Stand with Pakistani Christian Refugees - Hector Aleem

ladder

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
7,255
Likes
12,207
Country flag
Jinnah was a secularist in bone and marrow and a pragmatic person. He replied like a true leader should.

Can you answer my question?

Can a Jew deny the central positions of Abraham and Mozes in Judaism and still be called a jew?
What rights and freedom would he enjoy in Israel?
But, Jews didn't create Pakistan. OP doesn't face discrimination from Jews in Pakistan.

You claim Pakistani loved Quaid and still question his vision for Pakistan. The above is well documented, but still in 1974, the discrimination happened.

Now, Ahmadis too had voted for Pakistan. If any of their community opens a thread here, feeling betrayal, you will within a moment declare it Anti-Pakistan, isn't it.

And for your question. Read below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel
 
Last edited:

Neo

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
4,514
Likes
964
But, Jews didn't create Pakistan. OP doesn't face discrimination from Jews in Pakistan.
What is the relevence of this revelation?
Is the OP Ahmadi?

You claim Pakistani loved Quaid and still question his vision for Pakistan. The above is well documented, but still in 1974, the discrimination happened.
And my claim is still valid. Pakistan never embraced or experienced true democracy. Jokers run the country like personal kingdoms, amend or bypass the constitution whenever they want.
But none of this has to do with Jinnah's popularity with Pakistanis.

Now, Ahmadis too had voted for Pakistan. If any of their community opens a thread here, feeling betrayal, you will within a moment declare it Anti-Pakistan, isn't it.

And for your question. Read below.

Arab citizens of Israel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Actually there is an active Pakistani member in another Pakistani forum who belongs to the Ahmadi cult. I have had heated debates with him about a range of issues but he never crossed the limits. His posts are to the point, he criticises discrimination of minorities in which he is right and has my support.

What irked me with Mr.Worldpeace and it was also highlighted by Roma that he should avoid insulting his country and certainly not use India to bash Pakistan.
 
Last edited:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Jinnah may be secular in some ways and that is because he was a pucca Westernised Oriental Gentleman in attire, eating and drinking habits (including what is taken to be haram in Islam and he married a Parsi.

However, the the citizens of the Nation he created imbibed nothing of his characteristics.

I take it that there are many in Pakistan who are rather disillusioned with Pakistan, and rightly so, since Pakistan is not a even a ghost of the imagery that Jinnah had about Pakistan and so the frustration shows. And worse is that while they thought they were going to surpass 'Hindu' India, they were left way behind by the roadside, inspite of massive help from their mentors.
 
Last edited:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Christians have to flee the country and live a life of refugee in difficult countries like Thailand, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Malaysia etc
The moot point is why Christians have to flee the country and live a life of refugee in difficult countries like Thailand, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Malaysia etc?

It shows the immense fear and injustice meted out by Pakistan to their minorities that they are even ready to flee to countries that are not very developed.

Even Afghan refugees flee to Europe and US. but the Pakistan minorities to any nation, yes, just any nation will do!

What desperation!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Conversion to Islam for any reason other than love for Allah and the desire to serve Him wholeheartedly is considered unacceptable. Therefor conversions to marry or to attain heritage or enter politics are shallow indeed and should be denounced.
Some rules of Islam that any pious Muslim must follow.

In Islamic law, if a non-Muslim woman is married to a non-Muslim, and she converts to Islam, the marriage is suspended until her husband converts to Islam. She could, in theory, leave the non-Muslim husband and marry a Muslim one (analogous to the Pauline privilege among Catholics). If the non-Muslim husband does convert a new marriage is not needed. In the Quran, it is said,

O ye who believe! When there come to you believing women refugees, examine (and test) them: Allah knows best as to their Faith: if ye ascertain that they are Believers, then send them not back to the Unbelievers. They are not lawful (wives) for the Unbelievers, nor are the (Unbelievers) lawful (husbands) for them. But pay the Unbelievers what they have spent (on their dower), and there will be no blame on you if ye marry them on payment of their dower to them. But hold not to the guardianship of unbelieving women: ask for what ye have spent on their dowers, and let the (Unbelievers) ask for what they have spent (on the dowers of women who come over to you). Such is the command of Allah. He judges (with justice) between you. And Allah is Full of Knowledge and Wisdom. {Surah 60:10}
In Malaysia a non-Muslim must convert to Islam in order to marry a Muslim. The offspring of such unions are automatically Muslims and all Malaysian Muslims are legally prohibited from leaving Islam (Riddah)
http://www.malaysia.gov.my/EN/Relev.../Pages/MarriageBetweenMuslimandNonMuslim.aspx
 

Ashutosh Lokhande

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2014
Messages
1,285
Likes
568
@Neo do you got any credible source to counter my statement that major reson pakistan got created was for a seperate state for islam followers.

Plz provide a source of your counter.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ladder

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2013
Messages
7,255
Likes
12,207
Country flag
What is the relevence of this revelation?
Is the OP Ahmadi?



And my claim is still valid. Pakistan never embraced or experienced true democracy. Jokers run the country like personal kingdoms, amend or bypass the constitution whenever they want.
But none of this has to do with Jinnah's popularity with Pakistanis.



Actually there is an active Pakistani member in another Pakistani forum who belongs to the Ahmadi cult. I have had heated debates with him about a range of issues but he never crossed the limits. His posts are to the point, he criticises discrimination of minorities in which he is right and has my support.

What irked me with Mr.Worldpeace and it was also highlighted by Roma that he should avoid insulting his country and certainly not use India to bash Pakistan.
What for did you being in Jews? Is the OP talking about Jews?

Is it the fault of the minorities that Pakistan never experienced 'true democracy'? Or it is the fault of majority in Pakistan?
Or because you haven't have true democracy, it gives you right to discriminate.

The constitution was altered due to popular request. And the popular demand was against so called secular 'principles' of Quaid. Which brings out the assertion which I has posted earlier.

The popularity of Quaid without knowing his principles is just like the popularity of 'film star' or 'sports star'.

And FYI, any other Pakistani might find it Anti-Pakistan, your assessment that Pakistan is ruled by Jokers, in an Indian 'Hindu' forum. And so, you are no different from OP.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
@Neo do you got any credible source to counter my statement that major reson pakistan got created was for a seperate state for islam followers.

Plz provide a source of your counter.
Note this living in denial syndrome that afflicts Pakistan

Furthermore, it is said that Pakistan was demanded to enable Muslims to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of Islam. These much quoted words have been repeated many times but rarely understood in the real sense of the purpose.

In the days when this slogan was made, the world that the Muslims and Islam represented to the minorities of India, who were being persecuted and oppressed because of their faith, was that of a separate state where such persecution would not be possible.

To put it simply, the slogan meant that Pakistan would be a state where minorities would be free to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of their religion without the fear of any persecution. No other interpretation is possible, as the Muslims in those days were comprised of so many different sects whose principles of Islam were different on many points and in some cases contradictory.
Furthermore, it is said that Pakistan was demanded to enable Muslims to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of Islam. These much quoted words have been repeated many times but rarely understood in the real sense of the purpose.

In the days when this slogan was made, the world that the Muslims and Islam represented to the minorities of India, who were being persecuted and oppressed because of their faith, was that of a separate state where such persecution would not be possible.

To put it simply, the slogan meant that Pakistan would be a state where minorities would be free to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of their religion without the fear of any persecution. No other interpretation is possible, as the Muslims in those days were comprised of so many different sects whose principles of Islam were different on many points and in some cases contradictory.
Furthermore, it is said that Pakistan was demanded to enable Muslims to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of Islam. These much quoted words have been repeated many times but rarely understood in the real sense of the purpose.

In the days when this slogan was made, the world that the Muslims and Islam represented to the minorities of India, who were being persecuted and oppressed because of their faith, was that of a separate state where such persecution would not be possible.

To put it simply, the slogan meant that Pakistan would be a state where minorities would be free to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of their religion without the fear of any persecution. No other interpretation is possible, as the Muslims in those days were comprised of so many different sects whose principles of Islam were different on many points and in some cases contradictory.
Furthermore, it is said that Pakistan was demanded to enable Muslims to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of Islam. These much quoted words have been repeated many times but rarely understood in the real sense of the purpose. In the days when this slogan was made, the world that the Muslims and Islam represented to the minorities of India, who were being persecuted and oppressed because of their faith, was that of a separate state where such persecution would not be possible. To put it simply, the slogan meant that Pakistan would be a state where minorities would be free to lead their lives in accordance with the principles of their religion without the fear of any persecution. No other interpretation is possible, as the Muslims in those days were comprised of so many different sects whose principles of Islam were different on many points and in some cases contradictory.
They got discriminated by the Hindus with the power lying with the British Raj :shocked:

How much more ridiculous can the Pakistanis get?


and this

Additionally, no minorities except Hindus and Sikhs emigrated from Pakistan. Had Pakistan been created only for Muslims then all the minorities would have tried to immigrate to India.
Aha!

And how come there is hardly any minority left in Pakistan and a whole lot of them fleeing the persecution to Sri Lanka and elsewhere?

Not created for Muslims?

What tommy rot.

And they are such fairy tale spinners, they are now finding a new 'enemy' - the Shias and massacring them as sacrificial goats in id.

Pakistan was created for the Muslims and they are reinventing it to be a Sunni only Paradise!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Wow! Israel finds a Jew in Karachi

Jerusalem-based 'The Times of Israel' reported on February 26, 2014, the existence of a Pakistani-born Jew. Marc Goldberg claims that his discovery's real name is Faisal Benkhald. He was born in Karachi in 1987 to a Pakistani Muslim engineer and his Jewish wife. Faisal's parents died when he was 13.

Faisal wants to change his name to Fishel Benkhald. He argues that since his mother was Jewish, according to the Jewish law, he is automatically Jewish. Goldberg accuses Pakistani authorities for not accepting Faisal's claim – considered an apostasy by those Jew-hating Pakistani Muslims.

Interestingly, Goldberg claims that Faisal's Jewish mother gave birth to four more children – none of whom is interested to adopt their mother's religion.

Goldberg also claims that there are many other Jews who are living under Muslim names to avoid antisemitism.......

"Fishel is all that remains of what was once a small but thriving Jewish community. Estimated to have numbered about 2,500 people at the start of the 20th century, Pakistani Jewry consisted mainly of migrants from Iraq. Following Israel's War of Independence in 1948, the central synagogue in Karachi (demolished in 1988) became a focal point for demonstrations against Israel. The majority of Jews left Pakistan for India or Israel around this time," wrote Goldberg.

On May 1, 2012, the Weekly Press Pakistan, an Israeli propaganda outlet from Canada, reported the story of Yoel Rueben, a Jew from Lahore living in the Israeli occupied town of Lod. Rueben claimed that at the establishment of Pakistan on August 14, 1947, there were not more than 1,000 Jews in Pakistan, living in Karachi, Lahore, Quetta and Peshawar. The 350-strong Jewish community in Karachi had one synagogue, one prayer hall and one graveyard. According to Rueben, the majority of Jews in Pakistan belonged to Bene Israel from India.

Wow! Israel finds a Jew in Karachi | Rehmat's World
Indeed the Jew - Hindu - Christian conspiracy against pure Pakistan at work, right?
 

AVERAGE INDIAN

EXORCIST
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
3,326
Likes
5,408
Country flag
The Jinnah we don't want to know

have a large framed photograph of M A Jinnah, our Quaid-i-Azam, on a wall of my home office here in New York. It is an old photograph in sepia tones, showing the man dressed immaculately, as always, in a dark suit, striped tie, white straight-collared shirt with double cuffs that protrude a little from underneath his coat sleeves, revealing a cufflink and wearing two-tone shoes.

Jinnah is squatting on the lawn of what appears to be an elegant red-brick house lined with shrubs and greenery. He has a cigarette between his lips, while both his hands are occupied holding a small, white, long-haired dog, a West Highland terrier, or Westie, as the breed is called. Sitting next to the Westie is a big, black Doberman, wearing a studded leather collar, his ears pricked warily. All three — the man and the dogs — are looking straight into the camera.

Jinnah has an amused expression on his face, which, it seems, would break into a grin were it not for the cigarette between his lips. He looks about 60 and dashingly handsome with fine features, a full head of hair with generous splashes of gray carefully combed back.

It's a shame that the official Pakistan does not display pictures of Jinnah like this one more often — and there are numerous such charming pictures of him in the archives: Jinnah in a chair with his young and beautiful daughter, Dina, standing by, both with a big smile; Jinnah laughing with Gandhi; Jinnah sitting on the arm of a park bench, posing with his sister and other friends; and many more. These pictures reveal the human side of Jinnah, almost a flamboyant side.

Ironically, most Pakistanis have grown up seeing their Quaid-i-Azam, in textbooks, on the covers of their notebooks and currency notes, as an unsmiling, humourless and a somber man, clad in a sherwani and a boat-shaped karakul cap that came to be called the Jinnah cap.

True, Jinnah did start wearing a sherwani and chooridar pyjama or shalwar and a karakul cap — in the last 10 or 12 years of his life — in public gatherings. But he never gave up wearing western clothes. Nor did he give up his love for dogs, nor, unfortunately, his addiction to cigarettes.

Jinnah was a modern man, a westernised man. Whatever his personal beliefs, he never wore religion on his sleeves. No photographer has ever been able to capture him clad in an ahram performing umrah or Hajj, or at an iftar party, or visiting and praying at shrines.

Not only have we 'doctored' an official image of Jinnah, we even insist on misspelling his name. Jinnah would spell his first name as Mohamed, as evident in his passport, issued in November 1946. The picture in the passport shows Jinnah wearing a western jacket, a tie and a Jinnah cap. I suspect this is the same picture that appears on our currency notes, but with the tie and jacket replaced with a sherwani collar. Obviously, we have been trying to clad Jinnah in an identity we wish to assume for ourselves — an overt religious identity.

We even rearranged the famous phrase "Unity, faith and discipline" from one of his speeches to "Faith, unity and discipline" and translated faith to mean religion, which, in the context of the speech, meant confidence or conviction.
Published in The Express Tribune, September 14th, 2011.

The Jinnah we don't want to know – The Express Tribune
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Jinnah was a misfit for Pakistan.

He was too suave for the unwashed salwar kameez or whatever rustics that were of Pakistan.

But then it is not his fault.

Poonja Gokuldas Meghji, was the patriarch of the family and was the paternal grandfather of Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Fatima Jinnah. He was a Hindu Lohana from Paneli village in Gondal state in Kathiawar who embraced Islam.

and worse was he was a Shia after the family converted.

Interestingly, Dina Wadia (b. 1919) was born to Muhammad Ali Jinnah and Maryam Jinnah in London shortly after midnight on the morning of August 15, 1919. As Stanley Wolpert's Jinnah of Pakistan records: "Oddly enough, precisely twenty-eight years to the day and hour before the birth of Jinnah's other offspring, Pakistan."

She had a rift with her father when she expressed her desire to marry a Parsi-born Indian, Neville Wadia.

Dina Wadia is the only direct living link to Jinnah and the nation of Pakistan claiming her father as its own father of the nation is assumed to have some kind of kinship with her according to Akbar S. Ahmed. His descendants through her are part of the Wadia family and reside in India as she married and stayed in India after the independence of Pakistan in 1947.

Therefore, the Jinnah family is too modern for obscurantist and fundamentalist Pakistan.


Jinnah's taste and sense of style made him one of the most well-dressed and sophisticated man of those times.

However, while showing the cigarette packet, it has missed out on the whiskey and ham and bacon for breakfast.

it would hurt the Pakistani sentiments even though they never admitted that he enjoyed what is Islamically haram.

I like Jinnah for his 'man of the world' attitude.

Eat, drink, make merry for tomorrow we will die......and sadly he died prematurely and Pakistan went into a tailspin from which it has still not recovered, sinking deeper and deeper into the morass and swamp by those who did not heed Jinnah's ideals of a true secular nation where all are equal (Aug 11 address).

That is why a large majority are fleeing the sinking ship called Pakistan.
 
Last edited:

sydsnyper

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2013
Messages
1,752
Likes
3,947
Country flag
Paki hospitality -

Attacks on Sikhs – The Express Tribune

A debate on religion here will be classic. DFI members are a cross section of ideologies, right from athiests, to agnostics, christians, jew supporters, muslims, leftists, hindutvawadis and a few jihadi clowns too... and instead of misquoting your religion in the weirdest of posts, you will get this platform to vent out all you can...

Good luck with it.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Paki hospitality -

Attacks on Sikhs – The Express Tribune

A debate on religion here will be classic. DFI members are a cross section of ideologies, right from athiests, to agnostics, christians, jew supporters, muslims, leftists, hindutvawadis and a few jihadi clowns too... and instead of misquoting your religion in the weirdest of posts, you will get this platform to vent out all you can...
I am not surprised that the Sikhs are being targeted.

The Sikhs did the the Muslims in during the Partition, a fact that must be rankling the Pakistani pious.
 

sydsnyper

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2013
Messages
1,752
Likes
3,947
Country flag
The pakis had conveniently reversed the anti-sikh policy during the instigation of the khalistani insurgency. Now that the khalistan insurgency is desd, they can go back to giving the sikhs what they always had in mind.

I am not surprised that the Sikhs are being targeted.

The Sikhs did the the Muslims in during the Partition, a fact that must be rankling the Pakistani pious.
 

Virendra

Ambassador
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
4,697
Likes
3,041
Country flag
Pakistan was created because the leaders involved in politics failed to come to a workable solution for power sharing between the two largest religious groups, i.e. Hindus and Muslims. The greed of power hungry Nehru is as respobsible for the partition as the sidelined Jinnah who didn't agree with Gandhi's favoritism and soft spot for Nehru.
Considering the explosiveness of communial divide and discrimination of minorities at both sides, I think the two nation theory proved out to be right.

About my ancestors, they ruled the Sub Continent too, fought wars with and against the hindus and finally settled for Pakistan.
Seperatists? Hell no.! There was no India but hundreds of small princely states and kingdoms united under the
Imperial British Raj and we fought against them for our rights. It was the UK which granted us Azadi, not modern day India.
There was, is and will always be India. 20th century nationalism cannot erase that fact.
India is a different kind of polity, that you don't understand it doesn't change the facts of history.
It exists as a modern nation today, it existed as a dharmic civilization in the past.
But to see that, you'll have to go deeper than British Raj and Princely States.

Regards,
Virendra
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top