America is a Federation Pakistan is Not
Posted on 14. Aug, 2010 by Naveed Tajammal in Opinion
Editor’s Note: All colonial powers in general and the British in particular left many seeds of discord in their colonial domains that created a wedge between the people so that it could allow them to exercise their remote control over the region. Like there never was any Afghanistan but it was created to provide a buffer between British India and the Czarist Russia. Within this buffer, another buffer the present day FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) was also created. Kashmir was also delinked from Indus Basin and given a new status. At the time of departure from India, under British India Act of 1935 many states like Punjab, Bengal etc. were divided so that area never sees peace. This act is still in vogue that is eating into our national fabric like moth.
By Naveed Tajammal
There is an increased pressure to accept Pakistan as a federation for which it is being linked and governed by Government of India Act 1935 of British India, an Act. This Act was tailor made for the British as per their own geopolitical requirements in relation, to an empire where the sun never set, or the rule of the Union Jack. We as a nation, have to see our past divorced from the past that the British created and thrust upon us by creating new geographic entities that never existed before. This was a result of the British Imperialist Forward Policies, spanning part of the 18th and the whole of 19th century, when the British had started their annexations in Indus Basin (now known as Pakistan) in pursuance of, their own interest, to check the emerging threats of various pivotal powers of the 19th and early 20th century.
When the British finally left, they left behind the proverbial, Pandora's box with its ‘Lid’ open, but this particular Pandora's box was filled with demons created by the British and their identities established, as per the job requirements, having rewritten our records, and having given us a spin like a top, they departed! Yet we labor, learning a script alien to us, a language alien to us, and for to write to express ourselves, we resort to a form of writing, not even remotely associated with us, a result of a little over a hundred years of despotic rule on us. Our indigenous educational system was destroyed, a generation gap created in the 19th century, as well as 20th century by introduction of this English Language. With its literature, based on alien cultures and histories tailor made for certain needs, now established, as dogmas.
In a hundred years, come three generations, add another 60 years, you end up with five generations. Then try taking on to yourself to seek the truth, wrapped in a bundle of lies, the unwrapping takes its own time, but, if the intentions are honorable and the manner sincere, you can even today hit the bull's eye, and undo the damage which our old masters have done.
Of the former, two major British colonies in North America and Australia, both later became federations, we have to see the root of their creations and the races which decided to cross the stormy Atlantic Ocean fleeing prosecution of religious nature in their original abodes, and a feudal system despotic in all aspects of life, yet portrayed on us as the most harmless one. Taking USA as a case study of the original, thirteen colonies which formed the nucleus of a state, now called USA, the history is not very old, but of a recent past ,it's independence almost coinciding with the, influx of Sikh inroads in our central regions, of the Indus Basin.. If we dwell in the past records we see that,. it was Newfoundland ,the most ancient of Britain's colonial possession discovered by John Cabot in 1497. By 1504 fishermen of Normandy, Britannia and Basque provinces were engaged here, by 1517, forty sail ships of Portuguese, French and Spaniards were involved in the business of cod fishery. By 1578, four hundred vessels were engaged in fish business. But the British had only fifty out of the total quoted. Sir Humphrey Gilbert with letters from Queen Elizabeth landed at St John's in 1583 and took possession of the country in the Queen's name. But soon after, Gilbert was drowned and the whole maneuver failed. The other nations mentioned however maintained their businesses in these lands.
In 1606, James I, of England formed two companies by a single charter. To one, the London Company he granted, the North American East Coast between 34 degree and 38 degree north, and to the other, the Plymouth Company, whose membership was in West of England, he granted the coast between 41 degree and 45 degree North latitude. The intervening coast between the latitudes 38 degree and 41 degree north or between Rappahannock and Hudson River was to be common to both. The later colonists, had asked the Crown to declare that, their successor will be free persons and shall enjoy all liberties, franchises and immunities of free denizens, as enjoyed by all Born within the realm of England. The reason for this request was as quite a lot of these settlers were convicts being sent as penal settlers.
The London Company first sent the shipload under Christopher Newport and it landed near a River on 13th May 1607, in the present State of Virginia, a town was built called, James Town named after the King. Soon other waves of colonists came persecuted by the English Church; others came to Plymouth (Massachusetts) in 1620. In 1632, came up the Colony of Maryland, the land given to Lord Baltimore. In 1663, the South of present State of Virginia was cut off and called, Carolina, later they became the States of North & South Carolina in 1729. And that of Georgia in 1732. Hence five distinct colonies became states out of the London Company's grant ,the sixth was the Massachusetts by the Plymouth Company. Besides these, Connecticut was next(1662) and Rhode Island came after. The New Hampshire and the next to follow. The other four colonies and later states were between the London and Plymouth Companies.
Meanwhile, the Spaniards had taken over the South of North America and the French moved to it's North. The reason being, the religious differences with the Spaniards. Besides these nations, the Dutch also came in 1609. They had sent Henry Hudson an Englishman, to explore the central region of grant of James First. The Dutch had set up a trading post at, "Manhadoes" (the present city of New York) and a government under the Dutch West India Company was organized, here in 1621, named New Nether land and the town at the mouth of Hudson River, "New Amsterdam". The next nation was Sweden, who established a colony at Delaware Bay in 1638 but the Dutch took it over in 1655.
By the time of reformation in religious matters in England, the northern and southern English colonies had started looking at these in between colonies as an annoyance and danger. England and Holland went to war in 1664, the English won and took over New Amsterdam and the whole of the Dutch central region. The king of England, awarded this, to his brother, the Duke of York. So New Amsterdam became the State of New York. The Duke of York sold out a part of these lands to Berkley and Cartwright and thus, New Jersey was the result. In 1681, the Great Parallelogram, west of New Jersey was granted to a , Mr. William Penn and this became Pennsylvania. Soon after, Mr Penn bought some more land from the Duke of York which became the State of Delaware. The Quakers, a sect of Christians, found refuge here. Soon after, every language of Europe could be found in the subsequent USA. The French, had moved to Mississippi by 1702, under D'iberville, New Orleans was thus founded as was the city of Mobile. The land between Mississippi and Saint Lawrence was then called New France, however by 1750, the British numbered a million and a quarter as opposed to the French who were only a hundred thousand in America then.
The struggle from England was started by these states, being rooted in, the Stamp Act of 1765 and the revenue which was to be raised for the Crown from it. Then came the Tea Tax of 1770, the Boston Port Act of 1774 and the Quebec Act of 1774, which effected the lands North of Ohio and east of Mississippi.
The nail in the coffin for the British was, the Quebec Act, the American puritans, resisted the establishment of the Church of England, a Roman Catholic System in their lands, so started the Independence Movement between 1775 -1788.
In 1776, surprisingly, the first flag of thirteen states, the stripes which represented the states had, also, however the crosses of St George and Saint Andrew on the blue ground in the corner which acknowledged the royal power. It was later in war, that in 1777, the crosses were replaced by the stars.
Here it would not be out of context to describe the Pakistan flag that comprises of two
colours only. Green is for the Muslim majority and white that comprises of seven colours represents the religious minorities. These two colours do not represent any state or province as none existed in history. This reinforces the argument that Pakistan unlike the USA is a single state and not a conglomerate of various states.
Before, the War of American Independence, had started in the true sense, and the flag underwent changes as per the requirements of the people of earlier USA, which we have seen very briefly, i.e. the entities which were part of this Federation, then called as a Confederacy, and NOT a Federation. A legal difference, between the two which will be explained later.
The composition of these thirteen colonies, (later states), was that, all were called and termed provinces by the Crown, the Governors were appointed by the Crown and had an absolute veto on legislation. Hence there were thus, three proprietary, seven royal, one semi-royal and two charter colonies total ling the figure of thirteen. However, of the two charter companies, there were simple Representative democracies, having the power to legislate without a practical appeal to the Crown, and had no royal Governor or Agent within their borders.
It was their systems, which were the high water mark to which the desires and claims of other colonies gradually approached. Massachusetts, and the proprietary colonies were very nearly on a level with them, and the royal or proprietary governor’s veto power was rather an annoyance than a fundamental difference.
In all the colonies, representative governments had forced, their way and had fairly early taken a bicameral shapes i.e. the division of a legislative body into two chambers (a Senate and a House). In the Charter colonies, and Massachusetts, the Lower House was chosen by the towns, and the Upper House from the people at large, and the two Houses made up the Assembly.
In Pennsylvania, and Delaware, there were but only one House. In the Royal Colonies and in Maryland, the Lower House alone was elected by the people. The Upper House, or Council was chosen by the Crown, through the Governor. And the ascent of all three elements was essential for legislation. In the final revolution, the Charter Colonies did not change their governments at all, they already had what they wanted. The Revolution was consummated in the other colonies by the assumption of power by the Lower or popular houses usually known as, "Assembly". The Governor or Counsel, or both, being ousted. A marked and important distinction is in the local organizations of the northern and southern colonies, all the southern colonies(later states),had begun as proprietary governments, settlers went there as individuals connected ONLY with the colony, to the individual the Colony, was the greatest political factory, his true new identity. His other connection was, his local church, related to the sect of Christianity which he followed, and they being numerous as will be elucidated.
The religion, thus played a dominant role in these colonies in those days, which eventually shaped them in later entities called states. Ethnicity too, was another factor in the making of these early states of USA.
The Dutch meanwhile, had created, in the central regions of both charter companies i.e. London and Plymouth Companies, a system of, "Patroon ships," to understand the concept of this Dutch System one has to travel back in the Roman Times but briefly here, it was THE old patron and client relationship. The patron was technically here in USA in these states the First of the Equals, amongst the Dutch Colonists. The client was the New Colonists. It was the duty of the patron to provide his client with the necessities of life and it was the common practice to make him a grant of a small plot of land to cultivate on his own account, further, he (patron), advised him in all his affairs he represented, in any transactions with the third parties, in which the New Colonists took part. The New Colonist, had to render to his patron, the respect and obedience due by a dependent, but, also when he was in a position to do so and the circumstances of the patron required it, to render him, monetary assistance also. As the time advanced, the New Colonists amassed wealth, so now they, contributed towards the dowries of a patron's daughter and also paid fines imposed on the patron by a competent authority, and also towards his (patron's) maintenance when he had become reduced to poverty. The patron and the colonist were alike hereditary relationships. The traces of this system still exist as can be seen in the actual inner workings of certain classes in USA, the Mafia being the factor discussed. Such were the laws of the patron- ship fraternity prevalent in the central states in the Dutch regions of early USA.
In the religious matters, the colonies and later states were divided being protestants, Mormons, Quakers, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterian, Episcopal and roman Catholics. The Baptists were further divided into northern and southern churches.
The immigration factor which created these later states were the heterogeneous flow from Europe. The educational aspect was also fairly well covered, Harvard College in Massachusetts was founded in 1636,William and Mary College, in Virginia in 1692,Yale College in Connecticut in 1700,Princeton College in New Jersey in 1746,Pennsylvania University in 1749 and King's now Columbia College, in New York in 1754.
Amongst the causes of revolt against the English Crown, were the other restrictive laws also, imposed on the colonies, in 1699, on the complaint of English manufacturers, that the colonists were cutting them out of their foreign wool markets, the British Parliament enacted that no wool or woolen manufactures could be shipped from any of the colonies under the penalty of forfeiture of ship and cargo. The English manufacturers ruled supreme in Britain and at intervals, "The Board of Trade and Plantations" especially tailor made by the British traders having been created in 1696, saw to it. The Board, from time to time heard the complaints of English manufacturers and traders and framed remedial bills for the British Parliament, the home of democracy, the West minister type of Democracy which we so often quote, and this august assembly, saw to it, that, the bills were passed! The so often quoted man, MR Pitt, the famous Prime Minister of England saw to it, as late as 1766, as from 1718 onward in the colonies the manufacture of iron goods ,was alarming to the businessmen of British Islands. So Mr. Pitt, asserted the right and duty of Parliament to, "bind the trade and confine the manufactures" of the colonies, and to do all but tax them without representation.
Earlier too, in 1719, the British Parliament passed it's first prohibition of iron manufactures in the colonies, and in 1750, it also forbade under penalties the maintaining of iron mills, stilling or rolling mills, plate-forges and Stella furnaces in the colonies. Where it suited the British provisos, were made .To quote an example, as it suited the traders and manufacturers of Britain, it allowed the import of American bar-iron into England as it was cheaper and better than the Swedish.
Silly acts and parliamentary laws were passed by British Parliament, to quote only one, in 1731, the Parliament had forbidden the manufacture or exportation of, "HATS", in or from the colonies, even their transportation from one colony to the other.
The purpose of highlighting all these aspects of early American History, though as yet not fully covered is to enlighten the reader, that the British always drafted laws with ulterior motives. We have to question and check the veracity of these laws and study the past Acts of the British in their various colonies. The Act of 1935 is no exception as is being explained.
The British Imperialists, had thrust on us, by virtue of Government of India Act, the clause of Federation, and the cause of our present problems, which persists in all our Constitutions. The requisites of a Federation are quite different, and the term implies a state entity within the fold of a centre. Whereas, Pakistan never had State entities as the term goes, when the Act was passed; we had a Sindh, Punjab, NWFP and Baluchistan as per the Act. The War for Liberation brought in the AJK and Northern areas post 1947. Hence it is being explained how the USA and it's Federation cannot be compared to Pakistan as was done in the previous articles and the concluding one.
The Confederacy which existed in USA till 1789, of thirteen states, the term "Confederacy" and meaning generally is a league or union, of states or individuals, in a nutshell, it implies a temporary league of independent states for a certain purpose. It was after 1789, that the term Federation came into use in the USA, Federation, now meant a closer union. This distinction was emphasised during the American Civil war between north and south (1861-1865), the seceding forming again a Confederation, which had earlier lasted till 1789, in opposition to the Federal Union.
The system of a federal state as in USA was based, in it's own way, each state of USA is an independent state, as stated earlier it is a new country composed of different nations whereas, Pakistan is a new name yet we trace our past in a remote time. And have flourished as an entity, as a whole since then.
To further explain the American States composition and functions which has no bearing to our lands, as British ruled over us for barely a little over a hundred years. The point to note is, they did not settle us, like was the case of Australia too, a penal settlement initially hence it justified the Common Wealth Act of 1900 on the Australians. But the Act of 1935, with reference to Federation could not have been and, should not have been, enacted on us.
In the American State ,the powers of a state are inherent, not delegated, each retains all such rights and functions, of an independent government, each has it's own documentary Constitution, it's legislature of two elective houses, it's executive consisting of a Governor and other officials, it's judiciary whose decisions are final, except in cases involving Federal law; it's system of local government and local taxation, it's revenue, system of taxation and debts; it's body of private, civil and criminal law and procedure ;it's rules of citizenship. An American, may, through his life, never be reminded of the Federal Government, except when, he votes at Federal elections, his direct taxes are paid to officials, acting under the state laws. Lastly the Constitution of each State is formed and enacted by the State itself, save those states which were not a part of the old Federal Union. And, had joined later, even in such states, the Constitution derives it's force ,not from the national government, but from the people of the state.
When in 1776, the thirteen colonies threw off their allegiance to the British Crown, and took the title of States, they proceeded to unite themselves in a league by the Articles of Confederation of 1781.This scheme of Union proved defective, for it's central authority and assembly called, "Congress" was THEN, hopelessly weak. It had neither an executive, nor a judiciary, nor had it proper means of coercing a recalcitrant state. It's weakness became so apparent, especially, after the pressure of the war, with British had been removed. That the opinion of the wisest men called for a closer and more effective union and thus the present original Constitution(minus the amendments),was drafted by a convention in 1787, was ratified, by nine states(the prescribed number).In 1788, and was set, to work under George Washington as the first President in 1789. The original Constitution was a short document with only 7 Articles, sub divided into sections.
Now to compare this with Act of 1935 is an altogether wrong approach as this Act was the outcome of long constitutional developments, based on Government of India Act 1858 by which the Crown, took over from East India Company. The Act of 1909, which had introduced elective principles, the Act of 1919 which introduced provincial diarchy and some nation building subjects such as education which had already been introduced in the schooling systems of British India in the 19th Century as per the policy of Lord Macaulay vide his address to the British Parliament on 2nd February 1835.
Unfortunately, when this educational system was introduced and enforced ,it had already been well perfected in India and also the methodology of education had been refined by the hired and trained people to implement the British policies.
By virtue of the Act of 1919,the core subjects like law, order and finance were held by officials appointed by and responsible to British Governors and ultimately to the British Parliament. The Simon Commission in 1927 was greeted by black flags and mass protests on the roads as it was composed of only the British with no Indian Representation. In a nutshell, this report proposed ,"the setting up of an All India Federation in a distant future". The Indian Round table Conferences 1931 -1933 composition of which had men, who never decided an issue, which was in fact the objective of the British in the first place and hence the composition of such men in these round table conferences. So, the British could do as they pleased and eventually blame it on the natives, for, "lack of decision". So as the British wanted it, it was decided; that, both the British India and the Princely States would be integrated into an eventual Federal Dominion of India. Here again, the leaders of Congress and Muslim League could not arrive at any agreement, on how, this Federation would be structured i.e. how power was to be shared and how minority Muslims were to be protected from Hindu persecution, this resulted in letting the conservative dominated British Government, free to draft a legislative proposals in line with its own views, a joint select committee, chaired by Lord Linlithgow, received a draft paper termed as a ,"White Paper" and thus the Government of India Act 1935 was framed. In order to appease the die hearts of British Conservative Government, certain safeguards were strengthened. Indirect elections were reinstated for the Federal Assembly (Lower House). Among other things the Act continued to deny the British Indians the right to draft or modify their own Constitution.
The Act of 1935, was the longest Bill ever passed by a Parliament, a good constitution should clearly set out over arching principles, "Not lawyers small print", the most successful Constitution ever is indeed that of USA, as described in my article with reference to the Federation aspect only. The reason of this long draft was the British Parliaments lack of trust of the politicians in particular.
After Independence Act of 1947 with a few amendments in the Act of 1935 it became the functioning interim constitution of Pakistan. Earlier, the objective of British in enacting this Act was to make a tailor made Constitution, to fulfill the requirement of British needs and it was expected that the Act was to lead to a nominally dominion status India, conservative in outlook, dominated by an alliance of Hindu princes by this stance, the Muslim and the right wing Hindus would have then, naturally, sought the guidance and protection of the British Government, assure stalemate like situation.
As stated earlier, after the Independence Act of 1947, we as a nation, should have with the help of good jurists, drafted our own Constitution as per own requirements. It is true that we have a massive population growth, we have to and need to, clear our stables. The geographic entities, a legacy of British Raj should be removed, a nation which has always existed can never be classed as a Federation. No colonists or charter companies brought in settlers in our Indus Basin. Circumstances forced on us, a British Rule. We must break the chains and re-emerge as one nation as one state. From north to south, east to west keeping in view the number of our population, as many provinces as feasible.
If the Indians want to retain the federation aspect, they have truly the grounds for separate entities, a pre-requisite for a Federation.
Naveed Tajammal is a historian with no parallel. He is researching in history for over 25 years. Although his area of
focus is Indus Basin and the Muslim History but he has an equally good command over world history.
Naveed is a Member Board of Advisors, Opinion Maker where he takes lot of pride in discharging his responsibilities and making his contributions.
loading...
47 Responses to “America is a Federation Pakistan is Not”
Leave a Reply
Donations
Join Us
 |
| Subscribe to Opinion Maker |
| Email: |
Author Profile
Naveed Tajammal
Tweets that mention America is a Federation Pakistan is Not | Opinion Maker -- Topsy.com
14. Aug, 2010
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Raja Mujtaba, Raja Mujtaba. Raja Mujtaba said: America is a Federation Pakistan is Not ….. By Naveed Tajammal http://fb.me/A3N0HfIt [...]
neel123
14. Aug, 2010
While the barbarian Afghan Taliban is busy destroying the Bamiyan Buddhist legacy, it is an interesting recent phenomenon that the Pakistanis have started to own the Indus civilization, and taking pride in it, although very few would dare to go back beyond the 1400 odd years of the muslim era, and dig into their Hindu roots !
In this otherwise lengthy and informative article, that has delved on the British-American history, the sudden conclusion stating that Pakistan has always been a nation, and is not a case for Federation, is hard to comprehend.
How do you reconcile the distinct ethnic and cultural identity divide of the Punjabis, the Sindhis, the Baloch, the Pashtuns, not to speak of the numerous other sects and tribes…… !
Bangladesh has proved that Islam can not be the glue to impose an artificial nationhood in Pakistan…. !
jd
15. Aug, 2010
my friend muslims didnt appear out of thin air 1400 years ago, the people who accepted islam (the third abrahamic religion) belonged to other religions and older abrahamic religions ( yahud and messiats). accepting other religions doesnt mean one doesnt remain indiginous to their region.
you talk like you dont even know the basic teaching in the abrahamic religion, r u even an abrahamic.
naveed tajammal
15. Aug, 2010
For a change NEEL you did not rant your old line;so to your pointed query,we never were PUNJAB till 1849,like they gave identity to the afghan after demarcation of its boundaries, read my previous article on WAHKHAN,,(on google),sind too was a province made, as was the term balluchistan, & NWFP created, SO, was FATA made on,our west are the linguistic boundary of Iranian language GROUP on our EAST is the HINDI group,in-between is our language ,various names have been given to it, by the philologists, same call it DARDIC,AND SOME LHANDA,,however it is SINDHI,not as in sindhi seen or spoken in our sind province, that particular set was a creation of a German, Ernest trump,IN 1853 AD,our mother language has 22 main dialects,but language is one, as was the script, till lord maclauly’s disciples destroyed our indigenous schooling system, in the 19th century, the language of the sindh valley basin is UNIQUE it is by itself distinct from the both LANGUAGES,,found in our west and east,AS to our old tribes which are still the major population in the valley they represent the first wave of the TURK,,from our NORTH TO SOUTH, the Barrohi is not a BALLUCHI..the khan of kalat as well his tribes under him are not balluchi..but for a small segment.
Antonio Alves Lico
15. Aug, 2010
As far I can see, your brilliant article, intends to prove that Pakistan is a nation. Is a possibilitie, indeed. However a distinct thing did the british imperialism when Pakistan and India were divided. The core cement for Pakistan was religious, and fatally hurted Pakistan from de begining.
According your stament, wish, in principle, deserves good attention, I would rather call Pakistan Sindhistan.
Please accept my regards, and please forgive my poor english.
Naveed Tajammal
15. Aug, 2010
Thankyou for your comment,Antonio,we always,have been a NATION,however unfortunately the TIME ,was, of, in the last periods of, our, subjugation,now as Pakistan it is our rebirth.yes we have been called by the name of ‘SINDHUISTAN’ too, in some books.
Antonio Alves Lico
15. Aug, 2010
Thank for your answer. I wasn’t sure about the SINDHUISTAN designation.
I further state, that your article deserves good attention and makes an important point.
I would like, when possible, to hear from you, about that linguistic “frontier”, and I am refering to the persian speaking regions, now a part of Pakistan,
Thank you.
Naveed Tajammal
15. Aug, 2010
Antonio: while a NATION, maybe defined,as one:Linguistically and Culturally unified,however, that is just one facet;our Land of OLD ,The sindh valley Basin,encompassed, the east of Afghanistan,till chah bahar in IRAN,to the north till the Pamir knot,to the east till Dehli;and as followed the old river bed of JUMANA river ,NOT the course it follows in the bay of bengal, but when it fell in the Rann of Kutch,a old delta,now a swamp land.which adjoins our sea coast on our east.that means as a CIVILIZATION, we have to retain all other languages and cultures within our entity.The point being,we had, been under subjugation now for quite sometime till 1947.but we did not lose our distinct,language,but the major part of the fabric within the fold of the persian speaking regions still is bilingual or tri,as the case maybe
meaning thereby the old tribes within themselves speak the old dialects.,Balluchi is a language in books alone the language in vogue is the modern name of sareike,or old multani the region falling in the main administrative set up of that city.without understanding our historical geography it is a bit difficult to comprehend what , i ,state,all the same thankyou for your interest, in our region.pushto too,is not the only language spoken in the eastern Afghanistan.
Douglas Westerman
15. Aug, 2010
Gandhi,a deeply spiritual and religious man, knew that India could not survive as a Hindu nation. The State had to be secular and grounded in secular law, not upon Hindu religion. Non-secular states don’t work very well anywhere. Even Israel doesn’t work as well as it could if it treated non-Jewish minorities better. Pakistan can work fine, but not as a Muslim State, it had to modernize
Kakwani
15. Aug, 2010
this guy is very frustrated, evil, anti pakistan, anti muslim propagandist…probably belongs to intelligence community, you will find him on almost every forum if anyone interested to have a snap shot and bio data of him let me know. POOR creature !
KAKWANI
15. Aug, 2010
this guy NEEL123 is very frysttrated and evil, anti pakistan, anti muslim propagandist…probably belongs to intelligence community, you will find him on almost every forum if anyone interested to have a snap shot and bio data of him let me know. POOR creature !
Magnolia
15. Aug, 2010
Like your explanation on how the British leave a trail of discord when they depart a colonial land. It’s also interesting how they cut through tribal lands in Africa which has lead to nothing but decades of war in that region.
ducq
15. Aug, 2010
This American finds your article brilliant in scope and solid in application. The day that I learn my own country’s history from a Pakistani perspective, is an odd day indeed. Please keep writing.
I might mention, thought this is hardly the forum, that from my own research, the likelihood of our runaway military operating in their usual ruthless and lawless style within Pakistan soon is high. They have no sense of history, and while their death-throes are on the horizon, a lot of damage will be done between here and there. Take foresight.
peace
Phils holiday homes
15. Aug, 2010
The strongest and smartest of the species will always survive. Politicians may make laws and rules but the only prevailing law is that of the jungle.
Dr.A.K.Tewari
15. Aug, 2010
Neel 123 ,now i have nothing to add.Probabaly you have said every thing .
Naveed Tajammal
15. Aug, 2010
Tewari:
If you are gloating on the punch line of NEEL 123,what a call sign,That sind valley was HINDU 1400 years back,probably that, is what ,he refereed too, fortunately,Brahmanism, a post Islamic ,occurrence,was limited to our EAST, and no documentation exists that it ever was in our sindh valley,we were Buddhist,partly fire worshippers, and so we moved in the Islamic fold.yes a lot of concocted histories have been written,but none ever proves that,what the ARAB geographer called the PAGAN’s of east,i.e HINDU, ever where in our sindh valley.
iyamwutiam
16. Aug, 2010
To quote Aldos Huxley:
“That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that History has to teach”
What is the lesson- Federalism? The message that un-represented partition of a vibrant and for many centuries a synergistic culture being ripped asunder by supremacist’s who wish to continue to plunder all nations by ‘choosing’ the leadership which matched their interest?
Where is the history subsequent to the partition that closely matches Voltaire’s view of history. That it is ” nothing more than a tableau of crimes and misfortune”. Where is the history of propagated cold hearted famines imposed on the indigenous population for decades upon decades by the British! Is this a quiet assent to an embedded and class stratified fear of criticizing imperial master’s who generations ago granted our parents land and status. Are we still paying interest to our former master’s by being ‘mindful’ that our servility and treachery must continue to corrupt our nation with bankruptcy of character and vision!
Was there no time to show that regardless of the differences between India and Pakistan -we pale in the cultivated desire to do harm to each other when we compare it to the grim efficiency of the West. German/Portugese/Britsh/French all slaughtered the common federation of peoples that stretched from Iran to Indonesia. Apparently there is no time to remind our people that no enemy can be worst than a disguised patron who with malice and genocide in his heart clasps us to his bosom as Brutus does. This mindless repetition of a false precept and concept -’the enemy of my enemy is my friend’ is just ONE example of intellectual pollution assiduously fostered to hasten our own demise.
I respect your erudition and intellectual vigour but would urge you to focus on the truly horrific aspects of our history and shed light on the indisputable truth -that NO one has mirdered more of our brethren -explicitly adnd implicity (by funding corrupt politicians, academicians, etc) than the Whites.
They place glib quotations of survival of the fittest -but murder the innocents like harvesting wheat , lie, cheat, posion and break all moral and previously agreed rules of combat.! They smirk behind the false pretence of superiority and have psychosis because they knwo very well -that only the cowardly and the weak take pride in these victories. I urge you sir- to shed light on atrocities whose scales are beyond the holocaust !!
Naveed Tajammal
16. Aug, 2010
IYAMWUTIAM;
You are correct,on the fact that people do not understand that past present and future are all interlinked as in a chain,whites are indeed on a rampage ,it is a cycle,we have to endure,but to each action comes a reaction,gone are the days when people remained in the yoke of these empires,awareness, and media has brought an end to this,yes atrocity will remain, humans are all savages,when they have,the power to kill,whites are no exception to this rule !
Mihail
16. Aug, 2010
In few years Amerikkaa is going to be a waste land,theose stupid christian have to thank the JEWISH KHAZAR FOR THE DESTRUCTION OF THEIR COUNTRY,MOST OF THEM WAIT FOR RAPTURE,HA,HA,RAPTURE.
http://www.realzionistnews.com
Nikkis34
16. Aug, 2010
You dumb Pakistani’s just don’t understand. What will happen to you can be extrapolated from the quran. The quran says whatever bad that you do, then you will get the same in return. You Pakistanis destablized a lot of nations and it is time to get your reward. You can bitch and moan all you want, but you will get your reward.
Antonio Alves Lico
16. Aug, 2010
Thank you again for your patience.
Well, I can say, I have a very similar thinking concerning the wiews you pointed in your article, of course without the factual historical knowledge you have. However the knowledge I have about the facts you present, allow me to strongly agree with you.
Following my commentes on your brilliant article, I saw some comments inserted, who carry religious arguments. I am not interested in religion, and of course I will not reply comments with a religious bias. I respect others ideas, sure, but really I am not interested to speak on religious matters.
I think that your article and the ideas within it, can explain the reason because Pakistan still exists.
Ironically, and for the dismay of those who pemanently carry religious arguments, the present anglo-saxon inperial age, is precisely using relgion to divide and ultimately destroy a national entity.
Thank you
Dr.A.K.Tewari
16. Aug, 2010
@ Tazamal , As a historian you must be knowing that there exist several versions of history! .It is probably due to the fact that most of the historians are not clear about their own ancestory. we Indian say that we have decended from Vaaner i.e. Hanuman jee ie Monkey like ancestors and not from Adam and Eve . There are people who believe that world started to exist only after 1 St AD. Where as a lot of mans history percolates through rocks and air which is still existing but require an open mind for its proper analysis which is unfortunatly lacking in most of the prejudice historians .I hope you wont take it otherwise .Thanks for The response .
STTNGS04E06 Legacy 35
16. Aug, 2010
[...] America is a Federation Pakistan is Not | Opinion Maker [...]
America is a Federation Pakistan is Not | Opinion Maker | Syed Adnan Ahmed Blog
16. Aug, 2010
[...] of British India, an Act. This Act was tailor made for the British as per … More here: America is a Federation Pakistan is Not | Opinion Maker Share and [...]
Naveed Tajammal
16. Aug, 2010
ANTONIO ALVES LICO:
I would again thankyou for your interest in my current article,however people of west will never understand the internal dynamics of our region,SIND and HIND are and have been two different entities,our languages too are apart,as is and has been our dress and insignia,in history it is the indus civilization, not that of Ganges or jumana,hence my response ,we never ever went in the hindu or brahman fold.
History in reverse has been written,people do not go in research,hence the result.
Naveed Tajammal
16. Aug, 2010
DR.A.K.TEWARI:
You are absolutely, right on the aspect of several versions of history in vogue,however,when ,as is seen a History of a very old civilization is manipulated and injected in the world chronology,by vested parties and claimed as of their own, the truth will resurface at some stage or the other,the followers of Vedic Doctrine, have indeed played it to the hilt.For which i partly blame our own people too, as after we moved in the islamic fold,our indifferent rulers and the scholars bundled, up,all religions other then islam in a one scope of ,THE PAGAN,the Arab,was the least interested in our past,the second set of rulers ,the TURKS,who had just been converted from a BUDDHIST past,did not want any reference to remind them of their old heritage,hence the state of affairs,so the BRAHMAN,filled the void,and claimed indus as the land of its vedic scriptures.DR.Tewari, investigative historical research is a fascinating subject , and a discourse on it i always love to go in, but since my articles started to appear i have been blasted, from, USA to india by all,for challenging the Hindu dogma.negation should be based on or substantiated by references alone !! not just the rhetoric !!
Dr.A.K.Tewari
16. Aug, 2010
@Tazammal .If you have interest in investigative history then try to find out the fact that how the Quran is a havenly book which decended much later than our epic Ramayana .The evidence can be of different types .Some evidence flows in the forms of traditions and some in the form of stories .We have a lot of evidence about our glorious past which can not be negated by saying that some vested interest allowed their entry in the chronology .Any way it is all up to you to close your window of the mind .
Musings of the Angry Webmaster
16. Aug, 2010
The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America…
I found your entry interesting thus I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog
…
Naveed Tajammal
16. Aug, 2010
Well, DR.TEWARI:
None will every beat the jew or the hindu in the art of concoction,wither it be the cabbalistic rites or the magic in the numbers,inbuilt in it, or the concept of any antiquity to be assigned,to a book or work it is the duty inbuilt in the brahaman hindu to stake a claim on it, indeed ,Tulasidas , IN 1576 AD excelled, when he wrote the RAMAYANA.
A good job done,but why give it a back date ???
16. Aug, 2010
Good write up naveed tajammal. keep up the good work.
Dr.A.K.Tewari
16. Aug, 2010
@Taja mal , You apear to be over confidence on your command on the subject .Ram charitra Manas was written by Tulsidas while Ramayana was writen by Balmikee .Your feelings for Jews and Hindus exposes your prejudice then how one can expect justice from you to your subject .
Naveed Tajammal
17. Aug, 2010
DR.TEWARI.
you are bent upon distorting history, agreed,that ”ramacharitamansa’ is the work of tulsidas, but remember also that is infact, the hindi version of ”ramayana’, now to pre date it, the work is said to be attributed to a mythical figure called ,valmikee,now you enter the unending myths of hinduism,to give antiquity to Sanskrit, whereas, it remains a fact that sanskrit is but, a work of ,mazadkhite ,dasturs and mobids who fled the wrath of nausherwan, the emperor of the persians, when he had buried alive mazadkh upside down.in 530AD, the revival took place in the 7th century AD.AVESTA got a new name,”Sanskrit”.
do you know the story of your esteem script, deva nagari ??? i doubt it, well they have taught you all wrong things,let me enlighten you briefly;After, buddhism had lost its spiritual powers and had become a monastic,ceremonial religion,with monks chanting away verses in a monotonous tone and living to the bang of the brass Goong,by late 6th century AD,the renegade buddhist monks were thinking of launching a new faith,they became the new class of high priests,they in cahoots with dasturs of mazdakh settled in surat,went into the psychic insight of the primitive man, and fabricated history, as is seen,of a past which has no relationship with world history,till pundit radakanata and sir william jones in late 18th century created it,so your fertile minded priests,named the areas in the indus regions as well in,india as the abodes of there umpteen gods and goddess,they borrowed from the aborigines their darkest myths,their grossest superstitions. their most dreaded and degraded deities,and compounded them in one the most bewildering system of theology and metaphysics the world has ever known,the terms like ”nervana’ and karama were hijacked from older religions and professed as their own !!!
All Around The World News
17. Aug, 2010
McChrystal to teach at Yale…
We cover the same subject but your aproach is intersting….
Musings of the Angry Webmaster
17. Aug, 2010
Those voices to speak for the rest of us…
I found your entry interesting thus I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog
…
neel123
17. Aug, 2010
@ Naveed Tajammal,
In all religions, there were ups and downs, and there were times when spiritual strength and influence waned, resulting in religion being distorted and corrupted by misguided individuals.
We have seen that in Hinduism, Buddhism, Christianity before renaissance, and now in the perverted barbaric interpretations of Islam.
The basic point is that distortion and corruption of religion does not change the fundamentals of any religion.
Historians like yourself may find satisfaction in digging into the corrupted version of Hinduism ….. that will unfortunately not change the facts.
You will find a lot of European scholars to acknowledge that “Sanskrit ” is actually the mother of most European languages. Your claim that “Avesta”, the Bible of the Sun worshipers from the Persian region, is the origin of Sanskrit will not find many takers, although there might have been some connection, as the Aryans of the Vedas are believed to have had migrated from today’s Germany through Persia … !
Your claim that “Nirvana” and “Karma” never belonged to Hinduism will only make you a laughing stock amongst the scholars and the non-muslims …. !
Naveed Tajammal
17. Aug, 2010
NEEL,THE PROBLEM WITH YOU FELLOWS IS OF YOUR OWN MAKING,YOUR LOT, THE PAID BY THE MINUTE,TO GO ON ALL SITES WHICH ORIGINATE FROM PAKISTAN OR ARE AFFILIATED WITH,AND THROW A SPANNER TO DIVERT FROM THE MAIN ISSUE, AND ALWAYS AS HAS BEEN YOUR PEOPLE BRING IN THE RELIGION,WHEN YOU GET A BEATING AND HAVE NO ANSWER, THE ANSWERS ARE TYPICAL,IT IS FACT THAT NIRVANA &KARAMA ARE TERMS OF NOT HINDUISM,YOUR PROPAGANDA MACHINE WORKS FINE.WE MUST IMPROVE OURS.TO COUNTER YOUR LIES.
Antonio Alves Lico
17. Aug, 2010
Thank you again.
Some years ago, when I was studying Sanscrit, I was teached that the term “HIND” was in fact a mistake due the difficulties for Persians speaking peoples to spell the initial “S”, so “HIND” was a corruption due to this particular aspect.
I honestly assume that I could be induced in error.
I don’t wabt to polemise around who is who between AVESTA; VEDAS and other late Scriptures. What is clear is that was a vaste area where similar languages were spoken, and clearly the AVESTA language is in substance similar to that used on VEDAS and late Scriptures.
As far I remember the term “HINDUISM” has litle meaning, as the name for the main religions followed at India is ARYA DHARMA or SANATANA.
Thank you again for such a stimulating article who is giving to a few persons the opportunity to express and excahange views in a democratic way.
Naveed Tajammal
17. Aug, 2010
ANTONIO;THE PERSIANS HAD CEASED TO EXIST, BY 650AD,THE TERM HIND WAS COINED BY ARAB GEOGRAPHERS, IN LATE 8TH CENTURY.HISTORY IN REVERSE HAS BEEN CREATED,SINCE THE LAST 500 YEARS RESCUE PASSAGES HAVE BEEN ADDED,BOOKS WRITTEN, THEY THE INDIANS ARE MASTERS OF FORGERY, IT TOOK ME 15 YEARS OF PURE INVESTIGATIVE RESEARCH TO LOCATE THE FRAUDS DONE BY INDIANS, THEY HAVE EVEN REMOVED PAGES FROM OLD MANUSCRIPTS TRANSLATED IN THE18/19TH CENTURY,WHICH DEALT WITH OUR PAST HISTORY,WHEN THE BRITISH HAD STARTED THEIR RAILROADS, THEY HAD ON LOWER LEVELS HINDU OVERSEERS,MUSLIMS WERE STILL NOT WILLING TO WORK FOR THE BRITISH,IF YOU FOLLOW THE ROUTE OF THE RAIL LINES YOU WILL FIND THEY ARE ON A HIGHER GROUNDS,THESE WERE THE OLD SITES OF OUR PAST CITIES, THEY DEMOLISHED THEM AND USED THE STONES FOR BALLAST.THUS REMOVED THE EVIDENCE.HOWEVER OLD TRAVEL-LOGS CONFIRM THE LOCATIONS.
Dr.A.K.Tewari
17. Aug, 2010
@ Taja mal , Again you indicated your over confidence .Which exposes your prejudice .Any way I am least interested in the past .We know the status being enjoyed by Indian Hindu in the community of nation due to its glorious past .In contrast to it the Islamic Pakistan now do not exist as a sovereign nation it has turned in to a brothal which remain open to rich customer like USA,UK, GERMANY and now waiting for China .These customers are not required to seek permission to get an entry and can do whatever they want .Your present is reflecting your recent past and your survival will reflect your extreem past .Be sure .
Naveed Tajammal
17. Aug, 2010
TEWARI.YOU ARE WELCOME TO RAVE AND RANT;YOUR PAST IS IN DOUBT NOT OURS.
All Around The World News
17. Aug, 2010
Obama campaigning, ties Republicans to big business…
We cover the same subject but your aproach is intersting….
All Around The World News
17. Aug, 2010
In Time for Halloween, the BP Oil Spill Costume…
We cover the same subject but your aproach is intersting….
Blog Interviewer
17. Aug, 2010
This is America! – An Interview with Aziz Poonawalla on the ……
We’ve linked to you on BlogInterviewer.com . Could you put a link back to us?…
Consciousness and Spirituality
18. Aug, 2010
God and Country: America in Red and Blue…
I found your entry interesting thus I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog
…
TogeGames.Com
19. Aug, 2010
Monuments America – 1 – Statue of Liberty…
I found your entry interesting thus I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog
…
cna training
23. Aug, 2010
Great information! I’ve been looking for something like this for a while now. Thanks!
wzeprx
26. Aug, 2010
JhyVwd xqttyncuqxqz, [url=http://vsuaxnpotvdz.com/]vsuaxnpotvdz[/url], [link=http://hxjrmlnqsetn.com/]hxjrmlnqsetn[/link], http://rkspvuskaora.com/