Accountancy Forum

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

dear pracs and guybrush

i haven't read ur postings in detail, apologies if i dont answer them.
i m just going to write on the subject as long as the time permits.....it was long over due.

pracs i m already in ur camp ) dont ve to convince me for that )
luckily i managed to find one of my emails where i tried to explain my point of view. here u go

To start with, I am as proud of my country as anyone else could be
and yes I am a Pakistani.

in ISLAM, THERE is NO concept of a separate homeland on geographical basis, i m not a MAULANA, nor a MUFTI and don't think one has to be a genius to work out the basic concept of a SINGLE BODY "The Muslim UMMAH".

"Creation of Pakistan"

this is a misconception that the Muslims in South Asia gained ANY benefit from Pakistan infact the truth is quite contrary to this fact. had we been living together we would have out numbered other religions in many other states of the sub-continent. just beause of the partitian we are unable to meet our brothers in India and Bangladesh who STILL suffer every sort of mental and physical torture and are called TRAITORS no matter how good and faithful they are to their countries, all this happen just for the SO-CALLED benefit of 15 crore muslims living in Pakistan, not to mention the racial, provincial, political, religious and economic prejudice we have in pakistan. and what about 14 crore begalis and 30 crore muslim-indians, we dummped them against their wills just because of our personal motives, it was a known fact that majority of the muslims will never be able to migrate to pak even if they wish so. moreover hundreds of muslims have been killed in india whether it is Kashmir, Gujrat, Aasam, or anyother state. do u think had we been together in a 60/40 ratio those events would have happened. all this was speculated by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad well before the creation of Pak.i dont want to go into the harsh reality of WHY and for WHOM pak was created.

i do agree with Guybrush in certain situations it becomes inevitable.
now i want a separate Sindhudesh - a separate Pakhtunistan - a greater Punjab and ofcource Baluchistan liberation army is already fighting for independence and Kashimiris dont like to be called Pakistanis. we have witnessed ALL levels of atrocities within Pakistan which provide enough justification to take the suggested route. yes i am not going to further divide into Shia - Sunni states.

"THE IDEOLOGY"

what ideology? what nations? we are not a single nation.....are we?
we are Punjabi- Sindhi- Pathan- Mahajir- Sunni etc etc etc.

our beloved founder once woke up and realised he saw a separate homeland in his dream, i think he woke up a bit early coz he MISTAKENLY forgot to see BENGAL (biggest Muslim majority) in his dream, that was a "MISTAKE", amazing the same poor guy was rhyming in praise of India just days back SAAREY JAHAN SE ACHA HINDUSTAN HAMARA. what happened overnight, might had a wrong mix in his daily doze of alcohol. and guess what who is preaching for the cause....one who gets drunk every night and the other had Court Orders in London to stay away from his girl friend on UNMENTIONABLE charges. i should keep my mouth shut now. i really dont want to discuss personalities here......thats another issue altogether. lets come back to the ideology business, we are 2 nations MUSLIM and HINDUS and we cant live together at all, we hate eachother, we have nothing in common..........why on earth we lived happily for 900 years then, and as Guybrush mentioned NOW THE MUSLIMS in INDIA dont face the same bitterness..........WHAT??? so they are living happily now.....if they are living happily as a 15% minority ...i guess we would have been living more happily with 6040.

dont know about Guybrush, Pracs is living in UAE, i m based in UK, we all have many INDIAN and HINDU friends........aren't we living happily........we dont have to CREATE justifications for an unjustifiable event. we have to concentrate to save it now for the betterment of MUSLIM UMMAH as a whole. by the way we are ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN and a homeland for Muslims. dont know how much u know about the 1973 constitution. just try to find similarities b/w Sharia and OUR constituion.....won't take u long coz there hardly any.

to be continued..........

have to hit bed now - it is Pak Vs India cricket match tomorrow morning.....cant miss it.......and guess what i will be supporting my mother land Pakistan )

sweet dreams..........ab tum koi naya mulk na bana lena khwaab mein )

Allah hafiz

azeem

by the way our very own passport declines the so-called two nation theory.

on page 2 of our passport it says Nationality - and we write Pakistani. so we are a pakistani "nation" not muslim, there is a separate field for religion - dont know why???

azeem

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
by the way our very own passport declines the so-called two nation theory.

on page 2 of our passport it says Nationality - and we write Pakistani. so we are a pakistani "nation" not muslim, there is a separate field for religion - dont know why???

azeem

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

)) Yes we are the Pakistani nation !! true.. and muslims or christians or Hindus or Parsis or Sikhs etc.

â You will find that in the course of time, Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims will cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as the citizen of the stateâ â Muhammed Ali Jinnah â Quaid e Azam.

That would sum up the whole thing,.. and is my faith, for I do not see myself of a lesser Muslim if I see a pathan on the other side of the border in Afghanistan and consider him not a Pakistani.

Unfortunately the very ideology of Pakistan was hijaked after independence,.. people who sat on the fence and cried wolf became the country's gaurdians its Masihah.. well that is another argument all together,, some other day.

But Yes we are Pakistani first and foremost and muslims undoubtdly, the Muslim Ummah, Azeem, is dead ! you just need to take a look at the OIC and the 52 (or is it 54 now) muslim countries. We may have an Islamic state some where down the time line.. under Imam Mehdi. but that is destiny.. for now we are a Pakistani nation ,, and should think of ourselves as such .. Pakistan first and last.

Pakistan Forever.

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

Edited by - pracs on Sep 19 2004 63230 PM

Glad to read your point of view, (I think I have read this earlier on the FCA mail exchange,, but did not have the opportunity to respond to it then)

Just like to add that,.. it does not matter so much as to if you agree with what or how or why Pakistan was made.. as long as you are a citizen now.. and have your loyalties towards Pakistan.. I will respect you more the same...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>

in ISLAM, THERE is NO concept of a separate homeland on geographical basis, i m not a MAULANA, nor a MUFTI and don't think one has to be a genius to work out the basic concept of a SINGLE BODY "The Muslim UMMAH".<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

RE Agreed but, the calphate is over and the Muslim Ummah is dead.. the best we can aspire to do is form an EU kind of a bloc.. that would be the realisation of the Ummah dream.. if you dont see that happening.. (which I don't) there is no point in chanting Ummah...

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
"Creation of Pakistan"

this is a misconception that the Muslims in South Asia gained ANY benefit from Pakistan infact the truth is quite contrary to this fact. had we been living together we would have out numbered other religions in many other states of the sub-continent.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

We may have yes.... but the thing is,.. the merger of India and Pakistan would have been an artificial thing.. a cosmetic operation... these are and will remain different regions, they have been so historically even in pre Islamic times. The concept of a Pakistan was to have enough minorities (of Hindus and Sikhs) in Pakistan so as to make the minorities in both countries comfortable Congress played the part of villian and had Punjab and Bengal partitioned.. The league wanted these provinces un partitioned in Paksitan.. then Kahmir happened.. that is why Jinnah refered it to as Moth eaten Pakistan... Jinnah left his house in Bombay intact, his two cars and purchased the shares of a new IPO the Air India comapany ! simply that he wanted India and Pakistan to fucntion and live side by side as Canada and US... as these regions had done in the Past !! So Pakistan is as natural as Iran or England.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>just beause of the partitian we are unable to meet our brothers in India and Bangladesh who STILL suffer every sort of mental and physical torture and are called TRAITORS no matter how good and faithful they are to their countries, all this happen just for the SO-CALLED benefit of 15 crore muslims living in Pakistan, not to mention the racial, provincial, political, religious and economic prejudice we have in pakistan. and what about 14 crore begalis and 30 crore muslim-indians, we dummped them against their wills just because of our personal motives, it was a known fact that majority of the muslims will never be able to migrate to pak even if they wish so. moreover hundreds of muslims have been killed in india whether it is Kashmir, Gujrat, Aasam, or anyother state. do u think had we been together in a 60/40 ratio those events would have happened.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Well the ratio would have been something like 3070 and we just left behind 130 million or 13 crore Muslims in India and not 30 crore .. there are muslims outside of India in south asia around 30 crores(15 crore Pak + 13.5 crore Bengla. If you go by Canada-US model.. we did not abandon them... there was only one new change which was migrators from the North India to Pakistan, these people were asked by Jinnah to come over simply becasue they were better educated and Pakistan needed them...I think the position in an undivided India would have been more difficult and bloody..remember the language riots and other like wise riots in Bengal pre partition... two huge communities cannot live with each other at logger heads,, but a majority and minority can !!

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> all this was speculated by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad well before the creation of Pak.i dont want to go into the harsh reality of WHY and for WHOM pak was created.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

I am sorry I do not agree with you,, I consider the Abul Kalam Azad.. as Jinnah called him 'Congress' show boy ! and that he was...

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>i do agree with Guybrush in certain situations it becomes inevitable.
now i want a separate Sindhudesh - a separate Pakhtunistan - a greater Punjab and ofcource Baluchistan liberation army is already fighting for independence and Kashimiris dont like to be called Pakistanis. we have witnessed ALL levels of atrocities within Pakistan which provide enough justification to take the suggested route. yes i am not going to further divide into Shia - Sunni states.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

That sounds more of like for argument sake... there are no further nations in Pakistan there are people who speak different languages !! Iran has people who speak Persian and minorities speaking blauchi, tajik, uzbek, even arabs.. does that mean Iran cannot function as a country. Malaysia has people speaking and of different origins,, Malay, chinese mandrian, Tamil etc.. is Malaysia not a country ? Iraq has a shia - suni,.. population do we divide into two no... then why do we think of Pakistan on the same lines ?

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>"THE IDEOLOGY"

what ideology? what nations? we are not a single nation.....are we?
we are Punjabi- Sindhi- Pathan- Mahajir- Sunni etc etc etc.

our beloved founder once woke up and realised he saw a separate homeland in his dream, i think he woke up a bit early coz he MISTAKENLY forgot to see BENGAL (biggest Muslim majority) in his dream, that was a "MISTAKE", amazing the same poor guy was rhyming in praise of India just days back SAAREY JAHAN SE ACHA HINDUSTAN HAMARA. what happened overnight, might had a wrong mix in his daily doze of alcohol. and guess what who is preaching for the cause....one who gets drunk every night and the other had Court Orders in London to stay away from his girl friend on UNMENTIONABLE charges. i should keep my mouth shut now. i really dont want to discuss personalities here......thats another issue altogether. lets come back to the ideology business, we are 2 nations MUSLIM and HINDUS and we cant live together at all, we hate eachother, we have nothing in common..........why on earth we lived happily for 900 years then, and as Guybrush mentioned NOW THE MUSLIMS in INDIA dont face the same bitterness..........WHAT??? so they are living happily now.....if they are living happily as a 15% minority ...i guess we would have been living more happily with 6040.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

The Founding fathers did not dream the concept of Pakistan in sleep and no Iqbal did not just forget Bengal.. he was working on the same historical prospect of Pakistan,, Bangladesh has been in hstory either part of India or an independent region ! so what happened in 1971 was natural the bengalis were never meant to be Pakistanis.. the original Lahore resolution authored Sherae Bengal Fazlurehman .. spoke of muslim nations ! not muslim nation, not Islamic nation, not Islamic nations.... our history books have been doctored by people who have brought this country to the mess it is ! We lived with them together for 900 years... but ever in a single country !! don't forget that.. and even in India the Muslims ruled !! but never in the same country except for during the Mughals (the four kings) and Asoka... the British had hundreds of Princley states.. so it was never one country either..

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>dont know about Guybrush, Pracs is living in UAE, i m based in UK, we all have many INDIAN and HINDU friends........aren't we living happily........we dont have to CREATE justifications for an unjustifiable event. we have to concentrate to save it now for the betterment of MUSLIM UMMAH as a whole. by the way we are ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN and a homeland for Muslims. dont know how much u know about the 1973 constitution. just try to find similarities b/w Sharia and OUR constituion.....won't take u long coz there hardly any.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

We do,.. so that proves.. it is possible to live for the Indian Muslims with their Hindu country men,,, There was no unjustifiable event,.. for Pakistan is more than 3000 years ago... remember the Indus Valley civilisation...

And I agree.. Sharia is something we are not ready to have implemented in Pakistan,, the founders of this nation did not want a theocractic state. read about Jinnah and what he said,, read the Sufi Iqbal...

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>sweet dreams..........ab tum koi naya mulk na bana lena khwaab mein )[quote]

Better not,, coz there is no room for another country ! there is Pakistan

Khuda Hafiz.

Murtaza Pracha

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

Edited by - pracs on Sep 19 2004 70959 PM

salaam all,

i dont beleive tht v ve betrayed ne1, let alone muslims of india. i think the question of betraying or faking shud not b raised, bcoz, creation of pakistan was no conpiracy or secrete-deal. it was known to the whole world.
secondly, indians have always proved it on every walk of life tht they r not true to muslims, let alone pakistani muslims. so, v can clearly imagine our condition tht would ve been if v had not had opted for a separate country.
thirdly, not all muslims of india ve links to pakistan, i mean, muslims in india have their links/roots to many other muslim countries as well, eg, indonesian-muslims, malesian-muslims, arab-muslims etc etc etc ... so v r not responsible for tht.
furthermore, muslims of india were in imense problems b4 creation of pakistan. why did they not come to pakistan (migrated) n got releived??? i think they preferred their material interests at tht time n now they r in trouble. ie many muslim families didnot come here just bcoz they had big businesses, lands, farms etc etc there n they were not willing to giv it up!!!! my grandpa n grandma know many such families tht were their neighbors or in vicinity in india. they didnot migrated just bcoz of these reasons
so i dont think v r liable for ne hard-time for those ppl. although v feel pity n sympathy for their agonies, but pakistani muslims shud not b blamed. if v take long-term strategic decisions (eg nuclear weapons) tht get reflected negatively upon indian muslims, v shud not b blamed for tht. v r a nation n v ve to take all the legal measures for our survival.



FARHAN

live, n let live ...

hi

cant answer Mr Farhan, would like him to read books other than what he's been taught in Pakistan Studies.

in response to Prac's msg.

the best way i can think of is to quote u whereever possible and ask some very simple straight forward questions.

QUOTE #1

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>)) Yes we are the Pakistani nation !! true.. and muslims or christians or Hindus or Parsis or Sikhs etc.

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

so when it comes to Pakistan - we become a nation, two nation theory referred Pak and India as two nations not Muslims and Hindu? we can be muslim , hindu, sikh, parsi, christian and can still be called ONE NATION if we are Pakistani (a nation).

if that is true than we were one nation before partition, the only difference was our name......we were Indians then.

QUOTE # 2

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>â You will find that in the course of time, Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims will cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as the citizen of the stateâ â Muhammed Ali Jinnah â Quaid e Azam. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

the passage itself contradicts with the ideology and justification of two nation theory. if Mr Jinnah knew that religion will become personal faith then what was the point of having a POLITICAL COUNTRY on religious grounds.........we could always be called INDIANS (citizen of the state) and remain muslims in faith.

QUOTE # 3

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Unfortunately the very ideology of Pakistan was hijaked after independence,.. people who sat on the fence and cried wolf became the country's gaurdians its Masihah.. well that is another argument all together,, some other day.

But Yes we are Pakistani first and foremost and muslims undoubtdly, the Muslim Ummah, Azeem, is dead ! you just need to take a look at the OIC and the 52 (or is it 54 now) muslim countries. We may have an Islamic state some where down the time line.. under Imam Mehdi. but that is destiny.. for now we are a Pakistani nation ,, and should think of ourselves as such .. Pakistan first and last.

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

agree thats a seprate debate, also agree that Muslim Ummah is dead.
slight disagreement on the probabilities of joint effort or atleast a first step towards a united islamic block (ofcourse not in a geographical sense), i m quite optimistic about it and infact forsee it happening soon........perhaps a joint aggression of two notorioUS powers against Iran (which is very likely) might instigate a big change in OUR thinking. anyway thats something we are not discussing now.

QUOTE # 4

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> We may have yes.... but the thing is,.. the merger of India and Pakistan would have been an artificial thing.. a cosmetic operation... these are and will remain different regions, they have been so historically even in pre Islamic times. The concept of a Pakistan was to have enough minorities (of Hindus and Sikhs) in Pakistan so as to make the minorities in both countries comfortable Congress played the part of villian and had Punjab and Bengal partitioned.. The league wanted these provinces un partitioned in Paksitan.. then Kahmir happened.. that is why Jinnah refered it to as Moth eaten Pakistan... Jinnah left his house in Bombay intact, his two cars and purchased the shares of a new IPO the Air India comapany ! simply that he wanted India and Pakistan to fucntion and live side by side as Canada and US... as these regions had done in the Past !! So Pakistan is as natural as Iran or England.

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

riots were going on well before the partition, i dont know who could think of a peaceful partition then. Jinnah was an intelligent brain, he exactly knew what was happening, due to his illnes and immense pressure of the attrocities he speculated - he almost accepted whatever finally offered - i know Congress was no angel - but thats politics is all about - Jinnah did extremely well but it was an unfinished job.

not just his property and cars, his daughter still lives in INDIA.

QUOTE # 5

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>That sounds more of like for argument sake... there are no further nations in Pakistan there are people who speak different languages !! Iran has people who speak Persian and minorities speaking blauchi, tajik, uzbek, even arabs.. does that mean Iran cannot function as a country. Malaysia has people speaking and of different origins,, Malay, chinese mandrian, Tamil etc.. is Malaysia not a country ? Iraq has a shia - suni,.. population do we divide into two no... then why do we think of Pakistan on the same lines ?

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

i dont know what it takes to describe people as a separate nation, following diffs come in my mind

- Religion
- Language
- Colour
- Culture
- Logistics
- Hatred

starting with religion - everyother firqa or maslak is non-muslim to the other one, we speak diff languages, yes we all have diff colour (yes i m quite fair)) our culture is diversed like NWFP and Baluchistan are more conservative, logistically every single province has more similarities with our neibouring countries then with any pakistani province, for eg Baluchistan share similarities with Iran - NWFP with Afghanistan - Punjab with Punjab and Sindh with Gujrat. i m in my late 20s and i have seen enough hatred and socio politic prejudice in Pakistan. i have spent 25 years of my life in Karachi and have witnessed REAL violence and blood shed b/w Mahajir Vs Pathans, Sindhi Vs Mahagirs, etc etc.
well thats not my point - i totally agree with you - we cant make separate homelands on the above issues..........then what was the issue when Pakistan was created???

ever wondered how many people have been killed in Pak & India during the last 57 years, whether during wars, religious riots, freedom struggle etc. i guess thousands and thousands of people died........it would never have happened .........dont know who gained from partition.

QUOTE # 6

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote> Well the ratio would have been something like 3070 and we just left behind 130 million or 13 crore Muslims in India and not 30 crore .. there are muslims outside of India in south asia around 30 crores(15 crore Pak + 13.5 crore Bengla. If you go by Canada-US model.. we did not abandon them... there was only one new change which was migrators from the North India to Pakistan, these people were asked by Jinnah to come over simply becasue they were better educated and Pakistan needed them...I think the position in an undivided India would have been more difficult and bloody..remember the language riots and other like wise riots in Bengal pre partition... two huge communities cannot live with each other at logger heads,, but a majority and minority can !!

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

population at present
Pakistan = 15 - 16 crore
India = 20 - 22 crore
Bangladesh = 15 - 16 crore

on a prudent side it totals 50 crore against 80 crore hindus, the ratio comes to something like 4060 at present

come on pracs! i didnt expect it from u,

"two huge communities cannot live with each other at logger heads,, but a majority and minority can !!"

yes one big majority and minority can live happily as a MASTER SLAVE relationship..........there can be only two situations either hindu muslims could not live together or they could. historically they lived for about a millenium (whether in one country as a whole or in diff states) and for the last half century they have survived even as a minority.

obviously 6040 ratio would have boosted the lives of muslims in South Asia and we would have been more UNITED as muslims.

QUOTE # 7

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>The Founding fathers did not dream the concept of Pakistan in sleep and no Iqbal did not just forget Bengal.. he was working on the same historical prospect of Pakistan,, Bangladesh has been in hstory either part of India or an independent region ! so what happened in 1971 was natural the bengalis were never meant to be Pakistanis.. the original Lahore resolution authored Sherae Bengal Fazlurehman .. spoke of muslim nations ! not muslim nation, not Islamic nation, not Islamic nations.... our history books have been doctored by people who have brought this country to the mess it is ! We lived with them together for 900 years... but ever in a single country !! don't forget that.. and even in India the Muslims ruled !! but never in the same country except for during the Mughals (the four kings) and Asoka... the British had hundreds of Princley states.. so it was never one country either..

<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

i m sorry i dont want to answer this - i will be labelled a racist,
just an indication to u and u are wise enough to read b/w the lines, bengal was in every sense superior to punjab......what we witnessed in 1971 was the finishing touch. we never wanted bengal - we never wanted their rule.

QUOTE # 9 LAST BUT NOT THE LEAST

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>Just like to add that,.. it does not matter so much as to if you agree with what or how or why Pakistan was made.. as long as you are a citizen now.. and have your loyalties towards Pakistan.. I will respect you more the same...
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

its true, creation itself doesnt need to be justified, i dont want to justify why pak or why not pak? i am a pakistani and a proud one, nobody can doubt my loyalties just because i dont agree with their views, i m no less patriotic then them. i love my country and will remain do. i dont have to justify why i was created - I am Pakistan infact Islamic Republic of Pakistan, needed or not is history.
"even our name says Islamic before Pak."

congrats!!! we are victoriuos yet again, lets hope we raise the ICC cup this time.

Allah hafiz

azeem

busy pracs???

azeem

I know I invited this,, ) yeah.. but will get back to you tonite..

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

i shall wait for it....

would love to see REASONABLE POSTS from other people too..

azeem

Edited, please read the follwing post

Edited by - pracs on Sep 21 2004 113249 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Well here goes

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Azeem
hi

in response to Prac's msg.

the best way i can think of is to quote u whereever possible and ask some very simple straight forward questions.

QUOTE #1

Pracs
)) Yes we are the Pakistani nation !! true.. and muslims or christians or Hindus or Parsis or Sikhs etc.

Azeem
so when it comes to Pakistan - we become a nation, two nation theory referred Pak and India as two nations not Muslims and Hindu? we can be muslim , hindu, sikh, parsi, christian and can still be called ONE NATION if we are Pakistani (a nation).

if that is true than we were one nation before partition, the only difference was our name......we were Indians then. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

The two nation theory is not dead it is there.. remember that Pakistan meant a country where the muslims of the subcontinent (a majority ie) have a country to run and lead their lives as muslims,.. this does not mean that all non muslims would not be part of the nation (because muslims in India would be part of a non muslim majority country) so the balance was very much necessary... unfortunatley the likes of Nehrus and patels forced the partition of Punjab and Bengal. Getting Pakistan would also mean that muslims would have a chance of blossoming into areas where they in the British days were sidelined... (this is true for the Pakistan part), muslims in 'India' were prevelant in most professions.. unfortunately most of them migrated to Pakistan !

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
QUOTE # 2

Pracs
' You will find that in the course of time, Hindus will cease to be Hindus and Muslims will cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as the citizen of the stateâ â Muhammed Ali Jinnah â Quaid e Azam. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Azeem
the passage itself contradicts with the ideology and justification of two nation theory. if Mr Jinnah knew that religion will become personal faith then what was the point of having a POLITICAL COUNTRY on religious grounds.........we could always be called INDIANS (citizen of the state) and remain muslims in faith.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Jinnah new that very well,.. he tried his best not to go the other way.. but in Pakistan he saw that 'muslims' could become fathers of their own destination.. it was a political movement for the muslims.. muslims in an undivided India could have simply been sucked into the mainstream... I know you will point to muslims in India, but I think we in Pakistan have time and out tried to influence world opinion.. and even India when it comes to the rights of Muslims in India,, You must agree that in the after math of Barberi masjid-bombay riots and even the recent Gujrat genocide.. we have made a difference,.. I think pressure from outside (as in Pakistan) is more effectie than would have been had we been just provinces in an undivided India !

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
QUOTE # 3

Pracs
Unfortunately the very ideology of Pakistan was hijaked after independence,.. people who sat on the fence and cried wolf became the country's gaurdians its Masihah.. well that is another argument all together,, some other day.

But Yes we are Pakistani first and foremost and muslims undoubtdly, the Muslim Ummah, Azeem, is dead ! you just need to take a look at the OIC and the 52 (or is it 54 now) muslim countries. We may have an Islamic state some where down the time line.. under Imam Mehdi. but that is destiny.. for now we are a Pakistani nation ,, and should think of ourselves as such .. Pakistan first and last.

Azeem
agree thats a seprate debate, also agree that Muslim Ummah is dead.
slight disagreement on the probabilities of joint effort or atleast a first step towards a united islamic block (ofcourse not in a geographical sense), i m quite optimistic about it and infact forsee it happening soon........perhaps a joint aggression of two notorioUS powers against Iran (which is very likely) might instigate a big change in OUR thinking. anyway thats something we are not discussing now. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

I would like to agree with you on this one, I wish I could see something of that in my life time... The two countries you refer to had been at war for a decade.. but if its fate... Iran just announced today that it will not stop its uranium enrichment programme !

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
QUOTE # 4

Pracs
We may have yes.... but the thing is,.. the merger of India and Pakistan would have been an artificial thing.. a cosmetic operation... these are and will remain different regions, they have been so historically even in pre Islamic times. The concept of a Pakistan was to have enough minorities (of Hindus and Sikhs) in Pakistan so as to make the minorities in both countries comfortable Congress played the part of villian and had Punjab and Bengal partitioned.. The league wanted these provinces un partitioned in Paksitan.. then Kahmir happened.. that is why Jinnah refered it to as Moth eaten Pakistan... Jinnah left his house in Bombay intact, his two cars and purchased the shares of a new IPO the Air India comapany ! simply that he wanted India and Pakistan to fucntion and live side by side as Canada and US... as these regions had done in the Past !! So Pakistan is as natural as Iran or England.

Azeem
riots were going on well before the partition, i dont know who could think of a peaceful partition then. Jinnah was an intelligent brain, he exactly knew what was happening, due to his illnes and immense pressure of the attrocities he speculated - he almost accepted whatever finally offered - i know Congress was no angel - but thats politics is all about - Jinnah did extremely well but it was an unfinished job.

not just his property and cars, his daughter still lives in INDIA. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Well that is kind of harsh,,, he could not have forseen that the Sikhs in Punjab would turn against Muslims on Hindu instigation ofcourse ! and that practically every princely state army would start butchering muslims and that the British would look the other way, suddenly getting intimidated of their small numbers (it took them 200 years to realise that) at the wrong time.

It was unfinished..because Jinnah died... Had he lived another 5 years things would have been different and we wouldn't have been having this discussion )

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
QUOTE # 5

Pracs
That sounds more of like for argument sake... there are no further nations in Pakistan there are people who speak different languages !! Iran has people who speak Persian and minorities speaking blauchi, tajik, uzbek, even arabs.. does that mean Iran cannot function as a country. Malaysia has people speaking and of different origins,, Malay, chinese mandrian, Tamil etc.. is Malaysia not a country ? Iraq has a shia - suni,.. population do we divide into two no... then why do we think of Pakistan on the same lines ?

Azeem
i dont know what it takes to describe people as a separate nation, following diffs come in my mind

- Religion
- Language
- Colour
- Culture
- Logistics
- Hatred

starting with religion - everyother firqa or maslak is non-muslim to the other one, we speak diff languages, yes we all have diff colour (yes i m quite fair)) our culture is diversed like NWFP and Baluchistan are more conservative, logistically every single province has more similarities with our neibouring countries then with any pakistani province, for eg Baluchistan share similarities with Iran - NWFP with Afghanistan - Punjab with Punjab and Sindh with Gujrat. i m in my late 20s and i have seen enough hatred and socio politic prejudice in Pakistan. i have spent 25 years of my life in Karachi and have witnessed REAL violence and blood shed b/w Mahajir Vs Pathans, Sindhi Vs Mahagirs, etc etc.
well thats not my point - i totally agree with you - we cant make separate homelands on the above issues..........then what was the issue when Pakistan was created???

ever wondered how many people have been killed in Pak & India during the last 57 years, whether during wars, religious riots, freedom struggle etc. i guess thousands and thousands of people died........it would never have happened .........dont know who gained from partition. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

We cannot be sure of what could have been and if millions or thousands would have still died.. but with the kind of attitude Congress metted out during the negotiations I doubt that things would have been better.. more on the worst side. I am sure I would have not been who I am today had it not been for Pakistan. My Grand father was an illiterate shop keeper before partition,.. he grew into a business man in the very first decade of Pakistan.. and prospered during the Ayub Era,, his children went to school..

I do not carry any guilt on part of the Indian Muslims, since they were never meant to be united with us.. Pakistan had been a different country for thousands of years..

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
QUOTE # 6

Pracs
Well the ratio would have been something like 3070 and we just left behind 130 million or 13 crore Muslims in India and not 30 crore .. there are muslims outside of India in south asia around 30 crores(15 crore Pak + 13.5 crore Bengla. If you go by Canada-US model.. we did not abandon them... there was only one new change which was migrators from the North India to Pakistan, these people were asked by Jinnah to come over simply becasue they were better educated and Pakistan needed them...I think the position in an undivided India would have been more difficult and bloody..remember the language riots and other like wise riots in Bengal pre partition... two huge communities cannot live with each other at logger heads,, but a majority and minority can !!

Azeem
population at present
Pakistan = 15 - 16 crore
India = 20 - 22 crore
Bangladesh = 15 - 16 crore

on a prudent side it totals 50 crore against 80 crore hindus, the ratio comes to something like 4060 at present

come on pracs! i didnt expect it from u,

"two huge communities cannot live with each other at logger heads,, but a majority and minority can !!"

yes one big majority and minority can live happily as a MASTER SLAVE relationship..........there can be only two situations either hindu muslims could not live together or they could. historically they lived for about a millenium (whether in one country as a whole or in diff states) and for the last half century they have survived even as a minority.

obviously 6040 ratio would have boosted the lives of muslims in South Asia and we would have been more UNITED as muslims. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Well wrong math Azeem.. in the recent population census (based on relegious affinity for the first time in Indian history !) the figures for muslims in India is 135 million

Two huge nations living together give me one example... Bosina is what goes wrong (where Muslims- croats - serbians fought like animals)

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Pracs
The Founding fathers did not dream the concept of Pakistan in sleep and no Iqbal did not just forget Bengal.. he was working on the same historical prospect of Pakistan,, Bangladesh has been in hstory either part of India or an independent region ! so what happened in 1971 was natural the bengalis were never meant to be Pakistanis.. the original Lahore resolution authored Sherae Bengal Fazlurehman .. spoke of muslim nations ! not muslim nation, not Islamic nation, not Islamic nations.... our history books have been doctored by people who have brought this country to the mess it is ! We lived with them together for 900 years... but ever in a single country !! don't forget that.. and even in India the Muslims ruled !! but never in the same country except for during the Mughals (the four kings) and Asoka... the British had hundreds of Princley states.. so it was never one country either..

Azeem
i m sorry i dont want to answer this - i will be labelled a racist,
just an indication to u and u are wise enough to read b/w the lines, bengal was in every sense superior to punjab......what we witnessed in 1971 was the finishing touch. we never wanted bengal - we never wanted their rule.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Don't worry I have had my shocks in life early,, the day MQM was born and all the Mohajirs in my class actually took a count of Punjabis and Pathans in my class. Then when I visited Pakistan and met educated Pathans who thought poorely of Jinnah and did not speak Urdu considering it as a tool of Punjabi dominaton (sic).. I am all over that and greatly respectly people's point of view, which may not necessarliy meet mine. So if you are not comfortable on that,,I won't push you on that,, but I think its better to talk and differ and convert or be converted or be not converted than to slit each other's throats

I agree that Punjabis were fairly backward politically compared to Bengalis and the Mohajirs and the Urbanised Pathans (because of their tribal rather than feudal outlook and the frontier Gandhi), but in the last 50 years we have graduated and are now more politically educated and have exhibited impartiality to all sorts of ethnicity... atleast in Politics

Kher BANGLADESH is a complete topic which we will discuss at some other thread some other day...

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
QUOTE # 9 LAST BUT NOT THE LEAST

Pracs
Just like to add that,.. it does not matter so much as to if you agree with what or how or why Pakistan was made.. as long as you are a citizen now.. and have your loyalties towards Pakistan.. I will respect you more the same...

Azeem
its true, creation itself doesnt need to be justified, i dont want to justify why pak or why not pak? i am a pakistani and a proud one, nobody can doubt my loyalties just because i dont agree with their views, i m no less patriotic then them. i love my country and will remain do. i dont have to justify why i was created - I am Pakistan infact Islamic Republic of Pakistan, needed or not is history.
"even our name says Islamic before Pak." <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Though it hurts to admit or let others say that lets not get into justification,, for I believe there are justifications infact fairly good reasons... but i can let go for any one who is a proud pakistani !!

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>quote<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Azeem
congrats!!! we are victoriuos yet again, lets hope we raise the ICC cup this time.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote>

Was a great match,,.. loved every moment of it,, had great fun today with the Indians at the work place...!!! tried to pick you in the crowd at the stadium, Azeem.. guess you were home watching on the tele...

Pakistan Paindabad

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

PAKISTAN'S 5000 YEARS HISTORY !!!

1. Indus Valley Civilization 3000-1500 B.C. i.e. about 1500 yrs. Independent, separate from India.

2. Aryan period 1500-522 B.C. i.e. about 978 yrs. Independent, separate from India.

3. Small semi-independent states 522-326 B.C. i.e. about 196 yrs. Under the suzerainty of Iran's Kayani (Achaemenian) Empire.

4. Conquered by Alexander and remained under his successor 326-300 B.C. i.e. about 26 yrs. Under Greek rulers, not part of India.

5. Province of Mauryan Empire which included Afghanistan 300-200 B.C. i.e. about 100 yrs. Part of India, mostly Buddhist rule.

6. Graeco-Bactrian period 200-100 B.C. i.e. about 100 yrs. Independent, not part of India.

7. Saka-Parthian period 100 B.C.- 70 A.D. i.e. about 170 yrs. Independent, separate from India.

8. Kushan rule (1st phase) 70-250 A.D. i.e. about 180 yrs. Pakistan-based kingdom ruled over major portion of north India.

9. Kushan rule (2nd phase) 250-450 A.D. i.e. about 200 yrs. Independent, separate from India.

10. White Huns and allied tribes (1st phase) 450-650 A.D. i.e. about 200 yrs. Pakistan-based kingdoms ruled over parts of north India.

11. White Huns (2nd phase--- mixed with other races) 650-1010 A.D. i.e. about 360 yrs. Independent Rajput-Brahmin Kingdoms, not part of India.

12. Ghaznavids 1010-1187 A.D. i.e. 177 yrs. Part of Ghaznavid empire, separate from India.

13. Ghorid and Qubacha periods 1187-1227 A.D. i.e. about 40 yrs. Independent, not part of India.

14. Muslim period (Slave dynasty, Khiljis, Tughlaqs, Syeds, Lodhis, Suris and Mughals) 1227-1739 A.D. i.e. about 512 yrs. Under north India based MUSLIM govts.

15. Nadir Shah and Abdali periods 1739-1800 A.D. i.e. about 61 yrs. Iranian and Afghan suzerainty, not part of India.

16. Sikh rule (in Punjab, NWFP and Kashmir), Talpur rule in Sind, Khanate of Kalat in Baluchistan 1800-1848 A.D. i.e. about 48 yrs. Independent states, not part of India.

17. British rule 1848-1947 A.D. i.e. about 99 yrs (1843-1947 in Sind). Part of India under FOREIGN rule.

18. Muslim rule under the nomenclature of Pakistan 1947-present. Independent, not part of India.

The above table reveals that during the 5000 years of Pakistan's known history, this country was part of India for a total period of 711 yrs of which 512 yrs were covered by the MUSLIM period and about 100 years each by the Mauryan (mostly BUDDHIST) and British (CHRISTIAN) periods. Can anybody agree with the Indian 'claim' that Pakistan was part of India and that partition was unnatural? It hardly needs much intelligence to understand that Pakistan always had her back towards India and face towards the countries on her west. This is true both commercially and culturally.

With thanks to

http//www.pakistanidefenceforum.com

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

dear pracs

i think we are discussing too many things at the moment, lets confine our discussion to the following three points and if needed refer to other issues. three points

1. Two Nation Theory
2. Reasons for the Creation of Pakistan
3. Have we betrayed Muslims in India

i will come back to you very shortly

regards

azeem

sorry for the delay pracs...

hopefully comeback to you this weekend

azeem

Sure do no worries...

"Allah does not change the state of people unless they change what is within themselves" Quran 1311

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Azeem Shah Khan

Azeem Shah Khan

Pracs

Pracs

the_farhan

Azeem Shah Khan

Azeem Shah Khan

Pracs

Azeem Shah Khan

Pracs

Pracs

Pracs

Azeem Shah Khan

Azeem Shah Khan

Pracs