Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
Please don't bring the "Muslims needed a country" argument. There are more Muslims in India than Pakistan. Churchill's imperialist motives, and Gandhi's oblivious mysticism, prevented any reconciliation between Jinnah and Nehru.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
The issue is not that simple.
"In April 1946 Quaid-i-Azam called the Convention of all those persons, who had been elected members of the provincial and central legislatures on Muslim League ticket at Delhi. More than five hundred members had attended that Convention.
Concentrating on the Pakistan problem and arguing for its establishment, Quaid-i-Azam made his speech to forecast dire consequences for the Muslims of India under the Hindu majority government after the British. Hussain Shaheed Suharwardy moved the main resolution, which demanded “a sovereign independent state, comprising Bengal and Assam in the northeast zone and the Punjab, the N.W.F.P., Sindh and Baluchistan in the northwest zone”. It affirmed that “the Muslim nation will never submit to any constitution for united India and will never participate in any single constitution-making machinery set up for the purpose”.
Before the Convention concluded, each and every member of the Central and Provincial Assemblies solemnly took the following oath:
**“I do hereby solemnly declare my firm conviction that the safety and security, the salvation and destiny of the Muslim nation inhabiting the Sub-continent of India lie only in the achievement of Pakistan, which is the only equitable, honorable and just solution of the constitutional problem and which will bring peace, freedom and prosperity to the various nationalities and communities of this great sub-continent. I most solemnly affirm that I shall willingly and unflinchingly carry out all the directions & instructions, which may be issued by the All-India Muslim League in pursuance of any movement that, may be launched by it for the attainment of the cherished national goal of Pakistan. Believing as I do in the righteousness and the justice of my cause, I pledge to undergo any danger, trial or sacrifice, which may be demanded of me”.
**
Story of Pakistan | Muslim League Legislator
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
Please don't bring the "Muslims needed a country" argument. There are more Muslims in India than Pakistan. Churchill's imperialist motives, and Gandhi's oblivious mysticism, prevented any reconciliation between Jinnah and Nehru.
in that case we would have been ended up with one more Nigeria:D
@Shamraz Allah ki nafarmani =Mullah ki nafarmani?
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
Pakistan was created because of the fear that POLITICAL rights of Muslim minority might be usurped by Hindu majority India. India and Pakistan were not supposed to be 'enemy' countries to begin with. It was the mass killings and plunder during migration ( primarily because of idiotic border lines and lack of planning by British and local politicians) that bred hatred.
Even if we accept that Pakistan was supposed to be an Islamic state, we didn't move in that direction either. Many western governments are more 'Islamic' in terms of providing security of life and property to citizens, justice, education and medical care and protection to minorities. I don't think anyone would have a problem if such 'Islamic' government is installed in Pakistan. For us, 'Islamic' has mainly been prayers, fasting, clothing and superficial expressions of piety.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
Please don't bring the "Muslims needed a country" argument. There are more Muslims in India than Pakistan. Churchill's imperialist motives, and Gandhi's oblivious mysticism, prevented any reconciliation between Jinnah and Nehru.
^^ yeah we should go to Pakistan was accident argument?
65 years down the road, we have done almost nothing for the country but every year did not forget to bring the debate that Pakistan was secular or muslim...
If Secular Pakistan was needed, then India was a secular country, why to come out of that??? could have been part of Indian federation !!! but this simple notion is so hard for the so-called secularist to understand that they will go to every extent to negate it... but fact remains there...
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
^^ yeah we should go to Pakistan was accident argument?
65 years down the road, we have done almost nothing for the country but every year did not forget to bring the debate that Pakistan was secular or muslim...
If Secular Pakistan was needed, then India was a secular country, why to come out of that??? could have been part of Indian federation !!! but this simple notion is so hard for the so-called secularist to understand that they will go to every extent to negate it... but fact remains there...
Your point is that politics don't make sense? Welcome to the real world. It's the reason that America, despite it's significant advantage, continues to squander it's wealth. It's the same reason a secular Pakistan dumbfounds the politically naive, and the religiously fanatic.
1) Jinnah was a politician. He intended to leverage the threat of Pakistan to achieve **disproportionate **representation for Muslims. This was an unreasonable goal. His intentions were to preserve Muslim rights, but in a secular country, religious government seats are not needed, as evidenced by India today.
2) Churchill and the West were striving for animosity between India and Pakistan. I've read in several books that relations between Muslim and Hindus, while not the best, were not nearly as bad as after the arrival of the British, and divide-and-rule politics. A unified Pakistan-India would have had tremendous cultural ties to the Arab world, which the Europeans had carved out for themselves. God forbid those brown people start getting organized. So in short, the meddling of the West also led to a poor decision, aka the partition.
What you fail to realize is that a "Muslim" Pakistan was the last thing Jinnah wanted. He preferred a secular Pakistan, or a unified Pakistan-India with appropriate rights for Muslims. Our current situation is because of Jinnah's "failures" as a politician, and the West's continued fanning of extreme sects of Islam. This is well documented. The money only flowed to the violent sects in Pakistan, sects that could be controlled. The worst thing we ever did was accept foreign aid for fear of an Indian attack.
You might say then, what's wrong with a theocracy? Simple, it's too easy to fanaticize and it will eventually alienate the minority. In America, people defended the secular, legal right to build a "mosque" (actually a community center) near ground zero, whereas in Pakistan a Christian politician was killed for speaking out against Blasphemy Laws. Most people are not advocating violence, but your conservative views serve to increase the influence of the extremists. That's the reason Europe is becoming more receptive to Islamophobic/xenophobic political parties; average people like you and I are becoming more conservative, so the real nut jobs are coming out of the woods.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
^^ My point is simple,
leave this debate of secular or religious Pakistan and move your ass and do something constructive, we already have enough divisions within the country and we do not want additions to it... t
the thing Pakistan needs is sensibility, by the people.... and things you are trying to put here or discuss are opposite to it..
And what is wrong with theocracy, in the last 5000 year of known history of man-kind, democracy is just few hundred years old, and in case of Pakistan what democracy has achieved???? apart from killing, creating group who gets into power by using force and hijack a complete city, i.e. Mafia in disguise of political party or some land-lords getting together making a party to protect their own interest or some industrialists getting in politics to protect their vest interest????
And let me tell you one more thing, Pakistan is not USA and USA is not Pakistan... lets end it here... but if you still want to continue with your secular America Mahan thing, it is your choice
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
If Secular Pakistan was needed, then India was a secular country, why to come out of that??? could have been part of Indian federation !!! but this simple notion is so hard for the so-called secularist to understand that they will go to every extent to negate it... but fact remains there...
One of the reason why Pakistan is in such mess b/c of revisionist history & revisionist historians thy being prime example here. Surely, an English educated Ismaili lawyer did not want to create Sunni/Whahabi theocracy on the subcontinent. He wanted to create Islamic democratic state where all can co-exist. That is something that escapes revisionists like yourself.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
So, what you're saying that we should follow mullahs now & their ignorant ways? Perhaps we should all join Taliban? Or become suicidal terrorists?
Btw, separation of religion and state is prerequisites for any nation to succeed in modern world.
Seriously stop jumping to conclussions my posts did not mention anything about Mullahs... even Mr Jinnah would struggle to stem the simplest of problems today, namely corruption and the sheer scale of disunity among people... if we take his three most famous words and analyse them alone Pakistan is in no state for a quick fix.
As for seperation of Religion and State, I dont think personally there is any country in existance that has complete seperation of those things in reality even the USA has its idiots to simply point fingers at one factor being a problem is niave and foolish at best... our collapse is due to many factors, now please get this taliban fixation out of your head... its a very bad obsession you have.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
Why does being religious equate to joining Taliban or become suicidal terrorists? Is that what religion means to you? You can pick or chose, you can pick "worldly success" or "success in both". BTW, by picking "religion" I am neither picking Talibanic ideals nor the ones promoted by likes of Fazlu or Qadris.
Captain1, I could careless what someone believes or not. My point was separation of state & religion that is needed for modern functioning state. Look at west. They fought for 100s of years of wars in Europe & since they separated church and state & they are light years ahead of Muslim world.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
Mullahs hardly ever ruled Pakistan.
Its the non-Mullahs and there parties who brought so much troubles to Pakistan!
Forgotten Zia, have we. The country is still reeling from his legacy.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
As for seperation of Religion and State, I dont think personally there is any country in existance that has complete seperation of those things in reality even the USA has its idiots to simply point fingers at one factor being a problem is niave and foolish at best... our collapse is due to many factors, now please get this taliban fixation out of your head... its a very bad obsession you have.
False dilemma. It's not an all or nothing scenario. Most do not call for an absolute separation of religion and state, nor is Pakistani society a good candidate for it. Referencing extreme secular models is often an excuse to avoid addressing the fact that the role of religion needs to be modified in the public sphere. It'll be progress if we can start by addressing state sanctioned bigotry and misogyny in the name of Islam. Repealing and/or amending the blasphemy law is necessary. The Hudood Ordinances are a perfect example of why Shariah needs to be reigned in and replaced with civil law.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
Captain1, I could careless what someone believes or not. My point was separation of state & religion that is needed for modern functioning state. Look at west. They fought for 100s of years of wars in Europe & since they separated church and state & they are light years ahead of Muslim world.
we were light years ahead of them for some time when we did not have separation of "state and church", why do you not count that part?
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
Zia was not a mullah. 
As for the all or nothing Scenario you have a valid point but judging by the nature of some posters I am afriad it is being hijacked by many. I do agree though a compromise of sorts is not a bad idea but to reach it we need more eductation… all I see is biggots on all sides.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
I have read this thread in details and this is not new, although it is relatively new if we consider the era of Musharraf just passed by.
This conspiracy started in the days of Musharraf because he wanted to implement his ideas of Secularism in Pakistan, much more like the model of Turkey and Turkey of Ata Turk, to be precise, who happens to be his ideal as admitted by him in his book “In the line of Fire.”
He only created this debate in his times on media and we were all fooled. Pakistan now has a clear divide based on this one, single, sole speech of Jinnah, which never warranted separation of state and religion to begin with. What Jinnah has said is the very essence of Islamic state. There is nothing special about it to call it a declaration of secular state.
Have we forgotten his so many speeches about Islam being the part of State’s matter? His just single speech about minoroties is good enough to call him a secularist, even though that’s the teaching of the religion too? Funny.
Now, even if we assume, Jinnah wanted s secular Pakistan based on this speech, which was delivered before the creation of Pakistan, what are you going to do his change of mind in later days especially his last days? 
Let me quote from his one of the last speeches:
Source: State Bank of Pakistan
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
we were light years ahead of them for some time when we did not have separation of "state and church", why do you not count that part?
This is far too loaded a topic but that's false. Rome dominated the world on a scale far beyond the Caliphates. Part of the Islamic Empires' successes are based on their initial political unity (which is a key element), as well as being at the crossroads of knowledge from India and Rome/Greece. Even their successes were marginal compared to the divide between the West and the rest of the world today, a key element of which is escaping religious political institutions.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
^^ My point is simple,
leave this debate of secular or religious Pakistan and move your ass and do something constructive, we already have enough divisions within the country and we do not want additions to it... t
the thing Pakistan needs is sensibility, by the people.... and things you are trying to put here or discuss are opposite to it..
And what is wrong with theocracy, in the last 5000 year of known history of man-kind, democracy is just few hundred years old, and in case of Pakistan what democracy has achieved???? apart from killing, creating group who gets into power by using force and hijack a complete city, i.e. Mafia in disguise of political party or some land-lords getting together making a party to protect their own interest or some industrialists getting in politics to protect their vest interest????
And let me tell you one more thing, Pakistan is not USA and USA is not Pakistan... lets end it here... but if you still want to continue with your secular America Mahan thing, it is your choice
Considering the rise of conservative Islam, I think this debate is very relevant. Once religious minorities are not persecuted, then you can make your claims. Until then, all you are is a catalyst for the extremists. Without the tacit approval of you and your ilk, those extremists would be marginalized by society. And I referenced America because of its failures, not to glorify it.
Instead of getting off topic, please address the specific points in my previous post.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
... Jinnah realized but too late , that he has been outflanked by the communal bigots , that speech was his last feeble attempt on damage control ....and according to a discussion with a journalist friend of mine , .. it was Mian Iftakharuddin who encouraged Jinnah to wrestle himself out of it ...
Jinnah being a constitutional person , choose to then give this speech as a policy speech , unfortunately his untimely death did not allowed him the full damage control ..
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
Please don't bring the "Muslims needed a country" argument. There are more Muslims in India than Pakistan. Churchill's imperialist motives, and Gandhi's oblivious mysticism, prevented any reconciliation between Jinnah and Nehru.
Not relevant to the topic but the bold bit is actually not true, in the past yes but not today.
Re: Secular Pakistan: ‘Pakistanis should know Quaid’s Aug 11 speech by heart’
the first ever Curfew in Pakistan was imposed in Karachi in Jan 48 , when over a 1000 non muslims were killed , ..and when Khoro objected on this communal violence , he was chided by none less the NawabZada Sahib himself …who said… " Muslims are being killed in india and you are concerned with the non-muslims of karachi … " .
PS : sorry a correction , the first ever curfew in pakistan was imposed on 4 Sep 47 and in Nawabshah not Karachi , but yes … in Jan 48 , it also started with Sikhs being killed in Guru Mander area …
this is as per Haider Nizmani’s sahibs article in the express tribune …
Who orchestrated the exodus of Sindhi Hindus after Partition? – The Express Tribune