Daughters of Hajar Re: # 779 Tahmed32
If not Arabic, which language did he chose? Please let us know, since you are so sure. Thank you

Daughters of Hajar Re: # 754 Tahmed32

Actually, you are giving your opinion, when you stated in the original post, `If you really want to understand...`. So, in the footsteps of the esteemed Hamidm, `Prove it.
Plus, we never had the pleasure of your response to the inconsistency pointed out in #662
BTW, I noticed that my nick scratches your herniated disc. All the better!:)

Daughters of Hajar Re: # 749 Hamidm2
And how did you conclude that I was asking you to give up any of those other pursuits?

Daughters of Hajar Re: # 663 Hamidm2

I interpret Tahmed`s lack of response to your eminently logical reasoning as a sign of informal surrender and retreat in the face of reason. Keep up the good work.

Daughters of Hajar Re: # 665 Hamidm2

Bingo!

Daughters of Hajar Re: # 650 Tahmed32

``What is far more significant is the commonalities in religious theology (which are far greater than the differences in religious practice). And this underlying commonality in essence of all religions should not be surprising: religion fulfills a common human need...``

That would have been more believable if you were not such an unequivocal and ardent supporter of Partition. You will recall, that the Pakistan movement rejected efforts to find common grounds between Muslims and Hindus on matters of governance, claiming that the differences overrode any similarities. Quite the opposite of what you are espousing now.
CIAO

Daughters of Hajar Re: # 355 Naqshbandi

Hi there! Do you know if the former cutie Indian actress Zarina Wahab is descended from the Saudi Wahabbis? I`d hate to think of her as fire and brimstone on the inside!

Daughters of Hajar Re: # 192 Arjunm2
Actually, if I am not mistaken, wasn`t the entire Pakistan movement (just so no one misses this, aka `The Land of the pure`, leaving only fools to guess as to who is impure!) inspired by anything other than the fact that `Identities like ``muslim``, ``hindu`` are the broken crutches that others seek in order to belong`?

Pakistan – The Threat From Within Re: # 292 Arjun2

The crux of the matter is this extract from your post...

``Contrary to the widely held view among apologists and supporters of military dictatorships, the real per capita income is not only higher in India but the gap has increased since 1999. In that year, India’s per capita income was 25 per cent higher than Pakistan’s and in 2005 it was 46 per cent higher in purchasing power parity terms. ``

I would also specify that this needs to be considered by apologists of Jinnah, TNT, Lahore Resolution, YLH, and others

Citizenship and Identity in Pakistan Re: # 340 YLH
Ypu can`t see the forest for the trees. Go, debate the fine points on Ahmediya citizenship and the Objectives resolution and the requirement to declare Ahmediyas heretics on passport renewal foms. Leave India alone, and let it be governed by `3 Indian Presidents who happened to be Muslims (Zakir Hussein, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, and the current Abdul Kalam), not to mention that its current head (and de facto India`s most powerful politician) is a Catholic widow, the serving Prime Minister is a Sikh, the serving Chief of Army Staff is a Sikh, the serving Defense Minister is a Christian`.

Citizenship and Identity in Pakistan Re: # 326

``Indians want to both praise Congress for rejecting the CMP and abuse Muslim League for making Pakistan ... you can`t have your cake and eat it too which is what Indians end up doing.``

Let me explain so that you understand this: Pakistan was a bad idea (as proved by `71), the Cabinet Mission Plan was worse. Got it?

#328
``...Indian Army would have a large number of Muslims (according to Sadna 55-60% but in reality around 35%) ... and that was unacceptable to lovey dovey leaders of Congress Party...``

Let me explain this as well: The `Congress Party` had no problems with a Muslim as being it party President (Maulana Azad), nor with 3 Indian Presidents who happened to be Muslims (Zakir Hussein, Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, and the current Abdul Kalam), not to mention that its current head (and de facto India`s most powerful politician) is a Catholic widow, the serving Prime Minister is a Sikh, the serving Chief of Army Staff is a Sikh, the serving Defense Minister is a Christian.

But, given your rotten Pakistani upbringing, where you cannot see the world without religious filters (your protestations to being `secular` notwithstanding and appearing to be hollow in light of your crass remarks), your observations are not all that surprising. You, twit!

Go, stew in your Pakistani juices now.

Citizenship and Identity in Pakistan Hey guys and gals! Check out the new look of Nawaz Sharif! The hair transplant procedure seems to have gone well. I guess that he is ready for elections now:

Citizenship and Identity in Pakistan Re: # 291 Manto

``...There is one constitution (which I dislike for many reasons) of 1973... which has had many amendments and additions since 1973. Nor is it suspended right now... it was suspended twice 1977-1984 and then 1999-2002.... when Provisional Constitutional Order was in force...``

Thanks for correcting me. Given the checkered constitutional history of the land of the `original constitutionalist`, I was not sure if the PCO was still in effect. By the way, the PCO itself is unconstitutional, isn`t it? (Oh, I forgot, unless it is forced down the barrel of a gun on a pliant supreme court). Ciao!

Citizenship and Identity in Pakistan Re: # 287 Manto

``...Pakistanis chose joint electorate as the method of election under both constitutions of 1956 and 1973...``

You are clutching at straws. There are so many suspended versions of your god-forsaken constitution that they need to be put under effective configuration management:) A desi code coolie could help you do that along with his version of Java/.Net code:) My head is dizzy with which Constitution says what. But, wait a minute. They are all suspended/annulled/neutered today. The only constitution is the PCO, correct? So, who frikkin` cares what the constitution says? Why do you insist on introducing irrelevant details.

Citizenship and Identity in Pakistan Re: # 260 Bulleya

``Indians need to increase their knowledge of Pakistan..``

This is not something that can be ordained. Assuming that most people prioritize their time according to their interests, so it is with `Indians needing to increase their knowledge of Pakistan..`

``..Jinnah was far ahead of his time, and in the long run, his solution for South Asia will come out to be the best...``

The record so far is very poor. I don`t know how you can claim this. The two countries that he `fathered`, Pakistan and Bangladesh, are dictatorships where the average citizen is poorer, less educated, shorter lived, less connected with the world, more oppressed than his counterpart in India. So, what gives?

``...I have not seen the Indian economic rise trickling down to the Indian Muslims.``
Probably a fair assumption. But, there is a big difference between Bangladesh and the plight of Indian muslims. In the latter case, West Pakistan behaved like an imperial power, sucking resources off East Pakistan. That is not the case with Indian muslims. The sense of perceived `injustice` is not the same. A richer India will be in a better position to `appease` minorites than a poorer India.

``There are whole IT companies in India, without a single Muslim in their top tier of 30 executives.``

By the way, did you sit in a meeting with Azim Premji? He would have punctured your hypothesis?

``...Muslims had to have massive affirmitive action and a secure area within a federation....``
That is a fanciful proposition, considering that half of India`s princely states were ruled by Muslims. Not to mention that support for Pakistan came from India`s richest Muslims and of the erstwhile nobility, and not the dispossessed! The `nobility` had the most to fear because India quickly reduced the rajahs and nawabs to ordinary citizens.

This is also an offensive suggestion, because it shows that your worldview, despite your protestations, is a muslim-centric one. Assuming that you `accept` the many muslim dead as a `necessary cost` of Partition, did you consider the pain inflicted on unwilling Sikhs and Hindus?

``...I am not sure how India is going to handle this....``
Democratically. Just because you screwed up in Bangladesh, does not mean that we will do the same!

``...Jinnah had it correct all along...``
You can mouth that empty slogan to your heart`s content. What matters is the following graphic depicting India lifting 4 Pakistans out of poverty in the next 17 years:



You guys are screwed! A rising tide will raise all boats, even muslims ones!

#262
``..However, if this is true, then why do so many Indians on this site attempt to comment on Pakistan, with so much authority...``

Because, `many Indians on this site` do not constitute `most Indians`. Know the difference?

Citizenship and Identity in Pakistan Re: # 258 YLH/Manto

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing, as you so well exhibit. You have information, but not the wisdom to synthesize conclusions. Take for example, your reference to `tenured professors of history at Columbia University, Harvard University, Tufts University and Cambridge University`. Do any one of them assert that Nehru/Patel knowingly torpedoed the Cabinet Mission Plan because of their opposition to a decentralized vision as opposed to their distaste for etching permanently religious divides in the form of separate electorates? If the answer is ambiguous, then there was no need to introduce `tenured professors of history at Columbia University, Harvard University, Tufts University and Cambridge University`. Likewise, no need to refer to Jalal or Seervai, because neither can say for sure why Nehru rejected the Cabinet Mission Plan. Subsequent events have shown the wisdom of that decision.

Jinnah`s history prior to his Pakistan demand is irrelevant to the subject being discussed. What matters and counts is what he morphed into.

The bottom line is that his ambiguous post-Independence vision (rather, the lack of it) raised enough suspicions. You guys slug it out now in your sandbox, and as I mentioned in my previous post, `it is doubtful that you will join the world in a meaningful way as a productive, modern nation fully integrated with the world.`

And, yes I have read Maulana Azad`s book, including the 30 pages that were released many years after his death. He dedicated the book to Nehru, and blamed him for rejecting the Cabinet Mission Plan, and for not running for the Presidency of the Congress in `46. So what? Unity at any cost is not desirable. On the contrary, Pakistan`s continuing failures (the most damning being in `71) provide a useful civics lesson to others and warn Indians on how things can go wrong. Enjoy the ride.