Discussion on Jaswant Singh's book on Jinnah

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Aug 2009 22:54

Has anyone read the book and can comment on the facts he lays out?

Meanwhile I got these excerpts from TOI

Key Excerpts

NEW DELHI: Excerpts from "Jinnah: India-Partition-Independence" by Jaswant Singh, the veteran Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader whose views on the
Pakistan founder led to his expulsion from the party Wednesday:

"The basic and structural fault in Jinnah's notion remains a rejection of his origins; of being an Indian, having been shaped by the soil of India, tempered in the heat of Indian experience. Muslims in India were no doubt subscribers to a different faith but that is all; they were not any different stock or of alien origin."

- & -

"It is in this, a false 'minority syndrome' that the dry rot of partition first set in, and then unstoppably it afflicted the entire structure, the magnificent edifice of an united India. The answer (cure?), Jinnah asserted, lay only in parting, and Nehru and Patel and others of the Congress also finally agreed. Thus was born Pakistan".

- & -

"His opposition was not against the Hindus or Hinduism, it was the Congress that he considered as the true political rival of the Muslim League, and the League he considered as being just an 'extension of himself'. He, of course, made much of the Hindu-Muslim riots (1946; Bengal, Bihar, etc.) to 'prove the incapacity of Congress Governments to protect Muslims; and also expressed fear of "Hindu raj" to frighten Muslims into joining the League, but during innumerable conversations with him I can rarely recall him attacking Hindus or Hinduism as such. His opposition, which later developed into almost hatred, remained focused upon the Congress leadership' (M.R.A. Baig, Jinnah's secretary)."

- & -

"Religion in all this was entirely incidental; Pakistan alone gave him all that his personality and character demanded. If Mr. Jinnah was necessary for achieving Pakistan, Pakistan, too was necessary for the fulfillment of Mr. Jinnah."

- & -

"However, it has to be said, and with great sadness, that despite some early indications to the contrary, the leaders of the Indian National Congress, in the period between the outbreak of war in 1939 and the country's partition in 1947, showed in general, a sad lack of realism, of foresight, of purpose and of will."

- & -

"As (Maulana Azad) wrote in his memoirs, he had come to the conclusion that Indian federation should deal with just three subjects: defence, foreign affairs and communications; thus granting the maximum possible autonomy to the provinces. According to the Maulana, Gandhi accepted this suggestion, while Sardar Patel did not."

- & -

"For, along with several other there is one central difficult that India, Pakistan, Bangladesh face: our 'past' has, in reality never gone into the 'past', it continues to reinvent itself, constantly becoming our 'present', thus preventing us from escaping the imprisonment of memories. To this we have to find an answer, who else can or will?"

Google cache on Jaswant Singh's book

kshirin · Post by **kshirin** » 20 Aug 2009 23:05

[edited for bandwidth. ramana]

I have started it but will be too busy to read it fast as I am engaged in another more interesting project. The style is ponderous but if he had not gone overboad to praise Jinnah and lump Patel in the same category as Panditji, he may not have been expelled. I just met a press wallah who had gone to his launch and was preening about it and defending JS' sacred right to free speech. Cannot object to that of course except that everyone is suddenly trotting out this line which makes it unoriginal and uninteresting. I liked very much the post of R Puri's article on another webpage and did you see Jug Suraiya's in TOI on this, made an excellent point that BJP lost a chance to press their point home on who was responsible for Partition.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Aug 2009 23:16

My copy is still lying at my book wallah not delivered yet. I need to pick it up. Will post when I read it. However that will be some time.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 20 Aug 2009 23:24

Good publicity

This should become the most famous book in India.

* CPI demands withdrawal of ban on Jaswant's book

STAFF WRITER 18:2 HRS IST

New Delhi, Aug 20 (PTI) The CPI today demanded withdrawal of Gujarat government's ban on expelled BJP leader Jaswant Singh's book on Mohammad Ali Jinnah saying the action "anti-democratic" and "reflects intolerance to non-RSS ideas".

"The ban only reflects intolerance to non-RSS ideas.

It is an anti-democratic decision," the party's Central Secretariat said in a statement.

Observing that CPI and many others may not agree with Singh's views in the book, it said "in fact, there is nothing common between Communists and Jaswant Singh. But in a democratic society, everybody has a right to put forth ideas and opinions as long as these are not against national interests.

"It is a pity that the shadow of RSS is totally covering the BJP like an eclipse after its humiliating defeat in the recent elections," the CPI said.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Aug 2009 23:31

My latest theory is that the expulsion was staged, otherwise this book would have become a oh so saffron frothing category automatically which no one would have read -- over night there can be no partisan attack on the book (since saffron disassociates itself with it) it gets tons of publicity, any cribs that Raje may have had is shelved, BJP also gets to crow about intellectual purity and how it is close to the "ideology"

A book questioning the partition and blaming Nehru for it has been pilloried by those holding Akhand Bharat dear, and becomes a lets read book for intelligentsia.

There could be no bigger masterstroke... tough to believe it is all coincidental.

---------

JS can always come back after the current round of witch hunt inside BJP is over in a bigger better way later... all win.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 20 Aug 2009 23:48

Sanku wrote:My latest theory is that the expulsion was staged,

I knew in BRF there were people with brains...

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 20 Aug 2009 23:55

Acharya wrote:
Sanku wrote:My latest theory is that the expulsion was staged,
I knew in BRF there were people with brains...

Right,
this expulsion has made the line that Nehru and Jinnah are two sides of the same coin official and completely anti-rss

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 20 Aug 2009 23:56

More fun

http://haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?PageID=9078&SKIN=B

If Jinnah was secular, why did Advani come to India: Thackeray
18/08/2009 12:38:58

Flaying BJP leaders for heaping praise on Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray on Tuesday said calling the Pakistan founder secular was an insult to all those who shed their blood for India's independence.

"(L K) Advani created an ideological confusion by lauding Jinnah. Jaswant Singh has added to it," Thackeray said in an editorial in Sena mouthpiece 'Saamana.'

"It is due to this ideological confusion that the Hindus became frustrated and directionless and the impact was seen in Lok Sabha elections," he said.

"How can a person who demanded a separate state for Muslims be termed secular?" the Sena chief asked and added that "calling Jinnah secular is an insult of all those who shed their blood for India's independence".

"If Jinnah was secular, then why did Advani leave Sindh Province in Pakistan and come to India?" he asked.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 20 Aug 2009 23:59

While I have not read the book…I do welcome the debate this has unleashed. I predict nothing but good will come out this debate. For one, it will result in Jinnah being accepted back as a grassroots leader amongst the pantheon of Indian leaders and provide a way for Gharvapasi for the Pakistani mindset to come back to India.
A masterstroke by the Indic mind. Using the ghost of Jinnah tocut the Nehru dynasty to size.

My only regret is that the space that has to be created in the Indian mondset for Jinnah could have been occupied by Sri. Subhash Chandra Bose.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 00:19

"It is in this, a false 'minority syndrome' that the dry rot of partition first set in, and then unstoppably it afflicted the entire structure, the magnificent edifice of an united India. The answer (cure?), Jinnah asserted, lay only in parting, and Nehru and Patel and others of the Congress also finally agreed. Thus was born Pakistan".

Could the "dry rot" actually set in without any basis of this "rot" in the pre-existing relations between the two communities? Is JS starting from the Thaparite premise of total syncreticity of Hindu-Muslim in India?

"His opposition was not against the Hindus or Hinduism, it was the Congress that he considered as the true political rival of the Muslim League, and the League he considered as being just an 'extension of himself'. He, of course, made much of the Hindu-Muslim riots (1946; Bengal, Bihar, etc.) to 'prove the incapacity of Congress Governments to protect Muslims; and also expressed fear of "Hindu raj" to frighten Muslims into joining the League, but during innumerable conversations with him I can rarely recall him attacking Hindus or Hinduism as such. His opposition, which later developed into almost hatred, remained focused upon the Congress leadership' (M.R.A. Baig, Jinnah's secretary)."

The Congress leadership were also most careful not to make any anti-Muslim statements. Does it mean that their behaviour was motivated entirely by a "hatred" of Jinnah? If the Muslims were already confortable with a syncretic Hinduism, why should they be frightened of a "Hindu raj"? A syncretic "Hindu", even if a "raj", should still be sympathetic towards Islam - as it partially identifies with it! Is JS unwittingly saying that the real problem with the "muslim" was that he wanted to dominate the "Hindu", failing which he felt most uncomfortable? But then if you were already syntretic towards each other, why would you seek to "rule" or "dominate"? Anyway, who takes responsibility for organizing and funding the "volunteer" force of ML that trained for "direct action" and were sent out as activists and trainers for armed gangs. Part of this was also recruited from demobilized soldiers. These volunteers were sent out to express "hatred" against top Congress leadership? In the villages and streets of Bengal and Punjab - which of the top leadership of Congress moved around in these places?

"Religion in all this was entirely incidental; Pakistan alone gave him all that his personality and character demanded. If Mr. Jinnah was necessary for achieving Pakistan, Pakistan, too was necessary for the fulfillment of Mr. Jinnah."

Ah, JS uses the Indic concept of "religion"! Islam claims to be a "total ideology". It includes politics and military action as part of the ideology itself. So religion was very much part of it as far as political and military aggression was concerned - at least from the Jinnah side. If Jinnah was indeed non-religious - he would have had hope for a bigger constituency and base for power in undivided India. So JS has to identify exactly what Jinnah was looking for! If "pakistan was fulfillment" for Jinnah, that very Pakistan which was claimed to be the refuge of Islam in the subcontinent, a nation based on claims of complete disjunction between two immiscible "nations", and nationality based on islamic "nationhood", then how does JS separate Jinnah from Islamism?

"However, it has to be said, and with great sadness, that despite some early indications to the contrary, the leaders of the Indian National Congress, in the period between the outbreak of war in 1939 and the country's partition in 1947, showed in general, a sad lack of realism, of foresight, of purpose and of will."

When had they showed any grasp of realism, foresight, purpose and will?

"As (Maulana Azad) wrote in his memoirs, he had come to the conclusion that Indian federation should deal with just three subjects: defence, foreign affairs and communications; thus granting the maximum possible autonomy to the provinces. According to the Maulana, Gandhi accepted this suggestion, while Sardar Patel did not."

This again, is the direct acknowledgement of the Islamic complex about dominating the non-Muslim. Defence, foreign affairs and communications leaves out the most important aspects of concern to the Ulema - within provinces dominated numerically by the "Muslim" - the right to freely impose the Sharia in law, using madrassah and theological education to replace any modernization in education, and opportunity to carry out social engineering with or without violence in favour of turning the demographic balance towards Islam. MKG, the super-confident dreamer of the "benign Abrahamic" would of course have no problems with this - while Sardar the practical realist would have every bit of problem with it.

"For, along with several other there is one central difficult that India, Pakistan, Bangladesh face: our 'past' has, in reality never gone into the 'past', it continues to reinvent itself, constantly becoming our 'present', thus preventing us from escaping the imprisonment of memories. To this we have to find an answer, who else can or will?"

It continues to reinvent itself, because of religion - because of Islamic need to dominate. Because this basic character of Islam has not been attacked, dismantled or destroyed. Islam has no need to find an answer - their answer lies in the Quran, and it clearly states that Muslims should not rest until "all" submit to "Allah". This is what gives the activist "Muslim" his life's drive - for it also covers and justifies his own overwhelming need to dominate and obtain power over all else perhaps to compensate for an equally overwhelming sense of impotence and insecurity or inadequacy.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 00:28

Paul wrote

My only regret is that the space that has to be created in the Indian mondset for Jinnah could have been occupied by Sri. Subhash Chandra Bose.

Ah...if only it came from someone like JS! Guaranteed, even the Chintan baithak wouldn't have been necessary - equating Jinnah with Subhasji, the next best thing to having a trillion H-bombs detonated at the same time.

Why compare incomparables! Jinnah will never have space in the Indic mind except die-hard Islamics, and DIE's (although I doubt that), and he will never replace Subhasji - in spite of all his faults. Sheer character and values sets Subhas far apart and above compared to the slimy, shifty, and opportunist style of Jinnah's functioning. If JS is accepted at face value - Jinnah was slimy even in terms of ideological commitment. Here is a person, who founds a whole movement and creates a nation based on "ideological claims" of separate Islamic nationhood, without apparently ever bei ng "Islamic" himself!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 00:38

What are the Paki press reviews/reports of this book?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 00:42

One report:

Acharya wrote:
pgbhat wrote:Jaswant’s uncomfortable questions ---- Sarah Humayun
They are more interested in contradiction inside India
The ‘contradiction’ can point either way — towards a more or a less centralised India. Singh seems to view Indian Muslims’ need for a semi-autonomous space within the Indian political system with sympathy, yet he considers the path of reservation disastrous. What can Jaswant Singh’s answer be? Or has he merely raised a question? Only the book will tell us.
Maybe what got the BJP’s goat was that they had to find out? May be they couldn’t take the suspense?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 21 Aug 2009 00:44

brihaspati wrote:

The Congress leadership were also most careful not to make any anti-Muslim statements. Does it mean that their behaviour was motivated entirely by a "hatred" of Jinnah? If the Muslims were already confortable with a syncretic Hinduism, why should they be frightened of a "Hindu raj"? A syncretic "Hindu", even if a "raj", should still be sympathetic towards Islam - as it partially identifies with it! Is JS unwittingly saying that the real problem with the "muslim" was that he wanted to dominate the "Hindu", failing which he felt most uncomfortable? But then if you were already syntretic towards each other, why would you seek to "rule" or "dominate"?

One MR Wanchoo was a private secretary to Nehru has a brother. I met this brother - Wanchoo recently and we find that Nehru was angry during the riots. He used to stop in the middle of his travel and go to any Hindu who was rioting and pull him up for rioting against the Muslims. There was no equal admonishment for the Muslims to stop rioting.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 21 Aug 2009 00:48

ramana wrote: They are more interested in contradiction inside India

I want to understand what the Pakis was discussing on the subject. What contradiction they are focused on. That gives us lot of information

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 21 Aug 2009 01:00

From an earlier post.

Both MMS and BJP are flocking to make peace with Pakistan and Jinnah. Can it be that we consider our politicians to be far too preoccupied with vote-bank politics, that we project all their moves, stances to be directed only at domestic politics and completely ignore that these messages can be directed at a Pakistani audience as well, and that too for sound and strategic reasons?

How did Hinduism spread? It was by appropriating the gods of a conquered and defeated land, and calling them avatars of the gods of one's own pantheon. Jinnah is the newest entry into India's pantheon of patriots, so as to coopt Jinnah's children in Pakistan, a failed and defeated country. Jinnah is taking the last gasp in Pakistan, and so his children need a new home, a new framework. Of course, a lot of lies will be fabricated and accepted by the Indian establishment in order to rehabilitate the good old Jinnah, but this is considered a small price to pay for India to be able to be take part in the reorganization of Pakistan, both territorially and ideologically.

Our politicians are finally doing some international power politics, and we may not be noticing it! May be they too are aware of the death certificate of Pakistan lying in the drawer, only nobody wants to speak of it too openly. May be "Pakistan is a failed state" is not only a mantra for some psy-ops on Pakistan, but rather the working assumption, the premise for a new project.

The politics for the creation of a successor political regional structure in place of Pakistan have already started.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 21 Aug 2009 01:06

"The basic and structural fault in Jinnah's notion remains a rejection of his origins; of being an Indian, having been shaped by the soil of India, tempered in the heat of Indian experience. Muslims in India were no doubt subscribers to a different faith but that is all; they were not any different stock or of alien origin."

I agree 100%. I lay all blame on the 'Divide and Rule' policy employed by the British to hold on to power. It was root cause for the formation of a Muslim League or a Hindu Maha Sabha. The people of India had already fought against the British united in The First War of Indian Independence and many had endorsed a Muslim as an emperor of India. That was the time when the ideas of a Muslim nation or a Hindu nation was absent from the minds of the people. The British policy created mistrust between these people and we are still reeling from it's effects. India was never synonymous with Hinduism or vice-versa, but this British policy made people believe exactly that, which resulted in whatever that has happened from 1900 until today. Jinnah's notation of India being a Hindu nation and anti-islamic was completely flawed.

RayC · Post by **RayC** » 21 Aug 2009 01:07

Jaswant Singh was a statesman and no politician.

Rajnath is a politician but no statesman!

And he has not even read the book!

Bhagawat looks like an overfed walrus!

As far as Pakistan is concerned, who cares what they think. They should save themselves first from the Taliban!

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 21 Aug 2009 01:18

How can people ban the book, however offensive it maybe! People have the right of expression. I want to buy a copy right now!

munna · Post by **munna** » 21 Aug 2009 01:25

RayC wrote:Jaswant Singh was a statesman and no politician

A true Vajpayee-ite and in fact one of the bigger guns in the arsenal of BJP for a long while. His departure will hit parivar badly. Also let us not forget he was Capt Jaswant Singh prior to being a neta.

Rajnath is a politician but no statesman!

If he is a politician then I am COAS Indian Army! This guy is a sycophant careerist under whose able leadership BJP has gone from bad to worse in his home state. He reportedly cut a deal with BSP to win his own seat and what not?

And he has not even read the book!

None of the current crop of leaders has any respect for thinkers and people with ideas, lest they forget that last time they saw power was when a poet led them

Bhagawat looks like an overfed walrus!

As far as Pakistan is concerned, who cares what they think. They should save themselves first from the Taliban!

Well the key is not what they think but what we are making them think? By coming out with such books and huge 180 degree swings of opinion we are creating a situation whereby those fools are increasingly taking part in our national discourse and beoming a party to it. The first stage of withering that state is to attract the footloose intellectuals and the rabid war mongers towards the booby trap of seemingly harmless debate. The need of the hour is to get beneath their skins and MMS/JS are taking good shots at it.
PS: The core committe consisting of a rust bucket, las vegas tourist and bhutpurav krishi mantri were all burnt by the queen of jhalawar's rebellion and decided to show some maradnagi on poor Jasso Mithaiwalla.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 01:32

RajeshA wrote:From an earlier post.

Jinnah is the newest entry into India's pantheon of patriots, so as to coopt Jinnah's children in Pakistan, a failed and defeated country. Jinnah is taking the last gasp in Pakistan, and so his children need a new home, a new framework. Of course, a lot of lies will be fabricated and accepted by the Indian establishment in order to rehabilitate the good old Jinnah, but this is considered a small price to pay for India to be able to be take part in the reorganization of Pakistan, both territorially and ideologically.

Our politicians are finally doing some international power politics, and we may not be noticing it! May be they too are aware of the death certificate of Pakistan lying in the drawer, only nobody wants to speak of it too openly. May be "Pakistan is a failed state" is not only a mantra for some psy-ops on Pakistan, but rather the working assumption, the premise for a new project.

The politics for the creation of a successor political regional structure in place of Pakistan have already started.

Yes they have to be adopted or else someone else will. Why is it so difficult to see what JS is doing?

By rehabilitating Jinnah he is assuaging all the RAPE. MMS as already took care of Pakjabis - Gilani and Kiyani. Zardari has his uncle and Badmash has his sheikh. Only ones left are the Pashtuns. Looks like PIP is underway and as usual pata hee na tha!

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 21 Aug 2009 01:46

munna wrote:
RayC wrote:Jaswant Singh was a statesman and no politician
A true Vajpayee-ite and in fact one of the bigger guns in the arsenal of BJP for a long while. His departure will hit parivar badly. Also let us not forget he was Capt Jaswant Singh prior to being a neta.

munnaji,
RSS has always been against Jassoo bhai. He was and always has been viewed as ABVs psycophant by the parivar and co, with no public support to boot. So how will his departure will hit parivar badly, could you please explain.

Actually my first reaction to this was, so the cleaning up of ABVs baggage is going on. Also remember by this move, the baggage of Kandahar hijack is also removed to certain extent from them. I dont see much loss for the parivar and co by this move. If you could explain your viewpoint on why you think that this particular move will hurt BJP, I would be grateful. TIA.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 02:01

Banned books - why not? There is a long list in India - this is filched from Indian Express List (the link somehow is unstable). It is also most illustrative that this list by Indian Express does not list books banned to preserve Muslim "sentiments" but all books banned to preserve "Hindu" sentiments.

Scented Garden (Anthropology of sex life in the Levant) by Bernhard Stern; translated by David Berger. Banned: August 18, 1945
Dark Urge by Robert W. Taylor. Banned: Dec 29, 1955
The Jewel in the Lotus (A Historical Survey of the Sexual Culture of the East). Banned: July 20, 1968
The Face of Mother India by Katherine Mayo. Banned: January 18, 1936
Old Soldier Sahib by Private Frank Richards Banned: Aug 22, 1936
The Heart of India by Alexander Campbell. Banned: March 11, 1959
The Evolution of the British Empire and Commonwealth from the American Revolution by Alfred Le Ray Burt. Banned: Aug 9, 1969
A Struggle between Two Lines over the Question of How to Deal with US Imperialism by Fan Asid-Chu, Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1965. Banned: Dec 6, 1969
Behind the Iron Curtain in Kashmir: Neutral Opinion (author not mentioned). Banned: Aug 27, 1949
American Military Aid to Pakistan (its full implications) by Salahuddin Ahmad. Banned: July 31, 1954
Captive Kashmir by Aziz Beg. Banned: April 19, 1958
India Independent by Charles Bettelheim. Banned: May 15, 1976
Hindu Heaven by Max Wylie. Banned: April 28, 1934
The Land of the Lingam by Arthur Miles. Banned: Oct 2, 1937
What Has Religion Done for Mankind, Watch-tower Bible and Tract Society, New York. Banned: Feb 26, 1955
The Ramayana by Aubrey Menen. Banned: Sept 29, 1956
Nine Hours to Rama by Stanley Wolpert. Banned: Sept 1, 1962
Nehru, A Political Biography by Michael Edwards. Banned: Dec 13, 1975
Who Killed Gandhi by Lourenco De Sadvandor. Banned: Dec 29, 1979

Adding the refs that have been missed :
Satanic Verses - by Salman Rushdie. (Khuswant Singh's article is also a good prompter for a different line we should discuss - the hosting of authors who criticize and deconstruct the Abrahamic -
http://articles.latimes.com/1989-08-27/ ... ian-writer)

More details here
http://kitabkhana.blogspot.com/2004/06/ ... -help.html

Unarmed Victory by Bertrand Russell. The first section of the book is about the Cuban missile crisis. The next one is about the Indo-China war of 1962 and it was banned because it says unflattering things about Nehru.

‘Hindu Heaven’ by Max Wylie, published by Victor Gollancz Ltd., 14, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London.

Miss Katherine Mayo entitled “The Face of Mother India” published by M/s.Hamish Hamilton Ltd., 90, Great Russel Street, London.

“Old Soldier Sahib” by Private Frank Richards published by Faber and Faber Ltd., London.

“The Land of the Lingam” by Arthur Miles published by Hurst and Blackett Ltd., Paternoster, House, London

“Mysterious India” by Moki Singh published by Stanley Paul and Company Ltd., London

“Scented Garden (Anthropology of sex life in the Levant)” by Bernhard Stern, M.D., translated by David Berger, M.A. and published by the Ethnological Press, New York

July, 1946 issued of the journal “Britannia and Eve” printed by Odhams C.Watford Ltd., St. Albans Road, Watford, England and published by the Proprietors, British National Newspapers Ltd., Commonwealth House, 1-New Oxford St. John and containing an article entitled “Codijah the First and Devoted Wife of Mahomet” written and illustrated by F.Matania

“The Kashmir Dispute Through Neutral Eyes”

PAKISTAN-PASMANZARWA PESHMANZAR, by Hameed Anwar, published by Ishait Manzil, Bull Road, Lahore

‘CEASE-FIRE’ by Agha Babar, published by Little Theatre Group, Lahore

‘KHAK AUR KHOON’ by Nazim Hajazi, published by Quami Kutab Khana, Lahore

CHANDRAMOHINI

MARKA-E-SOMNATH by Maulana Muhammad Sadiq Hussain Sahab Sadiq Siddiqui Sardanvi of Lahore

“BHUPAT SINGH’ (a tale of adventure of well-known outlaw of Saurashtra) written by Kaluwank Ravatwank, published by Messrs Ummar Hussan, Newspapers Agent, Sukkur, Sindh and printed at the Milat Printing Press, Lee Market, Karachi (Pakistan)

“American Military Aid to Pakistan (Its full implication)” written by Salahuddin Ahmed, published by Abdus Salam on behalf of Crescent Club from 37, Bishnuchara Das Street, Dacca and printed by G.A.Chowdhury, B.A. at Paramount Press Ltd., Dacca

"What has Religion done for Mankind” published by the Watch-tower Bible and Tract Society, New York

“Rama Retold” written by Aubrey Menon, published by Chatto and Windus Ltd., London and Clarke, Irwin Co. Ltd., Toronto, and printed by Butler and Tanner Ltd., Frome and London, in the United Kingdom

“Dark Urge” written by Robert W. Taylor and published by Pyramid Books, 444, Madison Avenue, New York, 22, N.Y.

The Ramayana” by Aubrey Menon, published by Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York

“Captive Kashmir” written by Aziz Beg, published by Allied Business Corporation, 54, The Mall, Lahore and printed by the Pakistan Herald Press, Karachi

“The Heart of India” by Alexander Campbell, published in English by Alfred A. Knopf, New York

“Nine Hours to Rama” by Hamish Hamilton Ltd., London

Any issue of the Tamil weekly entitled “Desabhimani” edited and published by Hassan Mohideen Packeer Mohindeen at Colombo, Ceylon

Any issue of the Urdu newspaper entitled “Daily Jang, Karachi” edited, printed and published by Mir Khalil-ul-Rahman from the Javed Press, Macleod Road, Karachi

“Nepal” by Toni Hagen published by Kummerely and Frey, Berne, Switzerland

“Ayesha” written by Kurt Frishchler, translated from German into English by Norman Denny and published by Barrie and Rockliff (Barries Book Ltd.), 2 Clement Mn., Strand, London and printed in Great Britain by Charles Birchall and Sons Ltd

Urdu periodical “Bang” published by ‘Azad Kashmir Radio

Any issue of Portuguese bulletin entitled “Noticias De Portugal – Boletin Semanal Do Secretriado Nacional Da Informacao” published from Palaciao Foz, Lisbon, Protugal

Any issue of the periodical entitled “Korea News” published by Korean Central News Agency, Pyongyang, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea

Lushai weekly entitled “Ramthar” printed at Aung Thazin Press, Rangoon and published on behalf of Burma Lushai Organisation

Any issue of the weekly periodical entitled “The Muslim World – A Weekly Review of the Motamar” edited, printed and published by Inamullah Khan, Secretary-General, Motamar al-Alam-al-Islami (World Muslim Congress), from 294, Bahadur Shah Zafar Road, Karachi-5, and printed at Karachi Printing Press, South Napier Road, Karachi-2

Any copy of any issue of “Goan Voice” published by Majestic Printing Works Ltd., Nairobi

Any copy of any issue of the Magazine entitled “Noticia” published from Angola

Any issue of Portuguese newspaper entitled “Noticias De Macau” published from Macao

Any issue of Tamil weekly paper entitled “THEEPORI” edited by Mr.M.K.Anthonisil and published from Hatton (Ceylon)

The Jewel in the Lotus” (A Historical Survey of the Sexual Culture of the East) by Allen Edwards, published by Lancer Books, Inc. 185, Madison Avenue, New York, N.Y.10016 and printed in the U.S.A.

Any copy of any issue of the Magazine entitled “EASTERN HORIZON”, a monthly review, published by Eastern Horizon Press, 18, Causeway Road, 1st Floor, Hong Kong

Any issue of the Bi-Monthly International Magazine entitled “REVOLUTION” published from 52, Rue Galande, Paris 5, France, printed in France

“The Evolution of the British Empire and Commonwealth from the Americal Revolution”, by Alfred Le Ray Burt and published by D.C.Heath and Company, Boston, and printed in U.S.A. October, 1965

Any copy of the magazine entitled “Chinese Literature’ Nos.11 and 12/67” published by Foreign Languages Press, Pai Wan Chuang, Peking (37), China

A Struggle between two lines over the question of How to Deal with U.S.Imperialism” by Fan Asid-Chu, published by Foreign Languages Press, Peking, 1965

“Man from Moscow” by Greville Wynne, published by the Arrow Books Ltd., 178-202, Green Protlan Stree, London WI

Any issue of the periodical entitled “The Call”, the journal of the Afro-Asian Writers Bureau and published from 73, Castle Street, Colombo 8, Ceylon and P.O.Box No.9007, Peking, China

Any copy of the periodical entitled “The Vanguard” printed by the Challenge Press Pvt. Ltd., 66-Sydney Road, Coburg, Victoria, 3058 (Australia)

Any issue of the Punjabi Weekly entitled “LALKAR” printed and circulated by Avtar Singh Johal (a British National of Indian Origin holding British Passport No.937574), on behalf of the Extremist faction of the Association of Indian Communists in Great Britain, from 8, Sycamore Road, Smethwick Warley, (UK).

“MAKING THE MODERN WORLD – ASIA – FOOD AND PEOPLE” by Barry Williams, (edited by John Robottom, published by Longman Group Limited, London, first published 1970, and printed in Hong Kong by Sheck Wah Tong Printing Press)

“Early Islam” by Desmond Steward, published by ‘Time Life’ International (Netherland) N.V. and printed in 1971 in Holland

“Political Leaders of the Twentieth Century-Nehru-A Political Biography” by Michael Edwards (first published by Allen Lane the Penguin Press, 1971, published in Pelican Books, 1973, and made and printed in Great Britain by Coz & Wyman Ltd., London, Reading and Fakenhan set in Monotype Times)
“India Independent” by Charles Bettelheim, first published by Librairie Armand Colin, Modern Reader Paperback first edition 1971
“China’s Foreign Relations Since 1949” (World Studies Series) by Alan Lawrence, Department of History, Halls Park College of Education, Hertford, first published in 1975 by Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., Broadway House, 68-74 Carter Lane, London Ec 4V 5E1 and 9 Park Stree, Boston Mass, 02108 USA
“Who killed Gandhi” by Lourenco De Sadvandor International Copyright 1964 secured by Jose Luis De Souza

munna · Post by **munna** » 21 Aug 2009 02:10

I do not want to discuss the BJP/RSS politics here as this is not the forum but your questions merit one reply

ravi_ku wrote:munnaji,
RSS has always been against Jassoo bhai

Yes they view anybody who is not subservient to them as a potential "thought criminal" in the party. The fact is ideology is a facade they desire to create a Mullah-cratic subservience to their pracharaks without which you are on dangerous grounds.

He was and always has been viewed as ABVs psycophant by the parivar and co, with no public support to boot.

Corrections sir he is BIG election winner. None of the current crop of leaders (barring Swaraj or maybe LKA) can boast of having won elections in more than one state and being a Lok Sabha regular as he has been. You think I am joking? Wait till Rajputs teach a lesson to parivar in Rajasthan first they suspend Rathore and then Singh. Sure they are asking for trouble or maybe they want to "Karat-ize" the party, what goes of my father? All those discipline and sangh fan boys should go and do some research in politics of UP and cow belt states and then dare to call some body not a mass leader. The entire top leadership of BJP is composed of featherweights like a vakil sahib who has never even seen Lok Sabha's door (A Jaitley), twice rejected PM candidate (LKA), rejected CM and party president RNS, some sangh leaders who are mass leaders in their own right

and only one person of some weightage Mrs Swaraj. With such a leadership at helm you call Jaswant Singh a featherweight??

So how will his departure will hit parivar badly, could you please explain.

Yes I will! We have lost power twice and with this act we seem all set for political wilderness and in our country no politico-social entity survives for long without power to deliver partonage. In fact the mood on the streets is such that people have come to hate RSS from guts. Looks like its back to good ol' days when any government of the day could ban RSS and shove all those the pracharaks inside jails at the drop of the hat!! Its coming, hubris and karma will strike at will and then you will not have any moderates to defend you.

PS: Although the tenor of my post is in second person I do not intend any presonal remarks, its rhetorical tool onleee.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 21 Aug 2009 02:15

brihaspati wrote:Banned books - why not? There is a long list in India - this is filched from Indian Express List (the link somehow is unstable). It is also most illustrative that this list by Indian Express does not list books banned to preserve Muslim "sentiments" but all books banned to preserve "Hindu" sentiments.

Compared to this banned book list JS book seems lightweight.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 02:21

Please no discussion of BJP or RSS or INC here. I just want a discussion on Jaswant Singhji's book.

PERIOD.

Munna thanks for sticking to topic.

sanjaychoudhry · Post by **sanjaychoudhry** » 21 Aug 2009 02:34

It is also most illustrative that this list by Indian Express does not list books banned to preserve Muslim "sentiments" but all books banned to preserve "Hindu" sentiments.

Indian Engish-language journalists are notorious for their intellectual dishonesty and prostituting their profession at the altar of ideology. This is merely an example of this. The editor of Indian Express is known to be an intellctual con-artist.

Manny · Post by **Manny** » 21 Aug 2009 02:37

If Jaswant Singhs book about Jinnah was all about praising him, I so agree. I love Jinnah.

Jinnah is my Hero.. He is 100 times more a man than Nehru could ever be.

Jinnah IMO, saved India. Thank you Jinnah for taking the radicals out of India and placing them in Gitmo like territory away from the rest of us civilized society. Imagine Nehru wanted these terrorists inside India. Sheesh!

Now, I need to get this book. Can't wait.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 21 Aug 2009 02:42

Why are books about the British Imperialists banned? E.g.

Old Soldier Sahib by Private Frank Richards Banned: Aug 22, 1936

This book is about a Welsh soldier who spent time in India. I suppose the British banned it to not let the Indians know what sort of s** stuff he did in India, not to mention all the naukar-chakar he enjoyed in Bharat. Why does the Indian Govt. wish to ban it?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 02:55

Rehabilitating Jinnah ? Why is that mark of a great statesman?

Time and again, we make the blunder of modelling the "others" by what we know of ourselves. If an Indian statesman like JS is thinking that publicly rehabilitating Jinnah is going to provide the right mental framework for TSPites to accept conglomeration with India then that is a huge misconception. If TSP was another "India", then its members would have felt glad that its "founder" has been acknowledged by this copy "India" and would have taken this as acknowledgement of commonality and therefore reconnection.

But TSP theory is based on "otherness", on the inflated ego of superiority of the Islamic foundation as defined by Jinnah for Pakistan - where Islamicity was the basis of nationhood, and not cultural or historical continuity with the non-Muslim. From their viewpoint this acknowledgement from an Indian statesman is the belated acceptance that Jinnah was after all "right". He could not have been great and make silly and selfish moves at the same time, could he? If the inveterate enemies, the "Hindus" finally see Jinnah's greatness, then it means that finally the "Hindu" is giving up and is ready to submit to "Allah" and his "bandas". In the Islamic psyche, it all revolves around dominance and submission. If the non-Islamic acknowledges anything good in Islam, or an Islamic leader, or an Islamic project - then it means "Allah" has incited the "unbeliever's heart" to acknowledge the superiority of Islam. I know many here hate looking back at history, but there are recorded episodes in India under Islamic regimes, where mere acknowledgement of some apparent good deed or quality in a Muslim or Islam was taken as sign of Allah's will to convert the "acknowledger".

Just wait until the Mullahs grasp the magnitude of ideological opportunity provided by this book. It will be used to further bolster the mindset that sees the destiny of TSP to overcome the "Hindu" and bring the subcontinent under Islam. Such a mindset will be immensely encouraged by interpreting this as a sign from "Allah" that the non-Muslim opposition and resistance to Islamism is crumbling - as predicted in the Quran about the inherent weakness and fractures in the "unbeliever", subgroups of which will always appear sympathetic and prevent unification of the "unbeliever". This is indicated to be the sign that Muslims should separately have agreements with such subgroups to keep them neutral when the resistant subgroups are being liquidated. One by one all such subgroups will be liquidated or converted. This is quite clearly stated and outlined.

Alas, our statesmen our defined to be statesmen based on how lenient and magnanimous they are to determined and persistent destroyers and damagers - forget the costs of such magnanimity borne by subsequent generations or centuries.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 02:58

surinder wrote

This book is about a Welsh soldier who spent time in India. I suppose the British banned it to not let the Indians know what sort of s** stuff he did in India, not to mention all the naukar-chakar he enjoyed in Bharat. Why does the Indian Govt. wish to ban it?

The ban list seems to have still retained books anned in British India, maybe the following government thought if the British did it - there must be something evil in that book! So the ban should continue!

munna · Post by **munna** » 21 Aug 2009 03:00

Jaswant Singh has done a signal duty to the nation by doing a Jinnah==Nehru whereby he has identified a time node in the past where seeds of the separation were sown. He presents a new political realignement where by a loose confederation of territories not fully amalgamated with each other might be possible in the future since it was acceptable to Jinnah then how can it be non-acceptable to aam abdul? This line of thought looks to go into the future through a relook at the past.
My only doubt is if this latest gambit by MMS at Sharm-El-Shaikh and Jaswant Singh is the real McCoy then what about the statement by Advani in Karachi? Was that the first time we tested our version of a re-engineering of history or was it a genuine faux pax that we later realized was a useful tool to engage bakiland?
The latest round of our chankian By-Ops (Book Psy Ops) also raises a hajaar questions that are not easily answered but then it seems to be connecting far too many dots to be ignored.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 03:01

Should we start a thread in GDF on the banned list and try to get descriptions of the books?

munna · Post by **munna** » 21 Aug 2009 03:03

ramana wrote:Should we start a thread in GDF on the banned list and try to get descriptions of the books?

Will be a great idea to know about the things being hidden from mango public!

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 03:04

Maybe quite useful on GDF.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 03:06

Done. Please discuss the Banned books in the other forum.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 21 Aug 2009 03:06

Manny ,
Jinnha did indian big favour .JS is right , Nehru and his ideas are still damaging India . Nehuru reminds me of village idiot who always put his village . For remdemption ,The bugger told his village folks to beat the hell out of him while taking him to creamation ground after his death and Police saw the crowd beating him in public view while he lay dead and thought they killed him and all got arrested to enjoy Punjab Police's mehmannawaji.

BSir , if Mullahs get embolden with such unholdy thoughts , then we onlee recognize the dormant enemy in our midst.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 03:09

The time for "federalist approach" was immediately after 49 - and after Jinnah's death. There would still be social networks that connected the two sides which could be "gently" reconnected. All "federalist" hopes do not factor the 60 odd years of generational replacment under increasing Wahabization. A loose federal structure of units that retain their own little "social engineering" projects of Wahabization is worse than non-united India. At this stage, we need to undo the structures put up by the Wahaabis and undo the effect of their indoctrinations - this cannot be done without full rashtryia control.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 21 Aug 2009 03:17

Bji, Without trying to get them back they will be under outside control. The trajectory was Sayyid Ahmed, Deobandi -> Muslim League -> Partition -> Maududdi's Islamist state -> Zia's Islamization/ Wahabization.

What we are trying is to undo the Blunt project (read future of Islam by Wilfrid Scawen Blunt-PDF on the net) of the Anglo-Saxon powers. In 1949, India too was a wounded nation sadly viscerated and wealth looted for Independence. No wonder we had the million mutinies. Lets see the book and what it really says.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 21 Aug 2009 03:31

I understand. You know very well, how much I have argued in favour of getting them back. But this cannot be done by strengthening their psychological props. I get tad bit frustrated when I see the complete lack of understanding of the Islamic theological mindset and its political manifestation in the society. The pressure has to be applied in a different direction - by weakening and deconstructing the hold of the Isalmic elite. This is to show how theologian's (and the feudal elite who support these theologians ) personal interests and lifestyle or status differ in foundation from that of the common follower of Islam. To show how these cream of Islamic society actually exploit or use the common follower for their own material and biological interests. It is this internal conflict - over land, feudal exploitation, sex-ploitation of feudal-dependants, and prevention of modernization in education or health care, that needs to be highlighted. The internal conflicts, contradictions, and divergence have to be brought up. The leaders of TSP, and their support base have to be exposed - and shown to be exploitative, and dishonest. This cannot be done in the JS way.