PKPolitics Discuss » Current Issues

Secular Pakistan - The Vision of M.A. Jinnah, Who Hijacked it?

(477 posts)
1…910

  1. sultanalikhan
    Member

    It is a big irony (am not using word hypocrisy) that all those parties that once were completely against the creation of Pakistan have now become its biggest champion....So much so that they are now painting Qaid with the color of their liking.......

    The speech that was quoted in the beginnig of the topic should have been sufficient to cut any opposing arguments but NO SIR the same opposition never was, nor it will ever be,interested in finding the truth but would always attempt to impose its "concocted truth".......

    Posted 1 year ago on 16 Oct 2010 11:55 #

  2. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @SultanAliKhan: But;

    (1) Did idea of Pakistan originate with Mr. Jinnah ?

    (2) Did Mr. Jinnah always want a separate 'nation state' for Muslims ?

    (3) What does it mean ? -> 'being against creation of Pakistan' ?

    (4) Why were they against 'creation' of Pakistan ?

    What speech ? What argument ? Those words have been proven a false mockery blamed on Mr. Jinnah. How do you substantiate your claim(s) ?

    (5) What's the 'concocted truth' ?

    Posted 1 year ago on 16 Oct 2010 13:27 #

  3. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @Not Possible: Sorry!. I went to sleep.

    Posted 1 year ago on 16 Oct 2010 13:32 #

  4. Not Possible
    Blocked

    walikum aslam
    hk
    thats too many salams gone unanswered i think

    review below link and then reply
    http://pkpolitics.com/discuss/topic/gadi-nashin-khilafat-and-malookiat

    Posted 1 year ago on 16 Oct 2010 13:43 #

  5. Not Possible
    Blocked

    @ Sultan Ali Khan

    very well said

    and hk

    what are you on about this address is a very public and recorded speech in the constituent assembly, the white lie is that you are calling this a very publicly recorded event of history a lie.

    Posted 1 year ago on 16 Oct 2010 13:45 #

  6. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @Not Possible: (1) At this point in time, I'm talking based on a book we have come across, that debunks this notion, as a 'falsehood'. Did you go through it ?

    If you want me to, I'll re-check on this.

    At the same time;

    (2) What about all the speeches Mr. Jinnah gave between 1932 - 1947, before! creation of Pakistan

    Those speeches show, he 'repeatedly', 'consistently' wanted Pakistan to be built so that Muslims could live their lives as per Islam, and show the world an example ?

    Why do you 'negate' implementation of Islam when it comes to our 'collective' 'level' ?

    How do you put one speech in-front of the many, and claim what you are saying is right ?

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 13:01 #

  7. Not Possible
    Blocked

    @haris khan

    what book? and what that book came from heaven to tell you that recorded history is wrong?

    and whats the contradiction in that? Muslims can live peacufuly according to their wishes and free to practise their belifs in a secular state. Read the whole text of that speech

    http://therepublicofrumi.com/archives/jinnah19470811.htm

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 14:43 #

  8. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @Not Possible: You haven't gone through speeches of Mr. Jinnah before creation of Pakistan ? You haven't gone through life of Mr. Jinnah, have you ? You just posted one of his many speeches and with that you'v started telling Muslims to accept what you say on that basis ?

    (1) Do you read this thread ? or are you just posting your point of view ? One book is mentioned on this very thread;

    (a) Secular Jinnah: Munir's Big Hoax Exposed

    The other is;

    (b) Some-Recent-Speeches-and-Writings-of-Mr-Jinnah-1942

    (c) I want you to read speeches of Mr. Jinnah from the period 1932 - 1947

    (d) I want you to take out all speeches of Mr. Jinnah, read them, note the circumstances of the time, note the context, find our what he said in those speeches, compare it with what your saying with respect to the speech you'r quoting, and then give me your feedback on it

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

    (2) How do you substantiate your claim that 'Muslims can live, and live peacefully under 'secularism'' ?

    I have already posted history of;

    (a) Pakistan, since it was created
    (b) this past century
    (c) this past decade (2000 - 2010)

    as an example for you to check through, that negates your 'assertion' when we look at REAL life.

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 14:45 #

  9. Not Possible
    Blocked

    @NNL
    are these divine books? if I write a book to expose your books will you take my book ot be dinfuly right

    the address to constituent assembly is recorded history and it is not some thing that dates back a 1000 years

    why cant muslims live pecefuly in a secular state when they are in majority?

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 15:39 #

  10. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @Not Possible: If;

    (1) you can't face up to the truth
    (2) you don't want to accept the truth
    (3) you don't have the courage for it
    (4) its important for you to toe a line that is wrong, falsehood, immoral, unethical, unjust
    (5) its important for you to toe a line that can't be substantiated

    I need to stop wasting my time on you. Tell me 'how it is' right now.

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 15:57 #

  11. Not Possible
    Blocked

    @ HK

    you take it on good authority that these books are valid enough to refute historical record, how? why cant they be falsification, I mean that speech which is part of record is falsification but these books are not...how?

    1.how do you attest that this is the truth and speech that is part of recorded archives is not?

    what truth dont I want to accept? That Pakistan is homeland for muslims, thats a fact, was it meant to be an Islamic state ...thats entirely another matter.

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 19:32 #

  12. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @Not Possible: (1) I asked of you to conduct your own independent research into it.

    Lack of 'will' on your part to seek out the truth, gives me a crystal clear signal on what you want to achieve through this discussion.

    (2) How is that a different matter ?

    You'r going to 'selectively' 'allow for' Muslims to adhere to one part of Islam, and deny them to adhere to another part of Islam, and call it 'right', 'acceptable', 'justice' ?

    Its preposterous. This is a classic case of 'hypocr|sy'.

    How do you substantiate that claim ?

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 19:41 #

  13. Not Possible
    Blocked

    @hk

    you dont honestly expect me to read two whole books in 10 minutes do you? I will look when I get the time, but Im saying that Quaid-e-Azams sppech a the constituent assembly is a matter of record whilst these books arent.

    Islamic state will be formed by a leader Allah chooses, not man.

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 19:48 #

  14. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @Not Possible: You don't answer my questions. You don't substantiate your claims. You keep jumping from one point to another without backing your arguments with concrete facts. And you think that's acceptable ? No, it is not.

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

    What the heck are you on about with this statement;

    Islamic state will be formed by a leader Allah chooses, not man.

    How do you substantiate this claim ?

    Its the same old argument I'v already answered on this forum/community.

    You secularists. You keep repeating your illegitimate baseless arguments, thinking they will work some time. Well they haven't worked even after consistently having been repeated over decades and it won't work now.

    Secularism, as well as the people who 'subscribe' to secularism are responsible for destruction of lives of multiple generations of millions of people of Pakistan. And it is sad for me when I say, I find no drive in you people for accepting the truth.

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 19:55 #

  15. sweettruth
    Member

    Simple answer of this question is: Molvis

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 20:26 #

  16. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @Not Possible: You are welcome to take as much time as you 'need' in reading these books.

    Plus I encourage you to go through;

    (1) life history of Mr. Jinnah
    (2) all speeches of Mr. Jinnah

    I'v shared the ones I have found. If you can find online versions of others, please do share/link them on the;

    thread: pkpolitics book club

    Posted 1 year ago on 17 Oct 2010 20:28 #

  17. Not Possible
    Blocked

    @hk
    from yoru second post I gather that you dont read my answers just start to write yours

    I really want to write this in bold letters as per the rules of the forum I wont

    i am not a secularist, I believe in following principles of islam, however these priciples cannot be enforced by tyrannical ruler who follows in the foot steps of yazeed

    1.please pinpoint how I am jumping from point to point

    2.yes I will read the books, however the adrees to constituent assembly is a matter of record, the authencity of these books are not

    3.and i am sure Quaid e Azam a shia would not want to live in s atate where he would give power to jamtis to rule so they could persecute him and oppress him and stop his rights.

    4.except for point 3 all points are same as my above post so i am not jumping from point to point

    5."Islamic state will be formed by a leader Allah chooses, not man."

    first of all if I am saying Allah makes leaders for men why do I need to substantiate it? Isnt Allah above all, isnt he supreme so why do I need to substantiate that? you say some very blashphamoeus things which show that jamatis only serve self motives they dont even care about Allah.

    Secondly I have done that you have only not bothered to read it.So Iam going to post the link thrice so you see it click on it and read it.

    http://pkpolitics.com/discuss/topic/gadi-nashin-khilafat-and-malookiat

    http://pkpolitics.com/discuss/topic/gadi-nashin-khilafat-and-malookiat

    http://pkpolitics.com/discuss/topic/gadi-nashin-khilafat-and-malookiat

    Posted 1 year ago on 18 Oct 2010 1:36 #

  18. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    (1) The rules on this forum do not stop you from using 'bold' font.

    (2) You are conducting yourself on this thread, with the same arguments, that 'secularists' use. And you are conducting yourself in the same way.

    So, why is it my fault when I note, when I see the same from you ?

    (3) BS!. ALLAH ALMIGHTY doesn't choose leaders among human beings. This is a task left on human beings to decide on, on their own, as it has been happening for thousands of years.

    Nowhere has ALLAH said HE will 'decide' on 'leaders' of Muslims.

    This is the same old point 'secularists' raise in their arguments. They note that only after ALLAH ALMIGHTY sends a Prophet, or a miracle can we have a leader from good Muslims. Otherwise, no good Muslim can become leader of Muslims. It is them (secularists) or criminals who are to lead us in all other cases. This is a 'self created' 'concoction' meant to 'deceive' masses who are less-knowledgeable, less informed, less aware.

    ..and you are not only 'defending' this 'self created' 'concoction', you are 'promoting' it, 'propagating' it.

    Yes, ALLAH ALMIGHTY has said that HE will 'impose' leaders upon us, looking at how we the people conduct ourselves. IF we will be good, we will have good leaders. If we conduct ourselves as those who reject HIS message, and being good, he will impose bad leaders.

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

    I think you have forgotten the age old lesson about 'collectives';

    (1) When a 'collective' is of people who are 'good', they will 'willingly' 'choose' the best of 'good' among them to lead them, no matter what

    It is natural. They know, that person will make sure their 'interests', their well-being is kept above all.

    (2) When a 'collective' is of people who want to be 'criminals', who want to be 'bad', they will choose the worst of the 'worst' among them to lead them, no matter what

    It is natural. They know, that person will make sure their 'interests', their well-being is kept above all.

    This is what we are watching in Pakistan. This is what has been enforcing, re-enforcing itself in Pakistan for decades.

    Do good people choose 'criminals' as their leaders ? Is that even possible ? No, it is not.

    Do criminals choose 'good' people as their leaders ? Is that even possible ? No, it is not.

    Posted 1 year ago on 18 Oct 2010 11:14 #

  19. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @Not Possible: So .. you'r pleading the case of 'gaddi nashini' for 'legitimizing' current 'unjust' rulers of Muslims, their decisions, their actions ?

    Are you waiting for me/us to declare my/our 'bloodline', only after which you'll pledge your loyalty to me/us ?

    Is that how it is ?

    Secondly, you'v posted content in which you repeatedly talk of beliefs of 'shia'. Is that where you belong ? With shia people ?

    Posted 1 year ago on 18 Oct 2010 11:58 #

  20. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    @Not Possible: My knowledge is limited as far the question about 'lineage' goes.

    Even then, you neglected to mention, even back in the era before Muhammad (SAW), there have been cases where sons, families of Prophets were not spared from ALLAH ALMIGHTY's wrath.

    Why did that happen ? You didn't mention this case in your discourse.

    Posted 1 year ago on 18 Oct 2010 12:56 #

  21. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    I think there was a grass roots movement in Indian Subcontinent. How can I say this ? Because Mr. Jinnah gave a lot of speeches in universities and different parts of the Indian Subcontinent where Muslims were in majority.

    Those speeches were not organized, and given to a small group of people. They were given in large gatherings in Universities, local communities, etc etc.

    So, I have reason to believe there was a grass roots movement. It may also have been an organized one with Mr. Jinnah, Iqbal at the helm.

    Posted 1 year ago on 03 Nov 2010 4:19 #

  22. toamin
    member

    Yes, grass root level organization in Bengal and Muslim minority areas, no grass root level organization in NWFP/Sindh/Balochistan/Kashmir/Punjab

    Posted 1 year ago on 04 Nov 2010 10:10 #

  23. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    Didn't Mr. Jinnah give speeches all over Indian subcontinent ?

    Posted 1 year ago on 04 Nov 2010 11:49 #

  24. toamin
    member

    So did musharraf, does musharaf have grass root level organization in pakistan? (not comparing Jinnah with Mushy only point is rallies/jalsa/jaloos)

    Posted 1 year ago on 04 Nov 2010 12:03 #

  25. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    I don't think Mr. Musharraf did as much scooting around by far, as Mr. Jinnah did.

    Posted 1 year ago on 04 Nov 2010 13:05 #

  26. toamin
    member

    point is not as much or not much, not comparing how much, it is about the activity done by two politicians who both lacked grass root level organization-

    Posted 1 year ago on 04 Nov 2010 13:40 #

  27. hariskhan
    member

    Assalam-o-Alaikum-Warahmat-ULLAH ALL,

    My point is Mr. Musharraf may have lacked 'grass roots' level organization, but Mr. Jinnah did not. Mr. Jinnah worked far more tirelessly than Mr. Musharraf.

    Posted 1 year ago on 04 Nov 2010 14:19 #

RSS feed for this topic

1…910

Reply

You must log in to post.