Jinnah insisted on partition, declined offer to become India PM

[pothead]

So basically, you on a whole are a hypocritical society, when you are in minority, you claim we should rule the majority, then only you will accept, you are being treated fairly.

But when you are in majority, you claim, we will not let any one from minority rule us, because that would be unfair to the majority!

I guess even maggots have better morals than you.

Ain't that the true of all Islamic countries and primarily all muslims?

They deny rights to their minorities, which they demand in countries where they them selves are in minority.
The shocking duplicity, so obvious, is not lost. Hence the backlash all over the world against the hypocrites.

 

[MultaniGuy]

Ain't that the true of all Islamic countries and primarily all muslims?

They deny rights to their minorities, which they demand in countries where they them selves are in minority.
The shocking duplicity, so obvious, is not lost. Hence the backlash all over the world against the hypocrites.

You idiot. Pakistan does not claim to be a secular country.

India claims to be a secular country.

Counter my arguments, instead of farting garbarge here.

If India is a secular country, then a Muslim should be able to become the Prime Minister of India.

Pakistan claims to be an Islamic Republic. Why should we let a non-Muslim rule us?

That would be like asking a communist to be the leader of USA.

 

[ziaulislam]

JAMMU: Union Minister Dr Jitendra Singh said here on Sunday that a large majority of the Indian population, including Muslims, were against the partition in 1947 and it was primarily motivated by the political ambition of a handful of political leaders.

The Progressive Writers’ Forum comprising Kaifi Azmi, Ismat Chugtai, Mohsin Bhopali and several other respectable Muslim intellectuals had vehemently opposed partition, he added.
Speaking to media persons on the sidelines of a function at Jammu University here, Dr Jitendra Singh, without naming Farooq Abdullah, brushed aside the “unsubstantiated” statement that Jinnah was against the partition of India and said there is a need to re-read the history.

The facts of history, Dr Jitendra said, are quite the contrary and there are several references to indicate that Mahatma Gandhi was deeply anguished by the prospect of partition of India and in desperation, Gandhi had gone to the extent of making an offer to Mohammad Ali Jinnah that if Jinnah agreed to withdraw the demand for creation of Pakistan, Gandhi would persuade Congress Party to accept Jinnah as Prime Minister of India. However, he said, Jinnah was not impressed by this offer because he knew that it may not be easy for him to gain acceptability as Prime Minister of India and therefore he (Jinnah) insisted on the creation of Pakistan.

Referring to the role of Sardar Patel, Dr Jitendra said, it is a miscarriage of history that while as Home Minister, Patel had a free hand to deal with all the other states of the Indian Union, the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru did not give a free hand to Patel as far as Jammu and Kashmir was concerned because Nehru believed that he knew Kashmir better than others.
If only Patel was allowed a free hand to handle Jammu and Kashmir in the same manner as he was handling other states of the Indian Union, the history of the Indian sub-continent would have been different and the part of Jammu and Kashmir presently under illegal occupation of Pakistan would also have been with India, he said.


When asked about the role of Sheikh Abdullah and National Conference in the years following Independence, Dr Jitendra said, there were a number of opportunistic adjustments made, the climax of which was noticed during the finalisation of Indira-Sheikh accord of 1975. The present situation in Kashmir, Dr Singh said, is a cumulative outcome of a series of blunders and misguided experiments conducted by Congress and its allies who were at the helm of power, both at the Centre as well as in the State for over half a century.


http://news.statetimes.in/jinnah-insisted-on-partition-declined-offer-to-become-india-pm-jitendra/

absolute wrong..if you dont trust us, trust the British..go up and read the cabinet mission 1946

nehru accepted partition because he had a well thought out plan to destroy pakistan
plan was simple,

• partiton the provinces( under redcliff) take out kashmir in the process(not possible without provinces partition), take out Baluchistan via jirga
• and KPK via bacha khan
• take out major cities in Bengal like Calcutta

 

[pothead]

You idiot. Pakistan does not claim to be a secular country.

No Shit Sherlock.
That's exactly what we are pointing at.

 

[MultaniGuy]

No Shit Sherlock.
That's exactly what we are pointing at.

And why should Pakistan be a secular country, when we want to rule according to our Islamic religious laws?

 

[pothead]

And why should Pakistan be a secular country, when we want to rule according to our Islamic religious laws?

Dear Sherlock, get on with the program already.

That you demand secular values when in minority and shove down Islamic values when in majority is the duplicity being debated and pointed at.

 

[Shah Khalid]

Ain't that the true of all Islamic countries and primarily all muslims?

They deny rights to their minorities, which they demand in countries where they them selves are in minority.
The shocking duplicity, so obvious, is not lost. Hence the backlash all over the world against the hypocrites.

You Want Shocking Duplicity How About Claiming Secularism And Then Rewarding Lynchers With Jobs

https://scroll.in/latest/854125/fif...onal-thermal-power-corporation-limited-report

Dear Sherlock, get on with the program already.

That you demand secular values when in minority and shove down Islamic values when in majority is the duplicity being debated and pointed at.

Oh No We Don't Want Secularism.Enforce Your Hindutva By All Means.Create A Hindu Rashtra.Your Beef Bans Have Already Destroyed Your Beef Leather and Footwear Exports And We're Taking Place Please Keep Up The Good Work

 

[MultaniGuy]

You Want Shocking Duplicity How About Claiming Secularism And Then Rewarding Lynchers With Jobs

https://scroll.in/latest/854125/fif...onal-thermal-power-corporation-limited-report




Oh No We Don't Want Secularism.Enforce Your Hindutva By All Means.Create A Hindu Rashtra.Your Beef Bans Have Already Your Beef Leather and Footwear Exports And Were Taking Place Please Keep Up The Good Work

Indians are hypocrites.

On one hand they say India is a secular country, but then they do a Beef ban.

India is run by the Hindu majority. lol.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

That is true but it is important to note that Jinnah's primary motive was safeguarding the rights of minority Muslims in what is now India by leveraging the Muslim majority provinces in what is now Pakistan. He wanted to do this by creating constitutional structures that would create parity. This is evident in how Jinnah accepted the British Cabinet Mission Plan of 1946 only a dozen months before Pakistan became a reality.

Jinnah was a sick man and I pretty sure he knew he was not going to be around for long. However his political career had been marked by trying to secure protection to Muslim minority - ironically this minority Muslim community is in India today and even more compromised then it was before 1947. Pakistan had never been Jinnah's primary or intended goal. He threatened with 'Pakistan' to try to get his parity. When Nehru turned down the Cabinet Mission Plan Pakistan became a reality by default. Pakistan you could say came about as a accident and Nehru's intransigence.

The real people who from the outset had intended for and worked to Pakistan were Sir Allama Iqbal who had called for a independent Muslim country in the north west [read Pakistan] in 1930 Allahbad Address. Also Rehmat Ali who had coined the name 'Pakistan' in his 'Now or Never' pamphlet in 1933. This is very important to understand.

The Cabinet Mission Plan that Jinnah agreed to or "Plan of 16th May 1946" divided British India into three blocks. Muslim Majority West [1] or what is today Pakistan, Hindu majority Centre [2] or what is India today and Muslim majority East [3] or what is today Bangladesh. All these three blocks would be confederated at New Delhi where defence, taxation, foreign relations would be reserved. The idea was these three blocks would negate any majority and create a parity. Jinnah agreed to this. Nehru refused which left the British with only one choice. Partition of 1947.


Plan of 16 May

1. A united Dominion of India would be given independence.
2. The Muslim-majority provinces would be grouped, with Sind, Punjab, Baluchistan and North-West Frontier Province forming one group, and Bengal and Assam would form another.
3. The Hindu-majority provinces in central and southern India would form another group.
4. The central government, stationed in Delhi, would be empowered to handle nationwide affairs, such as defence, currency, and diplomacy, and the rest of powers and responsibility would belong to the provinces,coordinated by groups.

An interim Government at the Centre representing all communities would be installed on the basis of parity between the representatives of the Hindus and the Muslims.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1946_Cabinet_Mission_to_India#Plan_of_16_June

Jinnah was fighting from a tremendously weak position. Yet, he wanted the best deal for the entire British Indian Muslims at any cost. What a man of steel resolve and determination!!! And, what a courage he carried in his frail body!!! At the end, he succeeded with saving two thirds of them. At a time when most of the Muslim countries, with no leadership at all, are compelled to have the worst deal for 100% of populace, what Jinnah achieved is miraculous....

The Muslims in the current India live en masse in ghettos, where births are cursed and deaths are celebrated, under the socio-economic condition worse than that of Dalits. And, it's official according to Justice Sakar report. By the by, Dalits' job is to carry portable human toilets (of the 50% lucky ones) on their heads!!!! And, the Indian Muslims have no recourse to reverse their fate. They're doomed unless a Moses (PBUH) like miracle of pass-over happen to them. No further vindication of Jinnah's stance is reuired for the Ehl-i Iman....

 

[Ocean]

Yes, if the plan had been adopted we would still have got Pakistan or whatever name you care to give it. But the trajectory would have been differant. We are talking here about what was not what could have been. The fact is Jinnah accepted the three block plan and Nehru declined leading to 1947 partition.

However beyond that there is one glaring fact. Even if Jinnah had remained a loyalist of the Congress and 1947 had nopt happened the fact is and this is incontrevertible. The north west was too Muslim dominant and had too large a population. These demograhic facts would have torn India apart at some time. Consider this fact. The tiny Kashmir valley with a population less then Lahore city is at present garrisoned by over half a million indian soldiers, yes 500,000. Kashmiri's are not known for being militaristic. Can you imagine what number of en India would have needed to keep North West Frontier Province [today 30 million], Balochistan [today 10 million], Punjab [todayt 100 million] pacified? Can you imagine the impress of 200 million muslims of what is now Pakistan roaring away? And you know these regions have a history of conflict. In addition good chunk of the British Raj military was recruited from what is now Pakistan. I won't even go into the huge Muslim majority in the east of what become Bangladesh.

The fact is chunks of India would have broken off as is the history of South Asia. The unity brought about by British Raj was a exception rather then a normative.

you are acting as though before cabinet plan Jinnah was not working for Pakistan state? And if Jinnah had accepted cabinet plan then it shouldnt be forgotten 1. It was a ten years plan 2. All three regions would have been completely autonomous much like present day england and scotland.

As of provinces in north west breaking apart then even if they did what factor would have united them?

All of punjab, sindh, kpk, balochistan would have been small independent countries who could have easily been usurped after some military modernization by india, iran and afghanistan. Kpk to afghan, balochistan to iran and punjab and sindh would have been captured by india.

Jinnah had organzied all these ethnically and lingusitically diverse regions in one solid political unit. He had met with tribal elders from FATA and Balochistan , gained their trust to join pakistan.

Even if decades down these provinces of modern day pakistan had broken free of united india they would never have formed a united pakistan like we ahve it today.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

you are acting as though before cabinet plan Jinnah was not working for Pakistan state? And if Jinnah had accepted cabinet plan then it shouldnt be forgotten 1. It was a ten years plan 2. All three regions would have been completely autonomous much like present day england and scotland.

As of provinces in north west breaking apart then even if they did what factor would have united them?

All of punjab, sindh, kpk, balochistan would have been small independent countries who could have easily been usurped after some military modernization by india, iran and afghanistan. Kpk to afghan, balochistan to iran and punjab and sindh would have been captured by india.

Jinnah had organzied all these ethnically and lingusitically diverse regions in one solid political unit. He had met with tribal elders from FATA and Balochistan , gained their trust to join pakistan.

Even if decades down these provinces of modern day pakistan had broken free of united india they would never have formed a united pakistan like we ahve it today.

After Nehru returned from London following the acceptance of the Cabinet Mission Plan, he was encountered by even more cunning and meaner Hindu leaders!! They clarified to him that Jinnah had got the better of him for he's creating two Pakistans and one Hindustan. Hindu folks are very good with numbers, so Nehru torpedoed the plan immediately. Here, Jinnah could unmask the real face of the Hindu leadership for the final time, and Pak could be created without any regrets of some stones remaining unturned. In Turkish, gunah bizden gitti (sin has left us).....

Moreover, Rahmet-li Jinnah's action was as per Sheriyat, which envisages that do as much Hosh Amel as possible even though not in done entirety. As an example, you're passing by a lake and find that 3 persons are drowning, but you can surely save 2 of them. Now, you've 3 options:

1. Try to save all of them, but it's highly probable you're gonna lose all of them.
2. Save 2 of them.
3. Do nothing.

Sheriyat dictates that you go for option#2.

 

[jamahir]

The Progressive Writers’ Forum comprising Kaifi Azmi, Ismat Chugtai, Mohsin Bhopali and several other respectable Muslim intellectuals had vehemently opposed partition

Whatever be the truth, in those days the term "Muslim intellectual" meant actually intellectual persons, instead of the current fashion in India of bringing in some Deobandi mullah to be sat in some TV talk show.

 

[Taygibay]

Why create a permanent neighbor and an enemy, which is several times stronger than you and will always overshadow you ?

So you don't get why all those ex-Warsaw Pact
nations took their liberty back from Russia either?

It's the aspiration to live where you feel safe and at
home and take care of your own by yourself. It is
related to a sense of belonging. And it's a recognized
right of people by the U.N.

Kaptaan hinted at it in post #10.

Good day, Tay.

 

[Samlee]

Whatever be the truth, in those days the term "Muslim intellectual" meant actually intellectual persons, instead of the current fashion in India of bringing in some Deobandi mullah to be sat in some TV talk show.

So A Communist Can Be An Intellectual But A Devout Muslim (Read "Mullah") Cannot

 

[jamahir]

So A Communist Can Be An Intellectual But A Devout Muslim (Read "Mullah") Cannot

Please read this thread of mine from January 2016. It is an article written by Nadeem Paracha.