Open Letter To Dina Wadia

Ref Inji-kari-kuzhambu #121

[Harimau writes:
Aren`t you the guy who was willing to let a cum-bucket like Sonia become prime minister of India

The amount of misogyny in this statement is staggering.]

Misogyny is hatred of women in general. Disliking one woman is not the same as misogyny.

Didn`t I tell you to stick to words of one syllable or less? Barring that, you should at least check the meaning of words at www.m-w.com before you use them.

[I really, truly hope you`re not around any little girls where you can do physical, psychological damage to them.]

Well, I hope they kept you away from the goats in your village.

[Aren`t you the same guy who was sucking up to certain interactors on the Vagina Monologues thread, pretending to be enlightened?]

And aren`t you the same guy who is willing to hand over the prime ministership of India to Sonia-cum-lately but demand that I should not get even the job of a lower division clerk because I am an Aryan invader?

[There`s a reason why you aren`t married. Let`s hope it stays that way lest an innocent female should come to harm... ]

And I do hope that your daughter doesn`t let you near her pet hamster.

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

#145
Really? A woman (any woman) is nothing but a ``cumbucket?`` And you are a product of asexual reproduction? Because your mom couldn`t have been a ``cumbucket``, could she?

Manto man - you are loosing your edge - the quality of your arguments are deteriorating by day. First you put up the most absurd argument that Jinnah was justified in communal politics because he was a minority. Now I see more gems in your post #143 .

//...Jinnah had called for Civil Disobedience, taking a leaf out ...//

Civil Disobedience?? So what happnened to the ``principle of constitutionalism`` ?? Very conveniently sacrificed at the altar of opportunism ..... or is that called pragmatism ??? One more u-turn by Jinnah, the ``constitutionalist`` - don`t you think?

Any case - Civil Disobedience against who? Not against the British - that`s for sure. They were his buddies, his benefactors. So obviously the so called ``Civil Disobedience`` was directed against hindus.

What was Jinnah thinking when he ordered his version of ``Civil Disobedience``? Didn`t he know that it will inevitably end up in clashes amongst hindus and muslims? I mean - anybody could guess THAT!!
+++

//...Direct Action Day was celebrated through out India...//

Celebrated? Manto - come on man .... what is this - a dracula movie? Thousands died in violence .. blood flowed in the streets ...of both hindus and muslims. Whose idea of a ``celebration`` was it?

+++

//...the obvious reasons how can you blame Jinnah, a politician hundreds of miles away for disturbances ...//

It`s like saying - don`t blame Advani for bombay riots - he wasn`t there in that city - so how can he be responsible!!!

++++

//..even Suhrawardy, who was himself a man of peace and later Gandhi`s companion in Calcutta, could have imagined such consequences ...//

There you go - yet another favorite excuse I have heard from pakis defending Jinnah and others of his ilk. XYZ could not have imagined such consequences.... I mean - was this guy brain-dead? The whole freaking country is communally charged because of his and his muslim party`s communal politics. Then this guy orders a strike. It`s like throwing a lighted match to the powder keg.

And yet - he was a ``man of peace``. He just couldn`t imagine the consequences. It is not his fault. How can you blame him?

Yep - that is very convincing.

Ref Fake SC/ST College Graduate #147

[#145
Really? A woman (any woman) is nothing but a ``cumbucket?``]

I called ONE woman, Sonia G@ndu, a cum-bucket. You are the one generalizing it to all women.

People on Chowk now know what kind of harm can be caused byaffirmative action programs for the mentally disabled. I don`t mind it if people like you take courses in basket-weaving and pottery-making... you are probably a kosavan by caste anyway.... but professional education is a little bit beyond your infantile brain. Leave that to the brahmins if you want the country to advance.

Again, I who can document that his family has lived for nine generations in southern Tamil Nadu and countless generations before that in North Arcot district is an Aryan invader who ought to be driven out of Tamil Nadu but Sonia with her certificate of birth issued in Italy is welcome to be Prime Minister of India so long as Doctor Artist Leader the Fund of Compassion is able to pass Tamil Nadu to his son Stalin for continued rape and pillage.

Can you explain the logic behind that line of thought?

Is it because I refuse to name my children Tamil-this or Tamil-that but insist on calling them Subramanian, Venkataraman, etc.?

If so, I just want to explain one name to you in the hope that you and your ilk will not use it for your children.

Sujata -- from `Su`, good and `jata` of good jati or caste.

You guys are all low-caste to begin with. No frikkin way any one of you can be `sujata`.

You claim you don`t believe in caste (except when you marry a brahmin woman as Dayanidhi Maran, the nephew of Karunanidhi has done to upgrade his status in life. AND named his kids Divya and Karan...not some crapola like Nedunchezhiyan or Kalaignar Pitthan).

The name is from Sanskrit.

All very good reasons not to use that name.

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

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

#149
I called ONE woman, Sonia G@ndu, a cum-bucket. You are the one generalizing it to all women.

Let`s see. Were you to say `that nigger Condi Rice..,` would you not be a bigot because it was directed at one person only and not all black people?
Of course you might feel ``cumbucket`` is not an offensive reference to a female. Perhaps you consider yourself one too..

re:#149 by harimau
Harimau,
It may interest you to know that once for all Indian historians seem to have agreed to throw the ``Aryan Invasion Theory`` to the dustbins. I saw the news in sulekha.com but lost the link. DMK ideologues will have one less stick to beat the brahmins with but i doubt if one of them is even aware of this new development.
A similar thing is being attempted in the North East, where missionaries are telling the tribals that they have no connection with the Hindus. This is where i support RSS, VHP. Somebody need to go in there and correct this nonsense. An interesting insight by a Frenchman:
http://www.indiaabroad.com/news/2002/nov/22spec.htm
Sridhar

re: Romair`s various posts in defense of Mushy
Romair is making a virtue out of necessity. Political process in Pak has not matured to a point where elections are regularly held under the supervision of an autonomous body and where the results are respected by all parties (including the military) resulting in a smooth transfer of power. Army in Pak has nothing but contempt for the politicians and has stifled the political process many times in the past. Having once stifled the birth of democrazy in Pak, Pak Army is behaving as if the country cannot exist without it.
It will be a great tragedy if Pakis come to believe that army is its saviour. Right now, it seems to be the only institution that can fix the problems that plague Pak but that situation, paradoxically, has been brought about by the army itself.
Sridhar

re:#128 by Romair
Has it ever occurred to Romair, the Chowk Marshall, that it is perhaps a reflection of political decay if a country`s only hope is a military dictator. But that is how it is now. Most western powers have thrown their lot behind Mushy. During times when Islam has become synonymous with terrorism, a moderate ruler of an Islamic country is welcome even if he is a dictator. India too seems to have come to the same conclusion though independently (i imagine there is always this element of persuasive diplomacy by US to contend with).
So, Mushy is being supported on all sides: by US (as a non-NATO ally), by monetory agencies, heck even by arch-rival India.
This however does not augur well for Pakistan`s future. A dictator`s life is always short. what happens once Mushy is gone? Are there institutions in place that will carry on without much hiccoughs? Who will take over Mushy`s place? Will it be another dictator and if so, will he be as moderate as Mushy is?
All these questions must plague the minds of policy makers of other countries. Meanwhile, Pakis need to silently hope and pray that Mushy stays long enough to make some lasting changes in Pak`s economy and relationship with India. This may also be one last time for solving the Kashmir problem.
Sridhar

Error in my last post...

By mistake I said that the late justice and indian writer H M Seervai wrote a book on Jinnah... He wrote a book on the transfer of Power, in which he showed the facts and shattered all the myths concocted against Jinnah by the Indian nationalist press...

Thank God for people like Late H M Seervai who always to speak the truth... it is no wonder that with men like Seervai, India has managed to maintain a Supreme Court the integrity of which is unquestionable.

Mohar 11

You still haven`t answered very direct questions that I asked you.... sad. Neither have you shared with us the `lot of stuff` you`ve read about Jinnah. Your desperation is now showing. You are quoting half sentences and lines out of context to prove your points.

I strongly suggest you read H M Seervai`s book on the transfer of power. Maybe that will put your biases to rest. In case you don`t know who H M Seervai is .... He was a Justice in the Indian Supreme Court and a great man of integrity who wrote a great book on Jinnah in 1990 which managed to put some what of a stop on the Jinnah-bashing that people like you are sadly accustomed to. And H M Seervai is not the only Indian to hold this view.... other great Indian authors and historians who don`t agree with a lot of what you are saying are Khushwant Singh, Kuldip Nayyar, Raj Mohan Gandhi, Ajeet Javed, Anil Seal, Farrukh Dhondi, Jaffer Qureshi, A G Noorani, M J Akbar etc


``Manto man - you are loosing your edge - the quality of your arguments are deteriorating by day. First you put up the most absurd argument that Jinnah was justified in communal politics because he was a minority. Now I see more gems in your post #143 . ``

The arguments are there for everyone to see... and so are yours. Minorities are always more assertive... the Majorities always have to be magnanimous. I have already quoted from Atlee and other observers who credits Jinnah for overcoming communal trouble and anti-Hindu and Anti-Sikh violence with great resolve and determination. As the leader of the majority he became the greatest hope of the minorities, unlike the man you are comparing with him.


//...Jinnah had called for Civil Disobedience, taking a leaf out ...//

Civil Disobedience?? So what happnened to the ``principle of constitutionalism`` ?? Very conveniently sacrificed at the altar of opportunism ..... or is that called pragmatism ??? One more u-turn by Jinnah, the ``constitutionalist`` - don`t you think? Any case - Civil Disobedience against who? Not against the British - that`s for sure. They were his buddies, his benefactors. So obviously the so called ``Civil Disobedience`` was directed against hindus. What was Jinnah thinking when he ordered his version of ``Civil Disobedience``? Didn`t he know that it will inevitably end up in clashes amongst hindus and muslims? I mean - anybody could guess THAT!! ``


Ans:


Still it is amazing that despite what you say

1) No historian not even biased ones like Collins and Lapierre blame him for it...


2) The Riots happened in a Hindu majority city, where Jinnah himself wasn`t even present but didn`t happen in Muslim majority cities or cities like Dehli and Bombay, where Jinnah himself was present. I find it surprising that if what you say is true ... despite Jinnah`s presence in Dehli, the Dehli Muslim Leaguers peacefuly observed the Direct Action Day strike as did the rest of India ... something is not making sense here.


3) The Facts of the Calcutta riots speak for themselves... the Report to Wavell for example is very clear that the retaliation that two times as many Muslims died in that conflict on 16th August than Hindus ... some 4000 to 2000 approximately... and that armed groups of Hindus were ready to counter any eventuality, and fearing the worse they unleashed hell on Muslims. Either the Muslims were really stupid and sissy or the Hindus were heroic supermen ...

4) Jinnah`s calls through out were clearly of non-violent civil disobedience, and he spelt it out clearly. This call was followed to the bone in all cities especially those that were Muslim League strongholds and muslim majority cities. No Jinnah nor anyone could have expected what happened in Calcutta... Did the great prophet of nonviolence gandhi expect the violence that resulted from his `non-violent civil disobedience` of 1919... ?


5) Your claim that the civil disobedience wasn`t against the British but the Hindus is just hogwash... and shows how little you know of history. The Direct Action Day and Muslim League`s civil disobedience was against th Government ... in Punjab that meant the unionist led government. The reason why Jinnah had opted for the Civil disobedience movement at this stage was because despite the fact that Cabinet mission`s promise that the interim government would be formed by the party that accepts the Plan ... the British Government had refused to punish its Congress friends who even the Viceroy admitted were now being extremely unreasonable.


6) Jinnah`s decision to `bid good bye to constitutional ways` was voluntary and inspired the prevailing situation. He was well aware that he was stepping over the line he never crossed before.


Blitz the Congress mouth piece from Bombay actually praised the direct action day protest as a great anti-imperialist move by Jinnah. In fact to quote from memory what the newspaper said, the gist of it was that Jinnah had taken a bold step against the British and from the constitutionalist politician had now become the most ardent anti-british revolutionary. If what you, Mohar 11, say is true, why would Blitz say something like that?

Ofcourse the whole obsession with Calcutta riots.. forgetting that the Direct Action Day was observed all over India... and peacefuly so except for Calcutta... was not shared by the people of the time and is post-event analysis which has really no basis in truth.




+++

//...Direct Action Day was celebrated through out India...//

Celebrated? Manto - come on man .... what is this - a dracula movie? Thousands died in violence .. blood flowed in the streets ...of both hindus and muslims. Whose idea of a ``celebration`` was it?


Again... Please refer to the Blitz Newspaper ... which was the Congress Mouth Piece.




You still haven`t responded to many of my earlier posts. Nor have you quoted any credible sources or any sources for that matter... you have simply regurgitated the same old rhetoric that has been fed to you no doubt by the efficient propaganda machine... that we call state in our day. It is true that propaganda in India is more subtle but that makes it more sinister also.... Pakistan`s propaganda is so blatant that nobody accepts it... Personally I am glad I always studied in the British stream and then went to College in America... anything is better than the distortion of history that goes on in all countries of South Asia.


And a word of advice... I have maintained all the civility I could muster up... perhaps you will reciprocate and avoid personal attacks... that just weakens your argument further.

-YLH

Rozaiba #136/137: ``Unfortunately the reality is that even a mute, mentally handicapped begger on a wheel-chair high on opium will draw more votes than Musharaf. And you know it too. That`s why you are so happy with the status quo.``

If there is such an individual, who is financially honest, I will definitely vote for him, myself, over Musharraf, and over anyone else. In fact, I am all for average people coming to power in Pakistan. That is why I oppose the status quo screwed up political system (which you seem to adore). Unlike yourself, who is bent upon being ruled by the feudal elite, I am not an apologist for BB and NS. So hopefully, this will lay to rest, another imaginary allegation of yours.

Having said that, I will still vote for, and support Musharraf over BB and NS (and over the maulvis). That is my right. If you don`t like it. Too bad. But please, once again, I request you to not make assumptions about anything related to me. They all seem to come out to be false.

Now to your reply. As usual, no facts, no answers to my questions, no statistics. Infact, now that I have requested you to list your questions, you are even unwilling to do that.
I am not sure what else I can offer you. I have given you polls from credible organizations, I have asked for direct answers to my questions. I am willing to answer any question you ask. Yet you keep coming up with emotionalisms.

Rozaiba #136: You have stated the following:

``PEW POLLS: HA-HA-HA!
Now to your fascination with PEW POLLS. You know, if the favorable rating for Musharaf is today at 86 percent, that is a significant drop from April 2002. Back then it stood at 98 PERCENT!!! ``

Your argument is again ridiculous. I provided you results from a Pew Research Poll. To the best of my knowledge there was no Pew Poll on the referendum. Yet for some strange reason, you have attached the two. Once again, because you have no information to counter the facts.

Did the Pew Research group provide the figure of 98%? I don`t think so. I never linked the two. So why are you once again, letting your imagination run wild. When I provide you facts about Jinnah, you talk about Musharraf. When I provide you information from a poll on one subject, you talk about an unrelated subject with which Pew Research had nothing to do, i.e. referendum....Please debate the point.

If you would like to discuss the referendum, separately, as usual I would be more than happy to. I think it was a ridiculous idea. And I think the results were fabricated. The govt. itself even admitted to it.

``NS had the majority, he could do anything he wanted. He had every right. However, only idiots would assume that he could make himself a life-long ruler.``

I fail to understand your arguments insisting that, anyone who has the majority, can, ``do anything he wanted.`` The whole democratic process is designed to control this, not support it. You seem to support Constitutional dictatorship. Yet are unwilling to admit it.

I would be greatly interested in your views on BB being lifetime, ``elected`` head of PPP and NS`s Shariah Bill. Funny, you didn`t point to BB being lifetime chairperson of her party. Evne though that was one of my example. You conveniently avoided that. Is she an idiot?

NS was about to pass the Shariah Bill. Please read the text. It would have turned Parliamentary democracy on its head. Have you even read it? It was through the NA, and would have gone through the Senate, had the coup not occured. What are your views on the Shariah Bill? It was bill specifically designed to undo pariliamentary democracy, yet was passed by the parliament.

``Bhutto also won by a landslide in 1977, but even he was set to compromise with the opposition. The lesson learnt (or not learnt) was that when you come to power by the ballot process, you cannot use those power to crush the process.``

Hmm. Interesting. Were you alive in 1971? If you read some history, you will realize that a guy named Mujeeb should have come to power by the ballot. He had a much larger vote base than Bhutto. He had some parties in West Pakistan, that were ready to support him, also. The military is an unconstitutional dictatorship, and we all accept that. But even Yahya was ready to make him the PM of Pakistan. After all, it held the elections (which are still considered the fairest ever held, hence Mujeeb`s victory was legitimate).

What was Bhutto`s reaction to Mujeeb being PM? Bhutto wasn`t even in power by the ballot, and he was able to easily crush the process. And conveniently end up as the PM. Do you recall any comments about, ``breaking legs`` by Bhutto. Even if we assume the military to be a partner in crime, what justifications do you have for Bhutto`s ignoring the Constitution, which should have allowed Mujeeb to the head. Wasn`t the Constituitional process crushed by him?

NS came to power by the ballot, and crushed the process. Who was opposing him? No one. He gagged the legislatures. Bought off and split the Judiciary, and fired the executive (President). The guy was able to storm the Supreme Court, and get away with it, and then appoint his partner in crime, a judge, as the President.

What were you doing at that time? I assume you were trying to explain to everyone how NS was not a Constitutional dictator. And how, ``NS had the majority, he could do anything he wanted. He had every right.``

``About my queries to you, please refer to post 66. I don`t care to write them down again.``

I will request you once again to list your questions clearly. And I will directly answer them in one reply. Why do you get so flustered, when someone challenges you directly? You stated I would not answer your questions, and I am saying I will. Now you are scared to ask them. I didn`t understand the questions in #66. Kindly list them in a complete and clear form.

``one day, romair will see the light.``

I hope I never see the light. Life is a learning process. Anyone who is convinced, especially at a young age, that he has seen the light, turns into a single-minded fanatic, who can never argue facts. Such individuals become self-righteous ideologues.....like yourself....regardless of how many facts are provided to you, you will never change your mind....you only get into debates to change the other person`s mind.....never your own....and when you cannot argue facts, you start linking them to topics, which have nothing to do with the original debate.....

Romair...

``When I provide you facts about Jinnah``

You don`t provide facts about Jinnah... you provide your own point of view based on a very sketchy job of reading Stanley Wolpert`s book... Now... throw back some more insults... You still haven`t responded to any content...