Jinnah VS A.Kalam Azad

[SQ8]

Do you realize while criticizing Azad for being a showman you are actually asking for the same "showman"ship from India by asking us what names we have kept for our weapons ?

And I'm damn sure if we had indeed kept some Islamic names then that would have been dismissed as "showmanship". Either way you people will say the same.

We dont indulge in gimmicks like Pakistan by naming our weapons after looters/invaders who did nothing but pillage our territory...Abdali, Babur, AL khalid..seriously ? Babur in his babur nama gloats how he made a mountain of skulls from the pashtuns (in present day Afg-Pak) he killed on his way to India..should we also indulge in the same act ?

What is wrong in Muslims themselves identifying with the pre-Islamic past ? Did you people suddenly jump into this land with the arrival of MBQ.. Do you even understand that some are nothing but the Sanskrit names of the elements of nature ? This is why I respect the Iranians amongst all the Muslims...they dont strive for an artificial identity and their primary identity is Persian/Iranian...next comes muslim or whatever...Ask a Iranian Muslim who he respects more - Nader Shah (a Muslim) or Cyrus (a kuffar)....unanimously they will answer Cyrus and the Iranians still curse the Arabs for destroying their beautiful culture and religion..

p.s.: Anyway for your info the Mi-35 Hind is named Akbar in the IAF, if it soothes anything for you.



Frankly,there is no need to convince you of anything. That 50% of the Muslims rejected the "vision" of Jinnah is proof alone of its shallowness.

p.s: Personally I am a supporter of Jinnah's policies and I thank god he won against Congress.



UP politics is one of the MOST pro-Muslim in India and if he thinks he is sidetracked then his political acumen sucks and he should consider retiring giving ground for more capable players...No offence..


p.s.: Regarding Kerala..they are not majority there..they make up of 22% of the population...not much difference from the 19% in UP.



That is BS and I am tired of exposing it.

Go read yourself about the 1000 years buffalo manure yourself..

Hint : the Delhi sultanates started in 1206 and the Mughals breathed their last in 1756 or 1757.

And even in between they maintained their rule over North and Central India only by alliance with a the Hindu kingdoms like Rajputs and not by crushing anyone...they tried crushing the Marathas and were shown their true place.

Its not about names.. its about ownership.. representation.
Singular show boys do nothing.. Naming the mi-35 akbar does show some ownership of that part of history.
a 1000 years or not.. its there...
Those people whom you call looters and plunders(which all invaders are FYI..ranjit singh left little stones unturned in his invasion of the northwest)..are still a part of the Muslim section of Indian history. Specifically targeting only Muslims as looters and plunderers among all those that came into India.. interesting.
So in other words.. even though the Aryan religion and Hinduism itself was an invasion on this land.. only Islam qualifies as alien to it and therefore liable for ejection.. I see where this links up perfectly to the whole mess in the first place.

50% of Muslims did what? rejected what? lets see.. Two large independent Muslim majorities in Pakistan and Bangladesh... did they reject the idea that Muslims and Hindu's cannot exist as politically significant powers?..I think not. Bangladesh is one example of where Muslims are tolerant and able to integrate with a significant Hindu population..
So apparently only the opposite is not possible.. that Political Hinduism is intolerant of another major Politically active religion?

UP politics are pro-Muslim.... but as I mentioned before.. pro-anything but actual bargaining power.
The "cant own property but are welcome on rent" doctrine.
Where does that pro-Muslim political force translate into actual ownership of Islam as part of the state's culture?

Man, you got your wish; your own country! Good luck & from the tenor of your posts, good riddance! Now kindly stop pissing on the graves of our heroes. Move on...we get it... you don't believe in all the "hindu-muslim unity" stuff. Fine ! Make your country whatever you want, leave us to our & Azad's "delusions". I'm glad your leaders were great otherwise we would still be having this cancerous growth within us. I have no illusions of an united India that could have survived. While we may not accept the concept of the 2NT, we realise that we could have the India we wanted only & only when you chaps separated. So, it worked out best for all of us -for the ones who believed in Azad & the ones who believed in Jinnah. Whatever connections existed in the past, they don't anymore, some 65 years after the separation. We like our constitution & the nature of our state however flawed & untenable you think it is. Azad is our hero, we could not care less what you chaps thought of him .

Hey you came here.. registered here with us.
We tolerate all your BS on our country.. so suck it up and tolerate this.

Like you have done in Pakistan? By totally suppressing the Hindus?

And now you are forced to assume that the other side has to have the same low standards and the same sense of morality (or lack thereof).

They are suppressed.. but then their numbers dont count.. and we are already listed as an Islamic country while you guys wave the banner of secularism like you invented it.
We admit we are bigoted.. but your hiding your double standards on the guise of "show boats" has to be pointed out.
Wasnt there the issue of Low Muslim representation in the Military..
So if Muslims were really cared for.. Id suppose the political setup would work to bring their standards up.
An Azim Premji or A.R Rehman does not effect the ones having to wash clothes in slums.
There are showboats here.. why hide yours under the guise of "its really all ok here".

 

[Bang Galore]

Its not about names.. its about ownership.. representation.
Singular show boys do nothing.. Naming the mi-35 akbar does show some ownership of that part of history.
a 1000 years or not.. its there...

There are only two kings in the entire history of India whose names are appended with the phrase "the Great". They are Asoka from the 3rd century BCE & Akbar from the 16th century. The former was Buddhist & the latter Muslim. Every school child learns about these two. Proof that India has not only a single dimension cultural view, is it not?

 

[lem34]

The question I think we should ask is would Mr Azad and Mr Jinnah come to their respective conclusions that they did pre partition with the benefit of hind site in 2012.

In doing so we need not just to look at Pakistan successes and failures but at India's as well.

It simply is not good enough to look at the strife in Pakistan it's problems and say the Quaid was wrong and that we would have been better off with India.

In this regard we need to look at India and its issues and problems.

I have posted indicators and statistics from Indian and UN agencies about India and can do so again if necessary which show that India is not secular and that minorities are severely prejudiced. Notwithstanding the constitution and the laws of India which in my opinion are not being enforced I believe that had Mr Azad had access to this data he would have come to the same conclusions the Quaid came to at pre partition and the Quaid's position would be vindicated.

The reason that I do not put those figures here is that Indian forum members get so upset and take it as a personal attack on them and India because it shows India in such a bad light and start trolling and the thread gets closed two or three pages later.

 

[Bang Galore]

Hey you came here.. registered here with us.We tolerate all your BS on our country.. so suck it up and tolerate this.

Oh but we do. Any neutral person would have pointed out the absurdity in Mr.Jinnah's apparently over the top response. Only in Pakistani eyes would such a absurd response to a civil letter be held up as mark of the man's greatness. Mr. Jinnah was arguably a great man, not however so much on the basis of the purported letter. That could probably be held up as a lesson in how not to reply.

 

[Vinod2070]

vinod look bro all said & done
but there was no treason here as i said it was the rejection of the cabinet mission plan after which all hell broke loosed i mean Nehru knew it very well that by rejecting the carbonate mission plan he will be pushing the muslim league to the wall & its following consequences therefore it was nehrus treachery which was responsible for the events

It is fine.

We have our own interpretations and I am glad partition happened.

I wish we all live happily even if separate.

Let's not denigrate each others and everything is fine. Someone abuses his ancestors as "pagans" and he invites ridicule on his current religion and its holy figures.

Live and let live.

 

[third eye]

Jinnah was enlightened - Azad was under a delusion - Jinnah is hero & azad was a perverted man who believed in the idea of Hindu Muslim Unity.

Im sure gentleman's soul would be repenting on his miscalculations -- after Babri Mosque - Gujrat massacres - Kashmiri mass graves. I am sure if he was alive today he would have no shame in saying that in the battle of Two Nation Theory VS Hindu Muslim Unity theory -- later is totally failed - it was bound to.

Unity among two religious groups can hardly be termed perversion !!

@ the title of this thread..

Sigh !! Why must everything be this Vs that !!

 

[hotaki]

To compare the merchant muslims of Bosnia to Indian Muslims is an insult to Indian Muslims my friend.

Muslims in undivided India were Martial people who ruled India for over 1000 years. Why did we become so scared of being a huge 40% minority.

I can assure you 40% Muslims would not have faced any discrimination. Forty Percent of Population can bring the govt wheels to a screeching halt.

And that is all Maulana Azad was trying to point out.

Correction my friend Indian Muslims never ruled India, and never was there a united India.

Stop trying to distort facts turco afghans muslims ruled India and never the native Muslim, for he was glad to be liberated.

Mr Azad was a Hindu puppet and lacked any ambition and never had any plan or purpose other then the Hindu agenda.

 

[SQ8]

pakistan is a perhaps a unique case where minorities population is not increasing in spite of having sex !! from 15 % to 3 %.

Hindu chief ministers vs Presidents comical....ahhh I forgot that you can't have hindu president or PM.

the thing about 1971 was it was racial cleansing along with minority cleansing, didn't your PA kill HIndus of Bangladesh ??

How about it ???

Pakistan has institutionalized discrimination against minority (blasphemy laws etc..) we provide them equal opportunity.

Did your uncle tell u that he wants to come in Pakistan ? I know for sure that hundreds of hindus migrate to India from pakistan every month. What does that prove ?? Love to hear from you .....

Pakistanis should be last people who should mince a word regarding minorities.

You didn't prove that he was a show man...as u blamed him..onus is on you to prove it.

The minorities are increasing because the majority has increased exponentially at the same time.
They simply had more kids.. quite simple to guess... the same is why Muslims in India grew.. they just made more kids.

Not sure how that is relavent..
FYI ..Islamic republic vs Secular republic.

in 71 Bangladeshis were killed.. simple as that. Muslims and Hindus.. off course your country used the Hindu card to create more Hindu militants.. so basically India made sure more Hindus were killed..

Yes Pakistan has.. its an Islamic republic under Mullah's.. not Jinnah's vision anyway.

No.. He was too busy trying to croon the Vande Mataram more than his neighbors.. while the other party members stick to their normal expression of party language and banners.. his must include an Indian flag to prove loyalty... as do all other Muslim candidates.. Kind of funny as to how he has to be more Indian than the average Indian.. most of his cousins are living in much larger properties.. enjoying the good life...who.. did not actually migrate in 47..
they came in around the 50's and 60's.. after they saw that India wasnt delivering on its promises.
Perhaps this family is only anomaly .. while other Muslims have prospered?
But apart fromt the fact that Lucknow is a really shitty place.. I found very little prosperity in that Muslim majority.
And here is the even weirder stuff.. this family.. this household.. were extreme supporters of congress and Nehru.
My great grandfather was a close friend of Mr Nehru.. those who could walk into the PM's office.
Ran a daily urdu back then.. which eventually closed down...
Now if these people.. who were part of those that rooted for India... end up like this..
Something is going wrong then..

Your(and apparently others) whole tirade is on why I as a Pakistan am not qualified to speak..rather than actually giving me say a link to reports of Muslims Financial status on average.. representaion.. etc.

"you cant talk about us since you are in the shitter too"
And thats it.. that's all you got?

 

[Jade]

Oh but we do. Any neutral person would have pointed out the absurdity in Mr.Jinnah's apparently over the top response. Only in Pakistani eyes would such a absurd response to a civil letter be held up as mark of the man's greatness. Mr. Jinnah was arguably a great man, not however so much on the basis of the purported letter. That could probably be held up as a lesson in how not to reply.

On the first instance, I could not believe the reply was from Jinnah; moreover, the reply was almost a year late

 

[SQ8]

There are only two kings in the entire history of India whose names are appended with the phrase "the Great". They are Asoka from the 3rd century BCE & Akbar from the 16th century. The former was Buddhist & the latter Muslim. Every school child learns about these two. Proof that India has not only a single dimension cultural view, is it not?

We learn the same.. our history books(not those with Ayub Khan's taint on them) talk about all these empires and Ashoka's significance.. then the Mughal rule. What about the rest?

 

[newdelhinsa]

Oh but we do. Any neutral person would have pointed out the absurdity in Mr.Jinnah's apparently over the top response. Only in Pakistani eyes would such a absurd response to a civil letter be held up as mark of the man's greatness. Mr. Jinnah was arguably a great man, not however so much on the basis of the purported letter. That could probably be held up as a lesson in how not to reply.

I can now assume how difficult it might have become for the likes of Gandhi, Nehru and Azad to deal with him given his open stances against one religion.

 

[Bang Galore]

In this regard we need to look at India and its issues and problems.

I have posted indicators and statistics from Indian and UN agencies about India and can do so again if necessary which show that India is not secular and that minorities are severely prejudiced. Notwithstanding the constitution and the laws of India which in my opinion are not being enforced I believe that had Mr Azad had access to this data he would have come to the same conclusions the Quaid came to at pre partition and the Quaid's position would be vindicated.

Firstly, define "secular". That's an attribute of the state & not of individuals. Individual failures cannot be necessarily held up as the failure of the basic model. There is nothing in the Indian constitution which inherently discriminates against minorities of any type.

Funny, how you argue that the present condition of Indian muslims would be a basis of argument for support of the 2NT. The data will always be skewed(if not adjusted to a socio-economic base) because of a large migration of the middle class Muslims to Pakistan. Had that not happened, it is quite conceivable that the data would reflect a more uniform pattern. Even with that data, I believe Maulana Azad would be happy in the direction that India is going towards as opposed the one Pakistan has set its course to.

 

[hotaki]

Abdali was a bandit. He didn't change anything.

He taught you a lesson like his predecessors that you guys are just all talk, stopped you in your tracks and gave you a reality check, he was no bandit anyone that beats you guys is a barbarian or a bandit.

 

[Bang Galore]

We learn the same.. our history books(not those with Ayub Khan's taint on them) talk about all these empires and Ashoka's significance.. then the Mughal rule. What about the rest?

What about the rest? Pick one where you believe that injustice was done to a Muslim ruler merely because of his religion & not for his acts? Would be glad to debate that with you.

 

[53fd]

One must remember that 64 years since Pakistan & India's independence, Pakistan has been doing better than India in 45+ years in all socioeconomic, development indicators. Even today, despite being in the forefront on the WOT, Pakistan is doing better than India in many socioeconomic indicators. Where Pakistan is today is not because of what Jinnah envisaged for Pakistan, but because Pakistan did completely opposite of that.