What would have Jinnah thought of Ajmal Kasab and gang, wonders SC

[Ticker]

Jinnah was prepared as late as July 1946 to accept a United India but there were other forces at work too. Some put attribute the partition to Hindu aggression, others to muslim insecurity and some to British divide and rule policy. I believe it may have been an amalgamation of the three.

Wrong interpretation of historical perception.

Jinnah was an astute politician and knew his moves and the resultant outcome much better than many perceived. His offers were provisioned on certain acceptances by the Congress. He knew that the congress would never agree to what he sought and his demanded provisions were thus rejected by Congress. Thus, those Muslims who were skeptical about creation of Pakistan, better understood Congresses motives and started supporting him. Those English decision makers who were also reluctant to grant their support for creation of Pakistan, finally agreed to the fact that there was no other option but.

 

[Icarus]

Icarus bhai hold on-
you revealing to much about yourself-

just a thought- -

I let this be known about me on purpose otherwise everybody thinks I'm from the army.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Hahahahahaha, "I'd cook you a Biryani worth dying for".

Then I am prepared to die.
And I've already thanked you in advance for the meal. Later who knows........

 

[Icarus]

Then I am prepared to die.
And I've already thanked you in advance for the meal. Later who knows........

No! No! No! You take the fun out of it! You are supposed to take a spoonful up to your mouth a couple of times before losing your urge to eat without any explanation and then I say:

"Yeh toh phir bach gaya........Robert!"

 

[vsdoc]

We already know ! Icarus, didn't the intelligence report say that Vsdoc also has a grenade attached to where his right nut was supposed to be ?

The remaining nut was in overdrive in that case!

P.S I've only fired my Dad's baretta (can't even spell it !) once and instead of targeting the mark I had made on the tree-trunk in my lawn I ended up killing my Mom's petunias and her hand-made vase they were in ! Suffice it to say a leather sandal hasn't had as much fun whooping someone's arse as it did on that fateful afternoon !

See that's the difference. Barring leather sandal being the same, all we had at home was a pump action British Daisy air rifle of my dad's. Used it to hunt chipkalis on my terrace.

 

[toxic_pus]

Jinnah would have never allowed a Kasab to be created in Pakistan.

Lets not forget that he was alive and kicking when the Pakistani 'non-state actors', with active support from the 'state actors', infiltrated into Kashmir in the name of 'Jihad'. While his countrymen gleefully engaged in killing, raping, and looting the innocent co-religionists, his primary concern was his own conscience. To ensure a sparkly clean conscience he refused to even acknowledge the situation, let alone do anything to diffuse it. Curiously though, when the opportune moment came he didn't even hesitate to use this illegal act of occupying a sovereign country, as a bargaining chip.

So pardon me if I am not entirely convinced.

 

[vsdoc]

Toxic days are here again!

Grammar bootcamp

 

[Ticker]

Relevant - the Pakistani terrorists in Mumbai shot dead some 50 Indian Muslims dead, but when at Taj they captured two Muslims from Turkey, they let them go free.

Even if we accept the fundamentalist interpretation of Jinnah, even then he would despise the scum. Interestingly the same LET scum is a creation and pet of Pakistani establishment.

So the real question is, what do the real powerholders in Pakistan think of the Mujahir Shia Jinnah?

One of the greatest leaders the world has ever produced, who put a new country on the world map and changed forever how the Great Game in this part of the world would be played.

 

[Developereo]

Now Indian SC is trolling Pakistan

Agree. The comment by the SC judge was pointless, irrelevant and unbecoming.

However, since it was made, the proper question to as is "what would Jinnah, as a lawyer, think of this whole affair, including the trial?"

It's not about Pakistan's grandstanding alone, the Indian government has to worry about the effect of that grandstanding on the people of Mumbai in particular & whether the Indian judiciary, the sole arbiter in these matters of jurisdiction would be pleased about the offer.

Ironic that you mention grandstanding, since that is precisely what we accuse the GoI of doing all along. The GoI has refused to cooperate with Pakistan in giving access to witnesses (and all the other things mentioned earlier) because it was far more interested in milking this episode for maximum PR damage to Pakistan.

As Icarus and AA mentioned, Pakistani courts will not -- and MUST not -- forego proper legal procedures just to placate India. If the evidence isn't there, it simply isn't there. As mentioned previously, if India feels it has incontrovertible evidence, they can try HS in absentia.

The fact is that the GoI has been indulging in grandstanding from the get go.

What allegations? According to you, he may not be the criminal & India is just fudging facts... So who according to you was the mastermind, surely you have an alternate theory of how 10 Pakistanis(atleast) trained, acquired weapons, worked with people in the U.S.(Headley) & one who somehow managed a fake-genuine Pakistani passport(Abu Jundal) and managed to arrange finances to set up & manage a operation in India? Who were the men on the tapes giving instructions? Even if Hafiz Saeed had nothing to do with it (as per your version), who did? Offer an alternate theory first. Simply saying not enough evidence for this but not bothering about what is known & I gave you the questions that needed asking, is not going to cut it.

That's not how it works. You don't dream up suspects out of thin air and try to fit the evidence to fit your predetermined suspects. If India is serious about resolving this matter through proper legal process, then it should work WITH Pakistan to share all the evidence, including access to Kasab, and let the evidence lead where it may.

 

[Ticker]

Lets not forget that he was alive and kicking when the Pakistani 'non-state actors', with active support from the 'state actors', infiltrated into Kashmir in the name of 'Jihad'. While his countrymen gleefully engaged in killing, raping, and looting the innocent co-religionists, his primary concern was his own conscience. To ensure a sparkly clean conscience he refused to even acknowledge the situation, let alone do anything to diffuse it. Curiously though, when the opportune moment came he didn't even hesitate to use this illegal act of occupying a sovereign country, as a bargaining chip.

So pardon me if I am not entirely convinced.

Your conviction is not needed and is neither important.

 

[vsdoc]

Developer, you guys unfailingly ensure that everytime the innate soft heartedness of Indians overcomes their suspicion of you, someone somewhere wil do something and another 10 years of the uneasy hostile status quo will pass.

Pity for you that the Americans finally woke up and came and messed things up.

You had and have a good thing going with the Hindus on the other side.

Docile chilled out slow to anger race that they are.

Your conviction is not needed and is neither important.

Don't piss him off.

He carries tandoor skewers in his quiver like so many arrows.

 

[Developereo]

Developer, you guys unfailingly ensure that everytime the innate soft heartedness of Indians overcomes their suspicion of you, someone somewhere wil do something and another 10 years of the uneasy hostile status quo will pass.

Pity for you that the Americans finally woke up and came and messed things up.

You had and have a good thing going with the Hindus on the other side.

Docile chilled out slow to anger race that they are.

Spare us the victimhood speech. Hindu extremists have done their share of violence; it was neither chilled, nor slow.

 

[toxic_pus]

I beg to differ, Mukti Bahini and LTTE came way before anything else. India set the trend, others just followed and as for the second part. We have been blamed of having terrorists on our soil but not of harbouring them, that sort of absurdity comes from India alone.

Pakistan was barely a week or so old when the infiltration of 'non-state actors' into the independent Princely state of Kashmir began. When this trickle failed to bully the ruler, you eventually pushed the 'non-state actors' in one large horde during late October, 1947. When that failed, you started propping up separatist groups in P0K, in the 50s.

Not to mention how in the 60s you allowed NE separatists to take refuge in East Pakistan.

If anything India merely followed what Pakistan started.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Spare us the victimhood speech. Hindu extremists have done their share of violence; it was neither chilled, nor slow.

You don't get it. It becomes difficult for even decent people to condemn them wholeheartedly, and stomp on them as they deserve, because some little prick from your side comes out with a totally insufferable comment.

Just to be clear: I am not calling you a little prick.

 

[vsdoc]

Spare us the victimhood speech. Hindu extremists have done their share of violence; it was neither chilled, nor slow.

Mai to sirf bol raha tha.

Aap to bhadak pade.