From: mirza@sce.carleton.ca (Murad A. Mirza)
Subject: Re: Karachi and Sind
Keywords: Pakistan,capital
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 16:09:00 GMT

chaudhry@schroedinger.engin.umich.edu (Iblees) writes:



>The following excerpt is from "Pakistan : From 1947 to the Creation of 
>Bangladesh", a research report published by the Keesing's Publications in 1973.


>"The Assembly on May 23, 1948, adopted a resolution presented by the Government 
>formally proclaiming Karachi, the capital of Sind, as capital of the Dominion of 
>Pakistan. ( Karachi had been the provisional capital of the Dominion since the 
>latter came into existence.) This met with strong dissatisfaction on the part of 
>the Sind Moslem League Council, which, on June 11, instructed the Sind 
>Government not to surrender to the Central Government any of its powers in 
>respect of Karachi and to convene a special session of the Sind Legislative 
>Assembly to record a formal denunciation of the Constituent Assembly's 
>resolution, which it was said had "flouted the will of the Sind people."
> It was not until July 6 that, after having put their views directly before 
>Governor-General Jinnah, the Sind Moslem League Assembly Party decided to 
>acquiesce in the Constituent Assembly's decision. The administration of Karachi, 
>including the air and sea ports, the railway headquaters, and islands off the 
>coast, was formally transferred from the Government of Sind to the Government of 
>Pakistan on July 23."


>The excerpt given above is my total [ extremely small :-) :-)] knowledge about 
>this affair. Can any netter confirm/refute the contents of the this excerpt or 
>give comments or more information about this important event in Sind's history 
>which may have had an effect on the present demographics(?) of urban Sind.

>BTW my 2 cent worth of opinion about how we should look at our history:

>While ascertaining the facts about Pakistan's history, I feel it is imperative 
>that we should not allow the past to bury our future.  Neither do I feel that as 
>a country, our future course should be *hostage* to the actions and aspirations 
>of the generation which founded Pakistan. While making decisions Pakistan's 
>history should be kept in perspective, to fully comprehend the situation or to 
>learn from history ( and, thus the need to know more about our country's 
>history). But present day decisions have to be made in accordance with the 
>*present* aspirations of the *present day* citizens of Pakistan ( this, of 
>course, includes many people from the generation which founded Pakistan).

>Thus statements like " XYZ was the reason why my/our parents/grandparents ( or 
>whoever ) made such and such sacrifices, and so the country should now be doing 
>XYZ" should not be sufficient reason to do XYZ now. ( I am saying this because 
>some people on the net have been making statements similar to the above 
>hypothetical statement in discussions about present/future course of action of 
>the people of Pakistan.   


>Nauman [Iblees Iblees kardey ni maiN aapey Iblees huya ] Chaudhry
>( With apologies to Shah Hussain and Baba Bulleh Shah :-) :-) )

>----------------------------------------------------------------------------

>According to Christianity [ Islam and some other religions ] God " is supposed
>to be a revengful tyrant, delighting in cruelty,  punishing his creatures for
>the very sins which he causes them to commit; and creating numberless millions
>of immortal souls, that could never have offended him, for the express purpose
>of tormenting them to all eternity" 

assalam alaikum
some thoughts about first few paras. of Mr. N. Chaudry's dissertation:

as some said in the past that "Past is another country," were refering to
(probably - based on my limited knowledge) the follies of the people of
earlier generation, and not (refering to) the happenings which precluded the
creation of Pakistan.  Parallels can now easily be drawn between the situation
then and the situation now in Bosnia-Hercegovina.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

some more thoughts about last two paras. of Chotay Chaudry's dissertation:

Allah (SWT) says in Sura Al-Kahf (Sura 18):

(The other) said (to Musa (AlaihSalam) - Moses (may peace be upon him)) 
"Verily Thou wilt not be able To have patience with me!" (18:67)

"For how canst thou Have patience about things Which are beyond your 
knowledge." (Sura 18: Ayah 68)

so if you can take some of your precious time off to read Sura Al-Kahf in
earnest with open eyes ears and heart may be the last para. of your dissertationwill become more clearer to you (the reader who has not yet looked at those
golden words, I believe).  the lesson (what I understand) conveyed by this
Sura in general and these (and other Ayahs following these) Ayahs in particular
is that we should be very careful in judging the happenings around us.  We
are mere humans whose vision is limited to the Zahir (things whose presence
we can judge (or whose knowledge we can have) by our five (or six) senses).

Iblees is obviously Sadda chief in small things (Chori, Chakari, Bay Rahravi,
Ghunda Anaasir ki tarafdari, Rishwat Satan(i) etc. etc.), but remember that
he was the Wadda (Nari) Chief (or Mis-Chief for that matter) of the Nuri clan,
so you (mr. chotay chaudry) have now achieved the distinction of becoming   
Nam Ka Iblees, you have to do do much more to achieve the rank of Kam Ka
Iblees (but I hope in earnest that you don't achieve that distinction).

Murad [can be categorized in some matters as shaitan ka cheela or better
	still nanha shaitan and may Allah save me and us from this distinction] Mirza.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.pakistan