Indo-Pak History via Mail

#429 I always thought that she could out run most mules

OTOH WVA water is such that most fathers and then brothers catch up!

Salim

“Unfortunately none was as pernicious and as drastic as the Scotch-laden Jinnah in the number of people killed as a result of his nutcase policy.”

That is highly debatable… Some agreed with the partition to save lives…If it was Jinnah’s politics then more Muslims would have died in UP and CP than in Punjab. Pakistan was an excuse for all three communities in Punjab to let out frustrations and bigotr-y.

After Pakistan, Punjab in India was further divided on religious bases when Hindu and Sikhs got on each other’s nerves… Something in punj darya…Can’t blame it on Jinnah alone.

PS...Scotch is good....

Jang, HP,
I didn`t know that Shah Jahan moved to WVA with his daughter after Mumtaj Mahal died. :)

HP #425 {``This is such a non sense...equating Jinnah with OBL is like comparing Hitler with Churchill. ``}

HP, UBL is really a kid when it comes to Jinnah. The Quaid-e-Azam was always ready to threaten Direction Action if the Congress and the British did not listen to his demand for partition. Direct Action meant halla gulla in the streets, a few stabbings, some burning, and general mayhem. He used this trump card so often, that he lost control of the fire that swept through the entire land.
Jinnah used Islam to attain a homeland for some of his people over which he could rule. Those who did not make it to the promised land, were conveniently dubbed ``Indian citizens.`` The author of the TNT quickly dismissed the TNT when it came to fairness and justice. What a hypocrite?

UBL has got greater ambitions - restoration of the Caliphate with his sorry ass as Amir ul Momineen. To him ``Direct Action`` means terrorizing the enemy until the path is clear for his soldiers to take over Darul Islam.

HP #425 {``This is such a non sense...equating Jinnah with OBL is like comparing Hitler with Churchill. ``}

HP, UBL is really a kid when it comes to Jinnah. The Quaid-e-Azam was always ready to threaten Direction Action if the Congress and the British did not listen to his demand for partition. Direct Action meant halla gulla in the streets, a few stabbings, some burning, and general mayhem. He used this trump card so often, that he lost control of the fire that swept through the entire land.
Jinnah used Islam to attain a homeland for some of his people over which he could rule. Those who did not make it to the promised land, were conveniently dubbed ``Indian citizens.`` The author of the TNT quickly dismissed the TNT when it came to fairness and justice. What a hypocrite?

UBL has got greater ambitions - restoration of the Caliphate with his sorry ass as Amir ul Momineen. To him ``Direct Action`` means terrorizing the enemy until the path is clear for his soldiers to take over Darul Islam.

#421 HP {``Most of them were afeemchi anyway and had no idea what was going on...Aurangzeb was a nutcase…should have used afeem more...but most of the kings were nutcases any way...``}

HP,
I agree. Unfortunately none was as pernicious and as drastic as the Scotch-laden Jinnah in the number of people killed as a result of his nutcase policy. Others deserving somewhat less of a mention are Bhutto, Mujeeb, Indira, Yahya, Modi and Zia. And Zia just smoked dung. :)

#422

``So Jinnah is similar to OBL, both are condemned and their deals (i.e., politicising Islam) created shameful histories for their followers. ``

This is such a non sense...equating Jinnah with OBL is like comparing Hitler with Churchill.
The only thing common between the two was that both were European. Only thing common between OBL and Jinnah is that they are both Muslims and that is not enough to call them equal.
Political Islam has many shades and Jinnah never advocated political Islam...Hyperventilation becomes stupidity if not backed by proper knowledge and understanding of the process.
Do you even know what political Islam is? What similarities you find between Jinnah`s politics and OBL terrorism?

Raw Dust #422 {``So Jinnah is similar to OBL, both are condemned and their deals (i.e., politicising Islam) created shameful histories for their followers. ``}

Kachchi Dhool,
Exactly! I agree. Politicizing any spiritual belief and then militarizing to execute the ugly philosophy is the problem:

Jinnah, UBL, MMA, Tally Ban, Zarqawi, the Algeerian Militants, and so on.
Thackeray, Advani, Modi, Vajpayee, and so on.
King Constantine, Pople Urabanus II, Crusaders, Knights Templar, Conquistadores, Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand, Adolph Hitler, and so on.
Ben Gurion, Begin, Rabbi Kahane, Sharon, and so on
Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Chou, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, and so on
David Koresh, Brigham Young, Jones, UBL, Charles Manson, and so on.

Soysauce #418, {``Salim, perhaps what sets apart some of the rulers is the fratricide and patricide that you find among them. No, muslim rulers were not monolithic - most of them couldn`t even get along with their own families..``}

Soy,
Well if we used fratri, matri, infant, and patricide as a metric, then that opens up a whole new can of worms. :)

Peter the Great had his own son killed.
JahaNgir had his own son skinned.
Shah Jahan fired Aurangjeb several times
Aurangjeb had his father imprisoned and his brothers sent to paradise.
Ram`s father was not very nice to him.
The Pandavas killed many of their own cousins with the help of Lord Krishna
Dipendra and his killing spree in Nepal where he committed regicide, patricide, matricide, fratricide, sororicide, and finally suicide.
The War of the Roses
Greek and Roman rulers killing their mothers, fathers, and siblings
Ottoman Sultan killing their son, brothers, and nephews as a matter of state policy

``Almost saying the same thing. Let me give an example. UBL is NOT a Muslim hero, but he is definitely a Jiahdi hero. See the difference? UBL, in his belief in extremism to install a Caliphate with him at the top, has the aim of creating a permanent schism between Muslims and the rest of the world. Killing Muslims along the way to accompllish his goal is justified in his weird mind.

Jinnah is a Paki hero and definitely NOT a Muslim hero. He raised the Hindu vs Muslim problem to achieve Pakistan a country that he could rule. He did not care how many Muslims (and Hindus and Sikhs) were butchered along the way - as long as he attained his goal.

Ghaznavi, Ghori, and others like them are heroes to jihadists and Pakis. They succeeded in killing, looting, and pillaging Hindus - creating a rift between Hindus and Muslims almost forever, thus helping to create the separate identity for Muslims - under THEIR rule.
``

Dear Chauhan of Saleemi (afeemchee?) Persuasion
the point, you are trying to make is unflatteringly staring right in your face. Read again what you wrote, please. See how the lethal potion of Islam and its hold on the hearts and minds on Jihadis and soft-Muslims alike can give in to the worst form of killing, loot, plunder, pillaging and suppression of histories. (this is my point).
You must appreciate the metaphor of selling one`s soul to the Devil and in a reverse-analogy, i would guess that raising Islam-in-danger bogey is akin to selling one`s soul to the Devil on which no backtracking is possible. It doesnt matter, if a cultural, progressive, secular, alcoholic muslim does it. Making that deal have consequences and that`s What Islamism would see through.

So Jinnah is similar to OBL, both are condemned and their deals (i.e., politicising Islam) created shameful histories for their followers.

Jang Bhadur,
I am not upset... I am just harassing people. I know about that story as well... Shajahan`s daughter and many more...The history is just a biased view of some people. Those who liked them wrote the better side those who didn’t-- wrote other gory details.

Most of them were afeemchi anyway and had no idea what was going on...Aurangzeb was a nutcase…should have used afeem more...but most of the kings were nutcases any way...some got caught with their pants down and some became heroes...it is all relative...
Now chill! nothing serious here. I was just trying to get on Mohar`s nerves....

#404 HP.. dont get upset, this could just be gossip spread by firangi courtiers of the mughal court. they were always very interested in ascivious details. mughal and indian authors are always respecful to their kings.

there is also much gossip (again spread by ferners...rolling eye icon) about shahjehan..after death of mumtaz mahal, he was very upset and found much consolation for his grief with his duaghter (i think jahanara) ..the ferner, who was also some kind of a quack so had some harem access wrote that she was fair of limb (like he ever got to see her even a nakhun of her limb .. rolling eye icon) and the ferner claims that the dilli ulema opined that the emperor offcourse had a right to the fruit of the tree he planted. (those ulema very well knew that the emperor also had full-right to their privates.. showing teeth icon)

again no indian historian or cronicler would write such trash (angry face icon).

#404 HP.. dont get upset, this could just be gossip spread by firangi courtiers of the mughal court. they were always very interested in ascivious details. mughal and indian authors are always respecful to their kings.

there is also much gossip (again spread by ferners...rolling eye icon) about shahjehan..after death of mumtaz mahal, he was very upset and found much consolation for his grief with his duaghter (i think jahanara) ..the ferner, who was also some kind of a quack so had some harem access wrote that she was fair of limb (like he ever got to see her even a nakhun of her limb .. rolling eye icon) and the ferner claims that the dilli ulema opined that the emperor offcourse had a right to the fruit of the tree he planted. (those ulema very well knew that the emperor also had full-right to their privates.. showing teeth icon)

again no indian historian or cronicler would write such trash (angry face icon).

Salim, perhaps what sets apart some of the rulers is the fratricide and patricide that you find among them. No, muslim rulers were not monolithic - most of them couldn`t even get along with their own families..

#415 by Salim_Chauhan on November 14, 2005 1:11pm PT
``#414, HP {``The ones who wielded longer swords became leaders``}

HP,
Some things never change. :)”

One of the numerous benefits :)

Sword matters…

#414, HP {``The ones who wielded longer swords became leaders``}

HP,
Some things never change. :)