Discussion on Jaswant Singh's book on Jinnah

[ramana]

Events rapidly unfolded,the carnage in the Punjab saw the Congress Working Committee pass a resolution on 8th March 1947 in which they acknowledged for the first time the division of the Punjab between Muslim and non-Muslim areas.The fact that it was passed when both Gandhi and Azad away,is significant.Gandhi later wrote to both Nehru and Patel about the Resolution asking for an explanation.Patel replied that it was adopted after the "deepest deliberation" and Nehru lamely replied that the proposal to divide the Punjab arose from "our previous discussions".

*This clearly shows that the CWC wanted to pass the Resolution for dividing Punjab (and also Bengal ) in the absence of gandhi and Azad who were opposed to it.Thus did the CWC ditch Gandhi and Azad,the two men who had they been present would've prevented the Resolution from being passed.

A.K. Azad in his book "India wins Freedom" says he made two mistakes. The first one was to step down at the crucial juncture and and second one was not support Patel as his successor. I read this last night.

My take is JS is not praising Jinnah but examining all the facets. I think Arun Shourie is too shell shocked with the Partition events and the easy way is to blame it on Jinnah. One of my friends asked how come INC didnt have its own counter Direct Action day and target atleast the goons who unleashed it? According to game theory in the Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma 'tit-for tat" leads to cooperation.

I repiled maybe INC leadership was afraid that the Brits would use that as an excuse to delay Independence. For its not a true repeated Prisoner's Dilemma which is really between two players. The Indian Independence struggle was a multi-person situation. All post Indian Independence anti-colonial struggles were two person situations- the locals and the foreign colonizing power.

[svinayak]

Not telling the mods how to do their job however Jaswant Singh's book has major ramifications for Indian democracy and the way Government functions. The opposition are in the process of imploding and it's a shame we can't discuss it. We are all adults after all.

Didn't Ray C start a thread a few days ago where we could discuss the other implications of JS's book? I take it that thread is gone?

Anyway you guys make the rules and I apologise if this post breaks any.

Regards....

You can follow it HERE

[sukhdeo]

When sama, dana beda are vyarth, then only danda is left. Can you look in the mirror and say you have not been trying your best to disrupt and let off flame posts here and there? An sukhdeo what is there to laugh?

I am sorry, I was laughing without explanation. Your question really deserves an answer and an explanation. I have been on this forum, what 5-6 weeks now. And I can honestly say that not a day has passed( I dont literally mean each and every day, but just about everyday) when I have not seen you warn someone, threaten to ban someone, or at least talk about banning and if nothing else, use the word "ban" in one of your posts. I just find the whole situation hilarious and extremely funny , kinda a less sinister and more trivial "Lord of the Fly"ish. If Kafka were to direct a light comedy, this is the kind of script he would pick .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayatollah_Sadegh_Khalkhali

You invokation of the word "ban" conjured up within me, images of an Iranian cleric, and I must admit, it probably isnt a direct analogy, but during our college days we used to talk about this guy and just crack up laughing. Those were the days of Iranian Revolution and the Hostage crisis (1979-80-81). Ayatollah Khalkhali was a hardline cleric appointed the Chief Judge of the Revolutionary Islamic Courts. He had such a penchant for ordering executions that he came to be known as the "hanging judge". Sor far, there isnt a whole lot hilarious. But my roommate for a while in my dorm was an Iranian and we had several Iranian students there, who by and large were sympathetic to the Iranian revolution. But whenever the topic of Ayatollah Khalkhali would come up, they all would crack up laughing. So, one day I asked what was so funny about Khalkhali (just like you asked, Ramana, what was so funny). They cracked up again, and when they could manage to speak, they narrated to me that Khalkhali had been imprisoned by the Shah on some flimsy charge which was really based on a rumor (which could not be proved in Shah's court of law) that Khalkhali was a psychopath who enjoyed torturing small animals, a kinda compulsive disorder. It was charged in the court that he would pull out the legs of small animals, then burn them while still keeping them alive, then take out their eyes and tongue and then play a game with himself as to how long he could keep these animals alive and "kicking" while still inflicting torture on them. Again, Shah's regime not being a democracy and ostensibly, the higher ups in the regime wanting to get Khalkhali for "other reasons", the courts convicted him without any great evidence and there was a big hue and cry in Iran about it, particularly among the masses and the religious circles. Well, once in prison, Khalkhali went into a severe depression and a doctor was brought in to treat him. The doctor diagnosed him with suffering from severe withdrawl symptoms and prescribed various medications, but all to no avail and Khalkhali stopped eating. The doctor had also heard these rumors and charges against Khalkhali and as a last ditch desperate attempt, he ordered a dozen live mice and rats to be delivered to Khalkhali. Overnight Khalkhali was hail and hearty and by the time he was released after the revolution, he was eating so heartily that he had gained 50 pounds over his going in weight. Of course, every morning the guards in his prison found dead mice and mice body parts and blood strewn all across his cell.

I dont know why, when I saw you propose a ban for about the 50th time in last several weeks, this above incident came to my mind, although I acknowledge it probably has no correlation, as your use of the word "Danda" is really not the same as the "noose" of a hanging judge nor is there any similarity between mice and the word "ban. Its only because you asked why I was laughing, I answered your question, lest you think that I was being disruptive to the thread in some way by laughing.

[ramana]

Would you like to be mod for a day and see what we have to go thru to ensure a place for discussion? And I dont recall having used that word as often as you seem to recall. BTW your explanation is more than the original issue.

A word of caution. If one posts emoticons without any justifications it is bordering on trolling.

[RayC]

Sukhdeo,

Ramana is one of the most calm Mods and if he is upset, then I would be most surprised that there is something that is not wrong!

So lay off.

[sukhdeo]

Would you like to be mod for a day and see what we have to go thru to ensure a place for discussion? And I dont recall having used that word as often as you seem to recall. BTW your explanation is more than the original issue.

A word of caution. If one posts emoticons without any justifications it is bordering on trolling.

Quite right.

By the way, it is so refreshing to see you use "trolling" instead of your "other favorite word".

Are you offended by someone laughing ? You heard of that movie " Footloose", which was based on a true story of a small Indiana town which had passed an ordinance banning (this should brighten up your day) dancing.

Laughing, having fun and dancing should all be pushed underground.

[RayC]

OK, quit dancing with words that upsets!

We are not Pollyanna, even if you are in Indiana.

Thank you!

[sukhdeo]

OK, quit dancing with words that upsets!

We are not Pollyanna, even if you are in Indiana.

Thank you!

Ok, in all seriousness. My posts were not so much directed ar Ramana, as they were to the issue at hand, ie., Jaswants book on Jinnah. I was trying to be satirical, but my satire was not understood. Instead of following the BRF tradition of saying "well, just because you didnt understand me, or misunderstood me, that speaks volumes of your intelligence", I will take the blame and say that the fact that my satire was not understood was because my satire was probably not very good and the imagery too obtuse. A lot of us are failed poets, failed artists, and I have no problems in admitting, that perhaps, I am a failed satirist, at least in this instance.

Here is what I was trying to say and here it is an a straightforward way, rather than in metaphors. If you recall, I was the first one to comment on Jaswant's book here in BRF on the "Strategic leadership" thread, based on the article I read about his interview with Thapar in Hindustan Times. I used some choice words about Jaswant and I was warned by Ramana for that. Then the whole thing blew up and there were a couple of threads started on the topic, and Jaswant was expelled and banned. My take on this whole episode and Jaswant's book is a little different from most BRFits. I thought that thats why we were here, to have differing opinions and differing takes and points of views. What I am taking away from all of this is not the importance of rehashing partition or Gandhi or Jinnah or Nehru or even the BJP or Congress or RSS. I think the most interesting thing here is to watch the human drama unfold, how humans are behaving today in the context of this crisis. Jaswant writes some nonsense, in my view. Instead of countering this nonsense with sense and perhaps even some choice words and leaving it at that, the BJP decides to expel him and then ban his book in certain places. The real devil in all of this is this urge within human beings to suppress others, suppress their thoughts, suppress their expression, suppress their laughter and even suppress their existence. The same impulse that suppresses thoughts, eventually when in a position of being in greater power also suppresses people's existence. I was, in my satire, attempting to use Ayatollah Khalkhali is a metaphor for this incremental suppression, going from torturing mice to executing innocent humans, when he had the power, same impulse at work, in an Islamic context. BJP, who by all accounts claims and should be a bulwark against Islam, it turned out, had the same impulse as an Islamic fanatic, where without too much deliberations, and allowing things to calm down, picked up and "banned", or shall we say suppressed Jaswant. Although, I was "officially warned" here for cursing Jaswant out, that was my first impulse, but I am proud to say, my impulse was never is not even now, to "ban" him, to "suppress him", to disrespect him in that manner, which is very humiliating for all, but most of all for the people who do the suppression.

And, while all this is going on, I couldnt help but notice that in the same very threads, while we are discussing things, there are impulses to ban certain thoughts and strains of discussion, just because someone who has the authority, which is trivial compared to what BJP or Ayatollah Khalkhali had, in their own little way have that immediate shotgun impulse to "suppress".

Why I am virulently against Islam is not because they wear green, or pray differently, or are the enemies of us Hindus and Sikhs, but more because I am against all impulses to suppress and Islam today has the strongest impulse to suppress. We would all do well, to "suppress" the little bit of Islam, that crops up in each one of us, ie., the urge to "supress", and its only then that we can truly defeat Islam, by not allowing its worst impulses to permanently settle in our heart.

[ramana]

So why didnt you write like this before? Looks like something good did come, after all.

All those veiled and unveiled warnings, I mean

[RamaY]

The unintended (or is it?) consequence of JS’s book is that the world sees and spins it as a fight against religious-bigotry, that of Hindutvavad. And what good JS did to himself and to India with this book?

The sound bites are already coming out:

Samajvadi Party invites JS: Party leader Amar Singh announced that his party welcomes JS’s comment that Jinnah is a secular leader and it welcomes JS for fighting against religious bigotry of BJP. Link

[abhiti]

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.

At least someone is thinking straight...

[RayC]

While Jinnah's Aug 11 speech is secular, yet the atmosphere prevailing at that time did not give confidence to the non Muslims that they were safe in Pakistan.

Possibly the fact that the atmosphere was charged with tension could be the reason why most Hindus left Pakistan.

One may tell Thackaray that the parallel is that many non Maharastrians have left Mumbai (the daily labour class) because they are not too sure if the Govt will be able to control the SS goons if there is another trouble organised!

[shiv]

Jaswant Singh's book has major ramifications for Indian democracy and the way Government functions. The opposition are in the process of imploding and it's a shame we can't discuss it. We are all adults after all.

Didn't Ray C start a thread a few days ago where we could discuss the other implications of JS's book? I take it that thread is gone?..

Well the topic was reincarnated on BRF in the hijab forum - to discuss the political fallout. Kelik on the link below

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... =24&t=5139

[Paul]

What is more surprising is how Pakistan's intellectuals were drawn by Mr Singh's book to conclude that Pakistan's founding father was an "Indian nationalist" who did not want Pakistan as a first choice. This is incorrect, because it negates the force of history that favoured Pakistan. Tens of millions of people wanted to be future Pakistani citizens before the country even existed. The leadership of Mr Jinnah was an instrument, not the cause.

Sixty-two years later, Pakistanis shouldn't be discussing details. We know there was a Pakistan independence movement. We know it was anchored in history. We know that the fourth and fifth generations of today's Pakistanis are more integrated than ever.

As predicted, the fallout is turning Jinnah into a spurned Indian nationalist...thereby questioning the very validity of Pakistan.

http://thenews.jang.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=194873

[RayC]

The unfortunate part is Jinnah, though dead and gone, is still dividing India!!

[SSridhar]

One of my friends asked how come INC didnt have its own counter Direct Action day and target atleast the goons who unleashed it? . . . I repiled maybe INC leadership was afraid that the Brits would use that as an excuse to delay Independence.

Ramana, OTOH, the INC never took its programme to the Muslim masses effectively. When Jinnah became the ML Life President in 1936, the INC installed Azad as its President. One expected the two to slug it out as far as capturing the minds of the Muslims, at least in the sensitive Indo-Gangetic plains, was concerned. But, the INC did not sustain the campaign. There is no wonder there either because the INC was involved in a larger struggle whereas the ML was concentrating on a narrow parochial agenda. While the INC had to think and act on the larger goal to counter the powerful and Machiavellian British which consumed its energies, Jinnah and his ML were concentrating on a simpler goal.

[RayC]

I think there was and is a psychological quirk - the Holier than Thou syndrome!

The Muslims are clear in their objectives, be it then or be it now - the work to achieve the bottomline, by hook or crook!

The Hindus want to appear purer than the snow on Mt Etna!!

For instance, who cares what Jaswant S has written? But no, we have our ideals to guard. It would have been better to debunk the issues that are not palatable and make Jaswant look an intellectual midget. That would have sorted out the issue.

But no, without even reading, our good old Raja Harishchandra Rajnath gracelessly expels the writer and sinks his party down the drain, leading other luminaries to take up the rebellious cause !

They have ruined a house (party) that so assiduously Jack (ABV) built!!

What a comedown!

[svinayak]

Ramana, OTOH, the INC never took its programme to the Muslim masses effectively. When Jinnah became the ML Life President in 1936, the INC installed Azad as its President. One expected the two to slug it out as far as capturing the minds of the Muslims, at least in the sensitive Indo-Gangetic plains, was concerned. But, the INC did not sustain the campaign. There is no wonder there either because the INC was involved in a larger struggle whereas the ML was concentrating on a narrow parochial agenda. While the INC had to think and act on the larger goal to counter the powerful and Machiavellian British which consumed its energies, Jinnah and his ML were concentrating on a simpler goal.

Did INC show any indication that it knew that ML was getting help from British at any period.
The period 1940-1947 was crucial in the history of ML.

To counter ML for the support of the same public was difficult.

British in the archives noted that there was one leader for ML and Muslims and there were many leaders for the Hindu nationalists. They had a hard time when they built a relationship with one Hindu leader but another lowly leader would rise to the top and take over the leadership.

[SSridhar]

Did INC show any indication that it knew that ML was getting help from British at any period.The period 1940-1947 was crucial in the history of ML.

To counter ML for the support of the same public was difficult.

I am pretty sure that the Congress was aware of the support provided to ML by the successive Viceroys and the British regimes. Many erstwhile Congress leaders have commented about that at various times. They might not have known the depth of the support as we know of it today but whatever they would have known would have set alarm bells much before the 1940-47 period.

Of course, countering ML's divisive policy was going to be difficult. But, my reading of the situation was that they didn't even attempt to do that on a sustained basis. There was one big advantage that the INC had and that was the clergy, most of whom were supporting a united India either out of straight or convoluted convictions. The INC could have cashed in on that through leaders like Azad or Ansari and others. The UP, Bihar belt was the source of the trouble apart from Bombay where Jinnah ruled. They should have concentrated on these areas since the INC also had an excellent grassroot organization. Probably the 1935 elections where the ML was routed made the INC complacent.

[svinayak]

Did INC show any indication that it knew that ML was getting help from British at any period.The period 1940-1947 was crucial in the history of ML.

To counter ML for the support of the same public was difficult.

I am pretty sure that the Congress was aware of the support provided to ML by the successive Viceroys and the British regimes. Many erstwhile Congress leaders have commented about that at various times. They might not have known the depth of the support as we know of it today but whatever they would have known would have set alarm bells much before the 1940-47 period.

Of course, countering ML's divisive policy was going to be difficult. But, my reading of the situation was that they didn't even attempt to do that on a sustained basis. There was one big advantage that the INC had and that was the clergy, most of whom were supporting a united India either out of straight or convoluted convictions. The INC could have cashed in on that through leaders like Azad or Ansari and others. The UP, Bihar belt was the source of the trouble apart from Bombay where Jinnah ruled. They should have concentrated on these areas since the INC also had an excellent grassroot organization. Probably the 1935 elections where the ML was routed made the INC complacent.

QUit India movement changed the fortunes of INC and INC leaders.
British- Churchill promoted ML from 1942 and made sure that INC was downgraded. His ultimate secret weapon on INC - Jihad by ML

[ramana]

I think there was and is a psychological quirk - the Holier than Thou syndrome!

The Muslims are clear in their objectives, be it then or be it now - the work to achieve the bottomline, by hook or crook!

The Hindus want to appear purer than the snow on Mt Etna!!


For instance, who cares what Jaswant S has written? But no, we have our ideals to guard. It would have been better to debunk the issues that are not palatable and make Jaswant look an intellectual midget. That would have sorted out the issue.

But no, without even reading, our good old Raja Harishchandra Rajnath gracelessly expels the writer and sinks his party down the drain, leading other luminaries to take up the rebellious cause !

They have ruined a house (party) that so assiduously Jack (ABV) built!!

What a comedown!

RayC saab, iF you look thru political eyes there is no other choice. Gujarat is a "must not lose state" for BJP and is due for elections. And JS indictment of SVP is considered an affront for the Patel community which is a significant power in the state. As it is quite often dissidents aka those who were kept out of power in Gujarat have already sabotaged the BJP election prospects time and again. And they are mostly led by Keshub Bhai Patel. Already the INC Patel minister (Dinesha Patel) is calling for all India ban which is lost in the media focus on ban on JS book and expulsion. Electorally all the chatterati wont vote for BJ as was proven time and again in 2004 and 2009 so it doesnt matter. Also it is cleaning the BJP of many carpet baggers like Kulkarni etc.

As for JS, I think his book was coordinated with the RSS chiefs so all this is a tactical move. see the Sudarshan quote on NDTV. The strategic move is to make the TSP think again about their origins or where their naan is buttered. And if tis not JS is welcome to the think tank circuits.

PS: Its Mt Kailash. MtEtna will make INC cringe.

[samuel]

Both Nehru and Jinnah went to the Brits with a begging bowl. Guess who won.

[pgbhat]

Jaswant Singh to promote his book in Pakistan this week
Apologies if this was posted before.

[RamaY]

One may tell Thackaray that the parallel is that many non Maharastrians have left Mumbai (the daily labour class) because they are not too sure if the Govt will be able to control the SS goons if there is another trouble organised!

Wait a minute. Why is it wrong for a regional leader to demand protection to local interests from induced migrations from neighboring states. These state govts and central govt consistently failed to provide basic job opportunities in their native states.

RayC-ji, you were giving big speaches on Kashmiri (unique) culture and how the Kashmiris are justified to be upset with non-existent alianation from rest of India. The same Biharis were and are getting killed in JK and NE by local interests for the same reasons BT was protesting internal immigration.

I do not understand this level of intellectual dishonesty in the name of secularism. Why this ideological slavery?

[shiv]

Ramana, OTOH, the INC never took its programme to the Muslim masses effectively.

Perhaps the biggest error of the Indian National Congress was the boycotting of General election (between 1920 and 1930 IIRC). Last night a forum lurker( a retired Air Commodore, no less) told me exactly how this boycott panned out to give Suhrawardy and the Muslim league power in Bengal. I am trying to get his writing on this and will post excerpts here.

[RayC]

As for JS, I think his book was coordinated with the RSS chiefs so all this is a tactical move. see the Sudarshan quote on NDTV. The strategic move is to make the TSP think again about their origins or where their naan is buttered. And if tis not JS is welcome to the think tank circuits.

Very insicive analysis and the last part is real unique.

PS: Its Mt Kailash. MtEtna will make INC cringe.

You really have a sense of humour.

I thought you were the serious sort!

[SwamyG]

The Hindus want to appear purer than the snow on Mt Etna!!
<snip><snip><snip><snip>
They have ruined a house (party) that so assiduously Jack (ABV) built!!

What a comedown!

It is not a come down, it is churning. Good for the party and country. Some of the stalwarts (that is the rounds making buzz word in BRF these days) had opened my eyes during the elections debacle. It is not the party that is important - it is the value, mission, cause, ideology ithyadi. So if BJP is not solving nationalistic cause - it has to go. Simple. It is very Indic in my opinion - destruction and death brings new life. And hopefully it will be better for the country. No party is greater than the people it seeks to support or the country it serves.

It is refreshing to see Hindus get generalized with broad brush strokes.

[RayC]

Though OT, still............

Wait a minute. Why is it wrong for a regional leader to demand protection to local interests from induced migrations from neighboring states. These state govts and central govt consistently failed to provide basic job opportunities in their native states.

Wait two minutes.

Each State has it local interests and it is not unique to Maharastra or Mumbai alone. Or is it?

Now, if each State demand that there will be only the son of the soil who will get a job and throw and intimidate others to leave, then what is the meaning of 'India', being crafted on Indic and Hinduvta identity that you so dearly defend and promote in your posts? Intellectually honest, Dr Livingstone I presume?

The Central and State govt, be it elsewhere or Maharastra has failed to ensure 100% employment. Is it unique to Maharastra alone? Or are Marathi manus some unique souls that require velvet gloves and special treatment? Or are you assuming that other metropolis and industrial hubs of India do not have a whole lot of ‘outsiders’? Are you conjecturing that in Calcutta and Siliguri, the number of Biharis isany less? And why this animus against Biharis? If they are more hard working than the locals, then it is for the locals to match them and not weep and cry foul! Silguri is a Bihari town as far as population is concerned. Do you want Mamata Bannerjee to do a Bal Takhare stunt? She also is a political animal who exists on votes. Fortunately, we are not that parochial nor are weeping willows! It may interest you that Calcutta was the commercial and industrial capital of India once and there were whole lot of ‘outsiders’ and there was no narrow minded regionalism. Punjab agriculture is Bihari labour driven. Any complaints from Punjabis? It may interest you to know, that Bengal is not casteist either!! Mahrastra is. I have had to take up cases for my Mahar jawans and fortunately, my brother was the Home Secretary!! So, understand, India is my priority and not religious, communal and state divides!

Take the Naxal movement. The Naxalite movement is not because someone decided to use India as a firing range to hone his firing skills! It is because there are no jobs for the people.

What if all States throw out the Maharastrians working in their States?

Where will India be then? Will there be India thereafter?

Are you aware of the mineral wealth of Jharkhand and parts of Orissa? They languish since the minerals fuel industries in other parts of India and they are not given their due. What if they say that it will only be used for their States? It will lead to the collapse of India!!

Remember, what’s sauce for the Goose, is sauce for the Gander!

RayC-ji, you were giving big speaches on Kashmiri (unique) culture and how the Kashmiris are justified to be upset with non-existent alianation from rest of India. The same Biharis were and are getting killed in JK and NE by local interests for the same reasons BT was protesting internal immigration.

I do not understand this level of intellectual dishonesty in the name of secularism. Why this ideological slavery?

Actually, it is that you have just not understood the context and hence your opinion that it is intellectual dishonesty. We have anaysed your intellectual honesty in the above answer of mine.

I am also aware that any ‘softness’ to Muslims is anathema to you and brings out your ire and bile! Therefore, your view is understandable and it would be unfair of me to expect anything otherwise.

Notwithstanding, I reiterate that the context is that Kashmiris don’t feel alienated from hinterland India. On the contrary since there is so little interaction, they are falling into the welcoming arms of Pakistan. It may make you comfortable, but it surely does not make the rest of India comfortable. Further, since they are not that solvent or adventurous and the journey arduous, they don’t venture beyond their village. The more adventurous may hit the roads of Srinagar, while the carpet-wallahs go beyond and cross what they call ‘par’. But that hardly ingratiate them to the Indian polity and culture.

Also, what I said was in the interest of India. Hence you are masking and being very conservative with the truth and interpreting to suit your convenience to pen an elegy when you state that I sing paeans on behalf of Kashmiris, even though you term it as speaches.

Now which Bihari is being killed in Kashmir? Or, in the NE?

I wonder if you have been, lived or worked in an insurgency area. If you did, you would realise it is not only Biharis, but citizens of every other part of our Nation are bearing the brunt and insurgents are not selective. The locals too are killed, if you will.

The comparison of Kashmir and NE to Maharastra and Bombay is like chalk and cheese. I have not visited Maharastra recently. Am I to understand that there is a raging insurgency going on in Maharastra and so the comparison is apt? How is it that the media has not alerted us of the fact?

Therefore, you comparison of Kashmir and NE will Maharastra is, in my opinion, wildly misplaced and contrived to suit your convenience!

A PC Sorcar you have done on facts and logic.

I wonder who is guilty of intellectual dishonesty!

[RayC]

It is not a come down, it is churning. Good for the party and country. Some of the stalwarts (that is the rounds making buzz word in BRF these days) had opened my eyes during the elections debacle. It is not the party that is important - it is the value, mission, cause, ideology ithyadi. So if BJP is not solving nationalistic cause - it has to go. Simple. It is very Indic in my opinion - destruction and death brings new life. And hopefully it will be better for the country. No party is greater than the people it seeks to support or the country it serves.

It is refreshing to see Hindus get generalized with broad brush strokes.

You are absolutely right - it is the value, mission, cause, ideology ithyadi.

I sincerely hope that the churning removes the bumbling retards and some intellectual and nationalist aura is re-injected.

[Sanku]

The unintended (or is it?) consequence of JS’s book is that the world sees and spins it as a fight against religious-bigotry, that of Hindutvavad. And what good JS did to himself and to India with this book?

You guys dont understand, you have a book which is RSS version of partition lite being read by all and touted and welcomed as the secular manifesto.


This was a stream of thought being snuffed out with viciousness in India, and suddenly it comes alive and is acceptable.

I cant think of a bigger masterstroke -- and it is a testimony to the total idiocy and lack of education of the brainwashed DIE and leftist media that they are falling for it. Kudos.

[Philip]

I had recorded a programme on telly and was pleasantly surprised to have also recorded NS Sarila's interview with the channel.He has given some key insights into Mountbatten's thinking and his view of Jinnah (then the highest paid lawyer in India) "a complete megalaomaniac",who just wanted a dungheap for himself on which to perch himself as Fuhrer of Pakistan.Mountbatten told him of this extraordinary event,when he made his first visit to independent Pak,while he was still Governor General of India.There was only one grand chair on the dias and Mountbatten thought that it was for him as protocol demanded.Jinnah was about to occupy the chair himself when Mountbatten discreetly prevented him from doing so! According to Sarila,Jinnah pleaded with Mountbatten for "anything",Pakistan in any form so that he could rule the roost there.It is therefore quite obvious that Jinnah's overwhelming ambition was to be the equal of Nehru or whoever would rule India or be leader of the Congress.The big Q that JS has attempted to discover is why Jinnah,a former nationalist and patriot as even an ex-RRS chief has just said so,turned away from India to found his moth-eaten Pakistan that could not last even 25 years! Where the famous leaders of the Congress guilty in pushing him too far?

Jinnah's was renowned for his sartorial elegance and vanity in the House.However (from another famous source),he had a rival in the House from another "peacock",the flamboyant Col.Sir Henry Gidney,leader of the Anglo-Indian community and famous ophtalmologist,recognised for his valour for fighting the Chinese in the Boxer rebellion.Gidney,who was a well known shikari,who had famously fought head-hunters and Naga rebels,wore a monocle and treated Jinnah and his monocle with disdain,claiming for himself the unofficial title of being the most elegantly dressed member of the Central Legislative Assembly! Tango-dancer Gidney loved wine,women and song and was an avid collector of art and antiquities.Their sartorial rivalry provoked much amusement for the members.

Gidney's is best remembered for this famous dig at Jinnah in the House.After Jinnah had spoken,Gidney rose up to say that " The Hon'ble Member who has just sat down has not only got the bull by the horns but the cow by the udder end." The house burst into laughter.

[RayC]

Whatever be the case, I, for one, am happy that the jetsam and flotsam has gone away to make Pakistan.

If what is the mentality of people who made Pakistan and is bent on Pakistan disintegrating, then all I will say, is that we have been saved by the Grace of God!

Notwithstanding the turmoil and deprivation that my family suffered because we were displaced, I have no regrets to be in India and being an Indian by domicile!

We have risen from the ashes and it has been a great experience. It has made us stronger in mind, if I may say.

God Bless India!!

[Sanku]

Whatever be the case, I, for one, am happy that the jetsam and flotsam has gone away to make Pakistan

That unfortunately is not the real situation. Can we say that all the jetsam and flotsam and neatly gone away into Pakistan. Of what went to Pakistan what was flotsam and jetsam? Of what remained in Pakistan what was good.

Should we be happy that Khan of Kalat was left to the Pakistani's to be murdered and Baloch's destroyed?

Questions questions....

No Partition is not a neat little tidying up event which is a done deal.

[SSridhar]

. . . It is therefore quite obvious that Jinnah's overwhelming ambition was to be the equal of Nehru or whoever would rule India or be leader of the Congress.The big Q that JS has attempted to discover is why Jinnah,a former nationalist and patriot as even an ex-RRS chief has just said so,turned away from India to found his moth-eaten Pakistan that could not last even 25 years! Where the famous leaders of the Congress guilty in pushing him too far?

Philip,
Initially, Jinnah was close to Tilak & Gokhale when Gandhiji was nowhere in the picture and was still in South Africa. When Gandhi returned to India and joined the INC, Jinnah had already spent about 10 years in the party. He was also a leading lawyer in Bombay. As the rising popularity of Gandhi and his 'ahimsa' and 'satyagraha' techniques attracted mass attention, Jinnah felt the ground slipping under his feet. Being of almost similar age (Gandhi was senior by 7 years), Jinnah's ego got bruised especially when he was so successful as a lawyer and had been known for a decade to INC stalwarts like Phirozshah Mehta, Naoroji, Gokhale and Tilak for whom he even appeared in defending against sedition charges brilliantly. Neither Gandhi, nor Nehru later on, were known to be successful lawyers, much less of his stature. The sudden prominence of Gandhi irked Jinnah no ends. Jinnah equated himself only with Gandhi and dismissed Nehru as unequal.

Jinnah was also thoroughly disliked by the Muslim League leaders as I posted earlier. Jinnah was therefore totally disenchanted and disappointed. For a massively egoistic person like Jinnah, this rejection was unbearable and he was waiting for an opportunity to take revenge. That came his way when he was asked to revive the floundering Muslim League in 1935. He implemented his plan to show the rest who he really was and how he can outsmart and outwit everyone else.

[RayC]

Whatever be the case, I, for one, am happy that the jetsam and flotsam has gone away to make Pakistan

That unfortunately is not the real situation. Can we say that all the jetsam and flotsam and neatly gone away into Pakistan. Of what went to Pakistan what was flotsam and jetsam? Of what remained in Pakistan what was good.

Should we be happy that Khan of Kalat was left to the Pakistani's to be murdered and Baloch's destroyed?

Questions questions....

No Partition is not a neat little tidying up event which is a done deal.

Should I put it that we are now more comfortable?

We don't have the likes of those who did the Mumbai blasts!

Adn Dawood has gone to his natural pasture.

[Philip]

"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned".Jinnah behaved exactly like the quote !

Further to what Sridhar has said,there are parts in the book where Jinnah never believed Gandhi's offers as genuine,probably mirroring his mind and his suspicious mentality instead. If so,even the offer of first PM would never had worked as Jinnah would've suspected some future trap by the Congress at a later date to sideline him.His bitterness at the Congress and its leaders drove him to demand his own dunghill and Britain ceremoniously gave it to him,a steaming mess of "poo" to this day!

[Sanku]

Should I put it that we are now more comfortable?

Are we?

We don't have the likes of those who did the Mumbai blasts!

Yet all that happens and we cant do anything about it since they are not here. If they were here we could do something.

Adn Dawood has gone to his natural pasture.

AFTER causing all the mayhem, which means there are many Dawood's in the wing who know they can do stuff like Dawood and have a ready home.

[Sanku]

Further to what Sridhar has said,there are parts in the book where Jinnah never believed Gandhi's offers as genuine,probably mirroring his mind and his suspicious mentality instead.

That is because he was scorned many a times by Congress which went back on its words in 20s and 30s.

When MKG arrived in India, Jinaah greeted him on Behalf of all Indians to which MKG said that he was happy to see a Muslim doing well and at the head of an important organization.

For all the unity chorus, MKG was clear archetypical Hindu and the Muslim was the other, so much for the unity.

It appears to me that Jinaah was living in his "secular" imagining of India early on and when the reality broke his dream he went aggressively to the other side.

[RajeshA]

The unfortunate part is Jinnah, though dead and gone, is still dividing India!!

Jinnah is not dividing India. We are all having an argumentation bash, something all Indians relish. It provides all Indians with an opportunity to discuss history, something we do too little. In the 90s at least we used to discuss the 90,000,000 nuclear missiles we used to have at the time of Mahabharat.

Jaswant Singh's Jinnah will be dividing Pakistan in far more greater measure. BJP throwing out Jaswant Singh, and the criticism he has got at home, has given his book far more acceptance in Pakistan, something very positive. He is letting loose a fox in the hen-pen.

I am glad Jaswant Singh is playing this game.

History is gone. It is the future one needs to mold.

[Sanku]

Ramana, OTOH, the INC never took its programme to the Muslim masses effectively.

Perhaps the biggest error of the Indian National Congress was the boycotting of General election (between 1920 and 1930 IIRC). Last night a forum lurker( a retired Air Commodore, no less) told me exactly how this boycott panned out to give Suhrawardy and the Muslim league power in Bengal. I am trying to get his writing on this and will post excerpts here.

Funnily JS in his book talks about this, he says Jinaah was extremely frustrated with the Non-cooperation movement since it broke the back of the "constitutional" self-rule platform that Congress had build assidiously in the past and with ML-Congress cooperation that Jinaah had brought about, the joint front was so scary to the Brits that they were getting pressured into further dilution of powers as shown by Montague-Chelmsford reforms.

Of course the other PoV is that the British were only doing showbaazi reforms, reforms which made Raj stronger and not moving towards the ideal of Tilak which was of Indians completely being incharge of their destiny.

We will never know what would it be if Congress went with the first plan.

--------------------------

Interestingly; Gandhi though using non-cooperation as a method of pressure (and thus not participating in elections some times) also was not a votary of hurried moves to full independence. He wanted a gradual move to Independence. It was young people (and Nehru) who were set afire with Socialist-communist ideas who were pushing to a more Centrist-Secular state with no special treatment of any group.

MKG was quite all right with a partial preferential treatment of the "other".