengali Nationalism which led to the creation of Bangladesh.... so you see, it was Indira Gandhi who was mediocre, and it was she who created this myth that the basis for Pakistan is undone. Indeed, by helping the creation of Bangladesh, India justified the creation of Pakistan.

9) Historians and Intellectuals like Beverley Nichols (Verdict on India), HV Hodson (The Great Divide), and recently Henry Kissinger (Does America need a foreign policy pages 155-157)and Salman Rushdie (Imaginery Homelands) are of the view that it was the British who brought about the Unity of India as Nation-state on the basis of the Western concept of nationhood. India was more like a continent. Ch Rahmat Ali was of the same view. Jinnah ofcourse being a Bombay Politician and an Indian Nationalist was opposed to this view, but then he was converted to this view by 1940.

10) The Original Pakistan demand and the Lahore Resolution had espoused the idea of a Muslim Majority state(Later named Pakistan), and a Hindu Majority state(Later named Hindustan) to be created within or without, the United Federation of India. These two states or federal units will then convene at parity in the center or in the case of the latter will have a defence treaty. The Cabinet Mission Plan as we all know accepted this and AIML accepted this. Congress did not. Hence Partition.