Onus for Indo-Pak peace on Pakistan: White House

[Chhatrapati]

so who killed Ghandoo according to you?

Whoever killed Gandhi, he died quickly of yes, and he died because Godse thought he was soft on Muslims and Pakistan.
At least he didn't suffer like Jinnah, father of your nation, left on roadside to die. It was quite pathetic how you treated him towards the end.

 

[PradoTLC]

Whoever killed Gandhi, he died quickly of yes, and he died because Godse thought he was soft on Muslims and Pakistan.
At least he didn't suffer like Jinnah, father of your nation, left on roadside to die. It was quite pathetic how you treated him towards the end.

who ever?

why?

if it was a muslim then?.. would your reaction been the same?

it is quite pathetic how you hindus butchered him .. reflecting your intolerant nature. Not much has changed since then...

 

[Chhatrapati]

Jinnah didnt believe in partition till the very end...

haha you mean till August 13? Jinnah initially thought he could rule the entire nation by forming another party. But soon realized it is not possible, he wasn't serious about it but what Jinnah hadn't mind was different from what general Muslims had in mind, he later changed his stance, all these happened years before the actual partition and the direct action day sealed it's faith.

 

[PradoTLC]

haha you mean till August 13? Jinnah initially thought he could rule the entire nation by forming another party. But soon realized it is not possible, he wasn't serious about it but what Jinnah hadn't mind was different from what general Muslims had in mind, he later changed his stance, all these happened years before the actual partition and the direct action day sealed it's faith.

read his history not from hindoooo sources...

he made his decision when it was clear hindu intolerance and bigotry was glaringly obvious.

 

[Chhatrapati]

who ever?

why?

if it was a muslim then?.. would your reaction been the same?

Why would a muslim ever kill Gandhi?

He was killed because Godse, a hindu nationalist thought he was overly soft on Muslims and Hindus didn't get their due in partition.

 

[PradoTLC]

for your education

Jinnah did not want partition

https://herald.dawn.com/news/1153717

Why would a muslim ever kill Gandhi?

He was killed because Godse, a hindu nationalist thought he was overly soft on Muslims and Hindus didn't get their due in partition.

hindu nationalist?..

you mean terrorists... like ISIS

hindus took more than their fair share. shamelessly violating the rules of Partition, everything from land to money...

pathetic.

 

[Chhatrapati]

read his history not from hindoooo sources...

he made his decision when it was clear hindu intolerance and bigotry was glaringly obvious.

LOL! Why everyone has a mental block on direct action day? I mean, that should be remembered, given it happen to coincide with your Holy month of Ramadan. Muslim league put every party workers to the mosques for special announcement on it. It was initially thought to be a bandh but a violent riot followed.

Jinnah may not have intended it, but his silence proved he quitely approved it. Now tell me, in what world you say Jinnah didn't want partition?

hindu nationalist?..

you mean terrorists... like ISIS

There is a lot of difference between a terrorist and ultra nationalist. His sole aim was assassination of Gandhi, not kill maximum number of people around him because they are followers of Gandhi and install fear in their minds that anyone who follows Gandhi will be executed.

Meanwhile ISIS, I guess simply twist words in Quran and kill anyone who don't seem fit to be a Muslim. That's terrorism. These are pretty basic stuff dude.

 

[imadul]

Jinnah didnt believe in partition till the very end...

Opps .. didnt read that up?

Imran Khan think hindooo fags are scum... he appealed to you idiots before your 27 Feb public humiliation. He didnt do it out weakness he knew about Pakistan military capacity as he was heavily briefed .

after 27 Feb he thinks you guys are complete idiots.

again who killed Mathma Ghando?

Who killed Indra Ghandoo?

Who killed Rajiv Ghandoo?

One needs to be polite about others and their leaders however more we dislike them.
We just need to present facts.

 

[PradoTLC]

LOL! Why everyone has a mental block on direct action day? I mean, that should be remembered, given it happen to coincide with your Holy month of Ramadan. Muslim league put every party workers to the mosques for special announcement on it. It was initially thought to be a bandh but a violent riot followed.

Jinnah may not have intended it, but his silence proved he quitely approved it. Now tell me, in what world you say Jinnah didn't want partition?

you missed the point.

You people have serious issues. Till you deal with them no body would want to even live near u.

and silence = approval of partition?.. where did you get that from?... do some reading and then talk.

either way looking at india.. the decision was a correct one. I personally would not have waited that long.

One needs to be polite about others and their leaders however more we dislike them.
We just need to present facts.

opps that was typoo errors.

 

[Chhatrapati]

One needs to be polite about others and their leaders however more we dislike them.

I don't understand your dislike for Gandhi. He kinda agreed to partition at the end, although he had disagreements with Jinnah. He even went on strike when India refused to pay Pakistan repatriation. He was instrumental in stopping the communal violence too.

 

[PradoTLC]

LOL! Why everyone has a mental block on direct action day? I mean, that should be remembered, given it happen to coincide with your Holy month of Ramadan. Muslim league put every party workers to the mosques for special announcement on it. It was initially thought to be a bandh but a violent riot followed.

Jinnah may not have intended it, but his silence proved he quitely approved it. Now tell me, in what world you say Jinnah didn't want partition?


There is a lot of difference between a terrorist and ultra nationalist. His sole aim was assassination of Gandhi, not kill maximum number of people around him because they are followers of Gandhi and install fear in their minds that anyone who follows Gandhi will be executed.

Meanwhile ISIS, I guess simply twist words in Quran and kill anyone who don't seem fit to be a Muslim. That's terrorism. These are pretty basic stuff dude.

what twisted self serving logic.....


so lets see..

hindu nationalist = conducted mass murder, raping the women infront of their men, killing children, looting

not terrorist

but ISIS = conduct mass killing

Terrorist

so glad we dont have to see your faces.......

I don't understand your dislike for Gandhi. He kinda agreed to partition at the end, although he had disagreements with Jinnah. He even went on strike when India refused to pay Pakistan repatriation. He was instrumental in stopping the communal violence too.

dislike him?..

he used to go around in a diaper and a stick..

what is there to like?

 

[Chhatrapati]

and silence = approval of partition?

Jinnah's own words to congress. "We do not want war. If you want war we accept your offer unhesitatingly. We will either have a divided India divided or a destroyed India." That was on 16th of August before he declared direct action day.

It's sad you don't even know your history and arguing with me Jinnah was against partition. Partially you are right, Jinnah thought his idea wasn't serious but inadvertently he installed this idea in millions of Muslims. Later Jinnah had to support it, and he did support partition.

dislike him?..

he used to go around in a diaper and a stick..

what is there to like?

I guess that's why he is revered as Mahatma (a great soul) around the world.
Meanwhile, people ask Jinnah who?

 

[PradoTLC]

Jinnah's own words to congress. "We do not want war. If you want war we accept your offer unhesitatingly. We will either have a divided India divided or a destroyed India." That was on 16th of August before he declared direct action day.

It's sad you don't even know your history and arguing with me Jinnah was against partition. Partially you are right, Jinnah thought his idea wasn't serious but inadvertently he installed this idea in millions of Muslims. Later Jinnah had to support it, and he did support partition.


I guess that's why he is revered as Mahatma (a great soul) around the world.
Meanwhile, people ask Jinnah who?

it is sad you keep harping indian sources... kind of like your F-16 story.... feel sorry for u lot... fead on a pack of lies and cow piss.

I guess that's why he is revered as Mahatma (a great soul) around the world.
Meanwhile, people ask Jinnah who?

who cares?

the point is we are gratefull for him for giving us a homeland... far way from your rotten hindu state.

 

[Chhatrapati]

it is sad you keep harping indian sources... kind of like your F-16 story.... feel sorry for u lot... feed on a pack of lies.




who cares?

the point is we are gratefull for him for giving us a homeland... far way from your rotten hindu state.

haha, as usual keep deflecting. You will be further ignored, because you seem to be deficient in history. Alas I picked a dum dum to waste time.

 

[PradoTLC]

@chapprasi

haha, as usual keep deflecting.

You will be further ignored, because you seem to be deficient in history.

Alas I picked a dum dum to waste time.

But nothing to fear... prado here to educate the less capable clowns



Did Jinnah want Pakistan?

• Since the publication of Ayesha Jalal’s The Sole Spokesman (1985), conventional wisdom has been that Muhammad Ali Jinnah wanted to use Pakistan as a bargaining counter to get a better deal for Indian Muslims and the Muslim League in a united India. According to Ms. Jalal, this strategy backfired because Jinnah overplayed his hand. In the final phase, she says, “It was Congress that insisted on Partition. It was Jinnah who was against Partition.”
  
  Venkat Dhulipala challenged this view in his book Creating a New Medina (2015). He quotes Jinnah declaring several times, beginning 1941, that he was willing to sacrifice the minority provinces’ three crore Muslims to “liberate” the six crore in the majority provinces. Mr. Dhulipala attributes such statements to a carefully crafted policy by Jinnah to create an independent state that he calls a “New Medina”.
  
  There is truth in both these assertions. Jinnah was probably not interested in a completely independent Pakistan. He used the religious imagery of the “New Medina” to garner popular support in the Muslim-minority provinces, especially Uttar Pradesh. He needed this support desperately because he had no base in the Muslim-majority provinces.
  
  The North-West Frontier Province had a Congress Ministry and the Muslim leaders in Punjab and Bengal, the two largest Muslim-majority provinces, were averse to Jinnah’s interference in their provincial affairs. They were more interested in forming coalitions with their Hindu and Sikh colleagues than creating a separate state that would divide their provinces and subject them to Jinnah’s diktats.
  
  For Jinnah, the best option was the creation of a loose federation consisting of two autonomous entities, Hindustan and Pakistan, that would have parity with each other at the federal level, with himself the undisputed leader of Pakistan. This is why the Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946, which envisaged groups of provinces on the basis of religious majorities and a weak Centre, appealed to him.
  
  Jawaharlal Nehru torpedoed the plan, perhaps deliberately. The subsequent decision by Nehru and Sardar Patel that Partition was the lesser evil when compared to a weak Centre put paid to Jinnah’s ambition of dealing with the Congress leadership based on parity in a loosely federated India. Jinnah was left, in his own words, with a “mutilated, moth-eaten” Pakistan by the Congress’s insistence that Bengal and Punjab be divided simultaneously with the partition of the country. Jinnah was driven above all by the pursuit of personal power which he could not achieve in a centralised Indian state. Mahatma Gandhi suggested on the eve of Partition that Jinnah be made Prime Minister of a united India with the power to choose his Cabinet. Had the Congress leadership not rejected this proposal, it could have acted as a litmus test to assess Jinnah’s real intentions.
  
  The writer is University Distinguished Professor Emeritus of International Relations, Michigan State University
  
  https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/did-jinnah-want-pakistan/article25312966.ece

@chapprasi

haha, as usual keep deflecting.

You will be further ignored, because you seem to be deficient in history.

Alas I picked a dum dum to waste time.

But nothing to fear... prado here to educate the less capable clowns



Did Jinnah want Pakistan?

• Since the publication of Ayesha Jalal’s The Sole Spokesman (1985), conventional wisdom has been that Muhammad Ali Jinnah wanted to use Pakistan as a bargaining counter to get a better deal for Indian Muslims and the Muslim League in a united India. According to Ms. Jalal, this strategy backfired because Jinnah overplayed his hand. In the final phase, she says, “It was Congress that insisted on Partition. It was Jinnah who was against Partition.”
  
  Venkat Dhulipala challenged this view in his book Creating a New Medina (2015). He quotes Jinnah declaring several times, beginning 1941, that he was willing to sacrifice the minority provinces’ three crore Muslims to “liberate” the six crore in the majority provinces. Mr. Dhulipala attributes such statements to a carefully crafted policy by Jinnah to create an independent state that he calls a “New Medina”.
  
  There is truth in both these assertions. Jinnah was probably not interested in a completely independent Pakistan. He used the religious imagery of the “New Medina” to garner popular support in the Muslim-minority provinces, especially Uttar Pradesh. He needed this support desperately because he had no base in the Muslim-majority provinces.
  
  The North-West Frontier Province had a Congress Ministry and the Muslim leaders in Punjab and Bengal, the two largest Muslim-majority provinces, were averse to Jinnah’s interference in their provincial affairs. They were more interested in forming coalitions with their Hindu and Sikh colleagues than creating a separate state that would divide their provinces and subject them to Jinnah’s diktats.
  
  For Jinnah, the best option was the creation of a loose federation consisting of two autonomous entities, Hindustan and Pakistan, that would have parity with each other at the federal level, with himself the undisputed leader of Pakistan. This is why the Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946, which envisaged groups of provinces on the basis of religious majorities and a weak Centre, appealed to him.
  
  Jawaharlal Nehru torpedoed the plan, perhaps deliberately. The subsequent decision by Nehru and Sardar Patel that Partition was the lesser evil when compared to a weak Centre put paid to Jinnah’s ambition of dealing with the Congress leadership based on parity in a loosely federated India. Jinnah was left, in his own words, with a “mutilated, moth-eaten” Pakistan by the Congress’s insistence that Bengal and Punjab be divided simultaneously with the partition of the country. Jinnah was driven above all by the pursuit of personal power which he could not achieve in a centralised Indian state. Mahatma Gandhi suggested on the eve of Partition that Jinnah be made Prime Minister of a united India with the power to choose his Cabinet. Had the Congress leadership not rejected this proposal, it could have acted as a litmus test to assess Jinnah’s real intentions.
  
  The writer is University Distinguished Professor Emeritus of International Relations, Michigan State University
  
  https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/did-jinnah-want-pakistan/article25312966.ece

now of course this a hindu twisted type thinking but the point was he wanted muslims to have rights and believed in a united india..