Jinnah VS A.Kalam Azad

[haviZsultan]

Its very true whats written in the book.

Another book that should be read to know about Azad's interactions with Quaid E Azam is Jaswant Singh's book on partition. It shows how Quaid E Azam was forced into partition when everything failed and Indians refused to give us rights. It was a brilliant book that blames the congress-particularly Nehru for the partition. A line of thinking I completely agree with.

 

[shelly]

Its very true whats written in the book.

Another book that should be read to know about Azad's interactions with Quaid E Azam is Jaswant Singh's book on partition. It shows how Quaid E Azam was forced into partition when everything failed and Indians refused to give us rights. It was a brilliant book that blames the congress-particularly Nehru for the partition. A line of thinking I completely agree with.

thats fine.. partition is over. dont even try to say its a mistake, it was the right thing to happen

 

[Vinod2070]

1-As per our Prophet. He never approved of a Muslim community being ruled over by some one who has 5000 idols as god.

80% of the world never believed in your prophet's claims. It is just one man's word as far as we are concerned.

Obviously most people in the world remain unconvinced.

Entire India is going towards break up. As people get more aware that is inevitable. They would want their share in political power structure dominated by few high caste Indians. Even the seemingly apparent increased in wealth creation is not going to help since with increased wealth comes the increased desire to have a share in political future of one's kinship. That means Muslims would want their own political parties and Sikhs their own. Congress with a white woman at its head can not represent all.

You are not the only one with this wet dream.

Millions have gone to their graves with this unfulfilled wish and their souls are hanging in purgatory.

Apparently millions more are still going to meet the same fate.

Haters can hate. India is more united than ever, stronger than ever and more integrated than ever.

But I always wonder at the depth of hatred and negativity that "conversion" can induce in people. They just don't have a new faith, they must hate everything they had, all their legacy.

Must be difficult living with so much negativity and denial.

 

[Vinod2070]

Struggle to turn from British Raj to Italian Woman Raj by fair and free democratic elections!

Thats what he is referring to.

Your Arab masters and "fort of Sunnah" have been slaves for a thousand years and even now are supposedly American slaves. This is true for almost all of Islamic world and all Arab states.

I guess you are an ethnic Arab, given your views.

I am glad you are back from South Asia. I hope it was permanent.

 

[desiman]

far from it..
While Azad was aware of issues that would plague a separate Muslim nation , he put too much faith in communal harmony and the elixir of being a majority.
He may have been an Indian Patriot.. but he was far from being a beneficiary to Islam as a whole.

Shows that you have not read history but mearly seen it from someone else's point of view. It was Azad who had predicted that a religion based country would never be able to stand on its own feet and would be dominated by a extremely strong military which would never let the political structure out of its clutches. In a letter to Sardar Patel in the 1940's he had shown how India's military at the that time consisted primarily of muslims soldiers at the jawan level and that these soldiers once grouped together at a national level would be a huge roadblock in the success of the political structure. In this landmark book "India wins Freedom" he clearly predicts the future of Pakistan as well as the major flaws of the two nation theory. He also pointed out to that fact that all major political thinkers of the time would stay back in India leaving Pakistan without any clear successor to Jinnah which is what exactly happened. Kalam was a strategic thinker who saw things as they were, unlike Jinaah who was a popular leader who took advantages of situations and died leaving his new nation in peril forever. In term of benefits to Islam, Kalam far outdid Jinnah, Kalam spoke to a united India which would be unbeatable o n the global stage while Jinnah destroyered the unity in South Asia just for his own personal gains. Ill leave you with a quote from Azad himself in reply baseless comments by Jinnah -

"I am proud of being an Indian. I am part of the indivisible unity that is Indian nationality. I am indispensable to this noble edifice and without me this splendid structure is incomplete. I am an essential element, which has gone to build India. I can never surrender this claim."

 

[Guest01]

We don't have Muhairs in Karachi, we have many Urdu speaking brothers and sisters.

No, the fact that you and your countrymen are here, day and night, shows who is insecure

LoL, but your army had no qualms calling them Mohajirs and carrying out the second iteration of Bangladesh during the Jinnahpur conspiracy farce!!

Let us put it this way. Jinnah who parried and implied his homogenous muslim requirement platform so much everywhere including in his telegram had no clue that there is nothing called homogeniety in any religion!! Forget muslims. LoL, Jinnah in his insecurity was even running around Anna and the Dravidians trying to propagate the logic of the impossiblilty of existence with India. Of course as he could not have used the religion, he tried the ethnicity there and he conveniently decided to forget that the Pakistani punjabi ethnicity was totally different than the sindhi or the Pashtun and the baloch ethnicity (as is now evident with the propensity of punjabis towards terrorism in Pakistani).

By the end of it, Maulana who was being a saint trying to put some sense in the pompousness that Jinnah was in those days riding, could not have said it better. But look, Maulana tried. He did his duty. And if Jinnah is being credited with the creation of Pakistan shall we also credit him with the millions of bengali muslims slaughtered in Bangladesh, or the daily average of shias slaughtered by sunnis (now even started in what you call Gilgit Baltistan), or the daily dose of terrorism (yesterday saw 2 explosions in NWFP and 2 childred killed and a school blown up) or the extremism in the pakistani society (they are saying that 400 peace loving people did direct action in Bannu jail and got out of there ) That is just one day of regular Pakistani life after the partition. And I am not even getting in to the economics of it because how much can Jinnah be responsible for?? LoL

LoL, some over here seems to have made this a Jinnah's Pakistan versus Maulana's India scenario. And that is funny because some Pakistani poster without even uderstanding the impetus of the telegram on Islam thought that he can get this to this forum trying to throw mud on India and justify the creation of Pakistan. Little did he know that using Islam to compare Maulana with the alcohol drinking, second generation gujrati muslim convert from a Hindu family who had difficulty even talking in Urdu (or Hindi) is a total injustice to Jinnah.

The eagerness that Jinnah attempts in taking the Muslim leadership initiative shows very well his insecurities of qualifying for a role of a muslim leadership. It could have been his worry around his alcohol loving habit or it could have been anything else but the eagerness to get on to the Muslim platform gives away the insecurity surely.

 

[Guest01]

In fact if one was to read Jinnah behaviour and responses to other such suggestions even in unrelated matters as a whole then the common factor of his obstinacy to other's ideas can be seen as a consistent pattern.

For example, when Governer General M A Jinnah (sounds quite fancy and so originally british ) visited Dhaka on 21st of March 1948 then he declared that "Urdu and only Urdu will remain the state language of Pakistan". In going about his decision on the language in his obstinacy, he put aside the voice of the Bengalis who has been campaigning for making 2 national langauages = Bengali or Urdu. What remains a mystery is whether the fact that after Urdu is made the sole national language, the Bengalis or over 45% of then population would actually be illiterate and decladed incompetent for government jobs was lost on Jinnah or was it primarily a conspiracy to ensure that Bengalis were always subjugated to the West Pakistanis.

This event also draws a hole in Jinnah claim to the representation of Muslims. From his lack of understanding and respect of a language of his fellow 45% of muslims, it seems that for Jinnah, the only muslim population was the Urdu speaking population of what is now west Pakistan. In that scenario is there not a possiblity that Jinnah deliberately lied through his teeth knowing very well that Muslims will not be treated equal in Pakistan of which he was very prompt to become the Governor General. This sees through the claim that Jinnah was ever representing the Muslims of the subcontinent. It was either due to his alchohol drinking and other non-muslim habit that he was not able to see through the factual Muslim entity of India or the fact that he was just a recent convert (2nd generation) from a Gujrati Hindu family, it was too early for him to grasp the entirety of what he had become a part of. It is not unknown that converts to a religion always pick up a partial picture of it, the example of several off shoots of churches in Africa where Christin missionaries converted people only a few hundred years back is an example of this religious misintrepretation or apathy that can arise. This could pretty much have been a case when Jinnah was looking at the whole Muslim entiry with the prism of Urdu which was spoken by only a bunch of people in then East Pakistani.

If not a deciet, it was definitely ignorance and if someone really wants to know how cultures live together, India was very happy to adopt 19 languages as state languages in its consitution including Bengali (which Jinnah did not want) and Urdu (which Jinnah wanted).

So now tell me who had a better foresight, was it our Maulana or wast it The Governor General of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah?

 

[Manas]

Its so ironical that some liberal Pakistanis have to try hard to portray Jinnah as a secular figure to utter amusement of the rest of the Pakistanis .

In response they ask one simple question " if Jinhah was secular why he left congess and joined muslim league to demand for a separate muslim state of Pakistan ??" .

 

[Tamizhan]

Shows that you have not read history but mearly seen it from someone else's point of view. It was Azad who had predicted that a religion based country would never be able to stand on its own feet and would be dominated by a extremely strong military which would never let the political structure out of its clutches. In a letter to Sardar Patel in the 1940's he had shown how India's military at the that time consisted primarily of muslims soldiers at the jawan level and that these soldiers once grouped together at a national level would be a huge roadblock in the success of the political structure. In this landmark book "India wins Freedom" he clearly predicts the future of Pakistan as well as the major flaws of the two nation theory. He also pointed out to that fact that all major political thinkers of the time would stay back in India leaving Pakistan without any clear successor to Jinnah which is what exactly happened. Kalam was a strategic thinker who saw things as they were, unlike Jinaah who was a popular leader who took advantages of situations and died leaving his new nation in peril forever. In term of benefits to Islam, Kalam far outdid Jinnah, Kalam spoke to a united India which would be unbeatable o n the global stage while Jinnah destroyered the unity in South Asia just for his own personal gains. Ill leave you with a quote from Azad himself in reply baseless comments by Jinnah -

"I am proud of being an Indian. I am part of the indivisible unity that is Indian nationality. I am indispensable to this noble edifice and without me this splendid structure is incomplete. I am an essential element, which has gone to build India. I can never surrender this claim."

LoL, but your army had no qualms calling them Mohajirs and carrying out the second iteration of Bangladesh during the Jinnahpur conspiracy farce!!

Let us put it this way. Jinnah who parried and implied his homogenous muslim requirement platform so much everywhere including in his telegram had no clue that there is nothing called homogeniety in any religion!! Forget muslims. LoL, Jinnah in his insecurity was even running around Anna and the Dravidians trying to propagate the logic of the impossiblilty of existence with India. Of course as he could not have used the religion, he tried the ethnicity there and he conveniently decided to forget that the Pakistani punjabi ethnicity was totally different than the sindhi or the Pashtun and the baloch ethnicity (as is now evident with the propensity of punjabis towards terrorism in Pakistani).

By the end of it, Maulana who was being a saint trying to put some sense in the pompousness that Jinnah was in those days riding, could not have said it better. But look, Maulana tried. He did his duty. And if Jinnah is being credited with the creation of Pakistan shall we also credit him with the millions of bengali muslims slaughtered in Bangladesh, or the daily average of shias slaughtered by sunnis (now even started in what you call Gilgit Baltistan), or the daily dose of terrorism (yesterday saw 2 explosions in NWFP and 2 childred killed and a school blown up) or the extremism in the pakistani society (they are saying that 400 peace loving people did direct action in Bannu jail and got out of there ) That is just one day of regular Pakistani life after the partition. And I am not even getting in to the economics of it because how much can Jinnah be responsible for?? LoL

LoL, some over here seems to have made this a Jinnah's Pakistan versus Maulana's India scenario. And that is funny because some Pakistani poster without even uderstanding the impetus of the telegram on Islam thought that he can get this to this forum trying to throw mud on India and justify the creation of Pakistan. Little did he know that using Islam to compare Maulana with the alcohol drinking, second generation gujrati muslim convert from a Hindu family who had difficulty even talking in Urdu (or Hindi) is a total injustice to Jinnah.

The eagerness that Jinnah attempts in taking the Muslim leadership initiative shows very well his insecurities of qualifying for a role of a muslim leadership. It could have been his worry around his alcohol loving habit or it could have been anything else but the eagerness to get on to the Muslim platform gives away the insecurity surely.

Thanks for your wonderful posts..

 

[Kyusuibu Honbu]

I still don't get this thread, why does eulogizing Jinnah mean to demonize Azad?

 

[LaBong]

I still don't get this thread, why does eulogizing Jinnah mean to demonize Azad?

That too by using a telegram which falls under borderline personal attack and rather rude against a person who was known for never responding to attacks.

 

[Guest01]

I still don't get this thread, why does eulogizing Jinnah mean to demonize Azad?

LoL, good question. If to assume that it is objective to conclude the impossibility of eulogizing Jinnah in abstract, normal to ask the question as to why would that be the case? Could it be because Jinnah had nothing original to offer and the wares that he peddled were mere opposition to another mainstream line of thought? Could it be that eologizing Jinnah really needs to demonize others to reflect a kind of lesser evil picture!! May be the fact that In any which case when one picks up an event in abstract, Jinnah is lackluster or incompetent as an entiry makes it a compulsion to make a villain out of someone else to paint Jinnah as a hero.. Take for example the Bengali language conflict as a case in point or the ineffectiveness of Jinnah's proponence in any of the factual policy or social events in West Pakistani post 1947 (even when he was The Govneror General of Pakistan). Or maybe the demonizing of others is merely preventive just to ensure that simple facts like Jinnah's not participating or sacrificing in the struggle of Independence of India and trying to associate with it merely to gain a political legitimacy are not disseminated so widespread. Afterall is the genesis of a country on the basis of purported speeches and ideas of one man not dangeously fickle for the present day citizens??

 

[Ignited Mind]

I still don't get this thread, why does eulogizing Jinnah mean to demonize Azad?

That too by using a telegram which falls under borderline personal attack and rather rude against a person who was known for never responding to attacks.

Well, this is how they define a 'hero'. This is macho.

 

[notsuperstitious]

I still don't get this thread, why does eulogizing Jinnah mean to demonize Azad?

Exactly, on the second page Azad was called a pervert by the thread starter because ''he believed in the perverted notion of hindu muslim unity''.

Would the kind poster for once be intellectually honest and tell us - do pakistanis not believe in the unity of muslims - hindus - christians -sikhs - ahmedis in pakistan?

If not, then we stand vindicated, if yes then are all pakistanis perverted too?

 

[Vinod2070]

Exactly, on the second page Azad was called a pervert by the thread starter because ''he believed in the perverted notion of hindu muslim unity''.

Would the kind poster tell us - do pakistanis not believe in the unity of muslims - hindus - christians -sikhs - ahmedis in pakistan?

If not, then we stand vindicated, if yes then are all pakistanis perverted too?

This is a contradiction that they can never resolve.

Same as Mr. Jinnah dividing India in the name of religion and opposing that for Punjab, claiming they are Punjabi first. This was noticed then and is noticed now.

A country created in the name of Islam could never have been secular.

Either he didn't know what he was creating or he knew it and did it on purpose.

Both options don't give a pretty picture.