Pakistani flags in three places in Assam..wake up India

[Kasrkin]

These things have been going on from before Independence, and things were far worse back then, except for the fact that much of the time there weren't any reporters around to document it.

With the information age you can see everything in real time. Good for you.

But don't mistake more information for more actual events.

You do know what you just said right? I should not 'mistake' information about events for actual events because now these things can be seen on 'real time' thanks to the information age unlike before?
Just think over what you said, if you cant defend something, dont try.

Also there is no real need to explain yourself, your friend was just trying to tell us in typical 'trollish' off topic remarks (which were completely ignored by the administrator btw) that your 'democracy' is too good for the likes of us, and that we 'hang PMs', storm parliaments and all that. I just pointed out that I disagree and offered the video as reason for doing so.

Also the video is relevant to the topic at hand given that it is a fight between Hindus and Muslims in the Indian parliament. I also obviously feel (unlike you) that Indian Muslims happen to deserve better.

Still I dont see why Bangladeshis would not just raise their own flags, given their country is also a Muslim country with (fairly) bad relations with India. Bangladeshis also have nationalism (as we found to our expense in 1971), and I reckon most of them look at Pakistan with disdain since their text books do tell them we raped like a million Bengali women and all (a remarkable feat accomplished by only 70,000 men).

 

[Flintlock]

You do know what you just said right?

Erm...yeah...that's why I posted it.

I should not 'mistake' information about events for actual events because now these things can be seen on 'real time' thanks to the information age unlike before?
Just think over what you said, if you cant defend something, dont try.

Read it again. Then once again. Revise it. And think it over. Then reply.

Also there is no real need to explain yourself, your friend was just trying to tell us in typical 'trollish' off topic remarks (which were completely ignored by the administrator btw) that your 'democracy' is too good for the likes of us, and that we 'hang PMs', storm parliaments and all that. I just pointed out that I disagree and offered the video as reason for doing so.

? My friend? I don't even know the guy. If you have problems with his post please reply to it?

Also the video is relevant to the topic at hand given that it is a fight between Hindus and Muslims in the Indian parliament. I also obviously feel (unlike you) that Indian Muslims happen to deserve better.

They deserve Pakistan, I suppose?

Still I dont see why Bangladeshis would not just raise their own flags, given their country is also a Muslim country with (fairly) bad relations with India. Bangladeshis also have nationalism (as we found to our expense in 1971), and I reckon most of them look at Pakistan with disdain since their text books do tell them we raped like a million Bengali women and all (a remarkable feat accomplished by only 70,000 men).

Not everything can be explained in terms that may seem obvious to you.

Why would Muslims blow up fellow muslims, for example? Don't they know that's haram?

People interpret things differently.

Have you considered that perhaps these Bangladeshi immigrants have little formal knowledge about their country of origin because they have never been to a Bangladeshi school, or perhaps had no schooling at all? Perhaps they have developed their own ideology?

Why would Nepalis adopt Maoism even though we know that Mao massacred so many millions? Isn't it absurd?

 

[Kasrkin]

Read it again. Then once again. Revise it. And think it over. Then reply.

If you are trying to pretend that this video is a hoax or something you could have just said that. If not then why are you afriad to 'illuminate' me if I am confused about your post?

? My friend? I don't even know the guy. If you have problems with his post please reply to it?

Fine sorry, your non-friend fellow country-men who you are trying to defend, happy?

They deserve Pakistan, I suppose?

Ah, no one is falling for that one here. Typical, predictable response to aviod the topic at hand, thats what people do when they dont like where the discussion is heading. Pakistan is irrelevant in regards to the future of Indian muslims.
(But since you raised it, I can tell you Pakistani Muslims as a whole are way better off than Indian Muslims)

Have you considered that perhaps these Bangladeshi immigrants have little formal knowledge about their country of origin because they have never been to a Bangladeshi school, or perhaps had no schooling at all? Perhaps they have developed their own ideology?

Hm, I see, Bengalis are likely to forget everything their parents from Bengal and the civil war have told them and are in fact more inclined to be influenced and inspired by an entity and an idea a thousand miles away (one which their parents happened to forsake btw). I certainly agree, Pakistan's idealogy is strong and appealing. Thank you for this illuminating discussion.

 

[Flintlock]

Hm, I see, Bengalis are likely to forget everything their parents from Bengal and the civil war have told them and are in fact more inclined to be influenced and inspired by an entity and an idea a thousand miles away (one which their parents happened to forsake btw). I certainly agree, Pakistan's idealogy is strong and appealing. Thank you for this illuminating discussion.

What's new? China adopted communism which came all the way from Germany. Sheesh, I wonder why they didn't stick to confucianism.

The ummah factor plays up periodically, especially when extremists take the political space.

Bengalis might have rebelled against Pakistan, but the ideological similarities exist nonetheless.

 

[Neo]

I don't think I have any more time for trolling. I never said that Bangladesh is a gutter. But your idiotic smile was very apparent, the same smile that appears in all threads which are about people being killed in terrorist attacks.

A sick idiotic silly smile.

The infiltrators (especially these flag waivers) are traitors and need to go back to the gutter.

Nothing to do with Bangladesh. Clear now?

Asim can you kindly consider the following for some moderation as well. Thanks

Use the report button and leave it upto the mods to decide wether moderation is required.

You might have noticed that the thread was moderated by me last night, whats the point of asking publically for review?

 

[Spring Onion]

Use the report button and leave it upto the mods to decide wether moderation is required.

Done

Thanks.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The ummah factor plays up periodically, especially when extremists take the political space.

Bengalis might have rebelled against Pakistan, but the ideological similarities exist nonetheless.

It is fascinating - I don't think it is Ummah though, atleast not in the way "ummah' is typically used. There is commonality in the sense that a common denominator is Islam, but Bangladeshis woudl probably never want to reunite with Pakistan either.

I think it is more along the lines of a shared sense of grievance, as Muslims, not a shared sense of nationhood, and I think Pakistan represents that sense of being a 'different' community. A sense of that 'different, smaller and weaker' community standing up against all odds, surviving in the face of adversity and telling the behemoth to shove off.

We are the ones that started it all, we stood up and demanded we be given the right to our separate and distinct destiny. I think it is the symbolism of that history, rather than any sense of pan-Islamic nationhood, that might have led to this, along with the impression that it would definitely make a splash!

 

[Vinod2070]

It is fascinating - I don't think it is Ummah though, atleast not in the way "ummah' is typically used. There is commonality in the sense that a common denominator is Islam, but Bangladeshis woudl probably never want to reunite with Pakistan either.

I think it is more along the lines of a shared sense of grievance, as Muslims, not a shared sense of nationhood, and I think Pakistan represents that sense of being a 'different' community. A sense of that 'different, smaller and weaker' community standing up against all odds, surviving in the face of adversity and telling the behemoth to shove off.

We are the ones that started it all, we stood up and demanded we be given the right to our separate and distinct destiny. I think it is the symbolism of that history, rather than any sense of pan-Islamic nationhood, that might have led to this, along with the impression that it would definitely make a splash!

You are right that Pakistan represents the sense of being a 'different' community. And that would certainly not be appreciated by any country.

The partition was too horrific an event. The memories are too painful. The pain of division of the country (which you guys are also too familiar, though for you it was a 24 year union only), the horrors of partition violence, the terrible sense of loss all around.

All these memories become vivid when such an even happens in this country and it evokes a predictably strong response.

You are right that it represents an idea. For us it is an idea of separatism, divisiveness, may be hate. The idea that just because people changed their faith, they also lost the sense of patriotism to their own country, that they became ready to kill their own compatriots for happenings 2000 miles away, that they welcome and lionize the invaders, looters and murderers of their own countrymen.

That is not an idea that the majority of the minority community would want to associate with, but these isolated events do more to promote a bad image of the community that any others.

I fail to see any reasons for cheer from any conscientious Pakistani. The perpetrators of such events will only invite a strong response that may well tar the innocents. I am sure no one wants that.

May be some of them do.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

A question for Munshi sahib (or anyone else who might know), why did Pakistani leaders believe there was a strong case for the inclusion of Assam into then East Pakistan?

Were the demographics different then? Or was the case for Assam based on making East Pakistan more viable?

 

[Vinod2070]

A side note to that was that some of them also wanted Calcutta to go to East Pakistan despite its overwhelming Hindu majority.

I guess they felt that it was the West Bengal which was breaking away rather than the other way round and they wanted the capital to remain with the "parent" country.

Of course, the thinking is open to interpretation.

 

[Neo]

A question for Munshi sahib (or anyone else who might know), why did Pakistani leaders believe there was a strong case for the inclusion of Assam into then East Pakistan?

Were the demographics different then? Or was the case for Assam based on making East Pakistan more viable?

But Assam's tale of woes actually began with the Partition of the country. The problem of transport bottleneck and geographical isolation started in 1947. Road and railway transit routes through erstwhile East Bengal were lost. So also the traditional trade relations between Assam and the neighbouring countries were strained. 1947 also meant large-scale migration of refugees from East Pakistan to Assam and the beginning of ethnic conflicts in the state. Then came the great earthquake of 1950, which was one of the 10 biggest earthquakes ever recorded in the world. It changed the topography of the region and the courses of the river Brahmaputra and some of its major tributaries.

The earthquake was followed by severe floods in the mid-1950s bringing untold devastations and miseries in their trail. Next came India's war with China in 1962. Assam and the North-East faced the brunt of the war. It was a big psychological blow to the people of the North-East and it sent a strong signal to prospective investors that Assam is not a safe place for investment. The 1962 war also perhaps changed the perspective of the national policy makers vis-a-vis Assam from development to defence. Soon thereafter the Indo-Pak war of 1965 broke out. Once again Assam had to go through the trauma of the war. The riverine route from Assam to the outside world through the then East Pakistan were sealed as a result of the war. The next severe blow came in 1971 when Assam not only had to suffer the war-time tension and inconveniences of the Bangladesh liberation war but also had to give shelter to millions of refugees from erstwhile East-Pakistan for more than a year.

In 1971, Assam was fragmented once again and Balkanisation of the North-East was taken one step further. Assam had to shift its capital in 1974 from Shillong to Guwahati. Before the administration could settle down in its new environment in a make-shift temporary capital, the Assam agitation began in 1979 and the administration was stressed to its limits. Maintenance of law and order got precedence over everything else. The agitation was over in 1985 after the signing of the Assam Accord. But the respite was short-lived. The rise of the ULFA in the mid-1980s followed by unrest in Bodo areas engulfed the state with militancy, insurgency, terrorism, and associated killings, extortions. Although the state is very rich in natural resources and industrial raw materials, the process of industrialization of the state came to a grinding halt. Not only did the flow of fresh investment stop, there began a process of capital flight from the state.

The situation has been further compounded by involvement of some external forces inimical to India and their attempt to fish in the troubled waters of the North-East. It has now been established that many of the insurgent outfits of the North-East receive arms training and other logistic supports from the near abroad. During the last five years, from 1996 to 2000, 1889 persons were killed in terrorist-related violence, of which 413 were security personnel. In fact, during the last 20 years, the state government has hardly got any respite to take any strong development initiative. It has been completely engaged in fighting, with its back to the wall, the problems of insurgency and terrorism, ethnic uprising and violent clashes and natural calamities, mainly floods. Apart from the direct cost of fighting terrorism including loss of life and property, the indirect cost in terms of loss of production, employment, investment and a general environment of insecurity and despondency, have been immense. Assam's case of economic degeneration cannot be explained in its entirety by economic logic and theory. It must be seen in its proper historical, cultural, political and geographical perspectives.

Link

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You are right that Pakistan represents the sense of being a 'different' community. And that would certainly not be appreciated by any country.

The partition was too horrific an event. The memories are too painful. The pain of division of the country (which you guys are also too familiar, though for you it was a 24 year union only), the horrors of partition violence, the terrible sense of loss all around.

All these memories become vivid when such an even happens in this country and it evokes a predictably strong response.

You are right that it represents an idea. For us it is an idea of separatism, divisiveness, may be hate. The idea that just because people changed their faith, they also lost the sense of patriotism to their own country, that they became ready to kill their own compatriots for happenings 2000 miles away, that they welcome and lionize the invaders, looters and murderers of their own countrymen.

That is not an idea that the majority of the minority community would want to associate with, but these isolated events do more to promote a bad image of the community that any others.

I fail to see any reasons for cheer from any conscientious Pakistani. The perpetrators of such events will only invite a strong response that may well tar the innocents. I am sure no one wants that.

May be some of them do.

The events of 1947 are perceived differently by either side of course. Pakistanis don't look at British India as representing a 'nation', and for us it is axiomatic that a people would get to choose their destiny and their nation, especially after coming out of British occupation. Patriotism can only exist when a nation exists, a nation did not exist prior to 1947, so I think this sense of 'losing patriotism' attributed to Pakistanis by Indians is misplaced.

Pakistan therefore represents the struggle for a just cause, the right for a people to live as they wish, coming out of colonial occupation.

Partition did not cause the atrocities of 1947 - people with hate and intolerance did. To blame partition for those atrocities is to exonerate and excuse the hate and violence of those 'terrorists and thugs'.

Partition was in itself a glorious moment in that a peaceful struggle against occupation came to an end with the voice of the people being heard and respected. Pakistan's history symbolizes that voice, and perhaps that was the message being delivered with the raising of the Pakistani flag - 'listen to the voice of the people! We will not be cowed' - not some idea of separation necessarily.

 

[Vinod2070]

The events of 1947 are perceived differently by either side of course. Pakistanis don't look at British India as representing a 'nation', and for us it is axiomatic that a people would get to choose their destiny and their nation, especially after coming out of British occupation. Patriotism can only exist when a nation exists, a nation did not exist prior to 1947, so I think this sense of 'losing patriotism' attributed to Pakistanis by Indians is misplaced.

Pakistan therefore represents the struggle for a just cause, the right for a people to live as they wish, coming out of colonial occupation.

Partition did not cause the atrocities of 1947 - people with hate and intolerance did. To blame partition for those atrocities is to exonerate and excuse the hate and violence of those 'terrorists and thugs'.

Partition was in itself a glorious moment in that a peaceful struggle against occupation came to an end with the voice of the people being heard and respected. Pakistan's history symbolizes that voice, and perhaps that was the message being delivered with the raising of the Pakistani flag - 'listen to the voice of the people! We will not be cowed' - not some idea of separation necessarily.

I see your point completely and it is good to get a rational Pakistani opinion of the events.

Partition does symbolize those happenings even if you forget for a moment who those culprits were.

Without delving too much, let me give you few examples to illustrate what I am saying.

MA Jinna was the father of Pakistan. He is considered to be the main driving force for the creation of Pakistan. He was also the grandson of a Gujarati Hindu Baniya who converted to Islam. The reasons for his conversion are unclear but it is said to be to spite his estranged family. Do you think, he would still be the father of Pakistan had his grand father not converted? Didn't just the change of faith on his grand father's part make him do what he did?

Mr. Iqbal is another ideologue of Pakistan. He was from a line of Kashmiri Pundits. the same who have been hounded out now from the valley. Do you think he would have been that if his family had not converted?

These are complicated matters. No simple solution and no simple explanations. We may try to dumb them down but it is not so easy to answer the tough questions.

I find your post to be good but a little simplistic. You may feel it to be obvious but that is not how we see it.

Who is wrong? Well, no easy answers again!

 

[Flintlock]

In any case, the present crisis simply highlights the threat posed to India by refugees/migrants from Bangladesh who, rootless and without representation, are adopting extremist/separatist ideology.

We should either repatriate them (which depends on Bangladesh accepting their existence) or simply deport them by force.

Integration into India should not be an option.

 

[Vanguard_786]

In any case, the present crisis simply highlights the threat posed to India by refugees/migrants from Bangladesh who, rootless and without representation, are adopting extremist/separatist ideology.

We should either repatriate them (which depends on Bangladesh accepting their existence) or simply deport them by force.

Integration into India should not be an option.

Lets not forget that this has been an episode of ethnic cleansing by Bodo militants. Illegal Bangladeshi migration happens for economic reasons , however the various splinter groups that exist in the NE like Naga and Bodo separatists are a greater threat at the moment.

Illegal Bangladeshi migration should be a political solution, however the states of Assam and WBengal have not addressed it. Delhi should also make stronger POTA like laws on illegal immigration and treat it like a criminal offence. Lastly the government should have a bilateral agreement with Bangladesh regarding repatriation and job creatiion in Bangladesh as well