Old Neighbors And Old Memories
Feroz R Khan June 6, 2005
#75 Posted by harimau on June 8, 2005 4:51:48 pm
Ref Aha_Snark #65
[All right. Thapar and Panikkar have nothing valuable to say. Do you have anything to support that proposition other than your pungent assertion?]
Romila Thapar has been writing that Hindu kings used to demolish temples of their opponent (Hindu) kings and that this explained the destruction of Hindu temples in North India.
If you buy that line I have a bridge I want to sell you.
Except, as a frikking bleeding-heart liberal enthused over having Asia`s largest slum in Dharavi while not concerned about not having a single city of world class anywhere in India, you wouldn`t have too much money to afford the bridge.
[All right. Thapar and Panikkar have nothing valuable to say. Do you have anything to support that proposition other than your pungent assertion?]
Romila Thapar has been writing that Hindu kings used to demolish temples of their opponent (Hindu) kings and that this explained the destruction of Hindu temples in North India.
If you buy that line I have a bridge I want to sell you.
Except, as a frikking bleeding-heart liberal enthused over having Asia`s largest slum in Dharavi while not concerned about not having a single city of world class anywhere in India, you wouldn`t have too much money to afford the bridge.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#74 Posted by KaalChakra on June 8, 2005 2:50:49 pm
re: A_S # 73
LOL...Actually, I have been a JNU liberal, and worse. That unreasonable individual still lives inside me, and casues me considerable misery at regular intervals. :)
You could be right about what was said. I have just been amused to find Jyoti Basu and Mr. Tagodia showing up on the same platform, and in voluble agreement with each other against Jinnah.
LOL...Actually, I have been a JNU liberal, and worse. That unreasonable individual still lives inside me, and casues me considerable misery at regular intervals. :)
You could be right about what was said. I have just been amused to find Jyoti Basu and Mr. Tagodia showing up on the same platform, and in voluble agreement with each other against Jinnah.
#71 Posted by KaalChakra on June 8, 2005 12:17:07 pm
re: A_S # 67
JNU liberals and communists have reacted with horror not to the suggestion that Jinnah`s character may have been stained - we see the man as deeply flawed - but to the suggestion that he may have had secular bones within him.
A quick perusal of the the newspapers would easily offer evidence, but would gladly provide it here if you need it.
JNU liberals and communists have reacted with horror not to the suggestion that Jinnah`s character may have been stained - we see the man as deeply flawed - but to the suggestion that he may have had secular bones within him.
A quick perusal of the the newspapers would easily offer evidence, but would gladly provide it here if you need it.
#73 Posted by Aha_Snark on June 8, 2005 1:43:55 pm
Re: # 71
re: kaalchakra:
///JNU liberals and communists have reacted with horror not to the suggestion that Jinnah`s character may have been stained - we see the man as deeply flawed ///
;) So you`re a JNU liberal / communist ?
///but to the suggestion that he may have had secular bones within him.///
Frankly, that suggestion was imputed to Advani but never made by him. Advani said that Jinnah`s speech was a forceful exposition of a secular state, NOT that Jinnah was secular. The difference is subtle but important.
For example, if avenger123 were to say something that I thought was valuable, I would say (considering the shaky ground I would be and my present opinion on his interacts) ``avenger123`s statement X was valuable.`` I don`t think that can be conflated with the statement ``avenger123 is a valuable speaker/ thinker``. There`s miles to go between the two statements.
Cheers,
A_S
re: kaalchakra:
///JNU liberals and communists have reacted with horror not to the suggestion that Jinnah`s character may have been stained - we see the man as deeply flawed ///
;) So you`re a JNU liberal / communist ?
///but to the suggestion that he may have had secular bones within him.///
Frankly, that suggestion was imputed to Advani but never made by him. Advani said that Jinnah`s speech was a forceful exposition of a secular state, NOT that Jinnah was secular. The difference is subtle but important.
For example, if avenger123 were to say something that I thought was valuable, I would say (considering the shaky ground I would be and my present opinion on his interacts) ``avenger123`s statement X was valuable.`` I don`t think that can be conflated with the statement ``avenger123 is a valuable speaker/ thinker``. There`s miles to go between the two statements.
Cheers,
A_S
#64 Posted by Jami on June 8, 2005 11:14:13 am
It is really nice to keep the guest happy bcoz this is our tradation. This is islamic as well. We must look after and feel good about having guest from across the border.But just cursing and making fun of ourselves will make them happy, there is a big questin mark on that. Normally wise people avoid those who feel self pitty.
What all that we try to do is in reaction to our friends there. yes we want to be in peace with them.We do respect them as a big nation, bigger democracy and then as our neighbours.
What all that we want from them isthat when somebody from this side is visiting they should also have a big heart( I am refering just one example of cricket)I will not ask any question about Mr Advani that why the poor fallow was forced to resign and still you talk of love flooding in from the common people of both the cpountries. Sir plz look in to this as well.This is food for thought for those who really want friendly relation between both the nation
#62 Posted by KaalChakra on June 8, 2005 10:47:02 am
ally
People like you do a lot to change our opinions of Pakistan. It`s unfair, but real learning about Pakistan is going to be slow, at least among the hard-headed cynics. The love brigade in India has no credibility, being worthy of no respect or attention.
The problem is that for a very long time we have not heard from the common person in Pakistan, unless that common person was frothing at the mouth about Kashmir, or paying us a very unfriendly visit as a Jihadi. Over time, Indian people have learnt to identify the whole of Pakistan with the `proactive` Pakistani military. And it is fair to say that between Pakistani military and Indian people, there is no love lost. People to people contact and reconciliation will be much easier and is already occurring. Pakistan earned an unsavory reputation over many long decades. So please be patient. It will gradually step out of the shadows of that past, as that past is perceived by outsiders.
People like you do a lot to change our opinions of Pakistan. It`s unfair, but real learning about Pakistan is going to be slow, at least among the hard-headed cynics. The love brigade in India has no credibility, being worthy of no respect or attention.
The problem is that for a very long time we have not heard from the common person in Pakistan, unless that common person was frothing at the mouth about Kashmir, or paying us a very unfriendly visit as a Jihadi. Over time, Indian people have learnt to identify the whole of Pakistan with the `proactive` Pakistani military. And it is fair to say that between Pakistani military and Indian people, there is no love lost. People to people contact and reconciliation will be much easier and is already occurring. Pakistan earned an unsavory reputation over many long decades. So please be patient. It will gradually step out of the shadows of that past, as that past is perceived by outsiders.
#61 Posted by ferozk on June 8, 2005 10:05:14 am
re: rahulmal # 53
I would agree, with your conclusions.
re: kaalchakra # 58
Yes, it would seem that there is a distorted version of history in both the nations and there are people on both sides of the border, who wish to believe this version of history.
Ciao
I would agree, with your conclusions.
re: kaalchakra # 58
Yes, it would seem that there is a distorted version of history in both the nations and there are people on both sides of the border, who wish to believe this version of history.
Ciao
#60 Posted by ferozk on June 8, 2005 9:55:03 am
re: mohar11 # 55
My historic background is in European history and I will be the first one to admit that I am always learning about the Indo-Pak history through interacts such as these on Chowk.
I was surprised to learn that Indian texts are not critical of Muslim personalities and as a student of history, I do not agree with this logic. Historic analysis should ``cut to the bone`` of the issues and the personalities involved and no justice is, or will, ever be done by treating the past with gloved explanations. As Ana rightfully said, Jinnah and his politics did not exist in isolationism; Jinnah was reacting to the events and political debates/issues of his time. I am one of those people, who hold the view that history is accidental and it happens as a result of petty mistakes made by great women and men, who are at reacting to their environment instead being pro-active in influencing their political environment.
As to communalism and demonization of Hindus, would you agree or disagree that same was happening to the Muslims in the pre-1947 Indian politics? This demonization is still occuring as seen in the debates on Chowk and in the coverage, which dominates both of our news media and in the levels of distrust we all share about the other`s motives and intentions, while we hold ourselves and our intentions as noble and beyond the pale of question. Jinnah`s actions were not his alone and they had a stimulus, which was the politics of his time.
Nothing ever happens in isolationism; there is always a ``trigger`` to events. Otherwise, it would be like suggesting that the First World War was simply the result of the German attack on France. It would akin to suggesting that the Indian War of Independence of 1857 happened due to the instance of cartridges issued to the sepoys of the East India Company. There is always an immediate event and then, there are always long term consquences, which create a situation, whose consequences is the evolutionary process known as history.
As to my hyperbole, I will stand by it. It might be hyperbole to you, but it is a legitimate question to me. :)
re: arjun_m # 54
Arjun, I agree with you that the Indian government did not ask Advani to resign. Advani resigned due to the pressure from within his own political party - BJP. I was under the impression that Indian political parties have a healthy tradition of open debate and tolerance of dissenting views, which are sorely missing from Pakistani political parties and their political discourse.
Was I wrong in that assessment?
My own personal view is that Advani showed a very poor example of judgement. There is an opinion, within the Indian media, that Advani was simply catering to the ``secularists`` in India in hopes to enlarge his own popular support base outside of the BJP and in the process, cast aside the image of the hawk, with which he has been associated in the past. Personally, I think that the occassion of the remarks was a bit surprising and if he had to say them, it would have been better had he said them in India and not in Pakistan, given the emotionalism of political immaturity which exists in our nations.
Ciao
My historic background is in European history and I will be the first one to admit that I am always learning about the Indo-Pak history through interacts such as these on Chowk.
I was surprised to learn that Indian texts are not critical of Muslim personalities and as a student of history, I do not agree with this logic. Historic analysis should ``cut to the bone`` of the issues and the personalities involved and no justice is, or will, ever be done by treating the past with gloved explanations. As Ana rightfully said, Jinnah and his politics did not exist in isolationism; Jinnah was reacting to the events and political debates/issues of his time. I am one of those people, who hold the view that history is accidental and it happens as a result of petty mistakes made by great women and men, who are at reacting to their environment instead being pro-active in influencing their political environment.
As to communalism and demonization of Hindus, would you agree or disagree that same was happening to the Muslims in the pre-1947 Indian politics? This demonization is still occuring as seen in the debates on Chowk and in the coverage, which dominates both of our news media and in the levels of distrust we all share about the other`s motives and intentions, while we hold ourselves and our intentions as noble and beyond the pale of question. Jinnah`s actions were not his alone and they had a stimulus, which was the politics of his time.
Nothing ever happens in isolationism; there is always a ``trigger`` to events. Otherwise, it would be like suggesting that the First World War was simply the result of the German attack on France. It would akin to suggesting that the Indian War of Independence of 1857 happened due to the instance of cartridges issued to the sepoys of the East India Company. There is always an immediate event and then, there are always long term consquences, which create a situation, whose consequences is the evolutionary process known as history.
As to my hyperbole, I will stand by it. It might be hyperbole to you, but it is a legitimate question to me. :)
re: arjun_m # 54
Arjun, I agree with you that the Indian government did not ask Advani to resign. Advani resigned due to the pressure from within his own political party - BJP. I was under the impression that Indian political parties have a healthy tradition of open debate and tolerance of dissenting views, which are sorely missing from Pakistani political parties and their political discourse.
Was I wrong in that assessment?
My own personal view is that Advani showed a very poor example of judgement. There is an opinion, within the Indian media, that Advani was simply catering to the ``secularists`` in India in hopes to enlarge his own popular support base outside of the BJP and in the process, cast aside the image of the hawk, with which he has been associated in the past. Personally, I think that the occassion of the remarks was a bit surprising and if he had to say them, it would have been better had he said them in India and not in Pakistan, given the emotionalism of political immaturity which exists in our nations.
Ciao
#68 Posted by mohar11 on June 8, 2005 12:00:33 pm
Re: # 60 feroz
//... was surprised to learn that Indian texts are not critical of Muslim personalities ... Historic analysis should ``cut to the bone`` and no justice .... be done by treating the past with gloved explanations...//
That`s right. But the commie fools who write the text books don`t understand that ..... A lot of people are p!ssed about the ways commies have hijacked history.... but that`s the way it is.
+++
//..As to communalism and demonization of Hindus, would you agree or disagree that same was happening to the Muslims in the pre-1947 Indian politics?...//
I am sure it was happening [at the grass-root level] and it happens even now - this sh!t happens everywhere, all the time. But Jinnah didn`t have to do it. His other contemporaries from congress didn`t demonize anybody, despite their disagreements with him......Jinnah was an educated/experienced leader, he should have known better than that. He had various choices - and he made his choice. He has to own the consequence of his choice - everybody has to.
Yes - there were ``triggers``, there are always triggers. Triggers are just that, triggers - you cannot use them as excuses... Because, even after triggers have been fired, all of us still have many choices to pick from.
I am sure Hitler can claim some ``triggers`` [ I am not saying jinnah=hitler, just giving an example]. Bush can claim triggers for what he did in Iraq. But at the end of the day - 6 mil jews were dead, thousands iraqis dead, hundreds of american soldiers are dead. Triggers, you say?
//... was surprised to learn that Indian texts are not critical of Muslim personalities ... Historic analysis should ``cut to the bone`` and no justice .... be done by treating the past with gloved explanations...//
That`s right. But the commie fools who write the text books don`t understand that ..... A lot of people are p!ssed about the ways commies have hijacked history.... but that`s the way it is.
+++
//..As to communalism and demonization of Hindus, would you agree or disagree that same was happening to the Muslims in the pre-1947 Indian politics?...//
I am sure it was happening [at the grass-root level] and it happens even now - this sh!t happens everywhere, all the time. But Jinnah didn`t have to do it. His other contemporaries from congress didn`t demonize anybody, despite their disagreements with him......Jinnah was an educated/experienced leader, he should have known better than that. He had various choices - and he made his choice. He has to own the consequence of his choice - everybody has to.
Yes - there were ``triggers``, there are always triggers. Triggers are just that, triggers - you cannot use them as excuses... Because, even after triggers have been fired, all of us still have many choices to pick from.
I am sure Hitler can claim some ``triggers`` [ I am not saying jinnah=hitler, just giving an example]. Bush can claim triggers for what he did in Iraq. But at the end of the day - 6 mil jews were dead, thousands iraqis dead, hundreds of american soldiers are dead. Triggers, you say?
#59 Posted by Ally on June 8, 2005 9:42:57 am
# 48 Harimau
I personally have no malice towards your country or people, and if your students want to go to whichever country for further studies, then best wishes to them, may they be successful in their studies. You can trumpet your countries successes to me all you want, and in reply all I will say is MashAllah, long may it continue. Just as I would to students/successes of any other third country.
In the long run your country’s success will benefit my country. But my post isn’t about students knowing information about Pakistan, it was directed more towards the general population of India having a general idea about Pakistan. Basically the general kind of information that most culturally similar neighbouring countries have about each other.
People in Spain know that Italy has some great fashion, they often wear it. But they also know that not everyone in Italy is a fashionista. They have a general idea about Italy and Italian life, and vice versa. People in Italy know that Almodovar makes fab films, at the same time they also know that not all Spaniards live in an Almodovar film.
Many people in India still think that everyone in Pakistan wears a sherwani, speaks fluent Urdu, and says ‘Adab arz’ when greeting each other (Veer Zaara anyone!!!). Even my Punjabi Indian friends were surprised to hear that I spoke Punjabi, and in Canada some Asian ppl at work thought I was Sikh!
The fact of the matter is, now, our govt’s are beginning to work together, not because of pyaar mohabet, but because we have to, we need to, for pure economics. Your country’s success cannot be maintained without fulfilling your ever increasing energy needs. It’s your govt that wants to start construction of these pipelines etc within 6 months. Recently, Indian businessmen visited Pakistan in a big delegation, (100 or so) they invest all over the world and have expressed a desire to invest in Pakistan. Not because they love their cousins to the west, but because they are going to make money, moola, rokRa, rupaiyah!
And that is the bottom line. Money, is what it’s all about. The juppi brigade can juppi pa all they want, but it’s not their love that’s driving this, its big business. Those students will come back to India and deal with some of our students who also went there (haN haN, humarey log bhi udher jaatey haiN!) so we will have an expanding business relationship.
But those students will not know much about Pakistan other than the Veer Zaara type info they have been fed. And for us in Pakistan, that’s not so good. If we are to get more business from the east, we need to ensure that those people have a positive view of us, or at least know a little about our roz maara ki reality. For the most part they will be pleasantly surprised!
I personally have no malice towards your country or people, and if your students want to go to whichever country for further studies, then best wishes to them, may they be successful in their studies. You can trumpet your countries successes to me all you want, and in reply all I will say is MashAllah, long may it continue. Just as I would to students/successes of any other third country.
In the long run your country’s success will benefit my country. But my post isn’t about students knowing information about Pakistan, it was directed more towards the general population of India having a general idea about Pakistan. Basically the general kind of information that most culturally similar neighbouring countries have about each other.
People in Spain know that Italy has some great fashion, they often wear it. But they also know that not everyone in Italy is a fashionista. They have a general idea about Italy and Italian life, and vice versa. People in Italy know that Almodovar makes fab films, at the same time they also know that not all Spaniards live in an Almodovar film.
Many people in India still think that everyone in Pakistan wears a sherwani, speaks fluent Urdu, and says ‘Adab arz’ when greeting each other (Veer Zaara anyone!!!). Even my Punjabi Indian friends were surprised to hear that I spoke Punjabi, and in Canada some Asian ppl at work thought I was Sikh!
The fact of the matter is, now, our govt’s are beginning to work together, not because of pyaar mohabet, but because we have to, we need to, for pure economics. Your country’s success cannot be maintained without fulfilling your ever increasing energy needs. It’s your govt that wants to start construction of these pipelines etc within 6 months. Recently, Indian businessmen visited Pakistan in a big delegation, (100 or so) they invest all over the world and have expressed a desire to invest in Pakistan. Not because they love their cousins to the west, but because they are going to make money, moola, rokRa, rupaiyah!
And that is the bottom line. Money, is what it’s all about. The juppi brigade can juppi pa all they want, but it’s not their love that’s driving this, its big business. Those students will come back to India and deal with some of our students who also went there (haN haN, humarey log bhi udher jaatey haiN!) so we will have an expanding business relationship.
But those students will not know much about Pakistan other than the Veer Zaara type info they have been fed. And for us in Pakistan, that’s not so good. If we are to get more business from the east, we need to ensure that those people have a positive view of us, or at least know a little about our roz maara ki reality. For the most part they will be pleasantly surprised!
#58 Posted by KaalChakra on June 8, 2005 9:18:59 am
Ferozk
Indian history is as fraudulent as Pakistani history. It`s been made to order to support a distorted Nehruvian vision of the world.
India`s JNU propaganda-as-history discipline does not ask uncomfortable questions. It determinedly avoids vast areas of Indian life like the Great white Pope (we must hope) avoids pornography.
Fringe leaders of the VHP, or even the BJP, are understandably unlettered. But notice how JNU liberals and communists - the ever-obstreperous, self-deified `friends of Pakistan,` have reacted to the idea that there might have been shades to Jinnah`s character with howls of complete and unrestrained horror.
Indian history is as fraudulent as Pakistani history. It`s been made to order to support a distorted Nehruvian vision of the world.
India`s JNU propaganda-as-history discipline does not ask uncomfortable questions. It determinedly avoids vast areas of Indian life like the Great white Pope (we must hope) avoids pornography.
Fringe leaders of the VHP, or even the BJP, are understandably unlettered. But notice how JNU liberals and communists - the ever-obstreperous, self-deified `friends of Pakistan,` have reacted to the idea that there might have been shades to Jinnah`s character with howls of complete and unrestrained horror.
#67 Posted by Aha_Snark on June 8, 2005 11:48:11 am
Re: # 58
re: kaalchakra:
///But notice how JNU liberals and communists - the ever-obstreperous, self-deified `friends of Pakistan,` have reacted to the idea that there might have been shades to Jinnah`s character with howls of complete and unrestrained horror. ///
This is very intriguing. Can you please provide a link or a reference to such an incident ? Or at the very least, shed some more light on (correct me if I`m wrong) the refusal of ``JNU liberals and communists`` to accept that Jinnah`s character might be stained / flawed?
re: kaalchakra:
///But notice how JNU liberals and communists - the ever-obstreperous, self-deified `friends of Pakistan,` have reacted to the idea that there might have been shades to Jinnah`s character with howls of complete and unrestrained horror. ///
This is very intriguing. Can you please provide a link or a reference to such an incident ? Or at the very least, shed some more light on (correct me if I`m wrong) the refusal of ``JNU liberals and communists`` to accept that Jinnah`s character might be stained / flawed?
#57 Posted by arjun_m on June 8, 2005 8:40:41 am
#55 by mohar11 on June 8, 2005 7:28am PT
Indians in general know their history and their past -
First they`ll accuse Indians of not knowing enough about Pakistan...Then when Indians actually post what they know about Pakistan, like it`s support for Islamic fundamentalism/terrorism, it`s secterian conflicts, the joke that is it`s stock market(all true and all backed by links), you`ll be accused of being an anti-pakiland bigot....
maybe google can create a special search engine for pakiland.. pakiland.google.com.. searches on this domain will only return positive news about Pakiland...searching for Pakistan +``support for the taliban`` will return a no results found..
Maybe the new google India research ctr can work on this...
Indians in general know their history and their past -
First they`ll accuse Indians of not knowing enough about Pakistan...Then when Indians actually post what they know about Pakistan, like it`s support for Islamic fundamentalism/terrorism, it`s secterian conflicts, the joke that is it`s stock market(all true and all backed by links), you`ll be accused of being an anti-pakiland bigot....
maybe google can create a special search engine for pakiland.. pakiland.google.com.. searches on this domain will only return positive news about Pakiland...searching for Pakistan +``support for the taliban`` will return a no results found..
Maybe the new google India research ctr can work on this...
#56 Posted by ana on June 8, 2005 8:02:51 am
everyone always has an answer for everything, don`t they?!
mohar, no, jinnah`s actions were not completely jinnah`s alone, he wasn`t like in a vacuum you know. . . and yes, they cannot simply or completely be explained away by the actions of AINC. :)
there are enough boards going on and on about jinnah. i guess we are all ``doomed`` to dig him out of that beautiful mausoleum. can we please leave gandhiji and jinnah sahib to rest in whatever state of soul they are resting in, and go on with our lives?! i suspect the answer will be (looking at the 8 ball). . . .
mohar, no, jinnah`s actions were not completely jinnah`s alone, he wasn`t like in a vacuum you know. . . and yes, they cannot simply or completely be explained away by the actions of AINC. :)
there are enough boards going on and on about jinnah. i guess we are all ``doomed`` to dig him out of that beautiful mausoleum. can we please leave gandhiji and jinnah sahib to rest in whatever state of soul they are resting in, and go on with our lives?! i suspect the answer will be (looking at the 8 ball). . . .
#70 Posted by mohar11 on June 8, 2005 12:12:38 pm
Re: # 56 ana
//...no, jinnah`s actions were not completely jinnah`s alone, he wasn`t like in a vacuum you know...//
Neither was Hitler, or Modi, or pick your lunatic. ..... I am not saying jinnah = hitler = modi...... Just pointing out the absurdity of claiming triggers/stimulus or whatever, as excuse for your actions.
People have to own up. Modi can`t claim godhra as an excuse for his communal massacre. Neither can Jinnah claim congress as an excuse for his communalism. Like I said - ``devil made me do it`` logic doesn`t work.
//...no, jinnah`s actions were not completely jinnah`s alone, he wasn`t like in a vacuum you know...//
Neither was Hitler, or Modi, or pick your lunatic. ..... I am not saying jinnah = hitler = modi...... Just pointing out the absurdity of claiming triggers/stimulus or whatever, as excuse for your actions.
People have to own up. Modi can`t claim godhra as an excuse for his communal massacre. Neither can Jinnah claim congress as an excuse for his communalism. Like I said - ``devil made me do it`` logic doesn`t work.
#55 Posted by mohar11 on June 8, 2005 7:28:09 am
52/feroz
//...to the best of my knowledge, no Indian historian has asked what made Jinnah demand a seperate nation?....//
For a self-proclaimed history teacher - you don`t seem to possess that much knowledge, do you?
Almost all history texts india mention the dispute between congress and jinnah which led to his TNT and his communal politics. Of course, the books are critical of jinnah and his communal politics [ and rightly so] but not that critical. See - the history texts in india, as a rule, never go too critical on any muslim personality - not even the invaders ... because that may upset the secularism apple-cart.
So most people know about why jinnah did what he did. But see - unlike pakis, we don`t believe in ``devil made me do it`` theories. Just because Jinnah had a dispute with congress, doesn`t justify his communalism, vitriol, demonization of hindus and general islamo-fascism that he professed. just because you had a quarrel with your wife, doesn`t mean that you would suddenly become gay.
Jinnah`s actions are his alone and cannot be explained away with ``congress made me do it``.
++++
//..The hounding of Advani and maybe, Fernandes, suggests that India is also not ready to confront the past...//
The so called ``hounding`` is from congress, commies, and other assorted freaks[call themselves ``seculars``] who don`t know jack from their a$$es. And mostly because- advani seem to be on verge of redefining ``secularism`` iself and in the process, would pull the rug from under their feet.
Indians in general know their history and their past - there is nothing hidden to ``confront``. Indians know what jinnah was and what he did and why did. Like I said - that in no way justifies his actions. But people , in retrospect, generally accept that what happened is for the best - except for the bloodshed.
And please curb your paki tendency to throw stupid hyperboles like ``...political leaders in the world`s largest democracy cannot even express their own opinions`` - that`s just bullsh!t. The whole discussion here is because advani expressed his opinion and is standing by it.
//...to the best of my knowledge, no Indian historian has asked what made Jinnah demand a seperate nation?....//
For a self-proclaimed history teacher - you don`t seem to possess that much knowledge, do you?
Almost all history texts india mention the dispute between congress and jinnah which led to his TNT and his communal politics. Of course, the books are critical of jinnah and his communal politics [ and rightly so] but not that critical. See - the history texts in india, as a rule, never go too critical on any muslim personality - not even the invaders ... because that may upset the secularism apple-cart.
So most people know about why jinnah did what he did. But see - unlike pakis, we don`t believe in ``devil made me do it`` theories. Just because Jinnah had a dispute with congress, doesn`t justify his communalism, vitriol, demonization of hindus and general islamo-fascism that he professed. just because you had a quarrel with your wife, doesn`t mean that you would suddenly become gay.
Jinnah`s actions are his alone and cannot be explained away with ``congress made me do it``.
++++
//..The hounding of Advani and maybe, Fernandes, suggests that India is also not ready to confront the past...//
The so called ``hounding`` is from congress, commies, and other assorted freaks[call themselves ``seculars``] who don`t know jack from their a$$es. And mostly because- advani seem to be on verge of redefining ``secularism`` iself and in the process, would pull the rug from under their feet.
Indians in general know their history and their past - there is nothing hidden to ``confront``. Indians know what jinnah was and what he did and why did. Like I said - that in no way justifies his actions. But people , in retrospect, generally accept that what happened is for the best - except for the bloodshed.
And please curb your paki tendency to throw stupid hyperboles like ``...political leaders in the world`s largest democracy cannot even express their own opinions`` - that`s just bullsh!t. The whole discussion here is because advani expressed his opinion and is standing by it.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- masadi: tahmed writes "If you... How real is your
- MatloobZaman: Re: # 165 W/Salam WRWB My... How real is your
- masadi: HP writes "he problem... How real is your
- MatloobZaman: Re: # 26 by... Faith and Religion
- satyamvada: Murad, You are... Faith and Religion
- akcheema: I must say I... Alcohol and Teenagers: A
- ahmedmadani: ONLY OBAMA IS HOPE,... How real is your
- ahmedmadani: SAD thing Happening. Hope... How real is your
