09-14-2006, 02:14 AM
Aslam O Alaikum
I hope everybody would be fine here, so am I. I was a bit busy so had to remain away from this forum.
Pracs I didn't get exactly that what did you try to say in your post (second last). You, perhaps, said that Pakistan was made for the Muslims dwelling in Western parts of subcontinent and Bangladesh. It means that Pakistan was not made for the Muslims of subcontinent, it meant for the people living in present Pakistan and the basis for participation you have emphatically stated a number of times in your various posts. You may be would disagree but what a fine negation of two-nation theory it was. So, there is no concept of betrayal with Indian Muslims as you said they are as alien as any other Muslim state. According to you religion is not the basis of a state.
The second question I think is also very much relevant to the topic. What I asked was "Was freedom of sub-continent a result of ours and Indian leaders or this was the result of Second World War?â An ambiguous explanation was yours. You perhaps said had there been no world war freedom of subcontinent had been achieved a decade or two later. I don't know what make you believe that.
And, mind you, things like Hijab and Beard are becoming a stigma in our society.
Shoaib
I hope everybody would be fine here, so am I. I was a bit busy so had to remain away from this forum.
Pracs I didn't get exactly that what did you try to say in your post (second last). You, perhaps, said that Pakistan was made for the Muslims dwelling in Western parts of subcontinent and Bangladesh. It means that Pakistan was not made for the Muslims of subcontinent, it meant for the people living in present Pakistan and the basis for participation you have emphatically stated a number of times in your various posts. You may be would disagree but what a fine negation of two-nation theory it was. So, there is no concept of betrayal with Indian Muslims as you said they are as alien as any other Muslim state. According to you religion is not the basis of a state.
The second question I think is also very much relevant to the topic. What I asked was "Was freedom of sub-continent a result of ours and Indian leaders or this was the result of Second World War?â An ambiguous explanation was yours. You perhaps said had there been no world war freedom of subcontinent had been achieved a decade or two later. I don't know what make you believe that.
And, mind you, things like Hijab and Beard are becoming a stigma in our society.
Shoaib