‘Pakistan schools teach Hindu hatred’

[Karachiite]

Ok lets imagine for a second that Pakistani text books do teach anti hindu hatred. But till this date in Pakistan's history there has never been a massacare against the Hindu community. Unlike neighbouring country India where a whole book can be published on the acts of extermination against minorities. Its strange we would teach hatred against Hindus but give those same Hindus special benefits like quota.

 

[Doctor09]

guys i am waiting for your references ? other than this article show me something as solid proof ......

 

[alphamale]

How is that against secularism?



He wanted strong provinces. Muslim majority provinces would have strong provincial rights. Similarly, Hindu majority provinces would also have strong provincial rights. It has nothing to do with secularism. Spain has the same model today, their country is divided into autonomous regions not controlled by Madrid, but their country is secular.



Jinnah passed away right after Pakistan was created. And right after 1947, Kashmir happened. Jinnah didn't have time to set the house in order, & passed away too quickly after Pakistan was created. Jinnah always wanted a weak center & strong provinces for Pakistan. Your knowledge is very limited on the subject, so please, don't sprout off your misconceptions here.

u can't compare spain with jinnah's views. religion has nothing to do with state policy of spain. i suggest u to read jinnah's points from neutral source. he wanted special status for muslim majority areas & also he demanded 33% reservation for muslims
in every department whereas muslims were just 20 to 25 % of total population.

 

[ashokdeiva]

I believe the Congress didn't want to have strong provincial rights because they feared separatist movements in the future in united India. Which is why they wanted a strong center. Jinnah wanted to have very strong provincial rights, similar to the autonomous regions in Spain (Basque country, Catalonia, Galicia, Canary Islands etc). Jinnah feared that because the Hindus were sooo much more than Muslims, if the Muslims did not get strong provincial rights in Muslim majority areas, their political & social future in India would be bleak.

ya I understand that, but later he was proved wrong, we have Muslims in Parliment, we had a Mulim(APJ Abdul Kalam) as our beloved president, no one can decorate the post more than APJ did. see that myth that Mulism will be manslaughtered by Hindus is a myth actually fueled when some section claimed seperation.
We have a good number of soldiers and officers in the IA, does that not mean what Jinnah concived was just a fear and nothing more.

 

[53fd]

u can't compare spain with jinnah's views. religion has nothing to do with state policy of spain. i suggest u to read jinnah's points from neutral source. he wanted special status for muslim majority areas & also he demanded 33% reservation for muslims
in every department whereas muslims were just 20 to 25 % of total population.

Religion had nothing to do with Jinnah's views for creating Pakistan. You're mixing up a few events here. Jinnah never wanted any of these things in his 14 points, but the Congress kept rejected it, & kept acting as an hindrance. I'm talking specifically about his 14 points in response to the Nehru report. It was only near independence that Jinnah wanted these things you're mentioning, in a united India, but Nehru did not want to fulfill these conditions.

 

[ashokdeiva]

Ok lets imagine for a second that Pakistani text books do teach anti hindu hatred. But till this date in Pakistan's history there has never been a massacare against the Hindu community. Unlike neighbouring country India where a whole book can be published on the acts of extermination against minorities. Its strange we would teach hatred against Hindus but give those same Hindus special benefits like quota.

so how many had been state sponsered, every riot that happend had a spark(a mistake done by either of the community).
For example bringing down the Babar mosque was a spark(mistake) done by Hindus.
Buringing alive 57 pilgrims was a spark(mistake) done by the Muslim brothers.
Do not accuse the nation for a few incidents that was sparked by fanatics on both side.
if you say that Muslims are manslaughtered then Muslim population should have declained in India but the cences shows the opposite.

 

[Doctor09]

ya I understand that, but later he was proved wrong, we have Muslims in Parliment, we had a Mulim(APJ Abdul Kalam) as our beloved president, no one can decorate the post more than APJ did. see that myth that Mulism will be manslaughtered by Hindus is a myth actually fueled when some section claimed seperation.
We have a good number of soldiers and officers in the IA, does that not mean what Jinnah concived was just a fear and nothing more.

you are totally wrong about this ..... Jinnah's fear was right and it is proved when Muslims were migrating from INDIA TO PAKISTAN thousands of thousand muslims killed and burned in trains it shows that Jinnah was right .......

 

[Karachiite]

so how many had been state sponsered, every riot that happend had a spark(a mistake done by either of the community).
For example bringing down the Babar mosque was a spark(mistake) done by Hindus.
Buringing alive 57 pilgrims was a spark(mistake) done by the Muslim brothers.
Do not accuse the nation for a few incidents that was sparked by fanatics on both side.
if you say that Muslims are manslaughtered then Muslim population should have declained in India but the cences shows the opposite.

Don't be so naive you and I both know the government has had a huge hand in targetting minorities. Unlike Pakistan where a reeligious party has never been in power it is opposite in India where religious extremist parties like BJP with their hindu terrorist militia called RSS has created havoc within the minorities.

Gujarat Genocide was state sponsored and so was the demolition of Babri Masjid. Extermination of Sikhs was state sponsored as well. And why is it that Muslims are always encountered by the police in India?
And as for Muslims growing, it is merely due to their birth rates being drastically high.

 

[53fd]

ya I understand that, but later he was proved wrong, we have Muslims in Parliment, we had a Mulim(APJ Abdul Kalam) as our beloved president, no one can decorate the post more than APJ did.

Besides having a PM/President, Pakistan has non-Muslim representation in every field of life, at very high levels as well. Jinnah's point was not just about representation, but about the future & existence of minority groups. Riots killing thousands of Sikhs, Muslims, & Christians has already taken place. India is still riddled with communalism, & that is what Jinnah feared. The effects of ethnic unrest & separatist tendencies in its Central & Eastern states is also what Jinnah feared. The people in India's eastern states of Orissa (bauxite), Chhattisgarh (coal, iron ore, limestone), Jharkhand (iron ore, marble, copper, diamond) feel the central government in Delhi is too strong, & exploits their natural resources.

see that myth that Mulism will be manslaughtered by Hindus is a myth actually fueled when some section claimed seperation.

Jinnah didn't fear a manslaughter, but a 'gradual insignificance' of all minorities in India, not just Muslims.

 

[Karachiite]

you are totally wrong about this ..... Jinnah's fear was right and it is proved when Muslims were migrating from INDIA TO PAKISTAN thousands of thousand muslims killed and burned in trains it shows that Jinnah was right .......

Yeah Quaid e Azam was right about Muslims being marginalized in India. Look at the present situation. Muslims are begging to be given an equal chance. They can't even own property. I have family in India and they have been living in the same house since before 1947. My cousin and her family live in Delhi and they live in a segregated neighbourhood because when religious riots break out it can get deadly.
The situation is similar for Christians as well although it is easier for them to own property.

 

[alphamale]

Religion had nothing to do with Jinnah's views for creating Pakistan. You're mixing up a few events here. Jinnah never wanted any of these things in his 14 points, but the Congress kept rejected it, & kept acting as an hindrance. I'm talking specifically about his 14 points in response to the Nehru report. It was only near independence that Jinnah wanted these things you're mentioning, in a united India, but Nehru did not want to fulfill these conditions.

1/3rd reservation, provincial powers & special status to muslim majority provinces were the points mentioned by jinnah in his 14 points which he drafted in 1929. he didn't waited till partition for those demands.

 

[53fd]

1/3rd reservation, provincial powers & special status to muslim majority provinces were the points mentioned by jinnah in his 14 points which he drafted in 1929. he didn't waited till partition for those demands.

You're right, my bad. 1/3rd reservation in the central legislature. 1/3rd Muslim ministers for central/provincial cabinets.

But this has nothing to do with special status for Muslim majority areas. Is there something I am missing here?

 

[53fd]

1/3rd reservation, provincial powers & special status to muslim majority provinces were the points mentioned by jinnah in his 14 points which he drafted in 1929. he didn't waited till partition for those demands.

Anyways, what does reservations have to do with a nation being secular or not? Aren't there quotas & reservations in India for various things based on a religious being a minority or majority (SCs, STs etc)?

 

[ashokdeiva]

Don't be so naive you and I both know the government has had a huge hand in targetting minorities. Unlike Pakistan where a reeligious party has never been in power it is opposite in India where religious extremist parties like BJP with their hindu terrorist militia called RSS has created havoc within the minorities.

Gujarat Genocide was state sponsored and so was the demolition of Babri Masjid. Extermination of Sikhs was state sponsored as well. And why is it that Muslims are always encountered by the police in India?
And as for Muslims growing, it is merely due to their birth rates being drastically high.

see I have gone through the entire episode of the Gujarath riot, it was not sparked by state, it was our muslim brothers that did the spark when you hear that some of your men are killed by people whom you consider rivals will you keep quite will you not start commiting crimes out of emotional content, you have to know human and mob behavior when situations like this happens.
As far as the birth rate you are saying, so for every Muslim brother who is killed in INdia by a Hindu 2 more Muslims are born to take his place like a hydra, what a idea?
I am not being naive here, i am being rational, as far as the 1983 unrest against sikhs is considered its congress party sponsered and not the people sponsered one. we the people make the government here not the other way arround.

 

[ashokdeiva]

Besides having a PM/President, Pakistan has non-Muslim representation in every field of life, at very high levels as well. Jinnah's point was not just about representation, but about the future & existence of minority groups. Riots killing thousands of Sikhs, Muslims, & Christians has already taken place. India is still riddled with communalism, & that is what Jinnah feared. The effects of ethnic unrest & separatist tendencies in its Central & Eastern states is also what Jinnah feared. The people in India's eastern states of Orissa (bauxite), Chhattisgarh (coal, iron ore, limestone), Jharkhand (iron ore, marble, copper, diamond) feel the central government in Delhi is too strong, & exploits their natural resources.



Jinnah didn't fear a manslaughter, but a 'gradual insignificance' of all minorities in India, not just Muslims.

see even a Hindu like me who is from TN feel that we are loosing our identity at our own home ground what can we do, this is a mistake that is done long back, and India is going through a revolution to see some thing new replace the old mistakes with corrective messures.