Indians want...

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
41

A.B. Vajpayee was India’s foreign minister between 1977-79 when India and Pakistan shared best of relationships. Then Prime Minister Morarji Desai was awarded with Nishan-E-Pakistan by Pakistan Government. Pakistanis trusted Morarji and Vajpayee very much. Unfortunately that Government did not last long.

When A.B.Vajpayee because PrimeMinister in spite of opposition from hardliners in his party decided to open a bus service between Delhi and Lahore and Vajpayee himself visited Pakistan with a delegation of Indians. Even the likes of Bal Thakrey were silenced because majority of the people were in favour of good relationship. He visited Minar-E-Pakistan and in all his speaches he emphasized again and again that Pakistan is an Independent entity and its there to stay.

I reproduce this speach by Vajpayee in Lahore.

Gen Musharraf who was Army chief then refused to meet Vajpayee. Soon after Lahore declaration and all bon-homie Mush started Kargil which Indians consider great betrayal. No Indian leader no matter what is not ready to believe Mush and talk to him. All credit for bringing the relationship between two countries to the lowest ebb should go to Mush. After Kargil even neutral Indian English Press has become very much Anti-Pakistani. No Indian politician wants to do anything with Pakistan because you dont know when it will backfire. Whatever Goodwill some Indians had about Pakistan is gone after Kargil.

42

Yes, I am quite aware of the Sindhi migration to India, but get real, no province = no language. The fact that theres a East Punjab and West Bengal may give cover to making those languages official but sorry theres ONE and only ONE Sindh. <<

firstly, we dont have provinces in india, we have states.

secondly, national languages arent formed based solely upon state lines - there are atleast 3 languages in india's 14 official national languages that have no state-affiliations. quit reading the JeI enclopaedia.

As for the Muhajirs, they settled in where ever they pleased, the fact that Karach was ONE of the focal points was because it was the capital of Pakistan at the time, and the ICS (Indian Civil Service) Muslims were largely from what became India. it was only natural for them to gravitate to a city where civil and government jobs were available.<<

That was one reason. The big one being land left behind by migrants. Same reason why hindu east punjabis mostly ended up in delhi.

bottom line is, India has as much right population-wise to making sindhi an official language as Pakistan has to making urdu. not that i care two hoots what pak does..

43

firstly, we dont have provinces in india, we have states.

Weak rebuttal. You can call them adminstrative units for all I care. Now back to the main question, is there a SINDH in India?

secondly, national languages arent formed based solely upon state lines - there are atleast 3 languages in india's 14 official national languages that have no state-affiliations. quit reading the JeI enclopaedia.

Oh no? Why was East Punjab divided in Haryana, Punjab? Or the readjustments of other STATES (happy now?) based on on linguistic affinities? Hey I have the courage to say the truth, Sindh as well as the rest of Pakistan has never been accepted by India, and it's hegamonic designs still persist in the hearts and minds of the government and the citizenry, alike.

That was one reason. The big one being land left behind by migrants. Same reason why hindu east punjabis mostly ended up in delhi.

Got news for you mian, Delhi IS IN Punjab, so those east Punjabis were travelling within their homeland.

bottom line is, India has as much right population-wise to making sindhi an official language as Pakistan has to making urdu. not that i care two hoots what pak does..

What the hell does "population wise" mean? You must be mad because population doesn't have anything to do with this argument. Fine challenge us on Urdu, go ahead and do it :)

Queer, don't avoid the issues here...how many times have you thought about disintegration of Pakistan? A truthful answer will be the most shocking for me.

44

RajputFurry mian,

this stuff you post is absolutely hilarious. :)

Oh no? Why was East Punjab divided in Haryana, Punjab? Or the readjustments of other STATES (happy now?) based on on linguistic affinities? <<

pray what does this have anything to do with national languages?

Got news for you mian, Delhi IS IN Punjab, so those east Punjabis were travelling within their homeland. <<

haha i am not even gonna comment on this one! khee khee khoo khoo!

45

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by RajputFury: *
Got news for you mian, Delhi IS IN Punjab, so those east Punjabis were travelling within their homeland.
[/QUOTE]

Rajput bhai.. you kinda lost me here. In which province is Dehli, exactly?

46

Rajputfury,

what prompted you to start this thread? just curious.

I am Indian (big surprise!) and almost noone I know want pakistan to be annexed or otherwise reunite. I do know two people who hate the partition and alternatively blame Gandhi and Jinnah for it but even they do not lament for India to try and take pakistan back. I am telling you the truth about the people I know and it is up to you to trust the truth or not.

Most Indian complaints against pakistan, to my knowledge, is due to pakistan's designs for Kashmir and the rotten way they gone about it in the past. You may not like it said that way but that's how I and many I know feel.

By "rotten ways" I mean pakistan's tactics of cross border terrorism, trying to play the islam card and attempts to incite Hindu-muslim riots.

47

**pray what does this have anything to do with national languages? **

The division of States was done based on a linguitic basis and done by the NATIONAL government of India. The national languages are also designated on a NATIONAL level. Enough BS, explain the funding of World Sindhi Congress, repeated visits of GM Syed, and the arming of Jeay Sindh? Again at the tip of the iceberg.

**haha i am not even gonna comment on this one! khee khee khoo khoo! **

Ok now this is sad, I have to tell YOU (a self proclaimed Indian) your history?

The founding of the city by Punjabis

*Delhi’s history dates back to the first millenium B.C., when it was known as Indraprastha. The Tomar Rajputs built Lal Kot, the core of the first of Delhi’s seven cities. It was annexed by Prithviraj Chauhan, who extended it, to create the Qila Rai Pithora. *

Source:States-Delhi (Ouch! An official Indian Website)

Boundaries of Punjab

*The historical area of Punjab was defined to the east from the basin of the river Bias (including Dehli) to the basin of River Indus in the west. To the north it was bounded by the Himalayas of Kashmir and to the south it stretched as far as the plains of Cholistan and Rajasthan. *

Source: Punjabilok

Presence of Jats

*Among the main clans in Rohtak, the stronghold of the Ghatwalas (Malik) was at Ahulana in the Gohana tehsil of the district. The Dagars lived in Delhi and Gurgaon, while the Dahiyas inhabited the northeastern border of Sampla and the adjoining portions of the Sonepat tahsil in Rohtak and Delhi. The Rathi Jats were concentrated in Gurgaon, Delhi and Rohtak and the Golias in Rohtak and Karnal. The Dalals lived in the adjoining territory of Delhi, Hissar and Jind. *

Source: Jatland

So queer, are you going to ignore this in the trademark selective vision of yours or going to address my original claim, Delhi IS IN Punjab?

Calling it a union territory or changing it’s outward designation such as designating it a capital does not change history. Stripping Delhi of all titles, it will revert back to Punjab/Haryana.

48

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Faisal: *

Rajput bhai.. you kinda lost me here. In which province is Dehli, exactly?
[/QUOTE]

Indians call it a union territory, but it very much a part of Punjab both geographically and ethnically. It is like Pakistanis denying Islamabad is in Pakistani Punjab.

49

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Jagjeevan: *
Rajputfury,

what prompted you to start this thread? just curious.

I am Indian (big surprise!) and almost noone I know want pakistan to be annexed or otherwise reunite. I do know two people who hate the partition and alternatively blame Gandhi and Jinnah for it but even they do not lament for India to try and take pakistan back. I am telling you the truth about the people I know and it is up to you to trust the truth or not.

Most Indian complaints against pakistan, to my knowledge, is due to pakistan's designs for Kashmir and the rotten way they gone about it in the past. You may not like it said that way but that's how I and many I know feel.

By "rotten ways" I mean pakistan's tactics of cross border terrorism, trying to play the islam card and attempts to incite Hindu-muslim riots.
[/QUOTE]

Jag,

Look around your countrymen, India's role in Bangladesh, support of secessionist movements in Baluchistan, Sindh, attempts to include NWFP in India or at the very least, destabilizing Pakistan by supporting an independent Pakhtunistan. Note that I never one mentioned Kashmir in this discussion. Look at the facts! Indians wanted and still want, Pakistan to end. I won't bring up Nehru, VB Patel and others in the Freedom movement, whose very words indicated getting the Brits out and then worrying about annexing Pakistan. To be fair, that post-1947 ideology has been changed into breaking up Pakistan, Bangladesh style so an independent Sindhudesh or the like will never ever pose a threat to Indian hegemony...Put the facts where they are: Can India invade and occupy every South Asian country except for Pakistan? The answer is very unqualified YES. Pakistan is India's one and only mortal enemy because we have stood in defience time and time again.

Let me clarify, I don't want to exclusively blame Indians here, we have many so-called Pakistanis who are nothing but two bit traitors. Without the aid of these watan faroosh elements, Indians would not even have a foothold in their goals.

On a different note: Jag, you are probably more of a moderate compared to your other compatriots.

50

RF,

We all understand that this thread is aimed at "certain" Pakistanis than Indians ;)

51

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by RajputFury: *
The division of States was done based on a linguitic basis and done by the NATIONAL government of India. The national languages are also designated on a NATIONAL level.
[/quote]

So? What is the connection between dividing states along linguistic lines, and the 14 national languages of India?

all those links really dont says anything regarding Delhi being in Punjab. At best it says Delhi has a boundary with punjab.

Delhi was never a part of Punjab. Punjabi rule has extended quite a lot over the last few hundred years - right from NWFP, balochistan, northern sindh, south eastern Afghanistan, southern Kashmir, western Himachal. but Delhi NEVER was part of Punjab in the last 800 years. Neither were delhiites punjabi speakers prior to partition. Right before partition, Delhi was culturally distinctively urdu-speaking UP/lucknowi.

regarding sindh, who give shyt. :)

52

There would be no “role” for India had Pakistan not butchered a million Bengalis out of racial hatred.

India supported Balochs? Read this book by Sherbaz Khan Mazari. It was a rebellion that was against federal domination of state aspirations that was crushed by Bhutto. Tikka Khan had a big role too.

You have got to be kidding me. Pakhtunistan is a dream of Afghan monarchists. Nothing to do with India. Past govts may have provided moral support :wink: but nothing more.

Instead of looking for India to blame for everything, look at your own country.

53

99% of Indians are not aware of a province called Sindh in Pakistan and any separatist activities there. Sindhis are very prosperous community in India and they are happy there. The whole Sindhudesh or Sindhi conference whatever it is brainchild of only two RSS people one L.K.Advani another person R.K.Malkani.

Read about Sindh history by Malkani. It is history of Pakistan thru Hindu eyes. I agree he is totally biased and his view is somewhat distorted. But I am surprised there are many takers for his book in Sindh.

http://www.freesindh.org/sindhstory

Advani has started something called “Sindhu Darshan” in himalayas in Indian Kashmir where he is organizing a Sindhi meet at origin point of Sindhu river.

54

So? What is the connection between dividing states along linguistic lines, and the 14 national languages of India?

Both reinforce the Indian governments policy of laying importance to linguistic affinities rather than ethnic, religious ones. The States borders were adjusted to mirror the linguistic affinities thus laying credence to the initial assertion arguing that naming Sindhi as a national language is nothing but designs on a land that does not fall in India (Sindh). Why else would Sindhi become an official language?

Not to get too off topic, but why is Nepali also an official language?

**all those links really dont says anything regarding Delhi being in Punjab. At best it says Delhi has a boundary with punjab.
Delhi was never a part of Punjab. Punjabi rule has extended quite a lot over the last few hundred years - right from NWFP, balochistan, northern sindh, south eastern Afghanistan, southern Kashmir, western Himachal. **

Do you have selective vision? First off Delhi has boundaries with Haryana, which for all intents and purposes is classified as Punjabi. Secondly, we are not talking about “Punjabi rule” over other people like Kashmiris, Sindhis etc.

**but Delhi NEVER was part of Punjab in the last 800 years. Neither were delhiites punjabi speakers prior to partition. Right before partition, Delhi was culturally distinctively urdu-speaking UP/lucknowi. **

Delhi was largely as a capital or for adminstrative purposes by the Muslim conquers, the Brits simply continued that tradition. Had no importance been given to Delhi by the rulers of Inmdia, it would have been another Punjabi metropolis. So lets get this straight, urdu speaking up/lucknowi folks are Rajputs and Jats? :hehe: I thought so!

regarding sindh, who give shyt. :slight_smile:

Apparently your Indian government does by naming it an official language and still singing it in nationalistic songs. If you dont give a “shyt” then why even respond this message with a Sindhi focus? After all I said that India has designs on ALL of Pakistan.

55

There would be no “role” for India had Pakistan not butchered a million Bengalis out of racial hatred.

So then you suggest a “role” for Pakistan when Sikhs were being slaughtered in '84 because of religion, Kashmiris living in a police state in the 90’s because of Kashmiriyat? Are you justifying an interventionist policy? If so, then lets make your position clear: You don’t object to Pakistan creating an independent Khalistan or Kashmir.

I hate to bring up Kashmir because it is a special and separate case. It is a disputed area and has been since independence. However Pakistani involvement in supporting any OTHER territory in India control is not justified as it infringes on national soverignty. India did infringe upon Pakistani soverignty in '71, that is why it’s actions are condemnable. Unlike Kashmir, the partition of Bengal was not in dispute, East Bengal was accepted by India to be part of Pakistan, so why interfere? I have heard enough of the standard Indian BS on that matter regarding refugees, racial hatred (your point), religious hatred etc…then why didn’t India go to the UN to compel Pakistan to stop it’s misdoings? If Indians are such goody-two shoes policemen of South Asia, then why did they not convince the UN to step in the mess. OH PLEASE, I know the intentions, you know the intentions (except that you lack the courage to say it outright), you all wanted to split Pakistan and making it an International issue would still preserve the integrity of Pakistan. Don’t come here with a holier than thou attitude.

India supported Balochs? Read this book by Sherbaz Khan Mazari. It was a rebellion that was against federal domination of state aspirations that was crushed by Bhutto. Tikka Khan had a big role too.

Did I deny the role Baluch of nationalists? I did say that there are traitorous Pakistani elements (again with the selective reading, is this going to continue?). Why were the Indians funneling arms through the Irais into Baluchistan? Why did the Indians provide assistance to the USSR even up till the 1980s in their plans of annexing Baluchistan? No doubt, the rebellion was there, but India did not have to step in Bangladesh style. Even contemporary Baluchis have realized India’s self serving intentions. Did India really “care” for the well being of Baluchis? Yea right, all you Indians are looking for is a weak independent Baluchistan at your mercy!

You have got to be kidding me. Pakhtunistan is a dream of Afghan monarchists. Nothing to do with India. Past govts may have provided moral support :wink: but nothing more.

Why did Nehru attempt to including NWFP in India? We all know the “heros welcome” he recieved in Sarhad. Why did the Congress induct Bacha Khan and vigiourously support the Red Shirts in their drive for an Independent Pakhtunistan DESPITE the Cabinet Mission plan which had effectively led to the agreement to the creation of Pakistan. Supporting the fragmentation of areas that were to fall in Pakistan, a devious malintentioned goal of Indians. They wanted a weak and destabilized Pakistan, and to this day, the Indian movement to that goal has not desisted.

56

Rifak, thanks for the link..I must say the writings are heavily biased. One thing (and only one thing) that I do agree with, is that the Sindhi Hindus should not have left and those who stayed were not massacred or anything. Rifak, when you say 99% Indians are not aware of the Sindh situation, do you read Indian newspapers? The Times, the Hindu have reported quite extensively in the past regarding the situation in Sindh. Clearly there is awareness atleast in the literate classes.

My thesis on Advani is that he’s extremisim may be in part due to his migration experience that embittered him further.

57

RajputFurry Mian,

Both reinforce the Indian governments policy of laying importance to linguistic affinities rather than ethnic, religious ones.<<

Once again, what is the connection between having states along liguistic lines, and the 14 official languages?

The States borders were adjusted to mirror the linguistic affinities thus laying credence to the initial assertion arguing that naming Sindhi as a national language is nothing but designs on a land that does not fall in India (Sindh). Why else would Sindhi become an official language? <<

What is this connection between language and land? There are 2,800,000 sindhi speakers in India. Enough to warrant its being a national language. Also, there are atleast two more languages among the 14 with no particular state affiliation.

**Do you have selective vision? First off Delhi has boundaries with Haryana, which for all intents and purposes is classified as Punjabi. **<<

So? And Haryana isnt Punjab, its Haryana. People dont speak Punjabi there. How is it Punjab?

Delhi was largely as a capital or for adminstrative purposes by the Muslim conquers, the Brits simply continued that tradition. Had no importance been given to Delhi by the rulers of Inmdia, it would have been another Punjabi metropolis.<<

Bull. It would have been a Rajput stronghold, with Hindi speakers.

So lets get this straight, urdu speaking up/lucknowi folks are Rajputs and Jats? :hehe: I thought so!<<

You think UPites cant be Rajputs? munnay, there are Lucknowi Rajputs, Gujarati Rajputs, and even Bihari Rajputs. And whats this about Rajputs and Jats being Punjabi? Some of them are. Punjabis are more than just Jatts and Rajputs, they wouldnt be more than 60% of the Punjabis. The vast majority of Rajputs arent even Punjabi. Besides, Sindh has tons of Jatts. Does that make those parts of Sindh Punjabi?

Original Delhiites were mostly certainly non-Jatt, and before partition, the population was almost completely what you Punjabis call “UP-bhaiyya”. Go to Karachi and see how many of the migrants from Delhi speak Punjabi. you would find NONE!

If you dont give a “shyt” then why even respond this message with a Sindhi focus? After all I said that India has designs on ALL of Pakistan.<<

I was merely correcting your silly comments regarding the Sindhi language in India. :slight_smile:

58

Queer,

There is a large Nepali speaking population in Darjeeling and North parts of West Bengal and many states of North East like Sikkim. There are many Nepalis all over India. So Nepali is an official language of India. In fact there was a movement by Gurkhas to create a separate state from West Bengali with Nepali as the official language.

Languages in India

Languages recognized by the Indian constitution

  1. Assamese.

  2. Bengali.

  3. Gujarati.

  4. Hindi.

  5. Kannada.

  6. Kashmiri.

  7. Konkani.

  8. Malayalam.

  9. Manipuri.

  10. Marathi.

  11. Nepali.

  12. Oriya.

  13. Punjabi.

  14. Sanskrit.

  15. Sindhi.

  16. Tamil.

  17. Telugu.

  18. Urdu.

59

looks like u r right. let me edit the post. ;)

60

It may look strange to you. Indian textbooks cover very little or almost nil about Pakistan. There is very little people to people contact between two countries. Many Pakistanis atleast watch bollywood movies and get some idea about India whereas reverse is not true. Till I came out of India at age 23 , I never met even one Pakistani in my life !! How do you think we can relate to what is happening in Sindh or Pashtunistan when except few Indian muslims and handful of Sindhi Hindus nobody in India ever get to visit Pakistan or meet Pakistanis…

Even hardcore RSS Sindhis agree that Sindhi muslims treated Hindus well during partition. Hindus in Sindh were dominant in education and business. Sindh’s loss is Indias gain. This guy K.R.Malkani is currently governor of Union territory of Pondicherry. He was BJP vice-president and editor of RSS magazine. He is a major link between leaders in Sindh and Indian Governemnt.

http://pondicherry.nic.in/stategovt/govt/Governor/Governor.htm