'Even Mr. Jinnah's daughter didn't want Jinnah wali aazadi': Subramanian Swamy

[MenInG]

BJP leader and spokesperson Tajinder Pal Singh Bagga shared a video claiming that the protesters chanted 'Hum lekar rahenge aazadi, Jinnah wali aazadi' at the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act protest at Shaheen Bagh in Delhi.

The video went viral on social media, drawing flak from all corners for demanding 'Jinnah wali aazadi'. Now, BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy has hit out at the anti-CAA protesters in South Delhi for allegedly raising these slogans.

Swamy said that even Muhammad Ali Jinnah's daughter didn't want 'Jinnah wali aazadi'. "Tell Jinnah wali Azadi morons that the only child of Jinnah, his daughter, rejected Pakistan and chose India and settled down in Mumbai & married a Parsi. Her son and grand sons also live in Mumbai as industrialists," he wrote.


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">PTs: Tell Jinnah wali Azadi morons that the only child of Jinnah, his daughter, rejected Pakistan and chose India and settled down in Mumbai & married a Parsi. Her son and grand sons also live in Mumbai as industrialists.</p>— Subramanian Swamy (@Swamy39) <a href="https://twitter.com/Swamy39/status/1215787334647472128?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 11, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Dina Wadia was the only daughter of Muhammad Ali Jinnah, and his wife, Rattanbai Petit. In 1938, she married industrialist Neville Wadia but the marriage soon fell apart. However, she continued to reside in India until her death in 2017. Her personal diary revealed that she had only visited Pakistan twice, once on her father's death, and then for the 2004 India-Pakistan cricket match.

Here is the video which has been widely shared, claiming protesters chanted 'Hum lekar rahenge aazadi, Jinnah wali aazadi'

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"Hum Lekr Rhenge Aazadi, Jinnah Waali Aazadi"<br>Slogans by Left Terrorists in Anti CAA Protest at Shaheen Bagh<br><br>I am saying from day one<br>This is not Protest against Modi,<br>This is Protest against India <a href="https://t.co/CA4vVnMGD3">pic.twitter.com/CA4vVnMGD3</a></p>— Tajinder Pal Singh Bagga (@TajinderBagga) <a href="https://twitter.com/TajinderBagga/status/1215538566723301376?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 10, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

https://www.freepressjournal.in/ind...i-subramanian-swamy-slams-anti-caa-protesters

 

[MenInG]

We live in a dangerous world. No better example of what is above from BJP wallas.

 

[Syed1]

Isn't this the same joker who said India will be supa powa by 2020 and would have surpassed China by then?

 

[MenInG]

Isn't this the same joker who said India will be supa powa by 2020 and would have surpassed China by then?

He has obviously not run out of material.

 

[IAJ]

Lol how low will these facists stoop to make their point?
Even Prophet Nuh’s (Alaihi salam) son did not follow his father, and will that affect message of Nuh (AS)? I am not comparing MAJ with this beloved Prophet at all, but trying to say what children do, don’t necessarily represent the view or path of their parents.

 

[Hermoine Green]

O pai kehna kya chahty ho?

 

[AdamM97]

They seem to obsess over Jinnah quite a lot. I don’t see Pakistanis obsessing this much over Nehru, Gandhi or Patel.

 

[WebGuru]

Someone tell this idiot she got married in 1930s to this parsi against the will of her father far before the creation of Pakistan so this comparison here is making him look like the biggest idiot.

 

[Bewal Express]

With each passing day, we see how the vision of the Quaid saved us from servitude at the hands of these losers.

 

[BreadPakoda]

Lemme guess, another doctored clip by the goons?

 

[PakLFC]

Seems India's left walla's have become Quaid Jinnah's fans now. I knew it all the time

 

[Slog]

Guy needs history lessons lol

 

[FreakCricket]

Time for indian muslims to get up from the slumber, this rehtreoic only helps pakistan when india is divided and unstable.

 

[Local.Dada]

With each passing day, we see how the vision of the Quaid saved us from servitude at the hands of these losers.

Then with all that freedom how come Pakistan has not been able to match up to India on the scientific or economic front?

I mean even looking from the outside you can't really appreciate that can you? Unless of course you are looking at it from the perspective of UK then yes, India is behind UK on an economic front for now,I will give you that.

Look I understand you are proud Pakistani or British national or whatever and you are not a fan of Indian government and it's policies,I get it but to say words like servitude is what I take offense with.

The fact that Muslims who are on the streets protesting shows that they have a voice, how many such protests from minorities do you see in Pakistan which is even 1% of this magnitude. will they even be able to raise their voice?

Whatever happened in 1947 is done,can't change that, but stop trying to point to that as if proving a point,that is insult to what was one of the largest undocumented human losses in world history that happened on both sides.

 

[Bewal Express]

Then with all that freedom how come Pakistan has not been able to match up to India on the scientific or economic front?

I mean even looking from the outside you can't really appreciate that can you? Unless of course you are looking at it from the perspective of UK then yes, India is behind UK on an economic front for now,I will give you that.

Look I understand you are proud Pakistani or British national or whatever and you are not a fan of Indian government and it's policies,I get it but to say words like servitude is what I take offense with.

The fact that Muslims who are on the streets protesting shows that they have a voice, how many such protests from minorities do you see in Pakistan which is even 1% of this magnitude. will they even be able to raise their voice?

Whatever happened in 1947 is done,can't change that, but stop trying to point to that as if proving a point,that is insult to what was one of the largest undocumented human losses in world history that happened on both sides.

Our elite has messed up but Ind has over 100s of millions in absolute poverty, and its not exactly uprooted any trees. If you look at the recent events, you see Hindutuva brazenly tell Ind Citizens to leave if they don't like it, that is the ones have been patriotic and obeyed all your laws. You think these guys wouldn't have put us into serfdom. I thank QA for saving us from servitude by your fascists

 

[Mamoon]

M. Jinnah himself didn’t want partition and was ultimately coerced into it. Partition was done on weak grounds.

It should have been administrative-based rather than religion-based. Unfortunately, dividing the region on religious grounds has destabilized the subcontinent forever.

The Two Nation Theory was a myth and it was disproved with the way we discriminated against East Pakistan.

What the idealistic proponents of the Two Nation Theory failed to consider was that even Muslims cannot live together in peace as long as there are cultural, social and economic differences.

They were wrong to assume that religion alone would prove to be a binding force.

 

[Slim]

This guys own daughter ran with a Muslim. Looks like your daughter wanted that jinnah wali azadi?

Not only is this idiot known for making hilarious claims such as supapowa 2020, but is also ignorant about history. Dina married in 1930 long before Pakistan came into being. Jahil of the highest order but not surprised considering the whole of BJP is filled with them. From porn loving Amit shah to love jihad phobic Subarmian. What an amazing party.

 

[Mamoon]

People are throwing fits and handing out history lessons but he is actually right.

Dina Wadia separated from her husband before the partition and they never reconciled. Hence, she had no concrete reason for not living in the newly formed country that her father created.

Hence, it is factually correct that she rejected Pakistan and chose to live in India. The only incorrect part of his tweet is the assumption that she married a Parsi after the partition.

Or maybe it wasn’t an assumption and he didn’t word it properly.

Nonetheless, the fact remains that M. Jinnah’s only child preferred to live in India rather than Pakistan.

 

[Slog]

People are throwing fits and handing out history lessons but he is actually right.

Dina Wadia separated from her husband before the partition and they never reconciled. Hence, she had no concrete reason for not living in the newly formed country that her father created.

Hence, it is factually correct that she rejected Pakistan and chose to live in India. The only incorrect part of his tweet is the assumption that she married a Parsi after the partition.

Or maybe it wasn’t an assumption and he didn’t word it properly.

Nonetheless, the fact remains that M. Jinnah’s only child preferred to live in India rather than Pakistan.

Why did the same child campaign for Pakistan though?

 

[Mamoon]

Why did the same child campaign for Pakistan though?

It is the least that she could have done for her father.

The fact that she chose to live in Mumbai and didn’t care enough to live in her father’s country was enough proof of her loyalties.

She obviously didn’t want her children growing up in Pakistan.

To be honest, she made the right choice at a personal level because Ayub Khan would have treated her and her children the same way he treated her aunt.

 

[pillionrider]

Think I remember her sitting next to Musharraf and had the Indian flag in front of her.

This guys own daughter ran with a Muslim. Looks like your daughter wanted that jinnah wali azadi?

Not sure about running away. Fell in love. Yes.

Swamy himself is married to a Parsi btw.

 

[Slog]

It is the least that she could have done for her father.

The fact that she chose to live in Mumbai and didn’t care enough to live in her father’s country was enough proof of her loyalties.

She obviously didn’t want her children growing up in Pakistan.

To be honest, she made the right choice at a personal level because Ayub Khan would have treated her and her children the same way he treated her aunt.

This is pretty poor logic considering Jinnah himself wanted to split his time between Mumbai and Karachi. Did he also not want to live in Jinnah’s Pakistan?

She also herself said she did not want to live in Pakistan so as not to be used as a political prop.

You seem to be clutching at straws here.

 

[Local.Dada]

This is pretty poor logic considering Jinnah himself wanted to split his time between Mumbai and Karachi. Did he also not want to live in Jinnah’s Pakistan?

She also herself said she did not want to live in Pakistan so as not to be used as a political prop.

You seem to be clutching at straws here.

I am not saying anything about Jinnah here but if your statement were true,

it would come across as very pretentious of Jinnah to do that because one hand millions have lost their properties,uprooted their families, lost family members and Jinnah would himself navigate between his properties in Mumbai and Pakistan? I don't think a leader of that stature would do that based on what just happened?

I think we look at it (and this goes for both sides) so much from a religious angle that we tend to forget the human angle, that the death and carnage was even worse if not as bad as the holocaust.

Second, would it be that Jinnah just wanted a self-governing dominion for muslims within India and didn't expect a full scale partition?

Anyways don't care about their personal conflicts but Jinnah's daughter of all people lived a very happy,rich and fulfilling life in India and chose this country makes me proud though

 

[Aviator]

Wait for sometime ... BJP IT cell are masters at propagating fake videos.. I am sure this video is doctored. And this bagga guy gets caught everyday spreading fake videos just to please his masters..

 

[CricketCartoons]

Wait for sometime ... BJP IT cell are masters at propagating fake videos.. I am sure this video is doctored. And this bagga guy gets caught everyday spreading fake videos just to please his masters..

Bagga is a nice guy. Used to have tea with him when I was in Delhi when the BJP IT cell had hired me.

 

[Pakistanian]

It is the least that she could have done for her father.

The fact that she chose to live in Mumbai and didn’t care enough to live in her father’s country was enough proof of her loyalties.

She obviously didn’t want her children growing up in Pakistan.

To be honest, she made the right choice at a personal level because Ayub Khan would have treated her and her children the same way he treated her aunt.

She was a married adult with children, it doesn't matter where she lives. Here in the west nobody would care if an adult chooses to live a different life than their parents so I don't know why a so called "liberal" from Pakistan doesn't understand that adults don't have to live with their parents or support all their decisions.

 

[MenInG]

As I have asked before, please refer to Mr. Jinnah with the right title or you can call him Quaid-e-Azam.

Its polite request to honour the father of our nation.

 

[Abdul]

As I have asked before, please refer to Mr. Jinnah with the right title or you can call him Quaid-e-Azam.

Its polite request to honour the father of our nation.

Can we use sir instead of Mr?

 

[Mamoon]

This is pretty poor logic considering Jinnah himself wanted to split his time between Mumbai and Karachi. Did he also not want to live in Jinnah’s Pakistan?

She also herself said she did not want to live in Pakistan so as not to be used as a political prop.

You seem to be clutching at straws here.

Quaid-e-Azam’s expectations of splitting time between Mumbai and Karachi were not realistic. He expected Pakistan and India to be on cordial terms but that was not going to happen especially because of Kashmir dominion. When he left for Pakistan he actually vacated his house in Mumbai that he loved dearly.

This arrangement of him splitting time between Mumbai and Karachi would never have worked out and obviously he would have opted to live in Pakistan instead of India. No leader of a state can ever spend half of his time in another country.

On the contrary, Dina Wadia visit Pakistan after her father’s death until 2004, so she clearly didn’t intend to spend time in Pakistan.

I think the only people clutching at straws here are the ones who are refusing to accept that Dina Wadia chose India over Pakistan when all the facts support that claim.

 

[Mamoon]

She was a married adult with children, it doesn't matter where she lives. Here in the west nobody would care if an adult chooses to live a different life than their parents so I don't know why a so called "liberal" from Pakistan doesn't understand that adults don't have to live with their parents or support all their decisions.

You missed the point.

I completely understand that adults don’t have to support all their decisions. I don’t blame Dina Wadia for choosing India over Pakistan, considering how her aunt was treated in Pakistan after it became a colony of the Pakistani military.

Nobody should care, but we cannot run away from the facts either. Swamy spoke the truth.

Dina Wadia rejected her father’s country and preferred to live in India even though her marriage was broken before the partition.

 

[Pakistanian]

You missed the point.

I completely understand that adults don’t have to support all their decisions. I don’t blame Dina Wadia for choosing India over Pakistan, considering how her aunt was treated in Pakistan after it became a colony of the Pakistani military.

Nobody should care, but we cannot run away from the facts either. Swamy spoke the truth.

Dina Wadia rejected her father’s country and preferred to live in India even though her marriage was broken before the partition.

lmfaoo she didn't "reject" her father's country, you see things in black and white and see her choice living in India as some kind of referendum on her views of Pakistan and Mr. Jinnah's parenting. She chose to stay in Mumbai, India because she was literally married in 1931 to Christian man from Mumbai, you're really immature if you think she was gonna leave her husband and children to just move to another country. People choose not move for many reasons, it's really not that deep. Also lol at trying to connect all this to Fatima Jinnah and her death. Fatima Jinnah died in the 60s when her political career was at its peak where as the partition happened in '47 and Jinnah died a year later, Dina was already a grown woman that had been married for decades by the time her aunt had issues with the army.

 

[Slog]

You missed the point.

I completely understand that adults don’t have to support all their decisions. I don’t blame Dina Wadia for choosing India over Pakistan, considering how her aunt was treated in Pakistan after it became a colony of the Pakistani military.

Nobody should care, but we cannot run away from the facts either. Swamy spoke the truth.

Dina Wadia rejected her father’s country and preferred to live in India even though her marriage was broken before the partition.

This is fairly poor argument I’ll say it again.

Children and siblings of many founding fathers of America moved to England. Did this mean they rejected the United States? And even if they did does anyone care or does it even mean anything? This in itself shows clutching at straws if you think it has any significance.

 

[Mamoon]

lmfaoo she didn't "reject" her father's country, you see things in black and white and see her choice living in India as some kind of referendum on her views of Pakistan and Mr. Jinnah's parenting. She chose to stay in Mumbai, India because she was literally married in 1931 to Christian man from Mumbai, you're really immature if you think she was gonna leave her husband and children to just move to another country. People choose not move for many reasons, it's really not that deep. Also lol at trying to connect all this to Fatima Jinnah and her death. Fatima Jinnah died in the 60s when her political career was at its peak where as the partition happened in '47 and Jinnah died a year later, Dina was already a grown woman that had been married for decades by the time her aunt had issues with the army.

Her marriage ended in 1943, 4 years before the partition. They were informally divorced because divorce was illegal in India.

You need to brush up your understanding of history before hanging onto to the “she didn’t leave India because she was married to an Indian” moot point.

She wasn’t at the time of partition. They had parted ways for good.

And for the record, her husband was Parsi not Christian.

Furthermore, I am not connecting it to the treatment of Fatimah Jinnah. My point is that Dina Wadia made the right decision to stay in India because she would have suffered at the hands of General Ayub like Fatimah Jinnah did.

Of course she didn’t know that her father’s country would turn into a Pakistan military colony, but in hindsight, her decision proved to be correct. Her children and grandchildren are hugely successful now, and God knows if they would have even survived in Pakistan under the regime of General Ayub.

You can lmfaoo all you want but facts are facts. You were ignorant of the fact that her marriage had ended before the partition and you were also ignorant of the fact that her husband was a Parsi not a Christian.

It is also a fact that she preferred to live in India instead of Pakistan. Clearly, she didn’t want her sons growing up in the country created by her father. She also didn’t care enough to visit her aunt even once after her father passed away in 1948.

Her aunt lived in Karachi for 19 years after her father’s death, and during this time, she didn’t even step in Pakistan for a second.

Her only visit before her death in 2017 was in 2004.

All of this proves the following:

She didn’t share her father’s vision, she didn’t care to see her aunt, she clearly did not have any affinity with the country her father created because she didn’t care to visit after his death until 2004.

Was it wrong and should she be criticized for it? No, it is her choice. However, is Swami right in pointing out that she did not want Quaid-e-Azam’s azaadi? Yes, 100%.

 

[Mamoon]

This is fairly poor argument I’ll say it again.

Children and siblings of many founding fathers of America moved to England. Did this mean they rejected the United States? And even if they did does anyone care or does it even mean anything? This in itself shows clutching at straws if you think it has any significance.

It has no significance. She was an adult who grew up in Mumbai and wasn’t particularly close to her father, so it is not wrong that she ended up preferring to stay in India rather than move to Pakistan.

However, my problem is with people making excuses and justifications for her, and how she believed in Pakistan and would have moved there if so and so did not happen. There is no evidence to support that claim, but there is plenty of evidence to support the claim that she preferred to live in India over Pakistan.

Swami did not say anything wrong.

In hindsight, it was a good decision at a personal level anyway because God knows what would have happened to her under General Ayub.

The children and siblings of the founding fathers of USA who moved to England clearly preferred England over the newly formed country established by their fathers, just like Dina Wadia clearly preferred India over the newly formed Pakistan.

 

[IAJ]

The most active ones in this thread, why are you lecturing eachother in the history without mentioning sources? 10 people could have written about same topic but could have written opposing things.

So you can’t come here 70 years later when probably even your parents were not been born and lecture people in history without giving proper sources.

 

[Kriketer]

It has no significance. She was an adult who grew up in Mumbai and wasn’t particularly close to her father, so it is not wrong that she ended up preferring to stay in India rather than move to Pakistan.

However, my problem is with people making excuses and justifications for her, and how she believed in Pakistan and would have moved there if so and so did not happen. There is no evidence to support that claim, but there is plenty of evidence to support the claim that she preferred to live in India over Pakistan.

Swami did not say anything wrong.

In hindsight, it was a good decision at a personal level anyway because God knows what would have happened to her under General Ayub.

The children and siblings of the founding fathers of USA who moved to England clearly preferred England over the newly formed country established by their fathers, just like Dina Wadia clearly preferred India over the newly formed Pakistan.

You are trying too hard to make it look like she "rejected" the move. Many Muslims didn't move as packing up and leaving isn't an easy option, hence we still have many Muslims in India. What Swamy said is idiotic and far away from facts, so no surprise you are supporting it. You suffocate in Pakistan each day so your whines against Pakistan continue.

 

[Slog]

It has no significance. She was an adult who grew up in Mumbai and wasn’t particularly close to her father, so it is not wrong that she ended up preferring to stay in India rather than move to Pakistan.

However, my problem is with people making excuses and justifications for her, and how she believed in Pakistan and would have moved there if so and so did not happen. There is no evidence to support that claim, but there is plenty of evidence to support the claim that she preferred to live in India over Pakistan.

Swami did not say anything wrong.

In hindsight, it was a good decision at a personal level anyway because God knows what would have happened to her under General Ayub.

The children and siblings of the founding fathers of USA who moved to England clearly preferred England over the newly formed country established by their fathers, just like Dina Wadia clearly preferred India over the newly formed Pakistan.

Swami is wrong. Without a doubt

He is claiming she did not move to Pakistan as she did not believe in it. That is fede nye my not true we both know that.

Her moving or not moving had nothing to do with belief in idea. In fact she supported Pakistan movement and there is evidence in many letters of this.

You are clearly obfuscation facts

 

[CricketCartoons]

There is no proof that she accepted or rejected Pakistan when it was formed. People fighting over speculation.

 

[Mamoon]

You are trying too hard to make it look like she "rejected" the move. Many Muslims didn't move as packing up and leaving isn't an easy option, hence we still have many Muslims in India. What Swamy said is idiotic and far away from facts, so no surprise you are supporting it. You suffocate in Pakistan each day so your whines against Pakistan continue.

She wasn’t one of the “many Muslims”.

She was the daughter of Quaid-e-Azam. Moving to Pakistan was as easy for her as it was for her father and her aunt.

However, she clearly preferred to live in India and it proved to be an extremely wise decision.

 

[Mamoon]

Swami is wrong. Without a doubt

He is claiming she did not move to Pakistan as she did not believe in it. That is fede nye my not true we both know that.

Her moving or not moving had nothing to do with belief in idea. In fact she supported Pakistan movement and there is evidence in many letters of this.

You are clearly obfuscation facts

Well you can focus on his words but Dina Wadia truly believed in Pakistan and its future she would have followed her father and aunt.

But she clearly preferred India over Pakistan. The fact that she didn’t visit her aunt even once until her death clearly showed that she couldn’t care less.

Supporting the idea of Pakistan through letters means little. Actions speak louder than words and she didn’t envision as a country where she would want her children to grow up in.

I am sure Quaid-e-Azam would have wanted his only grandchildren to be Pakistanis, and it is quite ironic and sad that even the daughter and the grandchildren of the “Father of the Nation” are Indian.

 

[JaDed]

In theory she did but its not as concrete as say Rafi sahab’s first wife that purposefully chose Pakistan but Rafi just like Sahir chose to live in India.

Those two made a more specific choice imo irrespective of family commitments..more of an Independent decision and also unlike Manto that chose to move to Pakistan.

Also during those years there was not a strong border and immigration boundaries like today.. even nationalist loyalties weren’t a thing, I remember reading an article about how Muslims In India during earlier years supported Pakistan cricket team.
I still know many Tamizhan Muslims that do that though.

So this binary attitude of Subcontinent Politics and people is a new thing esp in India.

 

[CricketCartoons]

In theory she did but its not as concrete as say Rafi sahab’s first wife that purposefully chose Pakistan but Rafi just like Sahir chose to live in India.

Those two made a more specific choice imo irrespective of family commitments..more of an Independent decision and also unlike Manto that chose to move to Pakistan.

Also during those years there was not a strong border and immigration boundaries like today.. even nationalist loyalties weren’t a thing, I remember reading an article about how Muslims In India during earlier years supported Pakistan cricket team.
I still know many Tamizhan Muslims that do that though.

So this binary attitude of Subcontinent Politics and people is a new thing esp in India.

You read an article and concluded that nationalist loyalties weren't a thing then?

The only difference then was that political leadership was not so antagonistic. Q-e-A and Gandhi has mutual respect for each other, and Q-e-A even contemplated of having a joint army. Travel was easy between the two countries and newspapers from Pakistan were available in India. But don't mistake that people loved each other in general. They just kept it in their hearts and within their mohalla as there was no internet to broadcast what they thought of the other.

 

[JaDed]

You read an article and concluded that nationalist loyalties weren't a thing then?

The only difference then was that political leadership was not so antagonistic. Q-e-A and Gandhi has mutual respect for each other, and Q-e-A even contemplated of having a joint army. Travel was easy between the two countries and newspapers from Pakistan were available in India. But don't mistake that people loved each other in general. They just kept it in their hearts and within their mohalla as there was no internet to broadcast what they thought of the other.

Nationalism wasn’t as defined as it’s now, hatred was probably there coz religion if not we wouldn’t had seen the slaughter during partition.

The with us or against us attitude is much more now.

 

[Slog]

Well you can focus on his words but Dina Wadia truly believed in Pakistan and its future she would have followed her father and aunt.

But she clearly preferred India over Pakistan. The fact that she didn’t visit her aunt even once until her death clearly showed that she couldn’t care less.

Supporting the idea of Pakistan through letters means little. Actions speak louder than words and she didn’t envision as a country where she would want her children to grow up in.

I am sure Quaid-e-Azam would have wanted his only grandchildren to be Pakistanis, and it is quite ironic and sad that even the daughter and the grandchildren of the “Father of the Nation” are Indian.

You can keep going around in circles and changing goalposts to believe in what you want.

What you say and Swami say has no merit. I have provided enough logical evidence here.

However you can have the last word here if that makes you feel better. Good luck!

 

[KB]

Also during those years there was not a strong border and immigration boundaries like today.. even nationalist loyalties weren’t a thing, I remember reading an article about how Muslims In India during earlier years supported Pakistan cricket team.
I still know many Tamizhan Muslims that do that though.

So this binary attitude of Subcontinent Politics and people is a new thing esp in India.

There is a very important point here. It is tempting to read back into history contemporary concerns and sentiments. We see it too frequently and in many contexts. In this example as JaDed writes, it is too easy to see 1947 through the lens of now, to project the reality of today's hard borders and pervasive national allegiances in South Asia back to 1947. Remember that the first restrictions on the movement of people between India and Pakistan did not actually come into force until almost a year after partition, when in July 1948, India introduced the permit system (Pakistan implemented its own permit system in October 1948). Such limiting of mobility across borders was a shock for many and in the words of the pro-Congress Muslim newspaper, Al-Jamiat, the moment of "real partition."

 

[Mamoon]

You can keep going around in circles and changing goalposts to believe in what you want.

What you say and Swami say has no merit. I have provided enough logical evidence here.

However you can have the last word here if that makes you feel better. Good luck!

Well you didn’t provide any logical evidence. You only gave two irrelevant examples of Quaid-e-Azam aiming to divide his time between Karachi and Mumbai (wouldn’t have happened for obvious reasons) and how certain children of the founders of USA opted to stay in the UK.

That is not logical evidence, and neither is the fact that Dina Wadia supported the formation of Pakistan through letters.

The facts speak for themselves: she opted to stay in India in spite of the fact that her marriage was over, and she didn’t visit Pakistan between 1948 and 2004. She didn’t even care to visit Fatima Jinnah even once.

She clearly didn’t care about the country her father created. It couldn’t be more obvious.

Anyway, I am not interested in having the last word either. You can stick to your beliefs and I will stick to mine.

 

[MenInG]

KHANDWA: BJP leader and Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy has said he was in favour of inscribing the image of Goddess Lakshmi on banknotes which could "improve the condition of the Indian currency".

Swamy was speaking to reporters on Tuesday night after addressing a lecture series titled 'Swami Vivekananda Vyakhyanmala' in Madhya Pradesh's Khandwa district.

Responding to a question about the picture of Lord Ganesha printed on the Indonesian currency, Swamy said, "Prime Minister Narendra Modi can answer this question. I am in favour (of this). Lord Ganesha removes obstacles. I rather say that a picture of Goddess Lakshmi (on currency notes) may improve the condition of Indian currency. Nobody should feel bad about this."

Swamy said there was nothing objectionable in the Citizenship [Amendment] Act.

"The Congress and Mahatma Gandhi had requested this (CAA). Manmohan Singh had also requested in Parliament in 2003. We did it. Now they are not accepting it saying that we did injustice to Pakistan's Muslims. What injustice was done? Pakistan's Muslims don't want to come, we can't force them," Swamy said.

Earlier, while delivering the lecture, Swamy said DNA of Muslims and Hindus is same like that of Brahmins and Dalits.

Swamy claimed the BJP would soon introduce the Uniform Civil Code (UCC), which he said had been repeatedly directed by the supreme court in the past 70 years and by Article 44 of the Constitution.

Expressing concerns over the rising population, Swamy said India would leave China behind by 2025 as the most populous nation.

https://www.cricketcountry.com/news...ing-home-test-series-against-sri-lanka-913316

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

What is the point this guy is trying to make? If he doesn't agree with crowd chants for Jinnah wali azaadi, then logically he should be urging his party to unite India again, by force if necessary. Instead his party seems more intent on cementing partition, AKA Jinnah wali Azaadi by finishing off the job once and for all by swapping Hindus and Muslims left on either side of the border.

It makes no sense at all.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Earlier, while delivering the lecture, Swamy said DNA of Muslims and Hindus is same like that of Brahmins and Dalits.

Well I guess that could be true. Brahmins tend to have lighter skin tone, and Muslim population of the subcontinent is more often associated with Pakistan and Afghanistan.

 

[MenInG]

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) candidate in Delhi elections, Kapil Mishra, has refused to take back his tweets on Delhi Assembly elections, where he called the electoral contest as a match between India and Pakistan. The Returning Officer (RO) had issued a notice to him on the tweets.

“I received a notice from Election Commission last night, I’ll give my reply today. I don’t think I said anything wrong. Speaking truth is not a crime in this country. I spoke the truth. I stand by my statement,” Mishra said, according to news agency ANI.

“Roads are encroached upon in Shaheen Bagh, people aren’t being allowed to go to schools, offices, hospitals, inciting slogans are being raised. The shamelessness with which Manish Sisodia said he stands with Shaheen Bagh means that this is a political movement,” ANI further quoted Mishra as saying.

He is the BJP candidate from Model Town in north Delhi.

In its notice to Mishra, the RO had said “Clause 1(1) of the Model Code of Conduct stipulates that no party or candidate shall include in any activity which may aggravate existing differences or create mutual hatred or cause tension between different castes and communities, religion or linguistic.”

It further said that Mishra’s act violates the provisions of the Model Code of Conduct and the same is punishable under law; he has been asked to explain why action should not be initiated against him.

Mishra had said in the tweet that the assembly elections on February 8 will be like an India-Pakistan match.

He had further explained his tweets and claimed that the protest against citizenship law in Shaheen Bagh is Pakistan sponsored. “Pakistan has entered Shaheen Bagh. Mini Pakistans are being created in Delhi. The Indian law is not followed in areas like Shaheen Bagh, Chand Bagh and Inderlok. Pakistani hooligans have captured the streets of Delhi,” Mishra said in his tweet posted in Hindi on Thursday.

“AAP and Congress have created these mini-Pakistans, like the one in Shaheen Bagh. They will get the answer from India on February 8. Whenever seditious people create a Pakistan in India, they will come face-to-face with patriotic Indians,” Mishra furth said on Twitter.

Mishra was removed as minister by Delhi Chief Minister and AAP chief Arvind Kejriwal in 2017. Last year, he was also disqualified as AAP lawmaker under the anti-defection law.

https://www.hindustantimes.com/asse...elhi-tweets/story-nRIGyG7ZirseMhrd5rNLiK.html