You may be right about “brotherhood”. Only Pakistani Muslims give a damn to “Muslim Ummah” as it was chanted all over the country in Gen Zia’s days (perhaps ZA Bhutto’s days too), not any other single country’s Muslims shout as much for “brotherhood”. Look at Arab countries, Bengladesh… May be Indonesian/Malaysian think/dream of “ummah” too, but thats all.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by jeddahchap: *
First of all make sure if Indian Muslims treat Pakistani Muslims as their brothers and sisters, vice-versa. I think thinking on this line will help you get the answer.
Why Indian or Pakistani Muslims? Think, whether all Muslims in our locality have the same brotherly feelings towards one another? Are all of us stick to our Kalimah? Do we treat eachother equally on socio-economic front?----------------------- This is the prime requisites of Ummah-------------------work for it, begin it in ourselves and our surroundings and so on.............
Allah Hafiz
[/QUOTE]
Think it over and respond.
Allah Hafiz
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Changez_like: *
You may be right about "brotherhood". Only Pakistani Muslims give a damn to "Muslim Ummah" as it was chanted all over the country in Gen Zia's days (perhaps ZA Bhutto's days too), not any other single country's Muslims shout as much for "brotherhood". Look at Arab countries, Bengladesh..... May be Indonesian/Malaysian think/dream of "ummah" too, but thats all.
[/QUOTE]
muslim brotherhood is ok but must be subservient to pakistani nationalism...
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by shawaiz: *
muslim brotherhood is ok but must be subservient to pakistani nationalism...
[/QUOTE]
why?
A sense of nationalism is more important for a country than the commonality of religion. Pakistan is a heterogenous country with different ethnic groups and only the commonality of the religion cannot keep Pakistan together. We experienced the secession of Bengal, albeit we were both muslims. Pakistan has its own history and culture which cannot be ignored. Pakistan is a land of many ancient civilisations which give us a stronger sense of unity than Islam. Many ethnic groups are still not fully agreed to accept Urdu as a national language , Sindhis are a good example. I am talking about Urdu because it is a main pillar of the islamisation process of Pakistan. Why Sindhis say it every once in a while, that their culture and language are being ignored. Only the reiteration of Islam and the islamic brotherhood is not going to solve our problems. I am sorry for not being an articulated person but I hope you get an idea what I am talking about.
brotherhood is great when brothers care about one another, when brother 1 cares for brother2, but brother2 not only does not care but undermines brother1, should brother1 not watch for his own interests first? not to say u dont watch out for your brother too, but not at your own expense.
yasser arafat has always been palsy with India, and so was saddam, the irani leadership courted india because they looked at them as an ally against pakistan due to sectarian differences and the political kjabbadi that both played in Afghanistan.
shawaiz, there is not a single sentence in your post to agree.
We experienced the secession of Bengal, albeit we were both muslims.
I hope you have read the history, but apparently you forgot. The only reason we split was “Punjabi”, “Bengali” division. “West Pakistan” where majority was of “Punjabi” wanted to keep the government even though “East Pakistan” which of course was “Bengali/Bihari” majority won the elections. This division was the root cause, only “Islamic brotherhood” could have stopped it, but look what our army did to them. Again, it would be altogether different discussion. If we can’t use Islam to unite, there is nothing else to unite. We can pretend there is no “mohajir”, “sindhi”, “pathan”, but we can’t hide reality. Our past does not allow us to indulge in any sort of “nationalism”.
Pakistan is a land of many ancient civilisations which give us a stronger sense of unity than Islam.
Really? Name one source of “civilisation” which might have potential of giving us a “stronger” sense of unity, please please.
Many ethnic groups are still not fully agreed to accept Urdu as a national language , Sindhis are a good example.
Thats not anything to do with Islam. All it has to do with is “politics” played dirty way. If we are really sincere, I’d abolish all provinces and divide country into “district level” so there is no sense of “nationalism” at that level.
I am talking about Urdu because it is a main pillar of the islamisation process of Pakistan.
You must be kidding, right? Urdu as “main pillar of Islamisation”??? 
It was funny.
**Only the reiteration of Islam and the islamic brotherhood is not going to solve our problems. **
Its true, mere “reiteration” is not gonna do anything, just like US or anyone else keep saying “I’ll give you $10billion” will not do anything unless US actually gives $10billion. Similarly, chanting “Islam”, “Islamic brotherhood” is not any good until you start following Islam.
I hope you have read the history, but apparently you forgot. The only reason we split was “Punjabi”, “Bengali” division. “West Pakistan” where majority was of “Punjabi” wanted to keep the government even though “East Pakistan” which of course was “Bengali/Bihari” majority won the elections. This division was the root cause, only “Islamic brotherhood” could have stopped it, but look what our army did to them. Again, it would be altogether different discussion. If we can’t use Islam to unite, there is nothing else to unite. We can pretend there is no “mohajir”, “sindhi”, “pathan”, but we can’t hide reality. Our past does not allow us to indulge in any sort of “nationalism”.
Changez, you are a hypocrite of the highest order. You decry nationalism yet conveniently blame Punjabis for their alleged nationalism. Who was the CnC? The winner in W.Pakistan (rather the loser for the PM)? Who surrendered to Indian forces in E.Pakistan? All Punjabis right 
The Punjab bashing has gotten too old.
What is this inclusion of Biharis with the Bengalis? Biharis fully supported W. Pakistan. Do you know the root cause of the separation? Bengali nationalism. Ever since the Quaid was heckled for declaring Urdu as the sole language of Pakistan to the shouts of “Joi Bangla” on the streets of Dhaka…Nothing more than Bengali nationalism. If Islam could not hold Pakistan together, what makes you think it will be successful now?
**
Really? Name one source of “civilisation” which might have potential of giving us a “stronger” sense of unity, please please.
**
I’ll give you a few: Kushans, Gandhara, Indus Valley.
**
Thats not anything to do with Islam. All it has to do with is “politics” played dirty way. If we are really sincere, I’d abolish all provinces and divide country into “district level” so there is no sense of “nationalism” at that level.
**
Dividing on a district level will not change anything. A heavily Pashto speaking will have greater affinities and will have soldarity with nearby Pashto speaking districts..It’s a never ending game trying to make up districts only to see them fractured on ethnic lines.
**
Its true, mere “reiteration” is not gonna do anything, just like US or anyone else keep saying “I’ll give you $10billion” will not do anything unless US actually gives $10billion. Similarly, chanting “Islam”, “Islamic brotherhood” is not any good until you start following Islam. **
Now your just rambling. What is following “Islam”? is this Sunni or Shia Islam? Hanafi or Shafi? No country will EVER have EVERY citizen follow ALL the principles of Islam. There will always be crooks, cheats and immoral individuals. Give me one example of a nation following Islam? Don’t even try to say KSA because I just have too much knowledge of their “Islamic” activities.
I've said it before and I'll say it again: when I see the guardians and standard bearers of Islam i.e. the ARABS set an example and put muslim brotherhood ahead of THEIR national interests I will say put Pakistan first every time. Right now some Sheikh is more concerned about buying Leeds United. He was advised by the Sun headlines to 'Sheikh yer money maker'...and he probably will $$$
*Originally posted by RajputFury: *
…
Changez, you are a hypocrite of the highest order. You decry nationalism yet conveniently blame Punjabis for their alleged nationalism.
Ok now teach me. If I hate nationalism and blame nationalism for division of E and W Pakistan, how does that make me hypocrite and that of the highest order? 
Who was the CnC? The winner in W.Pakistan (rather the loser for the PM)? Who surrendered to Indian forces in E.Pakistan? All Punjabis right The Punjab bashing has gotten too old.
May be Punjab bashing is too old, but its because Pakistan split 30 years ago. When I “bash” Punjab, its the politicians I bash, not the public.
Look at this from “Bengla” point of view, surrendering resulted in their benefit.
What is this inclusion of Biharis with the Bengalis? Biharis fully supported W. Pakistan. Do you know the root cause of the separation? Bengali nationalism. Ever since the Quaid was heckled for declaring Urdu as the sole language of Pakistan to the shouts of “Joi Bangla” on the streets of Dhaka…Nothing more than Bengali nationalism. If Islam could not hold Pakistan together, what makes you think it will be successful now?
May be it was wrong to include “Bihari” with “Bengali”. But we all conclude that it was nationalism which split Pakistan in first place, and still responsible for further destruction.
I’ll give you a few: Kushans, Gandhara, Indus Valley.
Now tell me how do these civilisations really help in “uniting” Pakistani public, and on top of that prove that they are more promising than Islam?
Dividing on a district level will not change anything. A heavily Pashto speaking will have greater affinities and will have soldarity with nearby Pashto speaking districts..It’s a never ending game trying to make up districts only to see them fractured on ethnic lines.
Its okay to have “affinities” with like-minded, like-culture, but there wouldn’t be “Punjabi”, “Mohajir”, “Sindhi” in a longer run… 10-15 years down the road these IDs will start to diffuse.
**Now your just rambling. What is following “Islam”? is this Sunni or Shia Islam? Hanafi or Shafi? No country will EVER have EVERY citizen follow ALL the principles of Islam. There will always be crooks, cheats and immoral individuals. Give me one example of a nation following Islam? Don’t even try to say KSA because I just have too much knowledge of their “Islamic” activities. **
Just follow the Islam you think is right, don’t impose your thoughts on others, stop proving that other sects are kafir and bingo you have peace all over.
PS: I don’t take KSA any close to “ideal Islamic country” 
Pakistani culture...civilization...language.....B.S!!!!
We have no common culture or language or civilization.
Islam is what makes us one! I am amazed at how somebody said that E-Pakistan broke because of.... You know why it broke away? Because we did not follow Islam!! Simple and straightforward! We were too busy calling ourselves, sindhis, punjabis and Bengalis. We are one because we are Muslims. Even a child would understand that.
Why does Pakistan talk so much about Ummah? Because we are right in doing so!!! We have understood this aspect of Islam better. Its a matter of our survival. If we don't talk of brotherhood of Muslims, than in Pakistan we are 4 nations or maybe even more.
Be realistic, who in Pakistan (the common man) knows about the Indus valley, the Kushans....etc? Yes we had these civilizations but who cares about them today. They cannot be called a uniting factor.
And enough of this Punjabi Sindhi, Bengali debate. We are Muslims first and anything later.
You are contradicting yourself:
First your say:
*
This division was the root cause, only "Islamic brotherhood" could have stopped it, but look what our army did to them. Again, it would be altogether different discussion. If we can't use Islam to unite, there is nothing else to unite. *
then you say:
*
We can pretend there is no "mohajir", "sindhi", "pathan", but we can't hide reality. Our past does not allow us to indulge in any sort of "nationalism".
*
You can't have it both ways. If you're a staunch believer in the islamic brotherhood then ethnicity should not be a matter to you because for the believer of islamic brotherhood everything that counts is to be a muslim, nothing else.
*
We can pretend there is no "mohajir", "sindhi", "pathan", but we can't hide reality. Our past does not allow us to indulge in any sort of "nationalism".
*
I am also saying the same thing. Pakistan is a multi-ethnic society, Sindhis, Pakhtoons, Panjabis etc are living here. They have their own languages and customs which cannot be ignored. They have also many things in common, like their many millenniums old history, dress, ethics and religion as well. All these things together give them more sense of unity than only Islam.
As anyone who knows Pakistan will observe, this is true for most middle-class people in the Punjab. They believe that urdu, and the values which go with urban Mughal culture (the culture of the urdu-speaking élite), are superior to punjabi and rural values. However, in the
N.W.F.P., Sindh and tribal Baluchistan people are proud of their indigenous cultures. The language movements in various parts of Pakistan—including Hindko, Siraiki, Punjabi, Balochi and other languages—are trying to make urban urdu-using people take pride in the indigenous languages and cultures (Rahman 1996). In short then, the policy of favoring Urdu explicitly has devalued the other indigenous languages of Pakistan while English, about which more will be said later, has devalued all Pakistani languages.
Urdu, then, is very much at the center of three highly volatile issues in Pakistani politics: ethnicity, militant Islam and class conflict. The state promotes Urdu in order to counter ethnicity, but this has two contradictory effects: first, it tends to strengthen ethnic resistance because it keeps the grievance about suppressing ethnic languages alive; second, it tends to strengthen the religious right because Urdu is associated with, and is used by, the religious right in Pakistan. But the religious right not only represents religion, it also represents the class-wise distribution of power (and the resources which are a consequence of that power). Over the years the poor and powerless masses of Pakistan, disillusioned by both the ruling centrist establishment and the splintered left, have supported
the forces of ethnic nationalism and religious revivalism. Indeed, in the most populous province of the Punjab as well as in the N.W.F.P., a large number of young militant madrasa students are adopting the politics of the militant religious right because they feel they have been treated unjustly. Individuals in the upper echelons of the liberals and the leftists, who should have favored Urdu and the indigenous languages of the people, have generally favored English. While this keeps the religious lobby at bay for the present, it also generates an atmosphere which could lead to a future struggle for power. The masses, who are deprived of the top-level jobs for which English is required, of the respect which comes
from being highly-educated, of their rights and of power, may rise up in revolt to wrest control from the hands of the English-using élite! This is a nightmare the leadership of Pakistan prefers not to contemplate, although much of the indignation over the Westernized lifestyle of the élite, couched in the idiom of religion, is really an expression of the anger of
the dispossessed. Since Urdu (vis-à-vis English) is one of the symbols of the dispossessed in most of the urban centers of the country, it is intimately connected with class politics as well as ethnic politics in Pakistan.
Belief in Islamic brotherhood is not something of our choice. It is our religious duty. See the other Muslim countries, they do not have this basic concept of Islamic brotherhood strong. Arabs are lost in Arab nationalism, Turks in their own nationalism. So what is the result. Most of the Muslim countries are the most economically deprived, and disrespected in the world. Only Pakisatn seems to be a ray of hope. In fact the only nuclear super power and strongest defence amongst the Muslim countries.
Ummah concept is not invented by us, it is in the Quran. As part of being a true Muslim, we have to believe on it. If other Muslims are not strong about it, than it is our duty to teach them, instead of abondoning it like them.
How do you expect to face enemies in the world? We Muslims are gradually getting re occupied by the Western powers. How do we tackle this? Through petty nationalisms or through Muslim unity? It is a matter of our survival. I know it seem like a dream, but Pakistan was also a dream once.
**Originally posted by shawaiz: *
You are contradicting yourself:
....
You can't have it both ways. If you're a staunch believer in the islamic brotherhood then ethnicity should not be a matter to you because for the believer of islamic brotherhood everything that counts is to be a muslim, nothing else.*
shawaiz, I am a pro-Ummah. If I acknowledge existence of nationalism, I doesn't mean that I approve of it, or I am okay with it. I condemn it. I only showed you what were the causes of our downfall. Why E and W Pakistan split, was a "nationalism" issue, if we had been good Muslim we wouldn't have to see that day.
*...They have also many things in common, like their many millenniums old history, dress, ethics and religion as well. All these things together give them more sense of unity than only Islam. *
I don't have a problem with existence of old traditions, history. The only thing is what takes priority, your "nationalism" or "Islamic brotherhood". You have mentioned earlier that "nationalism" should come first, thats something I don't agree with.
Your paragraphs here and the link provided are not coherent. One speaks of Urdu in one context, the other in different. I agree that reason Urdu was promoted was for the unity of the country so local languages become secondary and if a Bengali travels in Punjab or NWFP he should be able to communicate with local population. It gives you a common ground, a source of communication.
It doesn’t have anything to do with “Islamisation”.
And it is these same Sikh brothers that you fought in 45, 65, and 71. How long will it take Punjabis to wake up and stop occupying Pakistan as their kingdom?
and my last post got deleted because I showed you mirror. I too revise it to suit more audiences 
Ethnic identities dissolve with time. Was there a punjabi 300 years ago? a Bengali 200 years ago? You can take your Punjabi identity and keep it in your pocket or push it into your “pagggar” as YOUR Sikh brothers do.
What is Punjab Zindabad? You may get any kind of relationship with ChannMahi, but don’t say that two parts of Punjab are same and alike.
Islam is what is supposed to unite all Muslims. If you prefer your regional friends, go stick with them.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Changez_like: *
Ethnic identities dissolve with time. Was there a punjabi 300 years ago? a Bengali 200 years ago?
[/QUOTE]
hahahaha this is the most hillarious comment I ever read on ghupshup...
Be it Punjabis , Sindhis or urdu all are part of Pakistan.
And Pakistan is GateWay of Islam. What happened in 1970's,
who did what. We Pakistanis Muslims must not be bothered.
The thing that we need to agree on that OUR IDENTITY
IS ISLAM.
Look at two nation theory. It was the basis of Pakistan.
It says that Muslims are separate nation. Why because their
practices, culture and beliefs are different than Hindu Majority.
So Pakistani Muslims opted for Pakistan. Now if anybody says
that Pakistan should be secular State has clearly not studied history.
And as for Bangladesh,it is a Muslim majority State. And they hate
Hindu India more than Pakistanis. When ever there is cricket match
they cheer for Pakistanis. And yes they even prayed that Pakistan should reply to Indian N tests in 1998.
It shows that only thing that ties us together is Islam.