Advani in Karachi

They did in 1947 as will Kashmir, Nagaland, Tripura etc. Soon.

re:#91 by justice4all
Why compare Jinnah and Buddha. The comparison is ludicrous. Buddha renounced worldy pleasures to attain ``nirvana``. Jinnah clung on to power even when he knew he was a dying man.
And, yes. We know the kind of country he founded and how that country has now become a ``jehad infested`` nation.
Sridhar

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

Re: # 52

``Ironic... more more of Pakistani elite (which speaks fluent accentless angreji) speaks in the national language .... from what I understand, and what was confirmed by Mr Mani Shankar Aiyar (he apologised for speaking in English by saying that in Posh Neighborhoods of Delhi it is a crime to speak in Hindi) yesterday ... it is a matter of absolute insult for the accented dhoti wallah elite of India to speak in anything but English.

I think you got it wrong.. Not everyone knows Hindi. People from the southern states, especially from TN where Manishankar aiyar got elected don`t know Hindi (Only 0.87% know Hindi in TN).. and people from other southern states and the North east are not that comfortable in Hindi either.. So he might have made a remark like that.. Because I suspect people who live in posh neighborhoods (who have a better chance of knowing English than Hindi) are trying to be more courteous to their neighbors who might not know Hindi..

It`s hard for people who don`t know what religious/linguistic diversity really means to understand such nuances.. I won`t blame you.. BTW, Should not a state formed based on a religion should have its national language the language of the holy scriptures??.. (like Hebrew for Israel.. I`m assuming jewish scriptures are in hebrew.) Arabic should have been the national language for Pakistan.. after all, all pakistanis are ``arab`` descendants.. LOL..

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

AlephNull #94: ``In that case there’s absolutely no reason why you should be getting testy and overly defensive.``

I am not getting testy or defensive at all. I have based all my arguments on statistics. I am simply asking you to do the same. It is true that statistics can be a bit difficult to interpret. But they are still better than simple personal opinion. So lets rely on statistics.........

``I could if necessary dig up books like Omar Noman’s ‘Political Economy of Pakistan, 1947-85’ and Kabir Ahmad’s ‘Breakup of Pakistan’``

Please do dig up the books and provide the statistics. According to Omar Noman, in a TV interview, Pakistan would have been at least where Malaysia is today, had Bhutto not nationalised the economy.

However, I am still unclear what you are trying to prove, other than to show Pakistan in a poor light. That is a fruitless aim. You will neither learn anything from it, nor gain anything. What I am trying to show you is that Pakistan has had economic growth and it has been distributed beyond elite (as third world countries go). The Ginni Coefficient values should indicate that. The fact that Pakistan was very poor at the time of partition and grew to have some of the lowest figures of poverty, in South Asia, by 1990, is another indication...........Pakistan averaged 6% growth over four decades.....

It seems like you agree that Pakistan did grow economically, which did result in a lot of infrastructure and poverty alleviation...........That is all I was saying.........i.e. that money did not just stay in the hands of a klepocratic elite.........In fact, had Pakistan not come into existence, I think the areas around the Indus would have remained very backwards, in economic and human resources. Much like they were pre-partition. Karachi would have been a fraction of its current size. There would have been no Islamabad. Very few roads, dams, universities etc...........

kaalchakra #89: ``In the early years Pakistan did grow faster than India did......However, today`s Pakistan is different from what Pakistan was until 1960s. Between 1980s and 9//11, Pakistan`s challenges consistently expanded, and the nation`s ability to deal with its challenges kept sliding..........Post 9/11, Pakistan has moved in the reight direction. If it maintains the momentum, it may pick up speed quickly.``

I think this is a pretty fair analysis. I would extend it to beyond early years. Pakistan`s real growth started in the late 50s or so. Before that, it may be possible that India grew faster, since Pakistan had no human or material infrastructure.........

From that point ownards, Pakistan grew at 6.7%. And was, according to Sahid Burki, taught as a case study at Harvard. That is when Pakistan moved ahead of South Asia in poverty elimination and infrastructure. Had it kept going, it would be where Malaysia is today (regardless of the type of govt.). In between Pakistan got into one war. Then another. Then Bhutto nationalized everything in 70s, bringing that growth down; though not completely down. Because during the 70s, Dubai kicked in. In 80s Pakistan averaged 6% or so growth.

So for around 4 decades, Pakistan`s average came out to around 6%. Due to this, by 1990, Pakistan had its historically lowest poverty rate at 18%. It had gone from the poorest of South Asia to amongst the wealthiest, per capita.

90s killed Pakistan economically. And the poverty rate at 2000, was 33% and getting worse. Due to this, Pakistan fell from being ahead of South Asia on HDI (other than Sri Lanka) to being behind. India lept ahead, of Pakistan, around 1999. HDI is the best index to see how well a country is doing............

Now things have picked up significantly. The growth rate this year was 8.4% - third highest in Asia, behind China and Singapore (tied?). And the per capita income has grown to $736. So Pakistan is back on track to its traditional growth rates.........

as one who was educated for the first nine grades as a non-muslim in a school primarily for muslims, i take huge offense at convent schools being referred to as ``ghaTTya``. na meiN ne, na meiN ne kabhi kisi issaiyee ya parsi se suna ke jis school maiN hum paRhtay thay, voh ghaTTya tha.

did the madresseh you attend teach you such heights of ignorance?

Dear dotty...

My friend... I did all those things (upper crust British school and American university) as the grandson of a ``Motor Battery mechanic`` who happened to be from an ``officially`` minority community. That should tell you something about what I am trying to say. The point is that Alephnull`s stark black and while view is not necessarily always true.

Raw Dust...

I haven`t changed my mind. I stick to my original position. You please read my statement in context... and explain how my grandfather, an ahmadi motormechanic, was part of the ``ruling elite`` with a massive sense of entitlement.

-YLH

Re: # 104

Ana,

The respect and gratitude most Pakistanis feel for missionary schools in Pakistan is unquestionable... even some of the most conservative mullahs send their children there.

A precursor to the complete interview...

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_6-6-2005_pg7_11

`Petrol firms might fund Lakshmi Mansions` preservation`

By Yasser Hamdani

LAHORE: Mani Shankar Aiyar, Indian petroleum minister, has promised
that Indian petroleum companies will help fund the preservation and
conservation of Lakshmi Mansions if the Pakistani government takes the
initiative to start the work.

``Unfortunately, I am no longer in a position to join your campaign for
the preservation of Lakshmi Mansions as a heritage site, but I wish
you all the best. And if your government decides to preserve this
heritage site and if you require the cooperation of a former resident,
perhaps the only one born here, then our petroleum companies will be
more than happy to make a contribution for its preservation,`` said
Aiyar, while speaking to journalists and Lakshmi Mansions residents on
Saturday.

He told Daily Times that a gas pipeline was in Pakistan and India`s
interests. He shunned American apprehensions as irrelevant and said
that India had cited ancient Indo-Iranian civilisation ties to the
Americans. ``Whatever the Americans might say, we need the energy and I
presume you do too, and without it our growth prospects will be
seriously threatened as I suspect yours will be too,`` he said.

``We have been progressing quickly down the road of Indo-Iranian
cooperation and I am hoping that my visit will contribute to an early
implementation of the project,`` said Aiyar. He rejected opinions that
the gas pipeline was pushing the Indo-Pak peace process and said that
it was quite the opposite.

Re: # 104
ana,

My sister and my cousin both went to convent school and they are doing great in life. Also Muree convent is considered the best all female school in Pakistan.

regards,

haideri

haider, manto. . .

thanks guys for your words, but my frustration was directed (and wasted) upon farangi kush.

haider,

is the murree convent you`re referring to st. denys per chance?

Romair #103, #102, #86

Excellent posts.
The real problem with people like A-hole is that it is hard for them to soak up that India all of a sudden walked from utter poverty to patchy economic development. This new breed of Indian upstarts and I would use an Urdu word here “chichoray” and “talangay” type think that India has achieved something so remarkable that nobody had done before.

The truth is that both countries are basically in the Economic shithouse and if you look at the utter poverty that is visible everywhere in India and at some places in Pakistan, the comparisons that we go into are flat out ridiculous. Both countries are basically at the bottom of every stat that one can think of. And here we have some attempting to prove that India has passed the whole world in economic development.

You are right that out of the last fifty five years Pakistan probably had one bad decade and India really had one good decade in the last fifty-five years.

From 1947 to 1970, India really had nothing to show for economically despite political stability. From the 70s to early 90s, from emergency to people drinking piss in the PM house, India really never registered on any scale anywhere except for may be begging for food aid and running out of gold reserve.

You take numbers coming out of both countries with a rock of salt as both bureaucracies are masters of lying and fudging numbers but what is coming out of India now is that even during the last decade India did not average 6% of growth rates. The real number appears to be 5.4%. It may be a hard pill to swallow for some Indians but the truth is that Indian democracy, India politicians, and Indian bureaucracy basically wasted all those years and in fact added communal problems and decaying agriculture to the growing list of troubles. Manmohan Singh is talking about reaching 6% growth rate this year if and it is a big if, agriculture results are better.

People talk about Bangalore, Bombay or Chennai but forget to mention Patna, Kolkata, pretty much all big cities of UP in fact the whole state of UP, Bihar, Orissa and I wont even mention smaller states. Patna city today is nothing more than a slum and Kalkota is not doing any better. Ahmadabad, the biggest city in the fastest growing State of Gujarat is practically knee deep in filth.
I visited India in the 80s and I know what conditions Indian countryside is. There is no indication anywhere that things have improved an iota in the Indian countryside.

To cover for all their inadequacies and ineptness, Indian politicians have created couple of straw man. Why India is a backward country today? The Indian politicians and upstart like A-hole would tell you it is all because of Pakistan and Muslim minority in India.

I am looking forward to stats from Omar Noman’s book as I have more interesting stats to throw at this dimwit from Kerala.

#34 by AlephNull

[I pity those nincompoops who take his comments on Jinnah at face value. Pakistanis were his bakras in May 1998 and some still are today.]

Just because Vajpayee said India was willing to discuss Kashmir, Pakis triumphantly proclaimed that it was a tacit acceptance of Kashmir`s disputed nature. A few years into the peace process and India is nowhere close to renouncing Kashmir. In fact, Manmohan Singh has categorically ruled out any redrawing of borders. Now when Advani calls Jinnah a great/secular man, Pakis (especially Yasser) are jumping with joy assuming that India has finally accorded Jinnah the `rightful` place in the pantheon of titans of the Indian freedom struggle, but what they fail to realize is that the cunning Advani was merely pandering to the Paki chatterati. Indian leaders, especially seasoned ones like Advani and Vajpayee, are out and out politicians (Chanakyas if you will). They will say something while meaning exactly the opposite. But it doesn`t take too much to fool a Yasser, does it?

Re: # 111

My dear HarishHyd...

As pointed out earlier... Pakistani Newspapers didn`t even carry the story on the front page and Dawn, Jinnah`s own paper, didn`t even carry the story... Indian papers carried it on front page. We took it for what it was... a diplomatic statement. You people on the other hand have made an issue out of it.

Please refrain from resorting to your old tactics.

Sincerely

YLH