Ramadan Special: Tales of Sufi Wisdom
One wishes dawa-i-dil was a Hindu, at least we would have had some enlightening critique on the Geeta.
Posted by
muqaddam
Sep 13, 2007 08:11 am
dawa-i-dil, who is often vitriolic when it comes to the Hunud, is in his/her elements here displaying fair knowledge of the Quran.One wishes dawa-i-dil was a Hindu, at least we would have had some enlightening critique on the Geeta.
Inside Story of Nawaz\'s Cooked Up Return to Pakistan
Posted by
muqaddam
Sep 12, 2007 03:17 am
Come on, Chowdhari, show the khaki clad scoundrel his place
A Political Manifesto for Sale! - Part I
Posted by
muqaddam
Sep 11, 2007 02:17 am
Zia also had said he was ruling by divine intervention
Jinnah and the Islamic State – Setting the Record Straight
Even the renowned and respected Islamic scholar Dr Rafiq Zakaria, father of Newsweek editor Fareed Zakaria, Minister in the state of Bombay and then Maharashtra, till the end of his life maintained that the partition of India was the biggest tragedy for it baecame the source of untold misery for Muslims of India.
MAJ in his speeches trying to justify his folly often referred to Muslims in India as a minority who faced a bleak future in undivided India. This is proving to be quite a misleading statement. If India were undivided today, of the population of 135 crore, Muslims would be approximately 50 Crore and Hindus would be 85 crore. That makes a ratio of 5:8. The ratio would have been ideal to ensure that Hindus would not been a overwhelming majority while the Muslims would not be a pushoverable minority. Just the right balance to ensure a happy secular state.
Surely crores of people would not have had to leave their hearths, the only expenditure on defence would have been in facing Chinese monster , the old Hindustani culture would have been preserved, in short, there would have been a lot of harmony and much less misery in the subcontinent.
But as fate would have it, a whisky guzzling, pork eating Muslim grandson of a Hindu parent managed to sway an undecided part of the population to separate, and there we are, two poor countries ready to go at each other's throats at the slightest excuse.
Wah re Quaid!
Posted by
muqaddam
Sep 6, 2007 08:53 am
When Altaf Hussain of the MQM says that the partition of India was the biggest blunder, many Pakistanis scoff at him even calling him a traitor. But the fact is he is dead right. Even the renowned and respected Islamic scholar Dr Rafiq Zakaria, father of Newsweek editor Fareed Zakaria, Minister in the state of Bombay and then Maharashtra, till the end of his life maintained that the partition of India was the biggest tragedy for it baecame the source of untold misery for Muslims of India.
MAJ in his speeches trying to justify his folly often referred to Muslims in India as a minority who faced a bleak future in undivided India. This is proving to be quite a misleading statement. If India were undivided today, of the population of 135 crore, Muslims would be approximately 50 Crore and Hindus would be 85 crore. That makes a ratio of 5:8. The ratio would have been ideal to ensure that Hindus would not been a overwhelming majority while the Muslims would not be a pushoverable minority. Just the right balance to ensure a happy secular state.
Surely crores of people would not have had to leave their hearths, the only expenditure on defence would have been in facing Chinese monster , the old Hindustani culture would have been preserved, in short, there would have been a lot of harmony and much less misery in the subcontinent.
But as fate would have it, a whisky guzzling, pork eating Muslim grandson of a Hindu parent managed to sway an undecided part of the population to separate, and there we are, two poor countries ready to go at each other's throats at the slightest excuse.
Wah re Quaid!
Living Through a Revolution
Hare brains, Urdu is a young Indo Aryan language whose grammatic and idiomatic structure is solidly based on khari boli like Hindi. The only difference between Hindi and Urdu is that Urdu has borrowed a lot of its lexicon from Persian and Arabic whereas Hindi from Sanskrit. In good old days both Urdu and Hindi were one language - Hindustani, one written in Persian script, the other in Devnagari.
Posted by
muqaddam
Sep 3, 2007 11:22 am
Re: # 48Hare brains, Urdu is a young Indo Aryan language whose grammatic and idiomatic structure is solidly based on khari boli like Hindi. The only difference between Hindi and Urdu is that Urdu has borrowed a lot of its lexicon from Persian and Arabic whereas Hindi from Sanskrit. In good old days both Urdu and Hindi were one language - Hindustani, one written in Persian script, the other in Devnagari.
Living Through a Revolution
Recently I happened to visit Macdonalds in an East European capital. I found two dark persons gesticulating trying to convey to the girl at the counter what they wanted to order, they spoke real badly accented English which the girl was not following. Knowing the local tongue,I volunteered to help, and of course they managed to get what they wanted. Initially from their complexion I was sure they were Bengalis, but when they started speaking I realised they were from Punjab, they said they were from Pakistan, one from Lahore and the other from Sialkot.
One does not understand why some Pakistanis like these two posters I have mentioned are so hung on colour of the skin and how they are fairer than Indians. Fairer does not necessarily make better. These two obviously have some kind of a complex vis-a-vis Indians.
Islam came to India only a few centuries ago, but those Indians who became Muslims and are today living as Pakistanis have not become fair because of Islam, the Indians in these parts were always light skinned, tall. Even memoirs of a Greek soldier mentions that Porus was 8 feet tall. Porus was an Indian and so were all people living in this region. Mahabharat was written in Afghanistan about 2000 years ago, everybody in the area comprising today's Pakistan was then Hindu, tall and light skinned. It was preIslamic India.
If light skin is to be attributed to Islam, all Muslims of India Pakistan and Bangladesh would have been tall and light skinned.
If these two posters feel superior due to lighter colour let them thank their preislamic(Hindu) roots and be happy. Islam is a faith the Indians in these parts have adopted but their true Indianness will never go away.
Posted by
muqaddam
Sep 3, 2007 07:28 am
Oh! How Chowk thrives at the expense of such characters like dawa-i-dil and ahmedmadani.Recently I happened to visit Macdonalds in an East European capital. I found two dark persons gesticulating trying to convey to the girl at the counter what they wanted to order, they spoke real badly accented English which the girl was not following. Knowing the local tongue,I volunteered to help, and of course they managed to get what they wanted. Initially from their complexion I was sure they were Bengalis, but when they started speaking I realised they were from Punjab, they said they were from Pakistan, one from Lahore and the other from Sialkot.
One does not understand why some Pakistanis like these two posters I have mentioned are so hung on colour of the skin and how they are fairer than Indians. Fairer does not necessarily make better. These two obviously have some kind of a complex vis-a-vis Indians.
Islam came to India only a few centuries ago, but those Indians who became Muslims and are today living as Pakistanis have not become fair because of Islam, the Indians in these parts were always light skinned, tall. Even memoirs of a Greek soldier mentions that Porus was 8 feet tall. Porus was an Indian and so were all people living in this region. Mahabharat was written in Afghanistan about 2000 years ago, everybody in the area comprising today's Pakistan was then Hindu, tall and light skinned. It was preIslamic India.
If light skin is to be attributed to Islam, all Muslims of India Pakistan and Bangladesh would have been tall and light skinned.
If these two posters feel superior due to lighter colour let them thank their preislamic(Hindu) roots and be happy. Islam is a faith the Indians in these parts have adopted but their true Indianness will never go away.
Musharraf\'s Options: Time Running Out
Posted by
muqaddam
Sep 3, 2007 01:32 am
A matter of shame really, Pakistanis running all the time to the Saudi or some other Arabs to sort out their internal troubles, is this a sovereign republic or what? Why this so called round table cannot be convened in Islamabad, if all concerned are really keen on resolving the imbroglio? Strange! This time you sort it out in SA, have a new PM/Prez, another strongman seizes power, sends the incumbent in exile, obviously to Saudia. Have the Pakistanis pawned their soveignty to the Arabs? And one wonders is sending an incumbent PM/Prez in exile permitted in the Constitution?
Please back off, Benazir!
Posted by
muqaddam
Aug 30, 2007 10:21 am
In this power struggle even if Mushy were to lose out, so what? He has already lorded it over the country and the army for 8 years, he will just retire to some mohalla in Karachi and the army will ensure he dies a peaceful and natural death when his time is up. Until then he will be a lifetime jamai of Pakistani govermment. Mushy should not have any regrets at all.
Please back off, Benazir!
Posted by
muqaddam
Aug 29, 2007 12:34 pm
I put my Rupee on Nawaz Sharif. I lost all respect for Bhutto when she called India a rogue state. Speaking good English does not necessarily mean you will make a good leader. She is riding on Zulfikar's legacy which will not take her very far. Nawaz Sharif on the other hand appears more solid, earthy and can take the country with him despite earlier setbacks.
Dodging Pakistani Sleuths to Cover a War and a Coup
Posted by
muqaddam
Aug 28, 2007 11:15 am
Naqvi Sa'ab is a journalist par excellence who is highly readable and much respected. If terms like Occupied Kashmir have been printed to denote Kashmir (Mind you, the whole of Kashmir is Indian) in pieces by him, then, indeed, Dawn is under censorship. Of course, he and Ayaz Sa'ab would have to take some nonsense from the Pakistani establishment, which must otherwise be very angry with the latter for signing on Naqvi Sa'ab in the first place. Knowing the India hating bureaucracy of Pakistan, they must consider unthinkable the idea of an Indian Muslim correspondent writing for a Pakistani newspaper. Ayaz Sa'ab rises in esteem even higher for engaging Naqvi Sa'ab.
Qurat-ul-ain Haider Has Passed Away
Any doubts who is running Chowk?
Posted by
muqaddam
Aug 23, 2007 11:36 am
"She came to Pakistan in 1947 when India was partitioned but went back to India after a few years"Any doubts who is running Chowk?
A Pakistani-American in India
Although polls have their own justification, methinks the one about 61% Pakis not wanting to visit India may be erroneous. With the whole raison d'etre of Pakistan being its claim to be representing the Islamic glory of erstwhile Hindostan, most Pakistanis would like to visit India to see the splendour that was India. Taj, Mughal forts, maqbaras, dargahs.
Every Pakistani head of state manages a visit to India under the pretext of attending a seminar whereas the secret desire is to be able to see the old motherland and visit the Taj or offer a chadar at Chishti's dargah. Politicians and Baboos can make it but if travel was easier most Pakistanis would be making a beeline for India.
And why not? there is no other foreign country where a Pakistani can speak his language and be understood, eat his own cuisine and generally feel at home. He does not get any pleasure when he visits other neighbours like Afghanistan or Iran or for that matter other Islamic countries like those in the Middlae East, where he is just a foreigner.
Posted by
muqaddam
Aug 14, 2007 10:06 am
Re: # 549Although polls have their own justification, methinks the one about 61% Pakis not wanting to visit India may be erroneous. With the whole raison d'etre of Pakistan being its claim to be representing the Islamic glory of erstwhile Hindostan, most Pakistanis would like to visit India to see the splendour that was India. Taj, Mughal forts, maqbaras, dargahs.
Every Pakistani head of state manages a visit to India under the pretext of attending a seminar whereas the secret desire is to be able to see the old motherland and visit the Taj or offer a chadar at Chishti's dargah. Politicians and Baboos can make it but if travel was easier most Pakistanis would be making a beeline for India.
And why not? there is no other foreign country where a Pakistani can speak his language and be understood, eat his own cuisine and generally feel at home. He does not get any pleasure when he visits other neighbours like Afghanistan or Iran or for that matter other Islamic countries like those in the Middlae East, where he is just a foreigner.
A Pakistani-American in India
running out of ideas, are we?
Posted by
muqaddam
Aug 13, 2007 12:30 pm
Re: # 459running out of ideas, are we?
A Pakistani-American in India
A comrade-in-arms is a comrade-in-arms
Posted by
muqaddam
Aug 13, 2007 12:23 pm
Re: # 442A comrade-in-arms is a comrade-in-arms
A Pakistani-American in India
You may stand by your opinion but the ground under your feet is very shaky, moreover your stand is based on hearsay, whereas yours truly is a personal acquaintance (comrade-in-arms) of Gen. Zaheer and by trying to belittle him you only betray your ignorance and if I may add stupidity.
Posted by
muqaddam
Aug 13, 2007 10:46 am
#424 Posted by IBYou may stand by your opinion but the ground under your feet is very shaky, moreover your stand is based on hearsay, whereas yours truly is a personal acquaintance (comrade-in-arms) of Gen. Zaheer and by trying to belittle him you only betray your ignorance and if I may add stupidity.
- muqaddam
- Interacts: 231
- iLogs: 0
- Gallery: 0
- Page views: 722
- Last visitor: guest
- Member since: Jul 8 2005
- Last signin: Dec 2 2008
- Send a message
- Add as friend
- Add to ignore list
- Add to block list


