Founding Mothers

the photograph of the women in Mr Yasser Hamdani`s article appears to be Noor us Sabah Begum.
The image appears to be the same women as the one on the stamp of Noor Us Saba published in 2002 in the series Tehrik e Pakistan ki Mujahid
Can you help verify this please?

Thank you for letting me on your site.
I read the debate on the founding mothers etc.
I have an urgent question. Can someone help in answering this.
Does anyone know about Noor us Sabah Begum?. She has appeared on a stamp of Pakistan published in 2002 as one of the Tehrik e Pakistan ke Mujahid series.
We have a copy of an interview taken before her death in 1978 by Begum Khurshid Mirza wher she talks of meeting the Quaid and presenting a check of a sum colllected. She was one of the women arrested in Lahore in the Anti Khizar Hyat movement.
There were many such unknown and unsung men and women who did their bit and no one remembers.
Does anyone know of her?
Iwould be grateful for an urgent reply.
Thanks a million

Rafay at # 62:

I would like to thank you for two great posts, especially # 59 proves that I am rightly a pro-Musharraf Chowky :-)

The law you have produced does not indicate that if a women commits suicide, her in-laws would automatically be considered guilty i.e. guilty until proven innocent. The laws only reflect penalty for committing acts of cruelty that lead to committing suicide by women or aiding and abetting suicide of women. I expect that same law would be existent in Pakistan on suicide incidents of women in their hosueholds. Suicide is not honor killing. You are treating both as same.

On honor killing in Pakistan you are right though.

The BD and SL laws, if I remember correctly, go by the rule - guilty until proven innocent.

Rafay

Apologies accepted.

Fascinating debate about honor killing/legal status. Definitely better than debating pointlessly with the self proclaimed defender of Madar-e-millat`s honor about why Fatima Jinnah was not included in the list above.

Syed Ahmed,

If mine is `teenage enthusiasm` yours must be the bitterness of a 90 year old.

Dear sir, if you care to note... You were called a bozo, because you have acted like one. You posted the same post 4 times... and this is not the first time on the board. You have done this atleast three other times. Now you are lying again... has your `browser configuration` miraculously fixed all of a sudden?

My dear friend you have established nothing, except that you are not very well read. Once again I must suggest two books of some renown on the subject (unlike you I am not fond grade 3 pakistan studies propaganda)

1) Rise of Feminism amongst Indian Muslim women 1920-1947 by Azra Asghar Ali (Oxford Millenium series)

2) From Purdah to Parliament by Shaista Ikramullah


The facts are:


I spoke of independent contribution to history, and not whether they were related to important men or not.

1) Jahanara Shahnawaz (who you believe to be young in 1940s) was amongst the 3 women
party touring England in the 1930s calling for the separate electorates for women for the emancipation of women of India... though she was the daughter of an important man, her achievements far eclipsed that of her family`s. By 1942 she had enough weight to be invited to the Viceroy`s war council, the acceptance of which led to her temporary ouster from the league. She also looms large as the first woman Muslim Leaguer, and the first asian woman to preside over a parliamentary session. Her contribution to Family laws debate, and her role in the parliament is well documented.

Q: Please inform me where Fatima Jinnah (before her brief but bold political campaign) made such a contribution. She emerges as a dutiful and dedicated sister of Jinnah. Raana Liaqat Ali`s primary claim to fame is her martyred husband.... though she played an important part in pakistani politics later.... what about Bi Ama?

An analogy could be drawn... thus that Turks were to abandon the memory of Halide Edib, their leading independence heroin, writer, poet and philosopher and instead eulogize Ataturk`s mother, sister, wife and daughter. I guess Turks are not as stupid as some other people.

2) Shaista Ikramullah was amongst the leading women of her times. Her contribution to feminism is discussed in Azra Asghar Ali`s book. In fact she thought so highly of this woman that Shaisata Ikram ullah has her picture on the cover of the book. She was the first Muslim woman PhD as I point out in my article, one of the two women in the first constituent assembly, a well renowned writer, she, unlike fatima Jinnah or raana liaqat ali, was part of the league central working committee... your claim that she was dependent because of her bureaucrat husband... and thus should not qualify in this list ... is laughable to say the least. Is her husband more famous than she is? Was he on the league working commitee? Was he a national leader? Was he in the Pakistan constituent assembly? Infact his contribution may well be that he was Shaista`s dutiful and supportive husband.


3) Had you bothered to read my post... I had quoted from `Nazaria Pakistan foundation` website ... about Sughra apa aka Fatima Sughra Begum... the very fact that you will call that `my word` or ` my immediate family members` shows that you are an intellectually dishonest human being.

Here is that entire post ``Was it Sughra Apa or Lady Hidayatullah?


Maybe to some brilliant scholars ‘relative obscurity and poverty’ means beggar woman… but to me it just meant that Sughra Apa was not living in opulent surroundings like the socialite wife of Hidayatullah…

Since Syed Ahmed is doing some cutting and pasting job…here is what I found on Nazaria-e-Pakistan foundation … While Sughra Hidayat Ullah (who was married to Sir Hidayatullah in 1919) was indeed present at the agitation, the woman I was talking about was also Sughra … she was known as Fatima Sughra begum … she was the ONE who hoisted the flag atop the secretariat. The nazaria Pakistan foundation makes that very clear.

Since Syed Ahmed’s research is limited to one website sadly…. There is no way he would know this.

http://www.nazariapak.info/ShowTopics.asp?TopicCode=14&CatCode=6

My mistake is simply not to write Sughra apa’s complete name which is Fatima Sughra …

Syed Ahmed’s favorite website is way off on facts… it has taken Sughra Apa’s picture and claimed that this is Lady Hidayatullah … http://www.storyofpakistan.com/person.asp?perid=P081 if you look at the picture she is holding the League flag… Sughra Apa’s picture was taken in 1947… meanwhile Lady Hidayatullah was born in 1904… Does the woman in the picture look like she is 43 years old?

It is a well known fact that Sughra Apa, and not Hidayatullah’s wife, hoisted the flag on the secretariat building….

I wonder who is altering facts to fit their agenda now? Nothing riles me up more than an ignorant (note IGNORANT) distortion of History.
No wonder ‘all Pakistanis are laughing hysterically’ after reading half of syed ahmed’s posts… as per his own admission. }

---

In re my post # 59:

It seems that sigalph235 has provided us with the details on the selection process for the Shariat Bench.

So I suppose I`ll have to discuss the Indian law with you. But first, let me point out the the Indian problem was dealing with dowry deaths, not honor killings (two completely different things, although both, I think, related to property). Dowry deaths were kept away from the police by describing them as suicides. But what is interesting to note is how the Indians tackled with the matter. First, they actually define what cruelty is (as a test, try defining honor in honor killing). Then they go about changing the presumptions of law. But don`t let me get ahead of myself. Here is the relevant law:

s. 498-A Indian Penal Code, 1860. Husband or relative of a husband subjecting her to cruelty.- Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to a fine.
Explanation: - For the purposes of this section, ‘cruelty’ means –
(a) any willful conduct which is of the nature as is likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether mental of physical) of the woman; or
(b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is with a view to coercing her or any other person related to her to meet any unlawful demand for property or valuable security or is on account of failure by her or any other persons related to her to meet such demand.

s. 113-A Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Presumption as to abetment of suicide by a married woman.- When the question is whether the commission of suicide by a woman had been abetted by her husband or any relative of her husband and it is shown that that she had committed suicide within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage and that her husband or such relative of her husband had subjected her to cruelty the court may presume, having regard to all the other circumstances of the case, that such suicide had been abetted by her husband or by such relative of the husband.
Explanation.- For the purposes of this section ‘cruelty’ shall have the same meaning as in s. 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

regards,
Rafay Alam

Law on Shariat bench From the Constitution of Pakistan, Article 203


``The Court shall consist of not more than eight Muslim [ Judges ], including the [5][Chief Justice], to be appointed by the President.

(3) The Chief Justice shall be a person who is, or has been, or is qualified, to be, a Judge of the Supreme Court or who is or has been a permanent Judge of a High Court.

[6](3A) Of the Judges not more than four shall be persons each one of whom is, or has been, or is qualified to be, a Judge of a High Court and not more than three shall be ulema who are well- versed in Islamic law.``


Similarly, appeals can be heard only by a specially constituted Shariat Apellate Bench of the Supreme Court where two of the five members have to be ulema.

Re:sigalph

I do apologise about the multiple posts - something wrong with my
browser configuration...

Re:mantolives........

Excitement is good ....pejoratives bad..... calling me a moron or an idiot hardly advances your argument.. ( are you sure you from Lahore - not Sheikhupura :)) Rather it shows exasperation on your part...... and detracts from the point that your are trying to make...

As for your sugra apa - I can hardly take your word for it -

1. I will confirm your Sugra story from credible sources ( preferbably published by somebody other than you or somebody related to you ) and will respond and issue retraction if necessary....

Let`s see what I have established .....
MAntolives wrote ...

``These women are those whose contributions to the cause of Pakistan stood independent of their spouses, brothers or fathers. Therefore Fatima Jinnah, Raana Liaqat Ali, Viqarrunnisa Noon, and Begum Abida Sultan are not amongst them, despite the fact that they too have every right to be included in the founding mothers``

1. The women you included were as dependent on their spouses/siblings/parental patronage as those you choose to exclude..... Now if you had stated that these were ``your`` preferential founding mothers... I would not be arguing about it .....But your basic premise does not hold any water.....

2. Now for your Ms Sugra- Apa , - lets us assume that you are right - I have nothing against her - but her inclusion in national leaders is bit far fetched - particularly if nobody but you and your immediate family members have heard of her .......

3. Shaista Ikramullah, Jahan Ara Shanawaz, Tassaduque Hussain - were relatively young in the 40`s and consequently emerged as the second generation of the league`s women leaders...... you ignored several others but we will let it pass....

4. Lady Haroon ( Ala Nusrat Khatoon) - who is described by you as an regional leader...was actually a national figure, along with with Fatima Jinnah and Rana Liaquat Ali.....formed the senior rung of the Women`s Muslim League leadership....

5. Your inclusion of Sugra-Apa ( a unknown) , Mumtaz shahnawaz ( Actually she was a writer - I am not sure whar her contributions to the movement were) , Fatima Begum - on par with the others is a bit unfair ..... thatis like trying to portray Crispus Attuckus ( the African-american who died in the Boston Massacare- and of course he did more than plant a flag ) on par with Hamilton , Washington and Jefferson as the founding fathers of the United states.....

Baring your teenage enthusiasm - I would suggest a little more research and little less emotion in your articles.... lest your beome known as a writer of fables ( a la Hans Christian Anderson or Aesop ) when you wanted to become Heroditus or Pliny the elder..

Romair # 50:

I`ll check the law on the selection of Shariat Bench Judges. My limited knowledge does understand that the Bench comprises of a mix of judges of the High Courts and other experts in Shariah. I suppose the decision of who is and who is not an expert in Shariah is taken by the State. But I`ll figure the connections out and let you know the answer on another message board (this one will soon be off the main page, and it is already getting hot in here).

And Ahmadzai # 52:
I studied in University that the Indians had passed the law. I`ll check my notes and have a snoop around the internet. Again, I`ll let you know if anything crops up.

Meanwhile, on the topic of Honor Killings (although, much to Mantolives/YLH`s increasing fury, this detracts from his article - many apologies), here is today`s editorial from the Daily Times:

EDITORIAL: Thank you, General Musharraf, but...

Sometimes a benevolent dictatorship can achieve socially desired results more efficiently than a lumbering democracy of vested interests. A recent case of a classic ‘honour killing’ proves this point. According to press reports, a young woman by the name of Afshin, who ‘belonged’ to a landed Sahu family in district Khanewal of Punjab, was done to death by family patriarchs because she was alleged to have brought ‘dishonour’ to the clan by wanting to marry someone unacceptable to family elders. The death of the girl went un-remarked because there was no formal complainant — it was, said the family privately, an ‘internal’ matter. Hundreds of such cases go by default every year in this country for three main reasons: clever lawyers can frame the murder under the Hudood laws and get the murderers off lightly; our ‘culture’ is still shackled by many pre-Islamic and tribal notions of honour and there is no great societal abhorrence of such acts; powerful vested interests in the state are inclined to side with, rather than book, the culprits.

But this case is shaping up differently, at least so far. It is learnt that the matter was brought to the notice of General Pervez Musharraf and he promptly ordered the machinery of the state into action. The local big wigs of the area, including a federal minister, were ordered not to protect the influential family, the local administration and police were whipped into investigation, the grave of the victim was officially dug up and Afshin’s body was sent for a post mortem. Initial press reports say there are torture marks on the body and that she was probably strangulated to death or electrocuted. Family sources have until now claimed various things: that she had a heart attack; that she died of a mysterious illness, and so forth. While the results are awaited, the Sahu family is said to be running from pillar to post seeking legal and political protection. And then yesterday, we heard the good news that the girl’s father gave himself up to the police and confessed to the crime.

We see this as a case that will test General Musharraf’s resolve to bring ‘enlightened moderation’ to Pakistan. When the action was ordered by General Musharraf, international wire services and news agencies were quick to praise him. In fact, CNN had a ticker tape of General Musharraf’s order launching the inquiry running below its main stories of the day, which meant that tens of millions of people all over the world would have silently applauded Pakistan’s president for his humane and timely intervention. Indeed, by this gesture alone General Musharraf may have earned more international goodwill than all his statements against extremism so far. But this sort of thing cuts both ways. By the same token, if General Musharraf doesn’t personally make sure that the case is concluded on merit and becomes a powerful deterrent for all honour killings in the country, a great opportunity would have been lost to strike a blow for human rights and the cynics would be encouraged in accusing General Musharraf of political opportunism.

That is why it is important for General Pervez Musharraf to personally make sure, on a day to day basis if necessary, that the case is not waylaid or sabotaged midway through a combination of vested interests, police corruption, institutional lethargy and political sifarshis. Certainly, this lethal combination of social, political and legal practice has been responsible for subverting the course of justice in this country for decades. When will it end?

There are five centres of power in Punjab: the chief minister, the governor, the corps commanders, the IGP and the chief secretary. They must all singly and jointly be ordered to make sure that justice is not only done to the spirit of Afshin and the human rights struggle against honour killings but also seen by everyone at home and abroad to have been done.

Earlier this month, we had cause to be shamefaced and dismayed (Daily Times editorial, ‘National Assembly’s “honour”’). Mr M P Bhandara, MNA, tried to rustle up a resolution in our ‘great and democratic parliament’ against the uncivilised practice of honour killings that is totally alien to the enlightened and moderating vision of Islam. But he was faced with a stunning conspiracy of silence. First the Speaker of the Assembly tried to kill his resolution. When Mr Bhandara insisted, he was given the floor. But except for one woman member of parliament, he could not get any of our gallant defenders of justice and democracy in parliament to stand up and shout NO to honour killings. Finally, he was summoned by the Speaker to his chamber where some treasury MNAs told him to withdraw the resolution since it (resolution) went against their ‘code of honour’. It would be tragic if this great initiative by General Pervez Musharraf were to meet with the same fate. This is a classic case of what may be a small step for General Musharraf but could become a great leap for Pakistan. *

---

end quote.

I think Sethi hits a couple of points in the head here.

Best regards,
Rafay Alam

Chowk staff

Please take care of this bozo who is pointlessly flooding this board.

syed ahmed...

Stop flooding my board like a maniac who can`t prove his point through logic alone!

The fact is that your claims have been disproved. Instead of making tall claims like revisionism why don`t you point out actual points where you feel I have passed on my personal opinion ... the fact is that you can`t and it pisses you off even more.. You just can`t admit you were out of line with your so called `historical` perspective. That would after all be a manly thing to do.

I still haven`t seen you apologize for insulting Sughra Apa who is an icon of Lahore.

Typical is your previous response... instead of admitting that you were dead wrong about who put the flag there... you have started a tangential debate on `ethnocentric` bias eventhough in the very next post I admitted that Lady Hidayatullah was also in that rally, but she was not the famous young lady of about 20 who put the flag atop Lahore secretariat.

``Some of your articles are on the mark - others are pure revisionism based not on fact but personal opinion. Andyou pass it off as history.... ``


Instead of barking it out repeatedly ... have the courtesy of pointing out exactly which articles are you talking about .... so that I can make amends next time. Or are you just lying out of teeth to save your own face???


-YLH

Syed Ahmed sahib

As much as your words are illuminating, must we have four times times the light?

rafay-alam at # 49:

``I know that India faced a crises in relation to Dowry Deaths (or stove deaths, as they were known) in the 80s. This resulted in a change to the Indian Penal Code. Now, if memory serves me correctly, if a newly married woman dies in unnatural circumstances within the first 7 years of her marriage, the burden of proving that they did not murder her falls upon the woman`s husband or in-laws. ``

Although this was mentioned once before by an Indian participant, I have my strong doubts whether this was passed as a law in India. This penalty was under discussion by HR activists both in India and in Pakistan (perhaps it is practiced in BD and SL), but was never implemented. In any case, even if it is implemented, the incidents have only increased. I can post a link on this one.

Perhaps an Indian Chowky will like to educate us all if this law really was rolled out.

RE: Mantolives.....

Re:# 34

MAntolives writes ..

``Good! Looks like you finally decided to read something other than third grade history books``....


Your posts amuse me .... you are too condescending - You dont hold the monopoly on truth - Some of your articles are on the mark - others are pure revisionism based not on fact but personal opinion. Andyou pass it off as history....


``Think logically instead of just quoting off of ‘Story of Pakistan’…
what would a wife of a politician from Karachi be doing in Lahore? ``

It would be depend on your mindset - Logically speaking in the Pakistan of today with a strong ethnocentric bias - this is probably true.... ( Actually even today in the cosmopolitan cities of Islamabad and Karachi `` amongst the enligtened ones`` - this does not hold true)....


The period of 1920- 1955 was unique in the history of the subcontinental Muslims - it saw the emergence of an ``enligtened class`` of Muslim intelligensia... - Some emerged from humble backgrounds like Jinnah and Iqbal - self made men - others like Liaquat or Nazimudin were aristoicrats - Still others like the Isphanis or the Haroons were mercantile houses.....- all buoyed by the traditions of the British Raj - which to large
degree promoted ``meritocracy`` at least in the administrative services.....

Consequently the degree of enligtenment that present amongst the founding fathers of Pakistan is noticeably absent today - Intermarriage accross ethnic lines was common place - Shia-Sunni marriage amongst them are also very common....


Jinnah - who was a gujrati speaking Khoja ( from Gujrat) was a hit across INdia partular respected among the lawless tribesmen of Baluchistan and the Frontier .....

Liaquat - A East Punjabi whose main constituency was UP/ CENtral India and Delhi....
Iqbal - A Kashmiri from Sialkot was a instant celebrity in Calcutta and moost of India......
Moin Nawaz Jang et al - from Hyderabad repatriated corores of rupees to Pakistan illegally....so that Pakistan could survive
Ross MAsood - from Delhi - grandson of Sir Syed was highly regarded in Lahore and a good friend of Iqbal...
Abdur Rab Nishtar - from West Punjab was much respected by the Indian Muslims

All India MUslim League held sessions in almost all cities of the sub continent - and the leaders attended these sessions with their wives .....so it is not inconceivable that Sindhi women was fighting for a cause in Lahore...

Also over time many of these leaders married their children or grand children into each others families - consequently many of their progeny is also inter-related ....

The ethnocentric focus that you allude to is a much later phenomenon ie mid -late 50`s

---

it was an attempt by the feudal forces ( mostly former Unionists) for a grab of power aided by the NCO`s who had become masters of Pakistan Army and eventually Pakistan. - It also saw the eventual disintegration of the institutions of the Raj which promoted meritocracy and instead regressed to a system that predated it and heavily relied on nepotism, and clan and regional affiliations...... ala ``sikha Shahi``.

Bhutto ( despite his dynamicism and substantial accomplishments as a FM)
through his machivallian poltics of populism - eventually destroyed the mercantile houses that opposed him ( destroying Pakistan industry) - and made a mockery of education by socializing it - and completely destroyed any semblance of law and order by politisizing the judiciary and enforcement.

It is also ironic that none of the leaders of the Pakistan movement promoted their children ...... In stark contrast to the dynastic ambitions of the houses of Ayub, Bhutto and zia and the sharifs......

I have had the good fortune to meet some of these ladies ( most of the ones who survived into the 70`s and 80`s) - that you write you about..and heard first hand anecdotal accounts from my family about others.

BTW - I am not the editor that you allude to - I am just a sruggling individual trying to make end meet... and not accomplished enough to meddle in poltics - local or otherwise.....

RE: Mantolives.....

Re:# 34

MAntolives writes ..

``Good! Looks like you finally decided to read something other than third grade history books``....


Your posts amuse me .... you are too condescending - You dont hold the monopoly on truth - Some of your articles are on the mark - others are pure revisionism based not on fact but personal opinion. Andyou pass it off as history....


``Think logically instead of just quoting off of ‘Story of Pakistan’…
what would a wife of a politician from Karachi be doing in Lahore? ``

It would be depend on your mindset - Logically speaking in the Pakistan of today with a strong ethnocentric bias - this is probably true.... ( Actually even today in the cosmopolitan cities of Islamabad and Karachi `` amongst the enligtened ones`` - this does not hold true)....


The period of 1920- 1955 was unique in the history of the subcontinental Muslims - it saw the emergence of an ``enligtened class`` of Muslim intelligensia... - Some emerged from humble backgrounds like Jinnah and Iqbal - self made men - others like Liaquat or Nazimudin were aristoicrats - Still others like the Isphanis or the Haroons were mercantile houses.....- all buoyed by the traditions of the British Raj - which to large
degree promoted ``meritocracy`` at least in the administrative services.....

Consequently the degree of enligtenment that present amongst the founding fathers of Pakistan is noticeably absent today - Intermarriage accross ethnic lines was common place - Shia-Sunni marriage amongst them are also very common....


Jinnah - who was a gujrati speaking Khoja ( from Gujrat) was a hit across INdia partular respected among the lawless tribesmen of Baluchistan and the Frontier .....

Liaquat - A East Punjabi whose main constituency was UP/ CENtral India and Delhi....
Iqbal - A Kashmiri from Sialkot was a instant celebrity in Calcutta and moost of India......
Moin Nawaz Jang et al - from Hyderabad repatriated corores of rupees to Pakistan illegally....so that Pakistan could survive
Ross MAsood - from Delhi - grandson of Sir Syed was highly regarded in Lahore and a good friend of Iqbal...
Abdur Rab Nishtar - from West Punjab was much respected by the Indian Muslims

All India MUslim League held sessions in almost all cities of the sub continent - and the leaders attended these sessions with their wives .....so it is not inconceivable that Sindhi women was fighting for a cause in Lahore...

Also over time many of these leaders married their children or grand children into each others families - consequently many of their progeny is also inter-related ....

The ethnocentric focus that you allude to is a much later phenomenon ie mid -late 50`s

---

it was an attempt by the feudal forces ( mostly former Unionists) for a grab of power aided by the NCO`s who had become masters of Pakistan Army and eventually Pakistan. - It also saw the eventual disintegration of the institutions of the Raj which promoted meritocracy and instead regressed to a system that predated it and heavily relied on nepotism, and clan and regional affiliations...... ala ``sikha Shahi``.

Bhutto ( despite his dynamicism and substantial accomplishments as a FM)
through his machivallian poltics of populism - eventually destroyed the mercantile houses that opposed him ( destroying Pakistan industry) - and made a mockery of education by socializing it - and completely destroyed any semblance of law and order by politisizing the judiciary and enforcement.

It is also ironic that none of the leaders of the Pakistan movement promoted their children ...... In stark contrast to the dynastic ambitions of the houses of Ayub, Bhutto and zia and the sharifs......

I have had the good fortune to meet some of these ladies ( most of the ones who survived into the 70`s and 80`s) - that you write you about..and heard first hand anecdotal accounts from my family about others.

BTW - I am not the editor that you allude to - I am just a sruggling individual trying to make end meet... and not accomplished enough to meddle in poltics - local or otherwise.....

RE: Mantolives.....

Re:# 34

MAntolives writes ..

``Good! Looks like you finally decided to read something other than third grade history books``....


Your posts amuse me .... you are too condescending - You dont hold the monopoly on truth - Some of your articles are on the mark - others are pure revisionism based not on fact but personal opinion. Andyou pass it off as history....


``Think logically instead of just quoting off of ‘Story of Pakistan’…
what would a wife of a politician from Karachi be doing in Lahore? ``

It would be depend on your mindset - Logically speaking in the Pakistan of today with a strong ethnocentric bias - this is probably true.... ( Actually even today in the cosmopolitan cities of Islamabad and Karachi `` amongst the enligtened ones`` - this does not hold true)....


The period of 1920- 1955 was unique in the history of the subcontinental Muslims - it saw the emergence of an ``enligtened class`` of Muslim intelligensia... - Some emerged from humble backgrounds like Jinnah and Iqbal - self made men - others like Liaquat or Nazimudin were aristoicrats - Still others like the Isphanis or the Haroons were mercantile houses.....- all buoyed by the traditions of the British Raj - which to large
degree promoted ``meritocracy`` at least in the administrative services.....

Consequently the degree of enligtenment that present amongst the founding fathers of Pakistan is noticeably absent today - Intermarriage accross ethnic lines was common place - Shia-Sunni marriage amongst them are also very common....


Jinnah - who was a gujrati speaking Khoja ( from Gujrat) was a hit across INdia partular respected among the lawless tribesmen of Baluchistan and the Frontier .....

Liaquat - A East Punjabi whose main constituency was UP/ CENtral India and Delhi....
Iqbal - A Kashmiri from Sialkot was a instant celebrity in Calcutta and moost of India......
Moin Nawaz Jang et al - from Hyderabad repatriated corores of rupees to Pakistan illegally....so that Pakistan could survive
Ross MAsood - from Delhi - grandson of Sir Syed was highly regarded in Lahore and a good friend of Iqbal...
Abdur Rab Nishtar - from West Punjab was much respected by the Indian Muslims

All India MUslim League held sessions in almost all cities of the sub continent - and the leaders attended these sessions with their wives .....so it is not inconceivable that Sindhi women was fighting for a cause in Lahore...

Also over time many of these leaders married their children or grand children into each others families - consequently many of their progeny is also inter-related ....

The ethnocentric focus that you allude to is a much later phenomenon ie mid -late 50`s

---

it was an attempt by the feudal forces ( mostly former Unionists) for a grab of power aided by the NCO`s who had become masters of Pakistan Army and eventually Pakistan. - It also saw the eventual disintegration of the institutions of the Raj which promoted meritocracy and instead regressed to a system that predated it and heavily relied on nepotism, and clan and regional affiliations...... ala ``sikha Shahi``.

Bhutto ( despite his dynamicism and substantial accomplishments as a FM)
through his machivallian poltics of populism - eventually destroyed the mercantile houses that opposed him ( destroying Pakistan industry) - and made a mockery of education by socializing it - and completely destroyed any semblance of law and order by politisizing the judiciary and enforcement.

It is also ironic that none of the leaders of the Pakistan movement promoted their children ...... In stark contrast to the dynastic ambitions of the houses of Ayub, Bhutto and zia and the sharifs......

I have had the good fortune to meet some of these ladies ( most of the ones who survived into the 70`s and 80`s) - that you write you about..and heard first hand anecdotal accounts from my family about others.

BTW - I am not the editor that you allude to - I am just a sruggling individual trying to make end meet... and not accomplished enough to meddle in poltics - local or otherwise.....

RE: Mantolives.....

Re:# 34

MAntolives writes ..

``Good! Looks like you finally decided to read something other than third grade history books``....


Your posts amuse me .... you are too condescending - You dont hold the monopoly on truth - Some of your articles are on the mark - others are pure revisionism based not on fact but personal opinion. Andyou pass it off as history....


``Think logically instead of just quoting off of ‘Story of Pakistan’…
what would a wife of a politician from Karachi be doing in Lahore? ``

It would be depend on your mindset - Logically speaking in the Pakistan of today with a strong ethnocentric bias - this is probably true.... ( Actually even today in the cosmopolitan cities of Islamabad and Karachi `` amongst the enligtened ones`` - this does not hold true)....


The period of 1920- 1955 was unique in the history of the subcontinental Muslims - it saw the emergence of an ``enligtened class`` of Muslim intelligensia... - Some emerged from humble backgrounds like Jinnah and Iqbal - self made men - others like Liaquat or Nazimudin were aristoicrats - Still others like the Isphanis or the Haroons were mercantile houses.....- all buoyed by the traditions of the British Raj - which to large
degree promoted ``meritocracy`` at least in the administrative services.....

Consequently the degree of enligtenment that present amongst the founding fathers of Pakistan is noticeably absent today - Intermarriage accross ethnic lines was common place - Shia-Sunni marriage amongst them are also very common....


Jinnah - who was a gujrati speaking Khoja ( from Gujrat) was a hit across INdia partular respected among the lawless tribesmen of Baluchistan and the Frontier .....

Liaquat - A East Punjabi whose main constituency was UP/ CENtral India and Delhi....
Iqbal - A Kashmiri from Sialkot was a instant celebrity in Calcutta and moost of India......
Moin Nawaz Jang et al - from Hyderabad repatriated corores of rupees to Pakistan illegally....so that Pakistan could survive
Ross MAsood - from Delhi - grandson of Sir Syed was highly regarded in Lahore and a good friend of Iqbal...
Abdur Rab Nishtar - from West Punjab was much respected by the Indian Muslims

All India MUslim League held sessions in almost all cities of the sub continent - and the leaders attended these sessions with their wives .....so it is not inconceivable that Sindhi women was fighting for a cause in Lahore...

Also over time many of these leaders married their children or grand children into each others families - consequently many of their progeny is also inter-related ....

The ethnocentric focus that you allude to is a much later phenomenon ie mid -late 50`s

---

it was an attempt by the feudal forces ( mostly former Unionists) for a grab of power aided by the NCO`s who had become masters of Pakistan Army and eventually Pakistan. - It also saw the eventual disintegration of the institutions of the Raj which promoted meritocracy and instead regressed to a system that predated it and heavily relied on nepotism, and clan and regional affiliations...... ala ``sikha Shahi``.

Bhutto ( despite his dynamicism and substantial accomplishments as a FM)
through his machivallian poltics of populism - eventually destroyed the mercantile houses that opposed him ( destroying Pakistan industry) - and made a mockery of education by socializing it - and completely destroyed any semblance of law and order by politisizing the judiciary and enforcement.

It is also ironic that none of the leaders of the Pakistan movement promoted their children ...... In stark contrast to the dynastic ambitions of the houses of Ayub, Bhutto and zia and the sharifs......

I have had the good fortune to meet some of these ladies ( most of the ones who survived into the 70`s and 80`s) - that you write you about..and heard first hand anecdotal accounts from my family about others.

BTW - I am not the editor that you allude to - I am just a sruggling individual trying to make end meet... and not accomplished enough to meddle in poltics - local or otherwise.....