Why can't you criticise

Re: Why can’t you criticise

**I think the freedom to educate yourself and form your OWN opinions - no matter what they are - is a basic human right. A right the evil Americans grant their people…lol.

Amreeki’s don’t ban books, education, information, etc. Its accessible.**

Where is the argument here? How can you compare two countries when Pakistan is nowhere as rich as or has the literacy rate as high as America? Everyone in Pakistan who have access to a computer also have all the resources available to them and can do research and form their opinion, who is stopping them?

And since when do American’s don’t ban books, go to any high school or middle school and you’ll see a list of books that are banned for one reason or another. Since I am currently taking Native American class in college, it really opens your eyes regarding all the propaganda that is going on in K-12 education. I don’t remember learning about any criticism against founding fathers of America in elementary-high school.

The point is, glorifying the founding fathers etc. is part of every nation’s agenda so please don’t make this Pakistan vs. rest of the world issue.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

I agree with you! But simply responding to the earlier posts about how Amreeka is somehow to blame in all of this as well.

P.S. - Books are usually banned for violence, inappropriate language, etc. Not the way I Am Malala is banned in Malaysia or in private schools in Pakistan.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

Of course you can criticise “Mr Jinnah”. He was a burger, he was well off, he lived in a pretty house, he had servants, he wore custom made stylish suits from England while poor old Gandhi wore no clothes. He was arrogant, the Brits always complained about him never smiling and shaking hands. And above all, he had three dogs, now Western wannabe who had three dogs as pet and shared sofa with them, did not deserve to become the leader of Muslim country. Just ask Khawaja Saad Rafique of Nawaz League, he’s a very important person in Pakistan. It is unfair that I actually don’t see people moaning about all that - why does Jinnah get a special treatment in Pakistan?

Anyway. Back to serious point. I’m one of those people that believe that Urdu as a *national *language did not prove to be an entirely successful experiment. Now that’s not due to Jinnah, I don’t feel ‘right’ about criticising him when I put all the emotions aside. By the time, the debate on Urdu language became a separatist campaign, Pakistan was far from being the shadow of the country, Jinnah had envisioned. The language debate was just the tip of iceberg. The issue was an offshoot of deep economic inequalities and political power struggle that became the reason for communities falling apart and growing hostile.

But why should I criticise Jinnah? Urdu wasn’t his language. He could barely speak the language fluently himself. It wasn’t even the most popular language amongst the people who migrated from India. But Pakistan was a new country, it needed a binding medium to unit all these people together, and make them an inclusive group, and Urdu as a lingua franca provided that opportunity. It was a good decision at that time. It made sense in 1947 to have it as a *national *language, but perhaps in 2014, you can have an argument that should’ve been declared an official language where you only speak the language if you need to, and it did not define your national identity and patriotism. I say this because I do not appreciate the past practice that just to maintain the supremacy of Urdu other languages and dialects of Pakistan were dismissed and downgraded, and that was not done by Jinnah! I’m pretty sure had he lived longer, he would’ve promoted the sanctity of locals languages as well.

But having said, Pakistan’s real tragedy is that Jinnah died soon after the making of Pakistan. In that one year that he lived, he was becoming increasingly ill. Had he lived for another ten years, or even five years, I have no doubt in mind that he would’ve penned down a lot of reforms, and made a lot of changes to his original plans. Pakistan was a different country back then, and the founding fathers and the general population were a lot smarter, back in the day, constitution or any kind Magna Carta was not considered a final word of God and subject to no change and criticism, like it is today.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

Yes, German was almost the chosen language of Israel and Russian was runner up. So when most of the settlers were from Europe, why did they choose Hebrew?

The place was colonised by Britain, why didn’t they just stick to English, in fact?

Re: Why can’t you criticise

:no:

No matter what you have idea to back up, two nation theory was implemented and brought a whole lot of benefit to Muslims of subcontinent.

Yes lots of people died sadly and should not have been, but the division of subcontinent had to be the best solution based on the political environment at that time.

It is a long debate with many different aspects: Bottom line is that making Pakistan was still the best option.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

then why double the amount of Muslims decided to stay back in india if the theory was so vital for muslims?

Re: Why can’t you criticise

On topic:

Founding fathers CAN be criticized but room for respect needs to be left open.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

Now that I agree.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

Knowing at least one of those like Mr. KKF, those who migrated were much better. J/K.

Joke aside:

You are counting all Muslims who were also living in states which were Muslims like in Kashmir and Hyderabad.

History will tell you those Muslims thought they were not being affected by division and will not be. But they indeed did.

Kashmir suffered and Hyderabad was taken over later.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

But not founding brothers, sisters, mothers, aunts and uncles.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

quid-e-azam per woh aytraaz keray jis nay muslmano ya pakistan k ley 1 % bhi koi qurbaani dee ho..ajj kal k pakistani to apna moun band rakhain ..jin k damaghoon per aghyaar say maro’ob honay ki cherhbee cherh chukee hai

ajj kal fashion hay k kisi bare shakhsiyat ko pakro or us per tanqeed ker k apnae zahanat k jhanday gaaroo

muhibeen-e-watan ko sirf ik bat samjhnay ki zaroorat hay jub app ka fareeqe mukhalif app k mulk mazhab her cheez per nazrain gaarhay baithay hain k kis kis terah in ko kamzorion ko highlight ker in ko kharab ter dikhaya jayee

aysay mahool main bajaye yeh k app apnay logoon ko defend kerain ..app khud garhay khod khod ker duniya ko bata rahay hain k hamara yeh ghalat hay woh ghalat hai..

baray faislay ya ijtmaai faislay hamesha waqt or mahool k munasib hotay hain .. na app us maahol main thay na app us waqt main thay app kis terah tanqeed ker saktay hain …

Re: Why can’t you criticise

You mean Muslims in Pakistan. What about the Muslims that were left behind in India? Don’t give me the BS that they should have migrated to Pakistan, coz it is not always feasible; for eg. Muslims in parts of India like Hyderabad, Gulbarga, Malabar, Assam etc. If you want to speak for yourself, your family, your mohalla etc, go ahead and do it. But don’t try to speak for all the Muslims in the subcontinent as if you know and pretend to care. Coz the subcontinent includes those muslims that were discriminated/harassed in the places I mentioned above and also the ones in Srilanka ( where LTTE tried to ‘eliminate’ them ) . For all of them partition just weakened them and they lost all clout because of it.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

P_G, pehli baat tou yeah ke Jinnah sahab, ya koi aur leader, allah ke rasool nahi thay, aap aur mere jese insan thay, jin se ghalti ho sakti thee, aur hui bhi. Doosri baat yeak ke agar kisi shaks ke faisialay se aanay wali naslain mutassir ho sakti hain, tou anay wali naslon ko haq hai ke oos faislay ko discuss karain. Agar apnay ooper musallat kye hoai fasilay ko challenge kerna fashion hai, tou phir fashion hee sahi.

Akhri baat yeah ke kabootar kee tarha aanakhain band ker leney se haqeeqat tabdeel nahi ho jaati. JO baat aap apne logon ko manaa kerte hain discuss kerne se, woh tou poori dunyaa ko maloom hai. Thareekh bohut bari adaalat hai. Khud hee sahi ghalat ka faislaa ker deti hai. Oosay hamaari aap kee sifarish yaa himaayat kee zarrorat nahi hoti

Re: Why can’t you criticise

Why do you hate Gandhi?

Re: Why can’t you criticise

app ki pehlee bat ka jawab yeh h k mainy yeh nahi kaha k un say ghalati nahi ho saktee …mainy sirf inta arz kia k app jis personality per tanqeed kernay ko bohat zarore samjh rahay hain pehlay us k or apnay martabay or qabiliyat or un ki mehnat un k khuloos ko daikhain ..

.or bilkul ghalat woh hum jaysay nahi thay agar hum jaiysay hotay …hamare terah he hath per hath dharay baithay rehtay or sirf gillay shikway kertay

anay wale nasal ko nuqsan pohncha hay? …is say bara koi joke nahi..jub anay walee nasal apne tarjeehat badal chukee un ko Na islami mumlikat ki zaroorat rahe na islaami azadi ki to u r right woh to zaroor he mutaasir ho gee …

lakin un baycharoon ko ki pata tha k anay wale nasal ko Ghulami ki amarat manzoor the lakin azadi ki ghurbat gawara nahi

kabooter ki terah ankhain band kerna ? TLK yeh woh hikamat-e-amlee hai jo islami tareekh mai mustaykam hai… ..

mainy nahi daikha kisi ko apnay ghar ki kharabian pata hoon or phir us nay un ko is ley discuss kerna shuroo ker dia k dunia ko to pata he hai…

tareekh jo bhi kahay.. lakin , app woh kahain jo app k mulk app k mazhab or app kay muhsneen ka app per haq hai

app apnay amal kay zimm e daar hain ..tareekh likhnay waloon k tajzeye ki nahi !

Re: Why can’t you criticise

Don’t fight fate and destiny’s child.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

BCC me

Re: Why can’t you criticise

Aqeedat apni jagah, lekin haqeeqat ka bhi apna martabaa hai :frowning:

Re: Why can’t you criticise

I criticize the above post for its incomprehensible urdu.

Re: Why can’t you criticise

My question : Is it distorted history that lead to such attitude or it is the attitude which lead to distorted history?