A Work In Progress

Ref AzadMunna #87

[Altrhough illiteracy is a curse but there Literacy has nothing to do with the calamity & you unfairly trying to dump a problem which just happens to be affecting Muslims & you being HINDU have no interest in it except howl at muslims ``hey ..its yours Take care of it `` ]

You said this in reference to bbabu`s post #86 where he quoted a NYT story on polio in India.

If you read the story, you would have to acknowledge that the government is NOT saying to Muslims, ``hey ..its yours Take care of it ``.

In fact, the government is using Muslim organizations and women to try to reach the Muslim population in the efforts to eradicate polio.

Perhaps your maulvis can tell their congregations that Oral Polio vaccine is a good thing. That would be a far better service than the usual ``Islam is in danger in Hindustan`` crap.

Ref ali87 #81

[I understand this logic....
but you dont understand the whole scenario...
The present day states are organised on basis of language..
The Idea that they share a similar culture and language and thus need to have a unit to self govern.
However nearly 70% of muslims ie nearly 90 millon (a sizeable number of people in sheer numbers) in present day India speak Urdu and they have no say in their unique Identity. They are expected to submerge their Identity into the Indian (read Hindu) Identity.]

Some two years back, the longest-published Portuguese daily in Asia (out of Goa) ceased publication. You didn`t find Goan Christians named Costanza or Rodriguez making a big fuss over it. On the other hand, the folks in Tuticorin named Mascarenhas and Machado have been doing without a steady diet of the Portuguese language for close to 250 years and seem none the worse for it.

The reason there is no separate Urdu-speaking state in India is, even in UP with its 170+ million population, you can`t get together enough people wanting to speak Urdu or run their administration in Urdu. If Hindus in UP and Bihar and Punjab spoke Urdu, that is because they needed to converse with Urdu-speaking people, meaning the nawabs and their minions who controlled the state apparatus for 750 years. But now that that is no longer the case (and remember, the British imposed English only in 1858, being content to govern in Persian between 1757 and 1858), maybe it is time for the Urdu spakers to learn the language of the local masses.

By the way, the railway stations in UP have station names in English, Devanagari and Urdu scripts, so it is not like Urdu-literate people have impediments placed in their way.

[Thus Muslims in Karnataka have to bear the humiliation of being asked to love Kannada first then Urdu.]

How about the Coorgis? They got to learn Kannada first and Tulu next. How about the Konkanis? They have to learn Kannada first and Konkani next. And these are Hindus! So it is not like the injustice is only meted out to Muslims. Get out of the victim mentality.

[In Hyderabad and many other muslim Majority distircts of Andhra pradesh simlarly Telgu is promoted and any suggestion of Urdu having any function is just wished away. There is a Urdu Academy which has govt administrators who cant even Understand sopken Urdu much less writtnen Urdu.]

If India is to be divided exactly along linguistic boundaries, we will have about 250 states in the country. Some 20 lanuages have been recognized as official languages and some 27 states exist, with Hindi being the language of administration in Haryana, UP, Uttaranchal, Bihar, MP, Chhattisgarh and Jharkand. You could argue that Chhattisgarh and Jharkand must be broken into some couple of dozen states each if the tribal/ethnic/linguistic identities are to be the sole criterion for creating a state. Even in Tamil Nadu, you would then have to give a separate state for the Todas of Nilgiris.

[In all of these places muslim majority electoral districts are broken up unnaturaly to include rurual areas where hindus are in majority. This is visible in three MLA electoral districts in Bangalore and nearly 4 MLA districts in Hyderabad.]

That didn`t prevent Mr. Jaffer Sharif from getting elected in Karnataka or being appointed the central minister for railways in the Congress government. Such gerrymandering did not prevent Abdul Rahman Antulay from becoming the Chief Minister of Maharashtra.

[It seems that any kind of pressure group is legitmate in India, Hindu caste based, language based, Geographic topographic based but Im frequently told that religious(read Muslim/ Urdu) based identity or grouping or even any hint of catering to the needs of muslims (called appeasement, you can count the number of so called moderate commentators who say that giving in to The Shah Bano case and other unspecified special favours had given the hindu right the legitimate Appeasement stick) is just dividing the nation.]

You should move to Tamil Nadu. The local school system offers the Oriental Studies Stream with Urdu as the major language.... this in a state where there was NEVER any history of usage of Urdu amongst the Muslims and where a Muslim poet wrote an epic on the life of Prophet Muhammad in Tamil.

I am sure if you look around, you will find that in every state you actually have the right to study Urdu during your school years and substitute Urdu for the basic language in high school. I know of people who bemoan that they can no longer learn French in high school like their parents did (I am not talking about French India here but about Cochin in Kerala). But at some point in time, some languages are going to drop by the wayside. Portuguese is probably on its way out in India.

[Im not inclined to belive that it would have been such a simplicist solution as you say if pakistan had not been created. I have serious doubts if the needs of muslims would have been taken care as easily or surely as you think to be the case.]

Do you think Hindus would have moved en masse into Sindh or Balochistan? The only thing would be Bengal and Punjab would not have been partitioned and Punjabi would be taught in West Punjab too. By the way, do you read all the laments from Punjabi Pakistanis about the loss of their language and culture on Chowk? What do you have to say about that?

[A case point in this argument is the roit in Bangalore a few years back on annoucement of start of Urdu bulletin by doordarshan. Now muslims in Bangalroe are generally thought to be well integrated with the locals there most being from farming or trading back grounds. For the first time in the history of Bangalore there was a communal rioit in which hindu groups burnt muslim business establisments and busses belonging to muslims. And what was the provocation? a 2 inch single colloum announcment that there will be a Urdu bulletin on Local Doordarsan. This is the extent of adjustment shown by the hindu establishment and the govt just gave a order 3 days later that the news bulletin was cancelled.]

What do you think the reaction would have been if the announcement said that there will be a news program in Tamil? Give me your honest answer. How many times have the locals demonstrated against Tamil movies being shown in Bangalore?

[Urdu was not even a state level recognised language in UP where there are a large number of muslims till mid seventies. Kashmiri language had to wait for 25 years to be recognised as a national language. And all this happend in the times of the great secular visionairy leaders.]

There are times when political decisions are taken that fly in the face of reality. When the central government said in 1965 that Hindi will be the sole language of administration in the future because English is a ``foreign`` language, they had to be reminded that Nagaland`s official language was English! And why was that? Because each tribe in Nagaland spoke a different language and they all agreed on English as the common language. So don`t ask me to justify the stupidity of politicians, and that too from the Cow Belt.

[Disadvantages of partition are hard to gauge in restospect each line of thinking gives rise to many unknowns each with far reaching consequenses. Looking at the condition of pakistan or even Bangaladesh makes it hard to justify the two nation theory but there were many more factors in play that have to be considered.]

At least, we could all concentrate our defense against EXTERNAL enemies instead of against each other. That would be one benefit of a united India.

[However that is water over the bridge.]

True.

[We can justifiably be say we are in relatively good positon vis a vi pakistan. All said and done we are not to much better than them either. It is also true that pakistani socitey has made some very bad choices but put yourselves in their positon and see given the pressures and influences and circumstances would you have come out any better?]

At every point in time, they could have used American aid to further the cause of education in Pakistan. They could have shown that Muslims are capable of getting over their victim mentality; that they can become a beacon to other Islamic countries. Instead, they are looking to Turkey or Indonesia to be their role models.

[Single nation or two or three nations this is a choice even in retrospect is very difficult to make or visualise. Im glad that im not required to make that choice.]

If Jinnah had not insisted on a Muslim veto over the actions of a Federal government, in a United India Muslims would still be in power in Sindh, Balochistan, NWFP, Punjab, Kashmir and Bengal. As it was, with the exception of Kashmir which was a Princely state, all other provinces did elect Muslim Chief Ministers and cabinet members. So where was the justification for Jinnah`s cry of ``Islam is in danger``? If indeed Islam was in danger, then there is no doubt that Jinnah wanted an ISLAMIC state and not a secular state. But this is a difficult issue for Pakistanis to confront because they will have to conclude that their country was born because of the stubbornness of one man and not for any rational reason. They at least admit that it has been governed for more time in its history by somebody who proclaimed himself to be The Lone Saviour of Pakistan.

[However there is sitll the question of kashmir........
Prehaps it is not the kashmiri people who are the problem or pakistan which is the problem. We need to ask ourselves why do politicans say that givning in to the demand of kashmiri (ie of autonomy or independece) will lead to similar demands elsewhere. If there are similar demands what is the fault of kashmiris? are they to be held ransom to the disunity of rest of India? In any case why should people in other parts of India not have more say in how they are governed?]

It is unfortunate that Kashmiris think they can actually become independent. They tried it between Aug and Oct 1947. In 9 weeks, they realized the intentions of Pakistan.

India is NOT going to give the high ground in Kashmir to Pakistan or to China. It is going to hold on to the territory and the Kashmiris can decide what they want to do about it.

[Now when you understand this remark in proper prespective you will know that it means that if you take up another religion and then ask for to selfregulate your self then you can go but leave the land.. ]

Self-government within India with even greater autonomy than they enjoy now may be possible. But they cannot ask to leave the Indian Union either to become independent or to join Pakistan. Nobody in India is going to cede land. That is why you see the statement ``Move to Pakistan if you want``.

[I think the solution most people in have in mind is negotiate with kashmiris on the autonomy that was promised and to honour that agreement while taking care of indias defense requirements in some agreeable way.]

If you really dispassionately analyze the situation, the only things that are now common among the states in the Indian Union are: defense, communications, currency, customs, industrial policy, and to some extent, education. Tamil Nadu is unable to enforce even legally-binding contracts on Kaveri water against Karnataka. Jayalalitha runs her state as she pleases and so does Chandrababu Naidu. They are now even b~tching about the fact that they get a lesser share of the federal revenues than they send in because more money is being allocated to backward states. If the Congress Party was interfering in Kashmiri elections. they did the same to Telugu Desam Party in Andhra too. After a while, they got thrown out of Andhra completely. The same thing would have happened in Kashmir too. But Kashmiris should be able to vote without fear of reprisals from the so-called mujahideens. If that happens, Kashmir will settle down like Tamil Nadu or Andhra did. It is unfortunate that Kashmir is right smack against Pakistan so that Pakistan is able to play games there.

[A added challenge could be to ask pakistan to match that in their part of kashmir. Im sure nothing of that sort will happen. It will starkly remind pakistan of the condition of their socitey. It will remove the cover of kashmir from the hate agenda in Pakistan and compell them to come to terms with the actual problem of hate and misinformation conducted for 50 years on India. ]

Truer words have never been spoken.

Ref yusafkhan #79

[yeah...sell this to the muslims of Gujrat. ]

If ypu notice, one idea was sold very clearly to the Muslims of Gujarat and the rest of India: don`t mess with Hindus again.

You didn`t see a repeat of Godhra anywhere, did you?

Sometimes you Butt-Fakhrs have to realize that you are no longer living under some Mogul emperor.

The payback will not be an eye for an eye; it is going to be 20 dead Muslims for every dead Hindu. Live with that thought or die by it.

AzadMunna

I have gotten my facts straight. I am interacted with speakers of Punjabi, Persian and Urdu. I learnt a good amount of ``Hindi`` in school.

There is no significant difference between Urdu and Hindi for a non-native speaker of those langauges or even a colloqual speaker of those languages.

http://www.geocities.com/sikmirza/arabic/hindustani.html

The only thing that stands out is the Arabic script.

I never said Hindus did not know or use Urdu. There is no enthusiasm among Hindus for any kind of recognition to Urdu.

Whether you like it or not India has choosen Hindi with Devanagiri script to be official language. This was done in 1948 not by the BJP crowd. Pakistan has choosen Urdu as national language even though 90% of Pakistanis have some other language as mother tongue. Keep in mind the arrogance of Urdu elite in Pakistan was a big factor in the events of 1971.

With indo-pakistani hostility you can kiss goodbye to the survival of the written urdu in India. I can tell you if you want non-Urdu people to learn Urdu in India you will have to kiss goodbye to the Arabic script.

On MNCs there are one way of getting investment. The other vehicles are foreign mutual funds, Indian companies and Indian entrepruners. Of course the Indian state is still responsible for some infrastructure. Even MNCs invest in a country for 2 reasons - one to sell goods and services, two to procurr goods and services.

ali87:

Try educating people instead of irredentist garbage on the status of Urdu.


---------
Distrust Reopens the Door for Polio in India
By AMY WALDMAN

RAMPUR, India � The little girl sat somberly, eyes large and sad, mouth an unmoving bow, legs as lifeless as a marionette`s. Her face contorted in pain and frustration. Tears streamed down her cheeks.

She clutched at her mother, who berated herself for her child`s agony. In trying to do what she thought was right for her daughter, Tehazib Jahan had done something irrevocably wrong.

Last year, Mrs. Jahan had heard the story circulating through her Muslim neighborhood that the polio vaccine would make her child sterile. She believed it. So even though her daughter, Uzma, still needed two doses of the vaccine, Mrs. Jahan would not take her to the immunization booth. When the vaccinators came to her house, she demurred.

Three months ago, Uzma came down with a fever. Then the paralysis, polio`s calling card, set in. Today the once playful 4-year-old cannot stand without help.

``We are illiterate, not very intelligent,`` Mrs. Jahan said. ``We were influenced.``

Borne along by rumor and fear as much as any biological route of transmission, the polio virus � almost vanquished worldwide thanks to a cheap and widely available vaccine � has made a defiant comeback in India.

In 2001, after years of aggressive mass immunizations, there were 239 new cases in the country � down from about 200,000 in the early 1980`s. Officials were confident that India could eliminate the disease, as so many countries have, by the end of 2002.

Instead, India had 1,509 newly diagnosed cases last year � the vast majority, 1,197, in Uttar Pradesh, the country`s most populous state, and one of its poorest. Uttar Pradesh accounted for 68 percent of the polio cases worldwide.

The reason, according to government officials and community leaders, seems to be largely a rumor that the oral vaccine, given as drops, was part of a government population control scheme. No one knows how it started, but its effects are now clear.

On a recent day, another mother, Shamina, 30, initially refused doses for her three children, ages 1, 3 and 5, when the vaccinators came to her door. Her husband had told her to do so, she said.

``We have heard some things about these medicines,`` she said as chickens pecked at her feet. ``That when these children become adults � they will be useless.``

The resurgence of polio here has alarmed international health experts, who had aimed for the global eradication of polio by last year. Last year, polio was found in seven countries and increased only in two: Nigeria and India.

``There`s a real risk of people thinking if we fail we`re going to have 1,000 cases a year,`` said Dr. Bruce Aylward, coordinator of the World Health Organization`s global polio eradication initiative. ``We`re not. We`re going to have hundreds of thousands of cases of kids being paralyzed by a disease that was an inch away from disappearing forever.``

Dr. Sobhan Sarkar, the Indian government`s deputy commissioner of child health and coordinator of the national antipolio campaign, said what worried him was the spread of polio to areas where it was not previously found. The virus is spilling from Uttar Pradesh into other states.

The polio outbreak has also exposed a religious, or communal, health divide. Only 17 percent of Uttar Pradesh`s population is Muslim, but 59 percent of its polio cases last year were among Muslims, like Uzma. Although the rumor was repeated in Hindu communities too, health officials say it gained greatest currency among Muslims, who in Uttar Pradesh tend to be landless laborers with lower literacy rates and a greater mistrust of the Hindu-dominated government.

Many Indians have feared forced sterilization since it was carried out during the authoritarian period of the late Prime Minister Indira Gandhi`s state of emergency in 1975. Since then, government health initiatives have often been viewed warily.

That has been especially true among Muslims, not least because most government health workers are Hindu.

Some health officials said they had known for years that they were having a harder time reaching Muslim households. But Naseem Ahmad, vice chancellor of the Aligarh Muslim University in Uttar Pradesh, said the divide between Muslims and Hindus widened when the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party rose to power in the state five years ago. It is now part of a coalition government.

``Because of the political setup at the moment, with the B.J.P. in power,`` he said, ``the impression from the illiterate and semiliterate is that anything from the present government would be to their detriment.``

This is not the first fear to foil a health campaign in India. Last year, rumors that vitamin A � dispensed to reduced the incidence of diarrhea and measles and to help prevent blindness � had caused the death of dozens of children halted a public health drive in the state of Assam.

Mrs. Jahan, who is 26, is totally unschooled. She was married at 16 or 17. Her husband rolls cigarettes for a living, and the family earns about 2,400 rupees, or $50, a month. She lives under the purdah system and so she rarely leaves the house. When she does, it is in a burka, the head-to-toe, face-covering veil. She said she did not know how the rumor got started. ``We are women, confined to the household,`` she said. ``We work and we eat.``

Uzma is unusual, in that most of the polio cases here have been diagnosed among children under 2. But almost all of them have come in places where significant percentages of children � 6 percent or more � did not complete the full course of the vaccine, which involves at least four doses.

Health officials say they hope that in the wake of the current epidemic the number of new cases will taper off this year, at least in Uttar Pradesh, with many children who are not immunized by the government developing natural immunity through mild exposure.

Dr. Aylward agreed that that could happen, but warned against a false sense of security. ``It`s going to plummet, and buy you a bit of time,`` he said, ``then it`s going to come roaring back.`` Mass immunization, he said, remains necessary, and that effort is under way.

The government and the World Health Organization, in partnership with Unicef and Rotary International, which has given more than $500 million to fight polio, started a drive this month to immunize 150 million Indian children, many of them in Uttar Pradesh.

Where possible, the government has tried to add health workers of the same religion and social caste as the people where the vaccinations are scheduled. But officials say they have struggled to find enough Muslim women with some education and without purdah strictures to join them. Nongovernment organizations have helped fill the gaps.

With 166 million people, Uttar Pradesh is more populous than all but five of the world`s countries. It has long been troubled by poor governance. Federal health officials say the repeated transfers of state bureaucrats have made it difficult to mount sustained campaigns.

Health workers and those with aid organizations said that in a state where so little seemed to work, the very efficiency of the eradication drive added to people`s suspicions.

``People say, `We do not have food, we do not have jobs, we do not have electricity. Why are you only after these drops? Why again and again these drops?` `` said Nikhat Parvin, a Muslim volunteer with the nonprofit Adventist Development and Relief Agency. On this morning, she accompanied a vaccination team through the lanes of Ger Hassanha, a Muslim neighborhood in this bedraggled city of 300,000 people.

Rampur district had 36 polio cases last year. Of those, 29 were among Muslims, although the district`s two million residents are about equally split between Hindus and Muslims. All the cases, the district`s chief medical officer, Dr. Vijay Singh said, were among the poor, those with inadequate food, unclean water and poor sanitation. In many localities, he said, human waste was simply dumped in the open, making fecal-oral transmission of the virus ``very, very easy.``

The team went house to house, checking to see whether the drops had been administered, giving them if they had not, and then chalking the status upon wooden doors.

By 11 a.m., two mothers, both Muslims, had refused. One of them was Shamina, who said she was illiterate. But she allowed the three women with the team into her courtyard to make their pitch.

``Your children are not only your children, they are like my children,`` said Byant Kaur, 55, a state health worker since 1969, and a Hindu. ``Why would I hurt my children?``

Hamida Khan, a Unicef community mobilizer who is Muslim, joined in. ``If the population decreases, who will the government rule?`` she asked, as Ms. Parvin nodded.

Ms. Kaur continued, ``If anything happens, you can get hold of my neck.``

The mother relented, and Ms. Kaur quickly dropped in the oral vaccine.

But across the narrow lane, her neighbor, who the team knew had a 3-year-old, refused even to open the door.

Instead, she shouted through it. ``You are dishonest! I don`t have time! I have so many other things to do!``

Then she added: ``My children are already grown!``

Dr. Singh said many parents, knowing they might face pressure from the government � or even the police � if they refused the drops, were now simply lying about whether they had children younger than 5.

From behind the door came the last word: ``I will not give the medicine to my child!``

To counter the creeping rumors, the government has begun a pro-immunization media campaign featuring India`s most popular actor, Amitabh Bachchan.

But as Mrs. Jahan herself observed, there may be no more effective advertisement than her little Uzma. Now that people can see from her daughter`s crippled limbs that polio is real, ``they do not believe the rumor,`` Mrs. Jahan said, almost proudly. ``They see the logic in getting the drops.``

ali # 81

I would contest the claim ``70% of Muslims speak Urdu``

Muslims in Tamilnadu, Kerala, West Bengal, Assam Kashmir, Gujurat generally don`t speak Urdu. To people who don`t know Hindi or Urdu, Urdu = Hindi in Arabic alphabets minus a few Sanskrit words.

Languages that don`t have a state are in trouble in the long run. Urdu speakers are not in a majority in any state in India. They are in no position to ask for one.

If people who are fond of Urdu can walk across the border to Pakistan where they impose Urdu over the native langauges.

shah # 80

Articles like this meant squat. MNCs are only one vehicle of investment.

re: problem of learning urdu in India
This problem is really there for people (especially muslims) who want to learn the language. But GOI is not all to blame. There is tremendous apathy among the Indian muslims in teaching their children urdu even when they continue to bemoan that they are not getting enough govt support.
Go to the following url for a detailed info on the status of urdu in India. This is written by a British teaching in London and is more balanced than many other articles written by muslims.
Url: http://www.ercwilcom.net/indowindow/sad/article.php?child=14&article=5
Excerpts:
1. ``What could individual Urdu speakers or small voluntary organisations formed by them have acted to combat the dangers that Urdu was facing? One thing that they could have done was ensured that their own children learnt to read and write Urdu. If the schools were not providing for their education, the parents themselves could have provided it, and by and large they did not. Even in Urdu-speaking families people who were generally devoted to Urdu and whose children were also interested in Urdu, had not taught their children to read and write it. Urdu for them was simply the language of the home. Many of them enjoyed Urdu poetry; they would go to mushairas and most of them could understand what was being said. I remember seeing a young relative of the late Habibur Rahman writing down in Devanagari script Urdu verses which appealed to her. On another occasion I met Ismat Chughtai. She told me that her daughter could not read and write Urdu. So one asks the question, why not? Why didn’t the parents make sure that their children could read and write Urdu? It seems to me that whatever the difficulties, it was, and is, primarily the responsibility of people who love Urdu and Urdu literature to arrange for the teaching of Urdu and Urdu literature themselves. They could and they should do that; and if I am not mistaken, they are not doing it.``
(My comments: the Tamil associations in Delhi depends on some govt aid but the school itself is run and funded by an association for Tamilians. Why should Urdu be any different?)


``....In many immigrant communities in countries like Britain people want their children to acquire a much better knowledge of what some people call their heritage language than is provided for in any official provision in the schools and the educational system. They act accordingly. That is, they themselves set up classes, hire rooms or meet in suitably sized rooms in their own houses and impart some instruction to their children. And there is absolutely no reason why Urdu speakers in India shouldn’t do the same...``.


2. ``...As I wrote in an article in the Indian Review of Books (September 15-November 15, 1995), one of the most disappointing features of the picture is the idleness and ineffectiveness displayed by those who have seen themselves as the trustees and leaders of the Urdu-speaking community. Substantial resources were from very early days made available by the central government to organisations established to support and promote the interests of Urdu. But the record of these organisations is a far from impressive one. In 1949-50 I spoke personally to some of those who sat on the governing body of the Anjuman i Taraqqi i Urdu and urged them to draw up a coherent plan of activity and proceed to implement it....``.

3. ``The protagonists of Urdu seem to me all too often to call upon somebody else to do something instead of doing it themselves, and that there is a historical background to this attitude, formed in the centuries when Muslims constituted the ruling elite of India. Shamsur Rahman Faruqi, who is himself a member of the UP Urdu-speaking elite strikes a rare – and welcome – note when he says in his interview (in English) with Ather Farouqui published in the Lahore paper The Nation on July 8, 1994: ``The Muslims of Uttar Pradesh...have a sense of superiority, which I consider quite stupid really...The UP sharifzada will never do for himself anything that he can command, persuade or cajole anyone else to do for him.``

4. ``I come now to what I think the protagonists of Urdu should do. I do not object to them saying that other people, like the government of India, state governments and so on, ought to be doing this, that or the other, and should be pressed to do so. I do not object to them saying that we should try and get teachers in religious institutions to take up Urdu. I do not object to these things, but they should pay far more attention to what they themselves should do, regardless of what other people are or are not doing. There are some important activities in which all protagonists of Urdu need to engage themselves and all others whose support they can obtain. One such is the production of Urdu materials in the Devanagari script. It would be extremely helpful to people who know Urdu but who cannot read the Urdu script and to the cause of Urdu generally if Urdu teaching materials and works of Urdu literature were published in the Devanagari script.``
``All organisations – government-sponsored and voluntary – ought to consider the implications for them of the fact that many Urdu speakers know Urdu but do not know the Urdu script. They are anxious to read Urdu, but they can only read it if Urdu literature is presented in the Devanagari script. ``
(My comment: This is a great idea. I am interested in reading urdu literature but i do not know the script. It will be immensely helpful if the same were made available in Devanagari script).

You may go to the url for a detailed discussion on the subject. People like Ali87 (how many Alis are there in Chowk anyway?) seem to say that, because urdu is not getting its due in India, muslims in India are being discriminated. The problems is more complex. Urdu is losing its popularity because urdu lovers and people who know the language well (almost all are muslims) are doing little to spread the knowledge around.
Infact, i may safely say that hindi films have done a lot more in keeping popularity of urdu (and many urdu words alive). Without these films, i would never have learnt of words like: Ishq, Mohabbat, dastaan, riyaz, etc etc. Kudos to hindi films.
Sridhar

#81 by ali87

``However nearly 70% of muslims ie nearly 90 millon (a sizeable number of people in sheer numbers) in present day India speak Urdu and they have no say in their unique Identity. They are expected to submerge their Identity into the Indian (read Hindu)``
You, i believe, are an Indian muslim. If so, you should know that everybody in India is a minority. As a Tamilian growing up in Delhi, i was expected to submerge my Tamil identity towards the larger North Indian culture around me. Did i like it? No, i did not, though i had no choice. The best my parents could do was to put me in a Tamil medium school where i learnt both Tamil and Hindi and was thus able to merge my identity with the larger North Indian identity somehow and still manage to preserve my language and culture.
Muslims in India have the same choice. A muslim in Karnataka can send his child to a school where he/she learns Hindi, Kannada. He can make efforts to educate the child in Urdu if he wants to by sending the child to a school where they teach urdu or in his private capacity. It is tough, like it is tough for a Tamilian growing up in the North. Urdu is not a muslim language (just like sanskrit is not a brahminical language but used extensively by buddhists, jains of the time). Anyone saying so is a fool. It is just a language used by muslims for historical reasons. Did you know that there was a time (before partition) when Hindi was taught an learnt only by hindu pandits along side sanskrit? Hindi gained importance again for historical reasons when Urdu was being projected by Muslim League as the language of muslims in Pakistan. There is no reason why muslims in India should stick to urdu at all but at least do not expect the GOI to give any kind of assistance in the matter. There is no reason to. But, muslims in India have constitutional rights to preserve their language and if they feel urdu is their language, they can do all they can to preserve it in their private capacity. Having said this, i will also say that GOI has done its bit in the preservation of Urdu in India. See my next post for details.
But where is all this debate. All we hear is if Babri Masjid needs to be reclaimed or not. There is little debate among Indian muslims as to what direction their education should take and how they need to modernise their education to fall in line with the mainstream. If they teach their children only urdu, these children are not going to fit into the mainstream Indian society (which is Hindu whether you like it or not) and will be marginalised. But, even teaching their children Urdu is not something that is done with any amount of seriousness. It is said that even Ismat Chugtais daughter did not know how to read or write the urdu script. Can you expect other muslims in India to do any better?
You are also talking about Kashmir and saying you wanted states to have autonomy without realising it already exists. You were in Kashmir in 1989 when militancy was taking root, so i am not surprised the people were disenchanted. I was there in 1978 and there were no such feelings. MY uncle, who worked for Doordarshan, was posted in Srinagar from 1972-76 and did not face any problems. There has always been a strong undercurrent of Kashmiriyat but that had, until 1989, never spilled into militancy. Latter has many reasons, but mainly the inablity of the Kashmiris to elect a govt of their choice due to rigged elections under congress rule. The situation has changed now. For the first time, there is a popular govt in Srinagar. Hurriyat is being told by visitors (mostly EU leaders) to talk to the govt and come to an understanding. I hear that the CM Mufti Md Sayyed is planning to raise a state level anti-terrorist squad to tackle the problems of militancy. Militants in Kashmir are mostly foreign trained and have a vested interest to prove to the world that democracy in Kashmir is not working. The world has seen thr` their designs. Their days are numbered.
Naga problem is close to solution. Have you heard of a highway being built connecting Myanmar with NE corridor and Thailand? This will boost trade and economic opportunities. NE has its own seperate council which takes economic decisions. It however depends on center for money. Even that may be a thing of past if trade with Myanmar, Thailand picks up.
India is already becoming a federal structure. Recently, Kerala govt had an Economic meet in which Reliance and other big IT companies participated. Each state is showcasing its own potential. Those who are energetic and have the drive, will reap a good harvest. States like Bihar (whose CM says ``ye IT Yt kya cheez hai) will be left behind for obvious reasons.
Sridhar

#78 by harimau on January 17, 2003 0:45am PT

I understand this logic....

but you dont understand the whole scenario...

The present day states are organised on basis of language..

The Idea that they share a similar culture and language and thus need to have a unit to self govern.

However nearly 70% of muslims ie nearly 90 millon (a sizeable number of people in sheer numbers) in present day India speak Urdu and they have no say in their unique Identity. They are expected to submerge their Identity into the Indian (read Hindu) Identity. Thus Muslims in Karnataka have to bear the humiliation of being asked to love Kannada first then Urdu. In Hyderabad and many other muslim Majority distircts of Andhra pradesh simlarly Telgu is promoted and any suggestion of Urdu having any function is just wished away. There is a Urdu Academy which has govt administrators who cant even Understand sopken Urdu much less writtnen Urdu.

In all of these places muslim majority electoral districts are broken up unnaturaly to include rurual areas where hindus are in majority. This is visible in three MLA electoral districts in Bangalore and nearly 4 MLA districts in Hyderabad.

I have discussed this extensively with many hindu friends but even these so called middle class liberals see no role for the religious Identity of muslims and the accompaning social and Cultural Identity.
It seems that any kind of pressure group is legitmate in India, Hindu caste based, language based, Geographic topographic based but Im frequently told that religious(read Muslim/ Urdu) based identity or grouping or even any hint of catering to the needs of muslims (called appeasement, you can count the number of so called moderate commentators who say that giving in to The Shah Bano case and other unspecified special favours had given the hindu right the legitimate Appeasement stick) is just dividing the nation.

Im not inclined to belive that it would have been such a simplicist solution as you say if pakistan had not been created. I have serious doubts if the needs of muslims would have been taken care as easily or surely as you think to be the case.

A case point in this argument is the roit in Bangalore a few years back on annoucement of start of Urdu bulletin by doordarshan. Now muslims in Bangalroe are generally thought to be well integrated with the locals there most being from farming or trading back grounds. For the first time in the history of Bangalore there was a communal rioit in which hindu groups burnt muslim business establisments and busses belonging to muslims. And what was the provocation? a 2 inch single colloum announcment that there will be a Urdu bulletin on Local Doordarsan. This is the extent of adjustment shown by the hindu establishment and the govt just gave a order 3 days later that the news bulletin was cancelled.

Urdu was not even a state level recognised language in UP where there are a large number of muslims till mid seventies. Kashmiri language had to wait for 25 years to be recognised as a national language. And all this happend in the times of the great secular visionairy leaders.

Disadvantages of partition are hard to gauge in restospect each line of thinking gives rise to many unknowns each with far reaching consequenses. Looking at the condition of pakistan or even Bangaladesh makes it hard to justify the two nation theory but there were many more factors in play that have to be considered.

However that is water over the bridge. We can justifiably be say we are in relatively good positon vis a vi pakistan. All said and done we are not to much better than them either. It is also true that pakistani socitey has made some very bad choices but put yourselves in their positon and see given the pressures and influences and circumstances would you have come out any better?

Single nation or two or three nations this is a choice even in retrospect is very difficult to make or visualise. Im glad that im not required to make that choice.

However there is sitll the question of kashmir. I think that no matter what pakistan does or not do India still has to address the question of the choice of kashmiris. If it was a simple question of holding elections then there would have been solved long ago. The question is clearly of the agreements that the Govt of Inidia made to the kashmiri people and visbile alienation of kashmiri people.
I dont know how many people have interacted with kashmiri people. I visited kashmir in 1985 for a couple of weeks before the current militancy started. Every person that I interacted refered to India as another land and referec we people as Indians(meaning to say that they are not). Subsequently I studied in a college in bangalore which had nearly 200-300 hundred kashmiri students and have come to the same conclusion.

Prehaps it is not the kashmiri people who are the problem or pakistan which is the problem. We need to ask ourselves why do politicans say that givning in to the demand of kashmiri (ie of autonomy or independece) will lead to similar demands elsewhere. If there are similar demands what is the fault of kashmiris? are they to be held ransom to the disunity of rest of India? In any case why should people in other parts of India not have more say in how they are governed?

If you dont belive that is the problem and not pakistan or kahsmir just ask this question among hindus (Honestly instead of discussing this endlessly on forums such as these it is better to conduct this exercise) among your friends in a casual atmosphere. You will be surprised at the answers you may get. I conduct this exercise frequently with my hindu unsuspecting hindu friends many time.

The discussions give rise to a wide range of responses and one thing least agreed is that of honouring agreements. Usually the remark of already having given too much land to the muslims comes up. Now when you understand this remark in proper prespective you will know that it means that if you take up another religion and then ask for to selfregulate your self then you can go but leave the land..

This is where all pretensions of democracy as etc are seen in proper prespective. even people who always thought themselves as very liberal just find that their thinking is just as similar to the VHP line or similar to the line of the that Justifies the two nation theory.

In media discussions and public platforms india there is a courious reluctance by all including members of common public, political commentators, defence commentators, politicans, peace activists to spell out their solution. Every one claims to have a solution but simply refuses to spellit out.

I think the solution most people in have in mind is negotiate with kashmiris on the autonomy that was promised and to honour that agreement while taking care of indias defense requirements in some agreeable way.

A added challenge could be to ask pakistan to match that in their part of kashmir. Im sure nothing of that sort will happen. It will starkly remind pakistan of the condition of their socitey. It will remove the cover of kashmir from the hate agenda in Pakistan and compell them to come to terms with the actual problem of hate and misinformation conducted for 50 years on India.

Till you examine the demons in yourself you cant hope to exorcise them out of others.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

harimau...#78...>
>>If you people understand the meaning of one-man-one-vote as >>practiced in democratic elections, you would have seen that the 80%>>+ Muslim population of what is now Pakistan would elect Muslims to >>positions of power and they then would be able to provide patronage >>to Muslims in the economic and education fields

yeah...sell this to the muslims of Gujrat.

Ref ayeshakhan #77

[Another piece of information for you, Jinnah did not ask to partition Bengal or Punjab. The Pakistan he had asked for was much larger than the Pakistan he actually got. In fact, his remarks when the boundaries were drawn were ``I don`t want a moth-eaten Pakistan!``]

You are darn right that Jinnah didn`t want to partition Punjab or Bengal. But this brilliant lawyer didn`t realize that every one of his arguments for partitioning India could be and was indeed used to partition Punjab and Bengal. If Muslims cannot live in a Hindu-majority India, why should Hindus be forced to live in a Muslim-majority Punjab or Bengal province? It just proves that Nehru and Patel were not as dumb as Jinnah thought they were. And if Jinnah didn`t want a moth-eaten Pakistan he could have stayed put in the Indian Union.

[Neither he nor the Muslims feared competing with Hindus economically--all they wanted was a fair chance--something they would have been denied in India. And so, thankfully, Pakistan was created to safeguard Muslim interests, economically and otherwise.]

You guys need some myth to hold on to, so hold on to the myth that the Hindus would have swamped the Muslims in India. The Sangilikkaruppans and Masanamuthus of Tamil Nadu demanded a Dravidastan on the same basis, that they would be swamped by the Aryans of the North but were totally ignored by the British. Today, the Aryan North as represented by the Congress and the BJP cannot get one of their members elected dogcatcher in any village in Tamil Nadu. Sangilikkaruppans and Masanamuthus, despite their diminished intellectual capacity, rule Tamil Nadu. If you people understand the meaning of one-man-one-vote as practiced in democratic elections, you would have seen that the 80%+ Muslim population of what is now Pakistan would elect Muslims to positions of power and they then would be able to provide patronage to Muslims in the economic and education fields. But your concept of one-man-one-vote is that one man, namely Jinnah, would have the one vote that mattered.

That now continues with one man, Pervez Musharraf, now wielding the one vote.

I have not read the previous replies and perhaps someone has already commented on this but the author does not seem to be aware of the rules for partition. Jinnah was not looking out for ``an ideal piece of real estate`` when he created Pakistan, but geographically speaking, those were the Muslim-majority provinces. And yes, he was a liberal man. He belonged to Congress before the Muslim League. He advocated Hindu-Muslim unity and joined the League only when he found such unity un-workable and when he became disillusioned by Hindu attitudes, in particular that of Gandhi, as he liked to mix politics with religion. Something Jinnah never believed in or practiced. Another piece of information for you, Jinnah did not ask to partition Bengal or Punjab. The Pakistan he had asked for was much larger than the Pakistan he actually got. In fact, his remarks when the boundaries were drawn were ``I don`t want a moth-eaten Pakistan!`` Neither he nor the Muslims feared competing with Hindus economically--all they wanted was a fair chance--something they would have been denied in India. And so, thankfully, Pakistan was created to safeguard Muslim interests, economically and otherwise.

#69 by YLH2 on January 12, 2003 6:47am PT

im with you on this...

americanexpress # 73

A lot of western technology companies are creating jobs in India. Of course the real question can they create enough.

The other issue in India is the closure of inefficient factories due to elimination of tarriffs. It is a good thing in the long term because it leads to a more efficient industry.

The basic problem for Pakistan is that nothing is happening due to Islamic fundamentalists. Pakistanis are stuck exporting textiles and living with expatriate remmittances for a few more years.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

It is Beilived that Pakistan was made to protect the Muslims of this part of the World and to ensure the Survival of Islam in Hindu DOminated India. But Dont you also feel that Pakistan was created to Protect the selfish greedy buessniess men of PAkistan and not for Islam? Since I`m considering the fact that the 3 to 5 thousand families which hold wealth in PAkistani are not devout Muslims nor do they follow ISlam PRoperly.

...ylh...great to hear you`re doing well...no offense taken...just glad you realized that waxing eloquent on everything jinnah and attacking ppl isn`t going to get us anywhere...since i`m in lhr too, let me know if there`s anything that i can do too....

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Semi Precious Me,

How are you?

Like you I too found the debates and discussions on this board to be quite redundant especially the ones carried out by the rabidly nationalistic lot amongst the expatriates.... perhaps it is more important to distinguish between a true patriot and a nationalist now than ever before...

It is here in Lahore that I have discovered the many intellectuals from both sides who are working for normalization, peace and friendship between our two proud nations in South Asia ... it is here I discovered the illuminating writings of Roy and Khushwant Singh (whose biography I am reading and whose take on Jinnah has convinced me that not everyone in India is just out to insult Pakistan and its antecedents.. read my earlier response) though I had heard of them before ....

The truth is that while you will find expats in cyberspace debating away which country has greater IT exports, which country has more planes, more weapons of mast destruction, who can kill more people at one go etc ... there will be many patriotic Pakistanis and Indians who want to live in peace with each and fulfil the visions of their respective founding fathers...

And ofcourse I am supremely confident now that we Pakistanis are a confirmed lot of South Asians proud of Pakistan and our neighborhood... for this late realization, I must apologize to someone like you for all the nonsense i spewed against you..

-YLH

why the hell are you all whinging and crying over spilt milk..

Ab jo ho gaya so ho gaya..paksitan banna tha so ban gaya..jyada hi takleef ho to phir se wapis aa jao..milkar bana lein ek bara saa hindustan ..pehle jaisa hi..

Jokes apart..if pakistan had not been not formed(due to jinnah or others) then all the muslims in the (bigger) India would have kept saying ``Oh ..only if we had our own country, our own land..we would hav e done this... done that..created an ideal perfect country``

So at least they got an opportunity. What they did with it..hamaari bala se.. at least they can`t blame anyone

There is much to ponder in what Sen says, as quoted in the interact # 65

Ciao

...arjun_m:....re: 41, 42, 46, 46, 48, 52, 53, 54, 55, 58, 59....

...gheez, you are SO redundant...don`t you get tired of getting the same cheap thirlls over and over and over and....?

IT WAS NOT THAT JINNAH WAS NOT RIGHT IN HIS PERCEPTION OF RT.WING LURKING .IT WAS DIFFERENT ESTIMATE OF IT THAT SEPERATED AZAD FROM JINNAH.BOTH WERE HIGHLY INTELLIGENT & HONEST PERSON.
http://www.rediff.com/news/2001/jan/02amar.htm
Organised attempt to write historywith slanted agenda:
*******************************************

Amartya Sen



In an obvious criticism of the Sangh Parivar`s stand on the Ayodhya issue, Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen Tuesday said there was an organised attempt in India to ``write a history manoeuvred to suit a slanted agenda in contemporary politics.``

``History could easily become bunk through motivated manipulation. This is especially so if the writing of history is manoeuvred to suit a slanted agenda. There are organised attempts in our country, at this time, to do just that,`` Sen said inaugurating the 61st annual session of the Indian History Congress in Calcutta.

Without naming any political party, Sen said such attempts were being made with ``arbitrary augmentation of a narrowly sectarian view of India`s past, undermining its magnificently multi-religious and heterodox history.``

Among other distortions, Sen said, there was a systematic confounding of mythology with history in the Ayodhya case.

``An extraordinary example of this has been the interpretation of Ramayana, not as a great epic but as documentary history, which can be invoked to establish property rights over places and sites possessed and owned by others,`` he said referring to the recent statement by the director of the Indian Council of Historical Research on the exact site where Rama was born.

The ICHR director`s statement asserting that the Babri masjid itself had no religious significance and then an `embarrassed` dissociation of the ICHR from these `remarkable pronouncements` illustrated the confounding of myth and history, Sen said.

The Ramayana, he said, was ``now being made into a legally authentic account that gives some members of one community an alleged entitlement to particular sites and land, amounting to a licence to tear down religious places of other communities.``

``Thomas de Quincey has an interesting essay called Murder Considered as One of the Fine Arts. Rewriting of history for bellicose use can also, presumably, be a very fine art,`` the renowned economist, who described himself as a non-historian taking interest in history, said.

Condemning the ``activist incursions of communal politics in contemporary India like in the Babri Masjid demolition issue,`` he said: ``A heavily carpentered characterisation of Mughal rule as anti-Hindu had repeatedly been invoked by certain political outfits.``

``There are many superb historians in India to give these misconstructions their definite due. I am outlining some issues that relate to the truth and falsehood in general history...why is history such a battleground?`` Sen asked.

PTI

What emerges from Professor FPR Robinson`s essay commissioned in the late 1980s at the University of Hawaii by myself and W. E. James in ``Foundations of Pakistan`s Political Economy: Towards an Agenda for the 1990s``, is the interesting paradox that, by the 1937 provincial election results, there was practically no demand for Pakistan in the areas which today constitute Pakistan! The demand for Pakistan had arisen mainly in Muslim-minority areas of India which would never become Pakistan, not the Muslim-majority areas which became Pakistan!

Jinnah received from the British parity of treatment with the Congress on September 4 1939, in spite of not having anything like a democratic base to support him. That may have been because the British had panicked after Hitler`s invasion of Poland on September 1 1939 followed by the British declaration of war against Germany on September 3 1939.

In the same book mentioned above (the history of which is itself yet to be told) I coined the term ``Paradox of Kashmir``, namely, how is it that Kashmir was never mentioned or predicted to be a contentious issue for 100 years before Partititon, and then, since Partition, it has become the single-point agenda of the subcontinent, and the source of an enormous and unending drain of economic resources by the military/political elites of both India and Pakistan? (There have been 19 divisions of standing armies on each side of the India-Pak border!) The answer I gave has to do with the collapse of the political conversation between the major players under game-theory like conditions.

Azad -- whose Islamic identity and beliefs could hardly be doubted especially as compared to Jinnah -- stood as the most clear-headed and objective of all thinking political men of his time. He almost alone tried to bring all the parties to reason, but clearly failed. Solving the problems of India and Pakistan today, especially that of J&K, requires in my view a return to an understanding of something like his prescient analysis. But there are now very deep vested interests on several sides unprepared to actually solve problems reasonably. It would take genuine statesmanship on both sides, like that of De Gaulle and Adenauer or Reagan and Gorbachev, and that is obviously lacking rather sorely.

Sincerely

Subroto Roy, PhD (Cantab.)
Professor, VGSOM,
IIT Kharagpur, India 721302.

Re: drsubrotoroy # 43

I would tend to agree with Azad`s contention. Pakistan and its creation, as a seperate response to the Hindu majority, seems to have a better economic reason than a religious one underlying its premise. If the histriography of the pre-partition history is looked at, it would suggest that Muslim political awkening was more a result of their economic complusions than it was due to their fear of a religious alienation in India.

Pakistan seems to have been created in order to give the Muslims of India an economic insularity and to protect their economic interests. Muslim Leaque started out as a response to the cancellation of the partition of Bengal, an idea that was resisted by the Muslims on economic and not religious grounds. Muslim delegation, which went to argue against the unification of Bengal was made of Muslim landlords and businessmen, who had profited from the partition and risked losing their economic advantages in a Hindu dominated province. To perserve their economic interests, they created the All India Muslim Leaque Party and did not create a political party to demand a seperate homeland on theocratic grounds.

The reality was that the Muslims of India, due to their lack of education, orthodoxy, dogmatic political believes and diminished economic status were not (and this is debatable, did not feel) confident in competing with the Hindus in an economic sense. Pakistan was never destined to happen and there is merit to the arguement that had it not been for the stubborness of the Congress party and its desire to monoployize the power in the post-British India, Pakistan would have remained as nothing more than an utopian idea; a bargaining chip to gain more concessions from the majority by moderating the Congress` position on sharing power in the post-British India.

Partition makes more sense economically than it does religiously and the tragedy in Pakistan has been that we have ignored the economic reasons and have solely concentrated on the religious reasons to show a difference between the Hindus and the Muslims. Religion was used to unify the Muslims of India under the Muslim Leaque, because it was a more powerful agrument than an economic one and this argument was suggested by leaders of the Muslim Leaque, who belonged to the urbanized land owning intelligensia of the Muslims of India. They did so to protect their own economic interests and were of the opinion that their economic interests could be better protected outside of India; outside the gambit of a Hindu majority India, which would have undermined their economic influence.

Religion was employed to give the whole excerise a cover from the accusations of greed and profit making and to legitimize the protection a few peoples` vested economic interests. The real reasons for partition and Pakistan are economic and religion is only a pretext.

The question is, if Pakistan was founded on the basis of religion then why did the Muslim religious leaders of India condemned its idea - a nation founded on the basis of Islam?

Religion, in hindsight, was used to make an acute distinction between the Hindus and the Muslims and to rationalize Pakistan as nation founded on religious grounds instead of its reality - the preservation of economic interest of the Muslim community and that too, only a selected Muslim community, which did not represent the economic interests of the entire Muslim community of India.

It is time that the Pakistanis really moved beyond religion and asked the real reasons behind the creation of Pakistan. I fear that the truth will be less noble than the lies.

Ciao

FINISHED WORK,

An egyptian and a yemeni, members of al quida have been arrested in karachi. A pakistani, name Hamdani arrested in the US. Pak UN ambassador to be recalled to avoid prosecution.

The used to be a YLH on chowk, he was a Hamdani and he maintains that hamdanis are direct decendents of the man.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

[ #43 by drsubrotoroy on January 9, 2003 3:20am PT]

At the link: (http://ghazali.net/book1/body_reference1.htm), the author, Abdus Sattar Ghazali, has following to say:

17. Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, in his biography, India Wins Freedom, fixes the responsibility for the partition of India, at one place on Jawaharlal Nehru, and at another place on Vallabh-bhai Patel by observing that ``it would not perhaps be unfair to say that Vallabh-dhbai Patel was the founder of Indian partition.`` H.M. Seervai, Partition of India: Legend and Reality, p-162

If you read links Google throws up on searching ``Direct action day`` (without quotes) and also searching ``G.M. Syed Jinnah`` (without quotes) you will find tones of writing which implicate Jinnah as chief mastermind of partition. So it surprises me that Maulana had different view. Obviously Maulana had no opportunity to observe Jinnah from very near. May be Maulana received his information from biased sources?

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#41 by arjun_m on January 8, 2003 10:52pm PT

and what else is new from the RSS chaddiwala? He feels free to gloat on the hardwork of Narayan Murty, Premji et al
He critisizes the pakistani fundus while he pretends to be a moderate.

How come he does not feel any shame in the plight of the those Indians who are die time and again while attempting to go to western countries by illegal means, some times in Slovenia, some times in cargo ships.

He feels no shame on the plight of those living Sub -Human lives in Orissa eating Mango kernels to keep away hunger.

He feels no shame in the millons in Mumbai who live equally sub- human lives.

He feels no shame in the Killing of thousands of Srilankans at the hands of Hindu LTTE which was trained by India in the jungles of Tamil Nadu and supplied with arms till Rajiv Gandhi was killed and IPKF was routed in Sri Lanka.

And why should he feel any shame. He is the one who feels that Prercived wrongs committed few centruies back need to be first corrected before he can breath. All the while he can be found with the VHP nanga Sadhus who will cheerfully claim that Life of a Cow is more sacred than of a Human.

These Chaddi walas are the one who find so much time to indulge in Pakistan/Muslim bashing be cause they feel they can take safe credit for the work of likes of Manmohan Singhs, Shiv Nadar, Premji, Murtys of India.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

````After all, the real reason for Pakistan was that the Muslims of India, having debated the wisdom of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, were still resisting learning English and as a result, were economically and politically disadvantaged. At the turn of the century, the Hindus had adopted the ways of the British; just like a hundred years later they would take to water like ducks in adopting American mannerisms, and were politically and economically better off than the Muslims. ````

This bit I didn`t understand. From all accounts, it was the pre-partition Muslims who were able to merge with the ``British way`` with ease.

Right?

Post 48:

That is nothing compared to the high hopes that UrsTruly had for providing US with assistance. Pls note points 1, 2 and 3...talk about fond hopes...

#34 by Urstruly on September 16, 2001 11:23pm PT
THE COMING DAYS

Pakistan must brace for a wave of ethnic violence and a series of terrorist bombings all across its bazars, railway lines, and densely populated areas. The GOP must anticipate this in advance because CIA and RAW will work in unison to unleash such terror on Pakistani nation. THe Western media will of course be used to spin doctor the whole thing and blame this violence on to Talibans. The purpose of such camapagin would be to change the general public opinion about Talibans in Pakistan. The sympathizers of Talibans in Pakistan will thus also be neutralized.

In this scenario Pakistan has two choices:

1. Expedite the handing over of OBL to a neutral Europeon nation.

If that is not possible

2. Provide US army the camp sites to launch ground operations into Afghanistan. The war of course will take years to end in Afghanistan because Iran, Russia, and China will be more than happy to help Afghans with weapons and supply line because each has some scores to settle. If Russia doesnt do that the Russian mafia definitely will. Afghanistan is definitely a Vietnam in the making.

Meanwhile:

1. Pakistan must raise the case for its 40 F-16s which are already been paid for but US government has hold them for years now, shamelessly and arrogantly.

2. Paksitan should have all its debts paid off by Americans.

3. The issue of plebicite in Indian Oppressed Kashmir must be put on the priority in the United Nations agenda.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

[ #38 by Ashok on January 8, 2003 5:59pm PT
...
To say Jinnah was villain judged by American or British is trying to determine how a patient feels through interpretor .What can Gora know how a 50 yr old muslim lady felt while travelling from India to Pakistan & breathed her lastr on the platform not sure whether or not she ha reached the promised land !

Right or wrong .....false or true TO SEE NOW IN HIND SIGHT EVERY ONE OF YOU CAN BE 100% RIGHT & TRUE .Thats the beuty of monday morning quater Backing !

It was a Different world 1/2 century ago....just imagine news travelled in weeks & distortions of news staggerring . ]

Thanks for your links on Ayesha Jalal and Jinnah.

You should not reject what Americans and British say when they are purely reporting. The link I had posted gave material which contained both reports as well as interpretation. Once you start rejecting Americans and British because they are Goras and Indians because they are anti-Muslims you are left with very little which may be practically nothing.

You have to see each writer and ask whether he or she is biased. Determination of biasedness should be based on reports by others. In this case you have to have reports by others which might be throwing doubt on her reports and interpretations, and then only you should reject her writings. You cannot reject summarily.

Participants in this current discussion at Chowk may find relevant ``Maulana Azad: Free India`s Tragic Hero``, at India Policy Institute http://groups.yahoo.com/group/IndiaPolicy Message 1174, July 16 2002, reproduced below. Azad was the polar opposite of Jinnah.

``On Maulana Azad: Free India`s Tragic Hero

Subroto Roy, © July 16 2002

I believe that Maulana Abul Kalam Azad had the right political
analysis and solution for the problems of the subcontinent -- more so
than Jinnah, Gandhi, Nehru, Patel, Bose, Golwalkar, Savarkar, Shyama
Prasad, Ambedkar or any other Indian of his time, let aside any of
the British.

Jinnah is today Pakistan`s solitary and rather improbable hero;
Golwalkar, Savarkar and Shyama Prasad are heroes of the Sangh Parivar as is Patel to an extent; Ambedkar`s name is taken by Dalit
politicians; Gandhi and Nehru are faintly remembered in today`s
Congress Party, and Bose is extolled in Bengal.

But I believe Azad`s words and actions were less part of the problem
and more part of the solution than the words and actions of any of
them.

I have personally typed in a statement of his issued on April 15
1946, which he endorsed again ten years later in his biographical
narrative India Wins Freedom.

The initial version of this book was published in 1959 by Orient
Longmans in New Delhi. Certain pages were kept confidential at
Azad`s request for a period of thirty years. In 1988, the complete
version was published, again by Orient Longmans, New Delhi.

I urge Azad`s April 15 1946 statement to be widely read and freely
distributed on the Internet today, to Indians of all faiths, to
Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, to any and all citizens and well-wishers
of the subcontinent.

The reason I urge this is not out of any piety towards a neglected
great man. Rather, I am being extremely practical.

If I am right to think Azad had the most profound analytical insight
and prescience of any political man of his time, then the resolution
of key problems on the subcontinent which have persisted since then,
e.g. that of the State of Jammu and Kashmir, may also depend on an
understanding and application of his analysis today.

Azad`s stated (India Wins Freedom p. 197):
``It must be placed on record that the man in India who first fell for
Lord Mountbatten`s idea (of Partition) was Sardar Patel. Till
perhaps the very end Pakistan was for Jinnah a bargaining counter,
but in fighting for Pakistan, he had over-reached himself. His
action had so annoyed and irritated Sardar Patel that the Sardar was
now a believer in Partition.``

This statement formed a basis for my suggesting a game-theoretic
explanation of the roots of the current and continuing Kashmir
problem in ``Foundations of Pakistan`s Political Economy: Towards an
Agenda for the 1990s``, edited by W. E. James and Subroto Roy, Sage
1992, Karachi OUP 1993. Recognising the problem to have game-
theoretic roots, itself is a first and necessary step towards a
solution. Jai Hind.``

Excerpt from India Wins Freedom by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, released
after 30 years, complete version, 1988, initial version 1959 ed. by
Humayun Kabir, pp. 150-152.

``I have considered from every possible point of view the scheme of
Pakistan as formulated by the Muslim League., As an Indian, I have
examined its implications for the future of India as a whole. As a
Muslim, I have examined its likely effects upon the fortunes of
Muslims of India.

Considering the scheme in all its aspects, I have come to the
conclusion that it is harmful not only for India as a whole but for
Muslims in particular. And in fact it creates more problems than it
solves.

I must confess that the very term Pakistan goes against my grain. It
suggests that some portions of the world are pure while others are
impure. Such a division of territories into pure and impure is un-
Islamic and is more in keeping with orthodox Brahmanism which divides
men and countries into holy and unholy -- a division which is a
repudiation of the very spirit of Islam. Islam recognizes no such
division and the prophet says ``God made the whole world a mosque for
me``.

Further, it seems that the scheme of Pakistan is a symbol of
defeatism, and has been built on the analogy of the Jewish demand for
a national home. It is a confession that Indian Muslims cannot hold
their own in India as a whole, and would be content to withdraw to a
corner specially reserved for them.

One can sympathise with the aspiration of the Jews for such a
national home, as they are scattered all over the world and cannot in
any region have any effective voice in the administration.. The
conditions of Indian Muslims is quite otherwise. Over 90 million in
number, they are in quantity and quality a sufficiently important
element in Indian life to influence decisively all questions of
administration and policy. Nature has further helped them by
concentrating them in certain areas.

In such a context, the demand for Pakistan loses all force. As a
Muslim, I for one am not prepared for a moment to give up my right to
treat the whole of India as my domain and to shape in the shaping of
its political and economic life. To me it seems a sure sign of
cowardice to give up what is my patrimony and content myself with a
mere fragment of it.

As is well known, Mr. Jinnah`s Pakistan scheme is based on his two
nation theory. His thesis is that India contains many nationalities based on religious differences, Of them the two major nations, the Hindus and Muslims, must as separate nations have separate States, When Dr Edward Thompson once pointed out to Mr. Jinnah that Hindus and Muslims live side by side in thousands of Indian towns, villages and hamlets, Mr. Jinnah replied that this is no way affected their separate nationality. Two nations, according to M Jinnah, confront one another in every hamlet, village and town, and he, therefore, desires that they should be separated into two States.

I am prepared to overlook all other aspects of the problem and judge
it from the point of view of Muslim interest alone. I shall go
still further and say that if it can be shown that the scheme of
Pakistan can in any way benefit Muslims I would be prepared to accept
it myself and also to work for its acceptance by others. But the
truth is that even if I examine the scheme from the point of view of
the communal interests of the Muslims themselves, I am forced to the
conclusion that it can in no way benefit them or allay their
legitimate fears.

Let us consider dispassionately the consequences which will follow if
we give effect to the Pakistan scheme. India will be divided into
two States, one with a majority of Muslims and the other of Hindus.
In the Hindustan State there will remain 35 million Muslims scattered
in small minorities all over the land. With 17 per cent in UP, 12
percent in Bihar and 9 percent in Madras, they will be weaker than
they are today in the Hindu majority provinces. They have had their
homelands in these regions for almost a thousand years and built up
well known centres of Muslim culture and civilization there.

They will awaken overnight and discover that they have become alien
and foreigners. Backward industrially, educationally and
economically, they will be left to the mercies to what would become
an unadulterated Hindu raj.

On the other hand, their position within the Pakistan State will be
vulnerable and weak. Nowhere in Pakistan will their majority be
comparable to the Hindu majority in the Hindustan States. ( NB Azad
could hardly imagine even at this point the actual British
Partition of Punjab and Bengal, let aside the later separation of
Bangladesh from West Pakistan, SR. )

In fact, their majority will be so slight that will be offset by the
economical, educational and political lead enjoyed by non-Muslims in
these areas. Even if this were not so and Pakistan were
overwhelmingly Muslim in population, it still could hardly solve the
problem of Muslims in Hindustan.

Two States confronting one another, offer no solution of the problem
of one another`s minorities, but only lead to retribution and
reprisals by introducing a system of mutual hostages. The scheme of
Pakistan therefore solves no problems for the Muslims. It cannot
safeguard their rights where they are in minority nor as citizens of
Pakistan secure them a position in Indian or world affairs which they
would enjoy as citizens of a major State like the Indian Union.

It may be argued that if Pakistan is so much against the interest if
the Muslims themselves, then why should such a large section of
Muslims be swept away by its lure? The answer is to be found in the
attitude of certain communal extremists among the Hindus. When the
Muslim League began to speak of Pakistan, they read into the scheme a
sinister pan-Islamic conspiracy and began to oppose it out of fear
that it foreshadowed a combination of Indian Muslim and trans-Indian
Muslim States.

The opposition acted as an incentive to the adherents of the League.
With simple though untenable logic they argued that if Hindus were so
opposed to Pakistan, surely it must be of benefit to Muslims. An
atmosphere of emotional frenzy was created which made reasonable
appraisement impossible and swept away especially the younger and
more impressionable among the Muslims. I have, however, no doubt
that when the present frenzy has died down and the question can be
considered dispassionately, those who now support Pakistan will
themselves repudiate it as harmful for Muslim interests.

The formula which I have succeeded in making the Congress accept
secures whatever merits the Pakistan scheme contains while all its
defects and drawbacks are avoided. The basis of Pakistan is the
fear of interference by the Centre in Muslim majority areas as the
Hindus will be in a majority in the Centre. The Congress meets this
fear by granting full autonomy to the provincial units and vesting
all residuary power in the provinces. It also has provided for two
lists of Central subjects, one compulsory and one optional, so that
if any provincial unit so wants, it can administer all subjects
itself except a minimum delegated to the Centre. The Congress
scheme threescore ensures that Muslim majority provinces are
internally free to develop as they will, but can at the same time
influence the Centre on all issues which affect India as a whole.

The situation in India is such that all attempts to establish a
centralized and unitary government are bound to fail. Equally,
doomed to failure is the attempt to divide India into two States.
After considering all aspects of the question, I have come to the
conclusion that the only solution can be on the lines embodied in the
Congress formula which allows room for development both to the
provinces and to India as a whole. The Congress formula meets the
fear of the Muslim majority areas to allay which the scheme of
Pakistan was formed. On the other hand, it avoids the defects of the
Pakistan scheme which would bring the Muslims where they are in a
minority under a purely Hindu government.

I am one of those who considers the present chapter of communal
bitterness and differences as a transient phase in Indian life. I
firmly hold that they will disappear when India assumes the
responsibility of her own destiny. I am reminded of a saying of
Mr. Gladstone that the best cure for a man`s fear of the water was to
throw him into it. Similarly, India must assume responsibilities
and administer her own affairs before fears and suspicious can be
fully allayed.

When India attains her destiny, she will forget the chapter of
communal suspicion and conflict and face the problems of modern life
from a modern point of view. Differences will no doubt persist, but
they will be economic, not communal. Opposition among political p
[arties will continue, but it will based, not on religion, but one
economic and political issues. Class and not community will be the
basis oaf future alignments, and policies will be shaped
accordingly. If it be argued that this is only a faith which events
may not justify, I would say that in any case the 90 million Muslims
constitute a factor which nobody can ignore and whatever the
circumstances, they are strong enough to safeguard their own destiny.``




Subroto Roy, PhD (Cantab.)
Professor, VGSOM, IIT Kharagpur
Kharagpur, India 721302.

ferozk 40

``Pakistanis should ask themselves, what they were before Islam came to India in the eight century? Did our ancestors drop from the Heavans as Muslims, like manna, or did they accept and convert to Islam from Hinduism or Buddhism? Islam is about 1400 years old. Were we Muslims before the advent of Islam? We have distorted our history and now we are confused and searching for an identity, which we seek to rationalize in extermism.``

At last my message appear to be getting through to at least one pakistani. It is time to look at Jinnah, look at the social system, the TNt. Time to rubbish all of it. It is the denial of linkage to india that has left pakistan only with the book and the social values that suit only the nomads of desert.
For the blasphemy laws, for the honour killing legalisation, for the hoodood, give credit to the man who popularised TNT, consign him to the appropriate place in history.

It is time for pakistanis to live their dreams, not that of jinnah.

Arjun 41,

It is sad to see a person, a minister in pakistan, elected by the people, who is a graduate of some pak university, beig such a fool to believe that pakistan is fighting terrorism. The world knows that most of the taliban where pakistanis, they have only with drawn to safer borders.

Products are flowing out of 200000 madrasas, of course none of them give any arms training, but only convince the young to seek out and kill kafirs to secure the highest religious reward. What the educated pakistanis do not realise is that these programmed biped killing machines will find the weapons any where, they will even kill with their bare hands to secure the heavens.

Musheraff himself has clarified, when he mentioned the non-conventional war what he meant was the letting out of these killing macjhines. Even Benazir had mentioned that a million jihadists were ready even at the time of her rule.

Re: Ras # 14

Ras, you had a very interesting comment and no, this is not about national confidence; it is about the arrogance of our leaders. There are a host of reasons for the problems of Pakistan, and one of them is fusion of the state and the personality of its leaders. Pakistani leadership seems suffer from a myth, which makes them echo Louis XIV`s statement that ``le etat est moi``. Pakistani leadership has always personalized politics and by extropolation, state policies to suit their own intentions.

We as a nation have been more than willing to subordinate national interests to the cult of personality in Pakistan`s politics. There is a pathological complex in the Pakistani political psyche, which champions the illusion of the ``man on the horse back`` theory as a solution to all our problems. Our politics is about the individual and we alwas cater to the individual in power at the expense of ignoring the political institutions of the state. Pakistan has a chronic case of suffering from ``legitimacy of regimes``, because all our politics, to date, have been about rationalizing illegal monopolizations of political power. This rot started from 1947, when Jinnnah assumed a ``devine right`` to rule Pakistan and absued his office of Governor-General. Pakistan, in 1947, adopted the Government of India Act, 1935 as it interim constitution and was a parlimentary democracy and not a presidency. Jinnah ignored the office of the prime minister and the parliament and ruled as a president - being both head of the state and the head of the government. From then onwards, the rot only got worse and it still festers our body politic.

From 1947, we have defied Jinnah and turned this mortal, with all his human weaknesses, into a demi-god with out any sins. We have raped our history in an experiement of national mythology and posioned the minds of the younger generation with a nationalistically biased history. We use history to justify our, as your said it ``national confidence``, and to legitimize corruption and arrogance of power historically.

The end result of this is that we, Pakistanis, have no history; only lies and half truths and it from this that we suffer due to a want of a national identity, which makes, mistakenly, seek identification with the Middle East / Arab world instead of with South Asia and yes, with India.

Pakistanis should ask themselves, what they were before Islam came to India in the eight century? Did our ancestors drop from the Heavans as Muslims, like manna, or did they accept and convert to Islam from Hinduism or Buddhism? Islam is about 1400 years old. Were we Muslims before the advent of Islam? We have distorted our history and now we are confused and searching for an identity, which we seek to rationalize in extermism.

We talk about ``Jinnah`s Pakistan`` and his ``vision for Pakistan``, but Jinnah`s Pakistan died in 1971 and the Pakistan that was left over, was a new Pakistan; one not created in 1947, but in 1971!

Ciao

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

fools. or maybe they are just muslims and thus must pay a price for belonging to a cult that produces insane, hate-filled dajjals like jinnah, malcom x, musharrif and obl. too bad cause i hear that hindu passports, like yehudi passports, come with preapproved american visas. not that hindus need it cause they have iit , infy, pota and ttfs (toilets that flush). why else would