1971 war a RAW success?

[Armstrong]

You don't have any idea.

Partition happened because Congress decided to make Deoband an ally instead of Aligarh educated Hindustani Muslim who were marginalized and saw their political future diminishing.

All these political dimensions of Islam, Islam is more than praying 5 times etc are hogwash, none of the stalwarts of two nation theory was practicing Muslims to begin with.

I suggest that you read Iqbal (grab a copy of his Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam) and Sir Syed Ahmed Khan; I suggest that you read Jinnah's speeches and in particular the ones where he addresses the State Bank of Pakistan to come up with something called 'Islamic Finance' or the one in Dhaka where he talks about our foundations being based on something he called 'Islamic Socialism' ! Also Liaquat Ali Khan - the Hindustani Muslim - was the first to move the Objective Resolution ! Furthermore, I'm not a practising Muslim...heck not most Pakistanis are but even the last practising from amongst us (who still call themselves Muslims) appreciate and respect that there is something called 'Shariah' !

And onto the Deoband and Aligarh divide ? Ever head of the Barelivis ? Ever heard of Pir of Manki Sharif ? Heck a significant portion of the Deobandis on this side were also with Jinnah hence the subsequent cleavage between Ulam-e-Hind and the clerics who choose Pakistan !

P.S I've got to go for a while but I'd be back in around 2 hours ! Should you allow me I can get back to you with more about the TNT and try to explain its origins, its nature, its evolution - the whole lot through credible references ? Alright...?

 

[INDIC]

2 nation theory is still alive as long as BD is not sikkimised and current PAK maintains her
integrity. For BD, thanks to a guy like Pres.Zia we have found an unique identity in line with our
islamic heritage i.e Bangladeshi nationalism not AL's ethnic bengali nationalism. While PAK is still
one of the cradle of muslim unity. Sindis, Baluch, Pathans, Pastoo, punjabis and kashmiris are still united as one single country. Today's PAK along with Indoneshia is a symbol of muslim unity.

I recently read about Bangladesh's High court's order that Bangladesh is a secular state as envisaged in first constitution of Bangladesh in 70s. But Awami League government is not reverting back to it because of the future turmoil that would be created by Islamic parties in Bangladesh.

 

[LaBong]

First some Muslims decided that they can't live with Hindu majority,
Well this was the whole point of the two nation theory was it not?

So as Luffy 500 pointed out, as long as Pakistan and Bangladesh are independent the theory still holds-just by a different name.

And 1971 was not due to religious reasons and that was bound to happen at some point considering how not feasible that union was.

Sorry but can you explain your last point to me? All the while, main proponent of two Nation theory, the Hindustani Muslims, remain minority in both India and Pakistan.

I'm not sure why Lufti and you are not getting the simple fact, that by birth of Bangladesh, it has been proved that religion is not the binding factor which makes a nation but many other factors like ethnicity, language take a part. Thus invalidating two nation theory.

Like I said, three nations defies the very existence of two nation theory.

Sorry but can you explain your last point to me? All the while, main proponent of two Nation theory, the Hindustani Muslims, remain minority in both India and Pakistan.

That mohajirs and north Indian Muslims are minority both in India and Pakistan.

 

[INDIC]

First some Muslims decided that they can't live with Hindu majority,
Well this was the whole point of the two nation theory was it not?

It ended up as a hype when only 15-20% of Muslims in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Delhi or Madhya Pradesh decided to migrate to Pakistan and handful of them from South India.

Infact, Deobandis were urged by their clerics not to migrate to Pakistan.

 

[Armstrong]

I'm not sure why Lufti and you are not getting the simple fact, that by birth of Bangladesh, it has been proved that religion is not the binding factor which makes a nation but many other factors like ethnicity, language take a part. Thus invalidating two nation theory.

No one disputed anything of the sort ever ! Hence why Jinnah was so insistent on Pakistan needing a 'National Identity' to galvanize herself into One Nation. Furthermore, the deciding factor between a Nation's continuation or demise is neither ideology or ethnicity or even a common tongue or history but Governance ! Take that away and even the most tightly knit nations will crumble - Case in point : Yugoslavia, most of the Slavic States of Eastern Europe and even Sudan !

I recently read about Bangladesh's High court's order that Bangladesh is a secular state as envisaged in first constitution of Bangladesh in 70s. But Awami League is not revoking it because of the future turmoil that would be created by Islamist in Bangladesh.

Yes a Secular State with a State Religion as Islam ! Like I said - interpretation of Islamic Polity isn't monolithic.

It ended up as a hype when only 15-20% of Muslims in Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Delhi or Madhya Pradesh decided to migrate to Pakistan and handful of them from South India.

Infact, Deobandis were urged by their clerics not to migrate to Pakistan.

15-20% is a huge number that comes at around 15 to 20 million of the 100 million Muslims of the Indian Subcontinent - thats more than the population of most countries out there !

 

[Dance]

I'm not sure why Lufti and you are not getting the simple fact, that by birth of Bangladesh, it has been proved that religion is not the binding factor which makes a nation but many other factors like ethnicity, language take a part. Thus invalidating two nation theory.

Like I said, three nations defies the very existence of two nation theory.



That mohajirs and north Indian Muslims are minority both in India and Pakistan.

The main point of the two nation theory was that "Muslims decided that they can't live with Hindu majority"

The fact that these two countries are still independent and are not a part of Hindu majority India shows the the theory still holds but the name has changed. Pakistan was formed as a safe haven for Muslims, not to show to religion is binding because if that was the case then all the Muslim countries in the world would have been one country.

Bangladesh was never supposed to be or was envisaged to be a part of Pakistan as Atanz already pointed out. There should have been 2 countries formed in 1947: Pakistan and Bangladesh.

 

[LaBong]

I suggest that you read Iqbal (grab a copy of his Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam) and Sir Syed Ahmed Khan; I suggest that you read Jinnah's speeches and in particular the ones where he addresses the State Bank of Pakistan to come up with something called 'Islamic Finance' or the one in Dhaka where he talks about our foundations being based on something he called 'Islamic Socialism' ! Also Liaquat Ali Khan - the Hindustani Muslim - was the first to move the Objective Resolution ! Furthermore, I'm not a practising Muslim...heck not most Pakistanis are but even the last practising from amongst us (who still call themselves Muslims) appreciate and respect that there is something called 'Shariah' !

And onto the Deoband and Aligarh divide ? Ever head of the Barelivis ? Ever heard of Pir of Manki Sharif ? Heck a significant portion of the Deobandis on this side were also with Jinnah hence the subsequent cleavage between Ulam-e-Hind and the clerics who choose Pakistan !

P.S I've got to go for a while but I'd be back in around 2 hours ! Should you allow me I can get back to you with more about the TNT and try to explain its origins, its nature, its evolution - the whole lot through credible references ? Alright...?

I know what am I talking about, for every speech of Jinnah I can site two where he contradicts himself.

Jinnah had his reason, noway a man like him, who didn't have the ability to tap the common people like Gandhi, would able to make common people join the movement without saying what they want to hear.

Iqbal was a poet and dreamer, he had negligible role in creation of Pakistan.

And onto the Deoband and Aligarh divide ? Ever head of the Barelivis ? Ever heard of Pir of Manki Sharif ? Heck a significant portion of the Deobandis on this side were also with Jinnah hence the subsequent cleavage between Ulam-e-Hind and the clerics who choose Pakistan !

Very well, now let me remind you I was talking about Hindustani Muslims, not Punjabi Muslims.

there is something called 'Shariah'

Now point to me when did ML under Jinnah opted for Sharia.

I'll reply rest of the posts later, ciao.

 

[INDIC]

I'm not sure why Lufti and you are not getting the simple fact, that by birth of Bangladesh, it has been proved that religion is not the binding factor which makes a nation but many other factors like ethnicity, language take a part. Thus invalidating two nation theory.

And the suitable example is present day Karachi where each linguistic group lives in their own ghetto pointing their gun on ghettos of another linguistic group and killing each other freely.

Infact, Muhajirs of Pakistan still feels anger and sense of betrayal when Pakistan disowned Biharis in Bangladesh to be suffered.

 

[Luffy 500]

I recently read about Bangladesh's High court's order that Bangladesh is a secular state as envisaged in first constitution of Bangladesh in 70s. But Awami League government is not reverting back to it because of the future turmoil that would be created by Islamic parties in Bangladesh.

Whether Its secular or not, replacing bangladeshi nationalism is impossible now. The tribals who
are vote bank of awami terror won't ever support it.Infact being doubtful of their legitimacy and
acceptance among public they started beating around the bush while changing the constitution.

BAL has 2/3 seats in parliament( by whatever means they won) and so they can easily overwrite the constitution but the deceptionist thugs they are and being fearful of antagonizing the population they opted their puppet supreme court judgement to over write the constitution which according to many LAW analyst is itself unconstitutional. Yet they couldn't include bengali nationalism in it. They really made a mess of it, as state religion is still Islam but one of the
founding principle is secularism. Quite a unique constitution eh. The first of its kind.

BTW to overwrite delicate issues like ISLAM and secularism and founding principles their is
a mandate for a obligatory referendum which they didn't do. Why do think they went
around so much trouble of supreme court and not going for a mandatory referendum if they don't fear popular wrath? BD public will never support a secular constitution in a referendum
and BAL can't muster the courage to implement it through the parliament either.

 

[Dance]

And the suitable example is present day Karachi where each linguistic group lives in their own ghetto pointing their gun on ghettos of another linguistic group and killing each other freely.

You obviously don't know too much about Karachi.

What happens in Karachi is POLITICAL violence. Besides political parties, people live beside each peacefully ( I would know since I have lived there) . Even in india you see tensions over north and south indians.

 

[INDIC]

15-20% is a huge number that comes at around 15 to 20 million of the 100 million Muslims of the Indian Subcontinent - thats more than the population of most countries out there !

So, 80-85% of Muslims of North India stayed back in India showing big failure of the partition and two nation initially. Only Punjab could be purely divided on religious lines between purely Sikh-Hindu majority East Punjab and Muslim majority west Punjab. Even Bengal could not be divided on religious lines.

And migration of Muhajirs to Karachi created another tensions and new decade of violence in Urban Sindh.

You obviously don't know too much about Karachi.

What happens in Karachi is POLITICAL violence. Besides political parties, people live beside each peacefully ( I would know since I have lived there) . Even in india you see tensions over north and south indians.

Its more than politics, Karachi is Pakistan's ethnic faultline which is the fully related to partition.

 

[Dance]

Its more than politics, Karachi is Pakistan's ethnic faultline which is the fully related to partition.

Its mostly politics. If you ever read the news its always this party member has been killed by this party member.

The average person in Karachi could care less of what ethnicity the person standing next to them is.

 

[Al-zakir]

Bangladesh was never supposed to be or was envisaged to be a part of Pakistan as Atanz already pointed out. There should have been 2 countries formed in 1947: Pakistan and Bangladesh.

Only problem with that would have end with zero outcome. There would have been no Pakistan. If Muslims of Bengal refused to go with west Pakistan than M. Jinnah could not come up with strong case for the need of Pakistan.

It was vote and brilliant logic that created Pakistan. Now it will be criminal for you to ignore the contributions of Bengal Muslims.

However I believe this could have been easy fix after 47. We should formed loose federation. We would have save our skin and bloody humiliation.

 

[Dance]

Now it will be criminal for you ignore the contributions of Bengal Muslims.
However I believe this could have easy fix after 47. We shoulv formed loose federation. We would have save our skin and bloody humiliation.

Bengal Muslims were the forerunners for independence and they have definitely contributed a lot, I would never deny that. That's why they deserved to have their own independent country.

Maybe there was something that could have been done to prevent 1971 but in the end there were too many factors going against the union.

Like physical separation by an enemy country, cultural differences, West Pakistan's issue with feudalism, language issue, etc

Now that its happened, we should concentrate on making our relationship stronger and just having a good relationship in general.

 

[INDIC]

Its mostly politics. If you ever read the news its always this party member has been killed by this party member.

The average person in Karachi could care less of what ethnicity the person standing next to them is.

The fact is that such politics and killings are accepted by people because there is ethnic faultline in Karachi.

The truth is that non-Muhajirs groups are under the mission to reduce Muhajirs to an insignificant minority by inciting mass migration in Karachi at the same time Muhajirs don't want any migrant to come in their city being reduced as minority and there is huge public support for both side. That is the main reason Pakistan left Biharis to suffer in Bangladesh.

Sindhis still have grudge that they lost majority in Karachi and still resisting Karachi being declared a separate federal territory or province.