The Summer of ’47

Re: Zafar Al-Talib

``In India the Presidency has been held by a muslim (Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed)``

One could also add President Zakir Hussain, and Vice President M. Hidayatullah. The current President is from the least priviliged of Hindu castes.

Re: Fuzair

``IF you want to beat these Indians with a really big stick, I would suggest asking them why

If we go by truth`s argument on the other board, it is crystal clear that no one can accuse Jinnah of being non-secular!

-YLH

PS Can you explain why Ardeshir Cowasjee calls Jinnah

`The truly democratic secular statesman, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, more by the sheer weight of his dominating will than by any otherfactor established the forward-looking and modern state of Pakistan.`

You know that Ardeshir Cowasjee is not Muslim dont you?

Fuzair #262
Fuzair, what do you mean `writeoff`? Are you referring to some specific actions?

If your term was meant as general rhetoric, you are in good company.

``President K R Narayanan told the country on Tuesday that the ordinary people, whom Gandhiji called the `dumb millions`, are becoming more and more articulate and impatient and it is imperative to maintain a balance between freedom and justice to meet their aspirations. ...``

``.. Narayanan asked ``the better off`` among the people to ask themselves what they could do for others and the country as inheritors of ``our great past and trustees of our future``...``

Akash

1) How old are you?

2) Give me one reason why we should take your word over Dr Ajeet Javed Singh of Dehli who wrote `Secular and Nationalist Jinnah`?

3) Tell me why Surat Chanderbose say what he said about Jinnah:`

``Mr Jinnah was great as a lawyer, once great as a Congressman, great as a leader of Muslims, great as a world politician and diplomat, and greatestof all as a man of action, By Mr. Jinnah`s passing away, the world has lost one of the greatst statesmen and Pakistan its life-giver, philosopher and guide``.

Next time dont act uneducated and make sweeping statements like `Oh what an oxymoron` ... If you fools cant see the oxymoron in a secular India with Mahatma as the Bapu, Pandit as the Prime Minister, and a Madrassah educated Mullah (all of a sudden a representative of the secular Muslims) as the Education Minister... then go to hell!

Akash,

Jinnah did not provoke Violence in the direct action day. He called for a non violent strike which Muslims obeyed. If violence broke out in a Hindu Majority city, how the hell can you accuse Jinnah of violence? Aray bhai, are you getting your facts from Hey ram the movie or Gandhi the movie... Historical facts make it abundantly clear that Jinnah`s call for direct action day had nothing to do with the Calcutta Massacres.

The only oxymoron my dear is a `Mahatma` claiming to be secular ... Mahatma Gandhi was a Hindu first second and last, and he hated secular politics... he made that very clear!.... and that is a given. By the way, when you get a chance try to find out what Nelson Mandella said about `Jinnah` ... he called him an inspiration for those fighting against race and religious oppression!

I have stripped your Mahatma Bapu of his dignity before and on facts, and I shall do it again... if

By the way idiotic fool, it was not a Pakistani who wrote `Secular and Nationalist Jinnah` it was an Indian... try reading his book sometime...

His name is Ajeet Javed Singh!

Fuzair,

Agreed!

Re: Macgupta #258

Interesting. Any sources?
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Yasser:

I`m afraid you are fighting a losing battle here in so far as trying to defend Pakistan`s track record on minority treatment is concerned. The official Indian position on minorities is far better than our own although it is a debatable point as to how far this offical tolerance/neutrality translates into practice. As far as Muslims in India are concernced, they don`t need anti-Muslim discrimination among the Hindus to keep them down. They are doing an excellent job all on their own.

IF you want to beat these Indians with a really big stick, I would suggest asking them why

Sigalph

``If I were to believe that only Muslims were responsible for the carnage on Direct Action Day in Calcutta, then how am I going to explain the 50/50 casualty rate?``

That was not my point. I was just exposing the lie of this YLH who said that Jinnah did not provoke violence in Direct action. Well, if you know the history, you should also know that at the agents of ML started violence first in Bengal. Hindus, wherever they were minority were butcherd mercilessly by ML and latern my Muslims as a whole. This riot spread towards west and then Hindus in the Bihar and Orissa where they were in a majority paid back in the same coin. Finally the damages could have been equal but that does not extricate Jinnah and his league from the responsibility for the start of these gruesome murderous riots. Plaese read his provocative speeches I have posted here to reach the decision yourself.

YLH

``Numerous posts: What the hell? What is your problem if I wish to praise Jinnah... he stands head and shoulders above your Gandhi and Nehru...``

This is purely your imagination. Open your eyes and see that Gandhi is considered next only to Einstein in the world(read the article in TIME).

Your Jinnah doesn`t come even a distant tenth. And Gandhi finds support all over the world, be it Martin Luther or Nelson Mandela.

Let me assert once again. I have no problem with what you think of Jinnah. If some people want to live in dreamland, by all means why should others have any probs. Just keep out of our way. Dont try to force your greatest secularist ever Quaid(what an oxymoron!)on us. I understand that he(Quaid) is the father of your nation. Hence inspite of whatever I think of him, I will not in any way try to strip him off,to borrow your own phrase, unless you try to malign people who are considered our ideals. I only retaliate whwnever you start your malicious propaganda and start frothing at the mouth. If you respect us and our ideals, we will also show the same for your ideals, whether we agree with them or not is a different matter.

Best wishes for your independence day

What a wonderful excerpt:

A man such as Jinnah, who had fought for the inherent rights of his people all through his life and who had taken up the somewhat unconventional and the largely mininterpreted cause of Pakistan, was bound to generate violent opposition and excite implacable hostility and was likely to be largely misunderstood. But what is most remarkable about Jinnah is that he was the recepient of some of the greatest tributes paid to any one in modern times, some of them even from those who held a diametrically opposed viewpoint.

The Aga Khan considered him ``the greatest man he ever met``, Beverley Nichols, the author of `Verdict on India`, called him ``the most important man in Asia``, and Dr. Kailashnath Katju, the West Bengal Governor in 1948, thought of him as ``an outstanding figure of this century not only in India, but in the whole world``. While Abdul Rahman Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League, called him ``one of the greatest leaders

in the Muslim world``, the Grand Mufti of Palestine considered his death as a ``great loss`` to the entire world of Islam. It was, however, given to Surat Chandra Bose, leader of the Forward Bloc wing of the Indian National Congress, to sum up succinctly his personal and political achievements. ``Mr Jinnah``,he said on his death in

1948, ``was great as a lawyer, once great as a Congressman, great as a leader of Muslims, great as a world politician and diplomat, and greatestof all as a man of action, By Mr. Jinnah`s passing away, the world has lost one of the greatst statesmen and Pakistan its life-giver, philosopher and guide``. Such was Quaid-i-Azam Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the man and his mission, such the range of his accomplishments and achievements.`

On another e.group., S. Thadani writes (and these would be interesting to validate) :

There was also a huge movement of population away from the cities back to rural areas. Consider that in Bengal, the population in some cities actually shrunk to 20% of what it was prior to colonization! India went from 30-40% urban to less than 20% urban at the peak of this de-urbanization trend.

The idea that colonization could have helped industrialize India is a complete myth - an ugly fallacy.

Just a few related points: Thailand which was definitely less industrialized than India, industrialized at a much faster pace than India because it was one of the few nations in SE Asia to escape direct colonial rule.

Thailand`s literacy in 1947 was 50% - almost five times that of British India.

Within India, my impression is that there was more industry in Princely India than all of British India (which was twice as big). Note that a considerable proportion of India`s industrialist clans hail from the former Princely States: Rajputana, Indore, Baroda, Gwalior, Kolhapur, Mysore, Hyderabad, Patiala, Malabar etc.....

-Arun Gupta

I suppose Cowasjee is and Srojini Naidu and others were also Islamists right?

http://www.dawn.com/weekly/cowas/cowas.htm

Ardeshir`s New article :

Pax VajMush

By Ardeshir Cowasjee

MOHAMMAD Ali Jinnah learnt his politics at Dadabhai Naoroji`s feet, and he spent most of his life in Bombay - which the Indians have since renamed as Mumbai - with his peers Sir Phirozshah Mehta, Sir Dinshaw Watcha, Sir Dinshaw Mulla (the framer of Mohammedan Law), Sir Jamshedjee Kanga.

He lived in the fashion and style in which he wished to live; his personal life, likes, dislikes, dressing and eating habits were not dictated by expediency or hypocrisy. He spent not one day in jail, he had no truck with street demonstrators or street fighters. He rarely compromised his strict code of honour. He went on to carve out and build a homeland for his compatriots, and having done so, eleven months later he died.

Sarojini Naidu, the great Indian congresswoman and poet, in 1906 wrote of Mohammad Ali Jinnah: ``Never was there a nature whose outer qualities provided so complete an antithesis of its inner worth. Tall and stately, but thin to the point of emaciation, languid and luxurious of habit, Mohammed Ali Jinnah`s attenuated form is the deceptive sheath of a spirit of exceptional vitality and endurance.

``Somewhat formal and fastidious, and a little aloof and imperious of manner, the calm hauteur of his accustomed reserve but masks for those who know him a naive and eager humanity, an intuition quick and tender as a woman`s, a humour gay and winning as a child`s. Pre-eminently rational and practical, discreet and dispassionate in his estimate and acceptance of life, the obvious sanity and serenity of his worldly wisdom effectually disguise a shy and

splendid idealism which is of the very essence of the man.``

In 1946, addressing members of the Muslim League, Jinnah told them: ``I am an old man. God has given me enough to live comfortably at this age. Why would I turn my blood into water and take so much trouble? Not for the

capitalists, surely. But for you, the poor people.``

And on he pressed. His ambition was achieved in August 1947. Three days prior to the birth of his country, on the 11th of that month, he declared to the members of Pakistan`s constituent assembly his credo: ``The first and foremost thing that I would like to emphasize is this - remember that you are now a sovereign legislative body and you have got all the powers. It, therefore, places on you the gravest responsibility as to how you should take your decisions. The first observation that I would like to make is this: You will no doubt agree with me that the first duty of a government is to maintain law and order so that the life, property and religious beliefs of its subjects are fully protected by the state.

``The second thing that occurs to me is this: One of the biggest curses from which India is suffering - I do not say that

other countries are free from it but I think our condition is much worse - is bribery and corruption. That really is a poison. We must put that down with an iron hand and I hope that you will take adequate measures as soon as it ispossible for this assembly to do so. Blackmarketing is another curse. Well, I know that blackmarketeers are frequently caught and punished. Judicial sentences are passed or sometimes fines only are imposed. Now you have to tackle this monster which today is a colossal crime against society, in our distressed conditions when we constantly face shortage of food and other essential commodities of life.``

The third thing emphasized by Jinnah that day was nepotism and jobbery which, he said, ``must be crushed relentlessly. I want to make it quite clear that I shall never tolerate any kind of jobbery, nepotism or any influence directly or indirectly brought to bear upon me.``

He continued: `` If you change your past and work together, and in a spirit that every one of you, no matter to which community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, cast or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this state with equal rights, privileges and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make ...... You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques, or to any other places of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed - that has nothing to do with the business of the state.``

On February 19, 1948, he recorded a broadcast to the people of Australia. He told them: ``The great majority of us are Muslims. We follow the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him, we are members of the brotherhood of Islam in which all are equal in rights, dignity and self-respect. Consequently we have a special and very deep sense of unity. But make no mistake, Pakistan is not a theocracy, or anything like it. Islam demands from us the tolerance of other creeds and we welcome in closest association with us all those who, of whatever creed,are themselves willing and ready to play their part as true and loyal citizens of Pakistan.``

Again that month he spoke on the radio to the people of the United States and told them much the same thing: ``Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. It has taught equality of man, justice and fair play to everybody. We are the inheritors of these glorious traditions and are fully alive to our responsibilities and obligations as framers of the future constitution of Pakistan. In any case, Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state - to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have non-Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Parsis - but they are all Pakistanis.They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizen and play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan.``

The truly democratic secular statesman, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, more by the sheer weight of his dominating will than by any other factor established the forward-looking and modern state of Pakistan. For as long as he lived and

for eight years thereafter Pakistan remained a dominion of the British Empire. In 1956 it became a republic and its constitution, promulgated the same year, proclaimed it to be `The Islamic Republic of Pakistan`. Ayub Khan, the first Ataturk of Pakistan until attacked by dry rot, in his constitution of 1962 again looked forward and changed the country`s appellation to the simple unambiguous `The Republic of Pakistan`. One year later, he surrendered to sycophants and supporters, spurred by the overriding cause of self-perpetuation. He was persuaded to backtrack and by an amendment the country reverted to being `The Islamic Republic of Pakistan`.

In 1973, again in contradiction to Jinnah`s intent and promise, desire and declaration, religion was made ``the business of the state.`` Article 2 of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto`s constitution proclaimed that ``Islam will be the religion of the state.``

As it happened, ignorance was the cause of the loss of half the country. Now two-thirds of the remainder is barren, a desert. For each and every purpose Karachi has lost to the thriving and vibrant Dubai its geographical advantage. That little state, a brotherly Muslim country, with no black gold under its ground, flourishes and looks to the future. Why? Because it is not beset by taboos - religious or cultural or any other. It has adopted Islam`s tolerance, Islam`s intent to march with the times. Its citizens and its visitors and its foreign residents are free to live as they choose provided they remain within the law.

However, weeping and wailing will get us nowhere. There are still six inches of water under the keel. We can still refloat. Pakistan`s second Ataturk is in command. The fact that he is a general of the army is no impediment. Washington, who became a president, was a general. Eisenhower, a general, became a president. And Wellington, who was a general, became a prime minister. MacArthur, a general, was the man who built modern Japan, who revived its economy and its world status. De Gaulle, builder and maker of today`s France, was a general.

General Pervez Musharraf, a soldier, wears many hats and is in command. He has concluded that Kashmir cannot be won by waging war, or by `jihadi` means. Realization has dawned. He seeks peace with India. He is dealing with a seasoned politician, Atal Behari Vajpayee, head of a 23-party coalition government, the leaders of which are as scary as are our `leaders` whose hirsute faces are depicted in our press each day. To make peace, the people of both countries must understand each other and to do this a continued dialogue is required. Each must read what the other writes.

Does our general know that our antiquated import policy prevents the import of newspapers and magazines from India - just from India, from no other country ? This law can be changed by an ordinance, by the stroke of a pen and it can be done immediately.

Two days hence we will be flying flags and singing songs, celebrating the 55th anniversary of the birth of this blighted land. May the 56th year bring us, for a much needed change, a bit of peace and prosperity.

`Heck, I think Bangladesh is THE successor state to Jinnah`s secular Pakistan and we need to get our 54 % share of all the assets of Pakistan!`

Indeed in many ways it is!

-YLH

Akash

Have you read the book `Secular and Nationalist Jinnah` by your fellow Indian sikh `Ajeet Javed Singh`...

When I read that book, I thought maybe all Indians dont have a keera up their rearside everytime they hear Jinnah`s name... but now I think differently!

-YLH

Akash:

Numerous posts: What the hell? What is your problem if I wish to praise Jinnah... he stands head and shoulders above your Gandhi and Nehru... and that is a fact even some Indians admit....

Long Live Pakistan!

Long Live Jinnah!

`Whether you like it or not, it seems that India is closer to Quaid-e-Azam`s secular model than Pakistan is. I certainly hope it changes because I am the biggest well-wisher of Pakistan. At the end of the day, only a secular Pakistan that Mr Jinnah envisaged and people like the H S Suhrawardy fought for can survive in this world.`

I dont know what the point of disagreement is :)... I have repeatedly maintained that I hold India`s secular constitution in highest esteem, its their rulers and their people I have a problem with.

Indeed you are right a secular Pakistan that Jinnah and Suhrawardy fought for is what is going to survive the world.

-YLH