Maulana Azad's predictions about the sub-continent

[GOD OF WAR]

Out of curiosity what % of Pakistanis think that creation of Pakistan was a mistake?

Less than 5%, and no thats not enough for India to start an instigation movement

 

[GOD OF WAR]

Most foolish. The borders of Pakistan were open for many years and not too many slaves came. Second if you want to free slaves just replenish your border and see how many go there . Hehe not too many

Why don't you guys arrange for a plebicite in Indian occupied Kashmir and find out first hand, then we will see whose the fool I don't even want to begin with the other Muslim majority areas.

 

[King123]

Why don't you guys arrange for a plebicite in Indian occupied Kashmir and find out first hand, then we will see whose the fool I don't even want to begin with the other Muslim majority areas.

First start in Gilgit-Baltistan, Pak occupied Kashmir and Baluchistan by International organizational like UN. Then we will surely do.

 

[jetti]

Why don't you guys arrange for a plebicite in Indian occupied Kashmir and find out first hand, then we will see whose the fool I don't even want to begin with the other Muslim majority areas.

For the Muslims of India , Pakistan was given. If people love pak , they can go. No one stopping them. Before plebiscite please ask why bd left u guys.
I would like to addthat I do not wish for Indian Muslims to got to pak. They belong to this land and have as much rights as I do.

 

[King123]

If anyone has problem, Those people can go to Pakistan. No Problem at all. But we won't give an inch of J&K at any cost. Indeed, If we get opportunity, We have intention to take back P.0.K. and Gigit-Baltistan.

 

[notsuperstitious]

Bro, not ALL slaves are bad, leaving out the likes of Shahrukh and Saif, there are some who indeed regret not coming to Pakistan and also some who could not due to some other reasons. A lot of Muslims I know living in India want to marry their cousins cross border so they can come and settle in Pakistan, I know some people who have done that personally.

Don't worry, we will free all those 'slaves', after all a slave cannot be blammed for not thinking as he wishes.

Your thoughts are grand and condescending, as befits a true pakistani nationalist. Your firm belief in your leadership role and your god given duty to free the oppressed is inspirational. Your claims of personal experiences is verifiable and representative. You hid your disappointment with Indian Muslims for not thinking right and gave them the benefit of the doubt with genuine magnanimity.

True to your nationality, You do not let facts on the ground delude you. We are honored and thankful to have you as our adversary

 

[T-Faz]

This is fake, Shorish Kashmiri made this up in early 70's.

There is no real source for it which can be used to identify its authentic nature.

1. First of all the interview finds no mention in any of the official works on Azad. It is only found in Agha Shorish Kashmiri’s book on Abul Kalam Azad which was financed and published by Kashmiri himself.

2. Azad says “H S Suhrawardy does not hold Jinnah in esteem”. Jinnah’s relationship with Suhrawardy soured in late 1947 but in April 1946 there were no such signs. Till 1947, Suhrawardy was tipped to be Pakistan’s firs t Prime Minister. Infact in his book “India Wins Freedom” Azad hints that Jinnah sidelined Nazimuddin because Nazimuddin was not the loyalist others (presumably Suhrawardy) were.

3. Azad is quoted as saying that “East Pakistan’s confidence will not erode as long as Jinnah and Liaqat Ali Khan are alive”. This is a rather odd statement on three counts. One in April 1946 no one used the term “East Pakistan”, secondly Liaqat Ali Khan just did not enjoy the kind of importance that is being attached to him and third that while Jinnah was ageing and was expected to die sooner or later, Liaqat Ali Khan was relatively young, and certainly younger than Azad. This sounds eerily similar to something our established Pakistan Studies’ books would say about Quaid-e-Azam and Quaid-e-Millat.

4. Azad is shown to speak about the “assertion of the subnational identities of Punjab, Sindh, Frontier and – please note- Balochistan”. There was no Balochistan issue till the annexation of Kalat. Balochistan did not exist as a proper province, let alone register as a possible hotbed in April 1946. All of Baloch grievances revolve around the purported events of March 1948 and the annexation in 1956. There is no way Azad could have spoken about Balochistan in April 1946.

5. Then Azad is quoted as saying “incompetent leadership will pave way for military dictatorship as has happened in many Muslim countries”. Till April 1946, there were no known coups in Muslim countries. Perhaps Azad was referring to Turkey but then Turkey was not a military dictatorship as Ataturk had retired from the military and was the elected – though autocratic – president of Turkey. His prime ministers, Ismet Inonu and Celal Bayer, had followed suit.

6. Azad then looks into his crystal ball and speaks of “heavy burden of foreign debt”. Foreign debt was an unknown and unlikely creature in Pakistan till the 1960s when Pakistan financed the building of a new capital. In April 1946, there were no apprehensions of foreign debt. Pakistan no doubt asked for military aid from the US soon after independence but that was hardly debt. Unless ofcourse Azad knew that the Congress planned on withholding Pakistan’s share of the treasury- another unlikely proposition since in April 1946 it wasn’t even clear that there would be a partition (except maybe in the note sent from V P Menon to George Abell on January 23rd 1946 which demarcated Pakistan exactly and precisely).

7. Azad is lavish in his praise of Jinnah as the best ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity, something he misses out completely in his book “India Wins Freedom”. Other than this purported interview Azad has never acknowledged Jinnah’s contributions to the Congress. It was just not Azad’s style. The description itself seems to follow the passages on Jinnah by Dr. B R Ambedkar’s “Pakistan or Partition of India”. Granted that this book was in circulation at the time but my bet will be that it was Kashmiri and not Azad who read it.

8. Azad then goes on to say “In the battle of Jamal, Qurans were displayed on the lances”. How strange and ironic that a learned Islamic scholar and authority would make such a major error? It was Jang-e-Sifin – between Muawiyah and Ali- where the Qurans were displayed on the lances. I for one cannot believe that Maulana Azad would say something like that given that this was his bread and butter. Had this been suggested about Jinnah or even Nehru or Iqbal it would have been believable but certainly not Azad.

The Man Who Forged An Interview: Shorish Kashmiri's Maulana Azad Hoax | Pak Tea House