Jinnah Was Right

[POTTER]

Makes sense but shouldn't your academics study, research on advantages and the disadvantages of partition. Aise lagta ka hai ke Pakistan me partition ko ghalat bataana bahot bada jurm hai(Which is understandly so)

Due to Kashmir, every Pakistani hates india excl. some liberals and some punjabis. Independence day per harr Pakistani khush hota hai koi ro ni raha hota k hum India sy juda ho gayy. Partition is a done deal. Yahan academics mulk ki economy aur halaat axha karny ka sochy hai partition ka nahi.

 

[Manidabest]

welll i m not a great fan of Jinnah and i never glorified him since i believe it was a team work but i must say that he was a good leader and he assessed the situation and foresaw the future and made his move ... one of the great Muslim leader in the history Islam

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Jinnah cannot live forever to watch over whether your leaders make or break, how could a nation who was the favorite of the west right after it's inception could go down this path? Jinnah lived long enough to set things right. You don't need a commentary on your history, at least from me and you certainly know from the path you're currently in where you will be.

Exactly why I asked didn't you guys, at least 90%, voted together to form Pakistan? If that much people would want a country, they surely can vote en masse for a particular party that would keep Hindu nationalists out.
Hindus are far more secular in their views, that's why you don't have a single "Hindu Nation" despite becoming majority in three countries. The current ruling government can at best be described center right in their political views.

Going by that logic, we could call the one who is responsible for direct action day as a genocidal begot. That would perfectly make sense for Bengalis.

I don't need to prove to a Pakistani, the strength of Indian union, we are not the one who couldn't keep the Union for a mere 50 years after partition and since 47 our area only increased.
Historically, India is very strong and ruthless in keeping itself together. If peace comes with barrels of gun then that's the way it is going to be and both time and money is on our side. The only ones fomenting trouble are now running to places to get rid of being tagged for their notoriety by UNSC and FATF.

Sure sure... We didn't sell our territory to a third country. Did we? Where did UNSC resolution go when you sold out parts of valley to China? Maybe for Pakistan, China is bigger than UN. UNSC, plebiscite are now irrelevant since we signed the bilateral treaty.

I thought you didn't recognize J&K legislature. Anyway, the legislature was dissolved which granted power to the President (and Governor) to act on it. Was it legal? Yes.


Yeah you wish. You tried twice to take Kashmir by force, tell me why did you fail twice? It was the same Kashmiris whom you say, hate India, holding by barrel of gun, helped us keep you at bay. By providing intelligence, and by not listening to Pak sponsored cartoons to take up arms. Why the valley was peaceful during Indo Pak skirmishes?

Nations are not formed through plebiscites asking do you want to join union or not. Almost all nation states in the world are formed as a result of conflicts. Be it barrel of gun or swords.




http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/PAK
http://hdr.undp.org/en/countries/profiles/IND

The difference is really small and suspect, which is compounded further considering the indian government lies about it's poverty figures in the 1st place.........:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...591/India-accused-of-poverty-smokescreen.html

 

[Chhatrapati]

The difference is really small and suspect, which is compounded further considering the indian government lies about it's poverty figures in the 1st place.........:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...591/India-accused-of-poverty-smokescreen.html

Yeah, you're on the same scale as Bihar. Indeed the difference is small.
Nice try bringing up 7 years old news.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Yeah, you're on the same scale as Bihar. Indeed the difference is small.
Nice try bringing up 7 years old news.

Do you have ANY authentic evidence to prove that claim?.........That which has not been doctored by the indian government?..................the same people who claimed that the iaf killed exactly 300 terrorists in Balakot and shot down an F-16... ... ..........so according to you, in 7 years, india has become super honest with 0 poverty.............

Didn't realise that pihar had the ability to whack the air force of a more than 7× bigger enemy and make that enemy too weak, powerless and incapable of doing anything about it.........

 

[Buddhistforlife]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1203988544928264192

I don't know why are Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh are getting agitated and pissed off?

This bill already mentioned "Minorities"

Are Muslims minorities in Pakistan and Bangladesh?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Exactly why I asked didn't you guys, at least 90%, voted together to form Pakistan? If that much people would want a country, they surely can vote en masse for a particular party that would keep Hindu nationalists out.

That is the key point (I pointed this out to Showstopper too) - political dynamics in British India, under British occupation, would be completely different from the political dynamics in an independent country. Muslims unified primarily over the demand for Pakistan & independence - that is 'Muslim nationalism'. It was a single issue platform that most Muslims could agree upon. Once that is taken off the table, smaller local level issues start taking primacy which splinters the vote.

No, they were not, Sikhs were pretty dominant in Punjab and they infact killed many a Hindus, Sikhs were massacred in Delhi and surrounding areas which is a Hindu majority region.

I'm talking about Sikh's in the government that assisted the Center in cracking down on Sikh Separatism - wasn't so called 'super cop' KPS Gill a Sikh? He's got quite a bit of Sikh blood on his hands.

And here you are assuming that Central Government of a country whose 40% population is muslim wouldn't have had any muslim presence midst them? Are you telling me that a citizenship amendment bill, NRC etc would have had the same overwhelming support for the Central Government had their been muslim leadership in the central government. I already showed you that muslims had a fair share(proportional) in politics prior to partition, same would have been the case even now with United muslim front...

It would have been a token presence and at this point, given the rise of the RSS & Hindu nationalism, you'd be seeing demands of independence for areas comprising Pakistan & Bangladesh in any case - hell, you'd have seen demands for an independent Pakistan back when the Babri Masjid was demolished. There is no situation in which this story doesn't end at the same point - a demand for an independent Pakistan.

The problem here is your (Indian) refusal to take responsibility for the rise of Hindu nationalism and bigotry in India. The Sangh was already expanding in 1947 & that hatred of Muslims would not have been tempered by the presence of millions more Muslims in a 'United India'. Islamic religious extremism in Pakistan is Pakistan's responsibility - Hindu religious extremism in India is India's responsibility.

 

[hussain0216]

I don't know why are Muslims from Pakistan and Bangladesh are getting agitated and pissed off?

This bill already mentioned "Minorities"

Are Muslims minorities in Pakistan and Bangladesh?

Buddy we really couldn't care, even though its a openly biased law

But it proves Jinnah right
And as we consider hindu india our enemy it allows us to create immense discord amongst a India being divided by its own extremism

I have been crazy trolling the last few days

Indians really hate each other at the moment

Its incredible how the hindutva bakhts have become so blind about how they are pushing india towards a cliff edge

 

[Buddhistforlife]

Buddy we really couldn't care, even though its a openly biased law

But it proves Jinnah right
And as we consider hindu india our enemy it allows us to create immense discord amongst a India being divided by its own extremism

It is not a biased law. The law was particularly made for minorities from Pakistan and Bangladesh.

It would have been a biased law if the bill would have mentioned that they would provide citizenship to non muslim minorities from Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Nepal where Muslims are also minorities.

 

[hussain0216]

It is not a biased law. The law was particularly made for minorities from Pakistan and Bangladesh.

It would have been a biased law if the bill would have mentioned that they would provide citizenship to non muslim minorities from Sri Lanka, Myanmar and Nepal where Muslims are also minorities.

India was supposed to be "secular" we all knew it was a sham but it kept the different Indians under the same umbrella

Its not just CAB on its own, its a number of laws and actions and statements against the Muslim community both by politicians and the Indian public on social media


The hate amongst is palpable

India a supposed secular state making laws with religious bias at its core

Not that it matters to us, we hate hindu people and india anyway
But boy oh boy has all the events in recent years allowed us to slowly help sow divisions amongst a Indian population that is being split apart


Look on social media, Indians HATE each other

 

[The_Showstopper]

I'm talking about Sikh's in the government that assisted the Center in cracking down on Sikh Separatism - wasn't so called 'super cop' KPS Gill a Sikh? He's got quite a bit of Sikh blood on his hands.

Was KPS Gill responsible for the mass murder of Sikhs? Was he responsible for anti-sikh riots? Obviously not. He fought against Sikh seccessionist militants, and the government of India didn't make it a anti-Sikh operation the way Modi/Shah are doing now albeit against muslims. They are quite clear who they are against. Did Indira Gandhi expressly hated Sikhs? Hell no, She infact had Sikhs as her body gaurds. The issue was Sikh vs Hindus.

It would have been a token presence and at this point, given the rise of the RSS & Hindu nationalism, you'd be seeing demands of independence for areas comprising Pakistan & Bangladesh in any case - hell, you'd have seen demands for an independent Pakistan back when the Babri Masjid was demolished. There is no situation in which this story doesn't end at the same point - a demand for an independent Pakistan.

The problem here is your (Indian) refusal to take responsibility for the rise of Hindu nationalism and bigotry in India. The Sangh was already expanding in 1947 & that hatred of Muslims would not have been tempered by the presence of millions more Muslims in a 'United India'. Islamic religious extremism in Pakistan is Pakistan's responsibility - Hindu religious extremism in India is India's responsibility.

I agree to the fact that partition was inevitable in any scenario but with 40% population, muslims would have got much more land area than they presently have in the present day Pakistan and Bangladesh. As I said, muslims have proportional representation even before the rise of Muslim league, though most of them fought as independents. You can cross check the links I previously provided. So no, there would have been proportional representation in Indian government and not just relegated to tokenism.

Tell me, when you say "The problem here is your (Indian) refusal to take responsibility for the rise of Hindu nationalism and bigotry in India", who do you think is refusing here? Many Indians are already speaking out against the rise of Hindu bigotry and fascism in India, right inside the parliament. You should watch the news and voices of opposition in India. I don't think Modi will come out in UN assembly and claim that there is a rise in Hindu extremism. So if you are expecting such kind of words from official sources, it is a misnomer.

Let me rephrase - Islam espouses many principles that secularism does as well, not that Islam IS secular.

Islam calls for freedom of religion, equality and justice for all regardless of faith, race, gender etc. Secularism does the same.

Islam calls for these within the ambit of faith, that these values are a part of religion - Secularism calls for these by officially separating religion from government.

Both Islam & secularism can be manipulated and distorted - Islam has been manipulated in various societies to justify inequality & discriminatory treatment. Secularism has been manipulated to justify discrimination against religion & those who practice it.

Whether we claim that our society is Islamic or secular, I think we can agree that the basic principles of freedom of faith & equality and justice for all are universal principles essential for a society to flourish.

I had a similar conversation with a "learned" muslim guy couple of years ago and he ended up hurling abuses at me claiming that I am kaafir, murtad etc. And it was a face to face conversation, so just imagine the atmosphere around us.. Some guys in the room did support my POV and that saved my skin on that day LOL..

 

[Chhatrapati]

That is the key point (I pointed this out to Showstopper too) - political dynamics in British India, under British occupation, would be completely different from the political dynamics in an independent country. Muslims unified primarily over the demand for Pakistan & independence - that is 'Muslim nationalism'. It was a single issue platform that most Muslims could agree upon. Once that is taken off the table, smaller local level issues start taking primacy which splinters the vote.

Would completely different? I don't know, not sure of that. The violence that happened during partition laid grounds for the trouble you see in parts of North India as communal violence. Probably lead to rise of Hindu nationalists. Hindus never had a nationalists movement until the 1925 when RSS was formed, which literally born out of communal violence in Nagpur as a self defense group. Hindu nationalists rose to a powerful party only in 1977 and reached nation wide prominence only in 1996 and absolute majority in 2014. In short it took 70+ years for Hindu nationalists to get to power with 10-14% Muslims.

For whatever reason. It was a unified Muslim vote, and how long it took to unify this Muslim vote what 5 - 6 years?
Given Hindus so far were not unified, if AIML tried harder they could've formed a government in unified India.
In short, your logic apply to Hindus, they are far more divided. Jinnah hoped for a Hindu republic, we got a secular republic. Jinnah failed to see it. There are checks and balances to keep that secular fabric, there is nothing that BJP can do that'd affect the secular fabric of the country. Absolutely nothing happened that questioned India's secular status so far. All these are noises which naturally arises when a Hindu nationalist party is ruling and all their actions comes under a scanner which automatically gets assigned to a communal angle.

Do you have ANY authentic evidence to prove that claim?.........That which has not been doctored by the indian government?..................the same people who claimed that the iaf killed exactly 300 terrorists in Balakot and shot down an F-16... ... ..........so according to you, in 7 years, india has become super honest with 0 poverty.............

Didn't realise that pihar had the ability to whack the air force of a more than 7× bigger enemy and make that enemy too weak, powerless and incapable of doing anything about it.........

Read back. I can't waste time proving simple things, which you're in denial. HDI of Pakistan as per UN despite having 7 times smaller size is poor compared to India. You claimed you're superior and shit. Now choke on that.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Would completely different? I don't know, not sure of that. The violence that happened during partition laid grounds for the trouble you see in parts of North India as communal violence. Probably lead to rise of Hindu nationalists. Hindus never had a nationalists movement until the 1925 when RSS was formed, which literally born out of communal violence in Nagpur as a self defense group. Hindu nationalists rose to a powerful party only in 1977 and reached nation wide prominence only in 1996 and absolute majority in 2014. In short it took 70+ years for Hindu nationalists to get to power with 10-14% Muslims.

For whatever reason. It was a unified Muslim vote, and how long it took to unify this Muslim vote what 5 - 6 years?
Given Hindus so far were not unified, if AIML tried harder they could've formed a government in unified India.
In short, your logic apply to Hindus, they are far more divided. Jinnah hoped for a Hindu republic, we got a secular republic. Jinnah failed to see it. There are checks and balances to keep that secular fabric, there is nothing that BJP can do that'd affect the secular fabric of the country. Absolutely nothing happened that questioned India's secular status so far. All these are noises which naturally arises when a Hindu nationalist party is ruling and all their actions comes under a scanner which automatically gets assigned to a communal angle.


Read back. I can't waste time proving simple things, which you're in denial. HDI of Pakistan as per UN despite having 7 times smaller size is poor compared to India. You claimed you're superior and shit. Now choke on that.

So that MEANS you CANNOT provide evidence that has not been tampered by the indian government falsifying indian poverty figures.......:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...591/India-accused-of-poverty-smokescreen.html

 

[Chhatrapati]

So that MEANS you CANNOT provide evidence that has not been tampered by the indian government falsifying indian poverty figures.......:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...591/India-accused-of-poverty-smokescreen.html

Nah. It means you're trying to deflect from your original bullshit claim which you couldn't prove and was debunked. Now you're clutching at straws.

The standard of living in india is WAYYYYY WAY below that of Pakistan.

The difference is really small

lol... The difference is really small? These are not poverty measurement genius, it's quality of living on an average. Can't comprehend even simple things. Bugger off.

 

[Rusty]

Like a typical Indian rapist, you are extremely stupid.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_states_and_territories_by_Human_Development_Index

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Indian_states_and_territories_by_Human_Development_Index

Kerla HDI is the highest at 0.784 in India while Lahore is highest at 0.877 in Pakistan.

You are comparing average of Pakistan with individual states of India. Which is extremely stupid and about the right IQ for Indian.

So now, why does supa dupa pawa 2020 India's best HDI fall behind "Failed state" Pakistan?

you people need to stop putting effort into raping and more effort into improving your HDI.