Pakistan Travelogue II

re:#747 by Mantolives

``Lamenting the fact that Indians knew very little of Jinnah unlike Pakistanis who were well versed with Gandhi, the Hindi scholar, Ved Prakash Vaidik, said Jinnah should be accepted as a ``sub-continental hero.``
Ha, ha, ha!
I had a good laugh.
Who the fukc is this Hindi scholar? Never heard of him.
Jinnah is a ``subcontinental hero``!
Now, that is a joke.
The more i read about Jinnah (and i have been doing some reading on and off as time permits), the more i am convinced the guy was conniving, brilliant but evil.
He set up a goal of achieiving a seperate state for muslims,without thinking much about millions who would still be left stranded in India, without anythought about the violence that would be unleashed (if he did not foresee this, he was not well informed) when partition was thrust upon a hapless populace.
Jiinah can never be my hero, not even on my deathbed.
He is just a despicable character. The more i read about him, the more i hate him.
A cool, calculating guy, who called for Direct Action Day, never once went to the scene of tragedy or tried to stop the carnage, can never be my hero.
If India has to improve, it should compete with China, not Pakistan.
There is a worthy competitor.
Peace with Pak is important but there is nothing much to learn from that benighted nation and its benighted inhabitants.
Sridhar

Re: # 748

Calling it Bullshit will not make it so... and you know it.

Just shows how frustrated and desperate you really are.

#746 by Mantolives

More bullshit as ususal. I will come back tomorrow and reply.

On a side note.... Thank God... not everyone is as biased or bigoted as Mr Harish Hyd and others ....

From the The Hindu today

http://www.hindu.com/2005/04/15/stories/2005041513761700.htm

NEW DELHI: Mohammad Ali Jinnah — a man often criticised in India for spearheading the formation of Pakistan — was hailed as a ``great secular`` of the order of the first Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, at the New Delhi launch of Asiananda`s book ``Jinnah -- A Corrective Reading of Indian History`` today.

Released by the Defence Minister, Pranab Mukherjee, the function saw speakers stress the need to accept the historical reality of Partition and work for ``togetherness`` rather than creating a confederation.

Not a Hindu-Muslim issue


In his address, the Union Minister for Petroleum & Natural Gas, Mani Shankar Aiyar, said: `` India-Pakistan relations should not be seen as a `Hindu-Muslim` issue. India is not a Hindu State. Pakistan is an Islamic State, but it is not representative of the Muslim voice of India.``

Mr. Aiyar said the two countries would not be able to be at peace with each other as long as Jinnah and Mahatma Gandhi continued to be demonised in India and Pakistan respectively. ``Both were great leaders,`` he said, congratulating Prof. Asiananda for ``touching a topic many of us would not have dared to touch in India``.

The former Rajya Sabha member, L. M. Singhvi, differed with the author`s advocacy of a confederation; arguing that the future of the region lay in togetherness of the two countries. Pakistan, he said, did not live up to the vision of Jinnah, and quoted from a book to show that he had repented the Partition soon after.

Reading out a passage from Jinnah`s speech on the eve of Pakistan`s independence, he said the vision of Jinnah was not very different from that of Nehru. ``He was a secular — quite contrary to the image we have of him in India — but his secular vision was abandoned by his successors.``

Lamenting the fact that Indians knew very little of Jinnah unlike Pakistanis who were well versed with Gandhi, the Hindi scholar, Ved Prakash Vaidik, said Jinnah should be accepted as a ``sub-continental hero.``

Re: # 745

Tsk tsk... You can`t argue with logic and facts so you resort to petty insults and abuse? That is funny.

The quote I put up is from Wolpert also... and unlike the internet excerpt, he is quoting a primary source here.

So rich and fanatical Hindus barricading a city from poor factory workers assembling peacefuly to attend a rally is perfectly alright? What is clear is that Hindus had decided to stop these poor workers from entering the city at all costs thereby stoking the communal fire. Only you can`t see the devious plan of the Congress Party? Fanatical bigotry had forced the Hindus to stop Muslims at all costs... including resorting to murder and mayhem.

Let me ask you some questions again....


1) Why if communal violence was the objective did ML not choose Delhi or Lahore where it had much more muscle and where it could blame it on another government?

2) Why if communal violence was the objective did ML didn`t start it else where in Bengal where Muslims were in a majority?

3) Why if ML had preplanned the whole thing, did Hindus still manage to kill many times more Muslims than Hindus? Are Hindus superhuman? Or do God`s deities help them?

4) Why was Patel gloating if Congress had nothing to do with it? Was it Hindu Pride? or was it an indication of Congress plan working ... as in destabilizing the cross communal alliance on which ML ministry stood?

5) Why was the direct action day an overwhelming success, as evidenced by the Congress paper, all over India, and yet no violence broke out where Muslim League was the strongest or where Jinnah himself was physically present?

6) Why didn`t communal violence break out in Bombay where Muslim League had won 40 seats and which was by far the most volatile Indian city?


And last but not the least:

7) Why did Lord Wavell who was in the Congress Pocket absolve Muslim League Ministry of all blame for Calcutta?


You see the contradictions of the Indian propaganda have been exposed and all you can do is quote ``journalese reports``....

#741 by Mantolives on April 15, 2005 0:52am PT

[Since you`ve already declared Wolpert to be a credible author based on some INTERNET excerpt.....]

The “INTERNET excerpt” is there because it is there in his book. The Internet cannot conjure up things out the thin air. But like the ``energy out of djinns`` theory that a Paki scientist put forth, Pakis would believe it is possible.

[Here is something directly out of his book Jinnah of Pakistan that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Hindus led by the Congress Party started all the trouble to taint the Muslim League with violece:]

Sure! Erecting barricades equals starting trouble. Gloating means killing. But issuing inflammatory speeches and baying for blood are not counted as incitement. Are there any more gems we are privileged to hear from you?

[it becomes clear that even before Muslims came to the city to celebrate peacefuly direct action day]

Sure! When Muslim Leaguers were issuing calls to violence and bloodshed, it is only natural that Muslims came to the city to “celebrate peacefuly direct action day”. Nice logic, but try another deluded Paki, he may listen to you.

[These are the facts... whether Gurumoorthy or Rsidhar or Netizen decide to evade them is another issue.]

How insightful! In case you missed it, here is another fact. The old crook did nothing to stop the violence that had started as a result of his call to Direct Action. Instead of asking the Muslim goons to calm down, he was sleeping on the floors and preparing to be arrested.

#740 by Mantolives

[If only you were so lucky... if you can selectively quote sources, why can`t I quote them in the same way?]

I selectively quoted sources?? In addition to being confused, you are now exhibiting the traits of a lawyer, and that is resorting to lies. Show me where have I selectively quoted, or accept that you have lost it.

[What is important is that despite its bias it was forced to accept certain truths about the direct action day...]

The truth is that the Muslim League started the violence in Calcutta. And this is the truth that the Time carried, in case it escaped you.

``Rioting Moslems went after Hindus with guns, knives and clubs, looted shops, stoned newspaper offices, set fire to Calcutta`s British business district. Hindus retaliated by firing Moslem mosques and miles of Moslem slums.``

If you haven’t noticed, it says that the Hindus merely retaliated. This is corroborated by the extract I provided from Wolpert’s book. Now the Time has all of a sudden become a pro-Congress magazine? Sure.

[Now.... wait for a quote I am about to put up .... which would prove Conclusively that Hindus started the violence in Calcutta and proceeded to Murder and maim Muslims for a whole week!]

“Hindus had erected barricades at the Tala and Belgachia bridges to prevent Muslims from entering the city”

Duh!! This “conclusively proves” that the Hindus started the violence? It merely says that the Hindus were trying to prevent Muslims from entering the city, not kill Muslims, unlike the Leaguer who said that Muslims were ready to shed their blood and if the opportunity arose, others’ blood.

Man, if you are an aspiring lawyer, I’m President Bush.

Re: # 724

I have answered this question in 741

No doubt you will appreciate that while your ``quotes`` are journalese reports ... mine are actualy primary sources like the transfer of power papers.

Since you`ve already declared Wolpert to be a credible author based on some INTERNET excerpt.....

Here is something directly out of his book Jinnah of Pakistan that proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Hindus led by the Congress Party started all the trouble to taint the Muslim League with violece:

On Page 284

`Muslim workers from Howrah Jute Mill had begun pouring into the city toward Ochterlony`s ``needle`` Monument for a mamoth meeting to celebrate direct action day. Chief minister Suhrawardy and some other leaders of Bengal`s Muslim League were scheduled to address the meeting. Reports that ``Hindus had erected barricades at the Tala and Belgachia bridges to prevent Muslims from entering the city`` reached British headquarters by 7 30 AM, but the Brigadier in command of Calcutta, JPC Mackinlay had ordered all of his troops confined to barracks that day.`


MY COMMENTS Stanley Wolpert has quoted a primary source Col Burrows to Lord Wavell from transfer of power papers volume 9.


When read in conjunction with Lord Wavell`s letter (which absolves the League ministry of any responsibility) on Page 879 IBID.... and Sardar Patel`s letter in which he is gloating about many more Muslims getting killed.... it becomes clear that even before Muslims came to the city to celebrate peacefuly direct action day .... the Hindus had been planning to sabotage the event by violence and they did so .... with great success.... murdering Muslim men raping Muslim women and pillaging Muslim households.

Now hatemongering fanatics and Gandhians on these boards CAN LIE all they want... misquote and try and latch on to small mercies of their foreign masters like the Time Magazine... the fact remains.... that it was the Congress Party that effectively ruined an otherwise successful direct action day.... for the simple and machiavellian purpose of bringing down the League Ministry which depended on Cross communal alliances.

These are the facts... whether Gurumoorthy or Rsidhar or Netizen decide to evade them is another issue.

Re: # 736

If only you were so lucky... if you can selectively quote sources, why can`t I quote them in the same way?

Time as I pointed out earlier was shamelessly pro-Congress and pro-Gandhi.... not to mention at one point pro-Hitler as well... but thats another story....

What is important is that despite its bias it was forced to accept certain truths about the direct action day...

Now.... wait for a quote I am about to put up .... which would prove Conclusively that Hindus started the violence in Calcutta and proceeded to Murder and maim Muslims for a whole week!

Re: # 735

First of all read the quote again.... shame on you for making up this new story. As for the link, unlike you my research is not dependent on ``google searches``, Wali Khan`s Internet propaganda website which actually makes a mockery of all human intelligence, or Hindu Nationalist websites..... the Blitz quote is found in many books on partition including if I am not mistaken Penderel Moon`s famous book.... it is also a primary source.

The worst enemies of the Muslim League cannot help envying the leadership of Mr Jinnah. Last week`s cataclysmic transformation of the League from the reactionary racket of the Muslim Nawabs, Noons, and Knights into a revolutionary mass organisation dedicated, by word if not be deed, to an anti-Imperialist struggle, compels us to express the sneaking national wish that a diplomat and strategist of Jinnah`s proven calibre were at the held of the Indian National Congress. There is no denying the fact that by his latest master-stroke of diplomacy Jinnah has outbid, outwitted and outmaneuvered the British and Congress alike and confounded the common national indictment that the Muslim League is a parasite of British Imperialism.

I don`t see the newspaper accusing him of violence... but instead praising him for standing against imperialism.

What you fail to see is that Blitz is commenting on the overwhelming success of Direct Action Day as a civil disobedience movement... and not the unfortunate events of Calcutta...


It is clear to me that the truth is a casualty in India .... clearly.

Re: # 735

First of all read the quote again.... shame on you for making up this new story. As for the link, unlike you my research is not dependent on ``google searches``, Wali Khan`s Internet propaganda website which actually makes a mockery of all human intelligence, or Hindu Nationalist websites..... the Blitz quote is found in many books on partition including if I am not mistaken Penderel Moon`s famous book.... it is also a primary source.

The worst enemies of the Muslim League cannot help envying the leadership of Mr Jinnah. Last week`s cataclysmic transformation of the League from the reactionary racket of the Muslim Nawabs, Noons, and Knights into a revolutionary mass organisation dedicated, by word if not be deed, to an anti-Imperialist struggle, compels us to express the sneaking national wish that a diplomat and strategist of Jinnah`s proven calibre were at the held of the Indian National Congress. There is no denying the fact that by his latest master-stroke of diplomacy Jinnah has outbid, outwitted and outmaneuvered the British and Congress alike and confounded the common national indictment that the Muslim League is a parasite of British Imperialism.

I don`t see the newspaper accusing him of violence... but instead praising him for standing against imperialism.

What you fail to see is that Blitz is commenting on the overwhelming success of Direct Action Day as a civil disobedience movement... and not the unfortunate events of Calcutta...


It is clear to me that the truth is a casualty in India .... clearly.

#736 by harish_hyd

PS: It also proves that Jinnah knew that his call for Direct Action would lead to violence. It did, but our man, instead of asking the marauding Muslim hordes to calm down, was sleeping on the floors anticipating arrest.

In post 683, Yasser quotes the Time. I reproduce extracts from his post below:

Time Magazine in its issue on 26th of August 1946 said:

Mohamed Ali Jinnah had picked the 18th day of Ramadan for ``Direct Action Day`` against Britain`s plan for Indian independence (which does not satisfy the Moslems` old demand for a separate Pakistan). Though direct, the action was supposed to be peaceful.

Like other Indian leaders, Jinnah denounced the ``fratricidal war.``

But very cleverly, he left out other damning portions of the report. I reproduce them here:

``Rioting Moslems went after Hindus with guns, knives and clubs, looted shops, stoned newspaper offices, set fire to Calcutta`s British business district. Hindus retaliated by firing Moslem mosques and miles of Moslem slums.``

Which clearly proves that it was the Muslims that started the riots.

Another excerpt from the report:

``Like other Indian leaders, Jinnah denounced the ``fratricidal war.`` But most observers wondered how Jinnah could fail to know what would happen when he called for ``direct action.`` Shortly before the riots broke out, his own news agency (Orient Press) reported that Jinnah, anticipating violence, was sleeping on the floor these nights—to toughen up for a possible sojourn in jail.``

Now dear Yasser, will you admit that the Muslim League started the violence? I have provided two different sources which clearly point the finger at Jinnah and the Muslim League as the culprits. In addition, I also provided the inflammatory statement made by Leaguers baying for Hindu blood. You have been caught with your pants down. The game is up.

re:#720 by Mantolives
You would do well to provide a link of that Blitz article.
Blitz is right in saying that it was a masterstroke from Jinnah. By unleashing violence on calcutta, ML and JInnah could point out the futility of the 2 communities living together. Jinnah`s poltical ambition of bringing Partition agenda centerstage was achieved. Congress came out cropper and there was not much of argument in favor of a United India after that riot.
Jinnah was a genius in that respect. He could always use human agencies to achieve his goal. What is a few thousand lives for a bigger cause? Right?
Sridhar