Talk:Muttahida Qaumi Movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Muttahida Qaumi Movement article.
Article policies
This article is part of WikiProject Pakistan which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Pakistan and Pakistan-related topics. For guidelines see WikiProject Pakistan and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

only general characteristic generally agreed upon is that terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence

This article and its contents mirror that of the wikipedia article for 'Muhajir Urdu'. I encourage the people that are presenting neutral views on this article to review the materials and information there as well since that article is looking like a MQM web-page, rather than neutral article on 'Urdu-Speakers'.

Contents

[edit] Kawaja da gawah duddo

What amazes me is the credibility of the article. How conveniently the posters have added references to MQM's official website. Couldn't it be more credible than that. I suggest removing everything from this page, and just adding a link to MQM's website.

[edit] Two Mistakes

MQM was not created by ISI..it evolved due to suppression of Muhajirs by quota system. MQM does not represent Muslims only. It represents all Muhajirs regardless or origin, language and religion.

Someome please correct that. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mailnotwanted (talk • contribs) 03:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] NPOV

I added a NPOV dispute tag to the main page. The article paraphrases quotes from the MQM's website in lieu of independent sources and uses exhaggerated language without supporting citations. More seriously, the MQM's use of violence is glossed over (referred to as "controversies") while the government's use of violence against the MQM is highlighted. sunbird (talk) 17:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Where's the Truth?

Siddiqui, why do you keep on changing it? Either remove this article from Wikipedia, or let us modify it to put it in the right perspective. In current state it looks like MQM's official website. The modifications that I made were very balanced, and were not critical of Muhajirs as a community or the current political standing of MQM. Previousy, you even took off my remarks on MQM talk. Feb. 27, 2006 PeterHenych

I wrote one paragraph in 'Background section:
The Muhajirs only constituted 7% of the Pakistani population but monopolized most of it's bureaucracy due to their higher educational levels and participitation in Pakistan's freedom movement. This created resentment in other linguistic and ethnic groups of Pakistan. The consecutive Pakistani governments tried to create balance by introducing job quotas in bureaucracy and higher educational institutions to help other ethnic and linguistic groups to get their fair representation comparable to their share in the Pakistani population. This affirmative action by the government of Pakistan was resented by the Muhajirs who preferred qualification and merit as the only criteria for jobs and admission into universities.
I also wrote:
Opposing views
It is generally believed in Pakistan that MQM was created by the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), main military intelligence agency in Pakistan. It was created to break the stronghold of Benazir Bhutto in her home province, Sindh. ISI believed that the ethnic tension between Sindhis and Muhajirs will distract Benazir Bhutto and her political party, Pakistan Peoples Party, from launching campaign against the military government of General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq. Altaf Hussain was living in Chicago at that time and he was called to form a Muhajir ethnic political party with funds supplied by ISI.
The success of MQM in attracting support of Muhjairs both surprised and scared the ISI. This unexpected popularity helped MQM to chart it's own independent political course rather than follow the ISI agenda. MQM went out of control of ISI and began a violent struggle for Muhajirs that turned Karachi into a virtual war-zone. In 1992, after months of extreme violence by the MQM, Pakistan Army launched a military operation to restore law and order in Karachi. The MQM gunmen were killed or arrested, armories and torture rooms were destroyed. The Army involvement is an indication of the seriousness of the crisis that MQM perpetrated in Karachi. Since the army operation and subsequent heavy activities of Pakistani police and paramilitary, the MQM has given up it's violent activities.
Now you discuss what changes you want to make. Remember there are some MQM members that may not agree with your changes but we must discuss them and agree to a comprimise.
Siddiqui 02:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
I don't get what part of my modifications was incorrect. MQM did have a terrible histroy. Note that I am not talking about present. Thats why in my modifications I insisted that people who were violent, are no longer part of the party. In current state it does not look like a serious article and suffers from credibility issues. Please don't use these pages to further your agendas.
And why did you remove my comments from this page?

PeterHenych Feb. 28, 2006

We are not reaching to a conclusion. You are not replying to my posts on this page. Instead you are trying to terrorize me by posting messages on my talk page and using the words like MQM supporters. Please keep words like that to your constituency, for instance mqm.org.

PeterHenych Feb. 28, 2006

[edit] About updating article

Dear All,

I have updated this article today. Whatever I corrected or added, is generally accepted view, and I give proper source of the event. Moreover, I did not touch opposing view segment of the article, since all has right to express their views as per given rules.

But there are many in Pakistan who do not like MQM and Muhajirs, and always try to demonize them by hook or crook. No one should damage ones image and deny ones existence by exploiting public encyclopedia like wikipedia. Such contributors may put their viewpoint under the heading of Opposing views.

User:M.Imran, 13:27 UT, January 21, 2006

You can add some Urdu speaking Muhajirs from Karachi who do not like the tactics and extreme violence of Altaf Hussain and MQM and I am one of them. It may come as a surprise to you but the truth is that 100% of Muhajir do not support MQM. There is a significant percentage that oppose Altaf Hussain and MQM. You cannot lecture me since me and my family lived in Karachi and saw what happened. In any case, Wikipedia must represent both views.
Siddiqui 14:24, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Do you think something should be added to this article regarding Benazir's crackdown on MQM, the subsequent army action and the strong support that followed in Karachi's youth. I think its important to include that information. Fkh82

Siddiqui! Since there exist uncountable examples, where a political party does not possess cent percent support from its birthtown. And it is an open secret that all Muhajirs do not support MQM (even in my family too). And it is not a matter of surprise for me, as I myself is a Karachiite. Even there are many Urdu-speaking who discourage MQM at many fronts and they have right. But what does this indicate? It allows us to distort once image. Lots of people oppose Nawaz Sharif, Benazir, Ch. Shujaat etc. and their policies. Take the example of politics of M.A. Jinnah. There were more opponents than supporters of partition of India. But does this allow that we put all this views in the main wiki article Jinnah. Obviously not. Similarly there are lots of political parties, personalities and ethnic groups whose past is full of contradictory sayings and actions. Today, a large number of Muslims even westerners do not like Blair and Bush policies. But just look at their pages, general information is not replaced by opposing views. You may put your views separately rather mixing it with main article.
User:M.Imran, 01:25, February 21, 2006 (UTC)
I think other pages have their own views. I cannot tell everybody the violence that went on in Karachi at behest of MQM. I saw what happened and heard many first hand accounts. I wrote the Opposing Views section as a very sanitized and civilized paragraph acceptable to Wikipedia. If I wrote what I saw and heard then it would not meet those rules.
Siddiqui 13:54, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

This page is target of vandalism by many anonymous persons. All the illegal changes will be reverted. -- User:Siddiqui 17:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)


This page is only target of vandalism by you - Mr. Siddiqui. The number of misleading changes you made is more than many times by rest of all contributors.
Your personal views and dislikeness for Urdu-speaking people, MQM and Altaf Hussain can not be generalized. Even if you want to express different views about MQM then you may put them under heading of Opposing views . But please dont distort the whole article. Misleading information is much harmful than ignorance.

User:M.Imran 11:15 UT, January 13, 2006

Do not delete any section or paragraph without first creating a consensus.
Siddiqui 14:28, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism has been a major problem on this page since the riots of May 12. For admins who have an interest in this topic, please add it to your Watch list and make sure additions remain academic, despite however we ourselves may feel about MQM. Afinebalance 12:15, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Why was Category:Political parties of minorities removed ?

I went back to see when and by whom this category was suppressed, I can't understand why Siddiqui suppressed it, the MQM was from its birth a party aiming at representing an ethnic minority. I put this category back. Even if this party has evolved and attracted non-ethnic voters, its categorization remains useful for comparison with other silmilar parties in the world. --Pylambert 12:16, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

I agree to you Pylambert. User:Siddiqui not only removed widely accepted view but also attempted to demonize MQM and Muhajir by putting biased facts and fadged information. Unfortunately User:Spasage also reverted changes, without reading changed material.
User:M.Imran, 13:17 UT, January 21, 2006
I did not try to demonize MQM but presented neutral view. As a Muhajir from Karachi, I also know the issues involved in rise of MQM and its faults and achievements. So I am not adding any "biased facts and fadged information". It is the truth of the dark side of MQM. I have tried to present neutral view in taking account views from all sides.
  • "The Muhajirs only constituted 7% of the Pakistani population but monopolized most of it's bureaucracy due to their higher educational levels and participitation in Pakistan's freedom movement. This created resentment in other linguistic and ethnic groups of Pakistan. The consecutive Pakistani governments tried to create balance by introducing job quotas in bureaucracy and higher educational institutions to help other ethnic and linguistic groups to get their fair representation comparable to their share in the Pakistani population. This affirmative action by the government of Pakistan was resented by the Muhajirs who preferred qualification and merit as the only criteria for jobs and admission into universities."
Can you point out any bias in above paragraph that you deleted.
Siddiqui 13:38, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
Why I deleted the above paragraph
No one argued that Muhajirs are more than eight percent of the total population of Pakistan, but the question in which context the statistic is used. The first sentence of the paragraph use the word, “monopolized”. Now lets see what does it mean. It is basically a term from Economics that portrays, “an exclusive control, while excluding all others”. Now which standard and unbiased source says that Muhajirs excluded and intentionally attempted to corner Sindhis and Punjabis in bureaucracy. Can you provide the statistics that signify how and when capable Sindhis and Punjabis were excluded by Muhajirs in civil services and bureaucracy.
Now in the next sentence you provided the effect of above cause. That is, “This created resentment in other linguistic and ethnic groups of Pakistan.” Now tell how many ethnic conflicts and clashes in Karachi and Hyderabad were based on the issue of monopolizing jobs in bureaucracy by MQM workers or even last generation Muhajirs. Then you come up with the argument that Muhajirs resented the quota system by Government of Pakistan. Well, the fact is that Muhajirs opposes the continuation of quota system rather its first promulgation. Bhutto imposed quota system (on the basis of population allocation) for few years in order to decrease the urban-rural inequality, but later Zia martial law did not lift the quota system as promised by the government. And this quota system is still part and parcel of government policy even after 30 years. MQM opposes the illegal elongation and extension of quota system rather its first imposition.
  • First of all, it should be cleared that clashed between MQM and other ethnic groups' political activist have occurred during mid and late 1980s. And the basis of those clashes were not, what you inferred. Please see back issues of The daily Dawn, The News and other authentic sources, including official publications and chronology of Pakistan.
  • While, during 1990s, a series of conflict between government and civilians have been occurred. This was fueled by 1992 military operation. During 1990 there was no direct or indirect conflict between Muhajirs and any other ethnic group of Pakistan. That was a strife between government (security forces, rangers and police) and MQM political activists, specially between 1991 - 1996.
User:M.Imran, 01:25, February 21, 2006 (UTC)
Firstly, we were discussing this paragraph and you again deleted it. This is unacceptable. I have reverted your deletion. We have to agree to one of these three options: a) Include it; b) Delete it; c) Modify it. We need to discuss these issues.
Secondly, You may also recall that Sindh government declared Sindhi as official language of the province and Muhajir resented that decision. It was stayed for 10 years and has not been implemented in last 30 years. If we support end of quota system then we must also support Sindhi as official language of Sindh province. We should also support its inclusion in school, colleges and universities. We should also support it as a criteria for provincial jobs and admission in universities. All muncipalities in Sindh will also have adhere to provincial official language policy.
The real question is how many Muhajirs do speak Sindhi after living nealry four generation in Sindh ?
Siddiqui 14:08, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
The purpose of deletion from my end, says that it is not acceptable (on account of one-sided information it contains, rather facts).
In this reply, you are deviating from the issue. The issue is argument and inference in the mentioned paragraph, which is not unbiased. Instead of answering the arguments, you jumped to another topic and criticized the MQM past. Dont merge quota system with language issue. By the way, Sindhi has the status of official language of the province since Bhutto regime, along with Urdu. Still today, Sindhi is a part of compulsory subject in all public schools till matriculation in Sindh. Simultanesouly one is allowed to give any paper in Sindhi language.
Since we are discussion the historical and logical reliability of the paragraph, which does include the issue you hilighted that The real question is how many Muhajirs do speak Sindhi after living nealry four generation in Sindh ? Well, learning languages is issue of social and economic preferences that depends upon the its historical association, richness and acceptability of the language. Moreover, MQM endorsed and appreciated the promulgation of Sindhi language (few months back) in the province at college level. If you criticizes the past then also appreciate the present. But if you are only keen to pinpoint faults then dont forget this is not the heaven and we are not the angels.
Re-read the paragraph and provide the historical sources, if any.
User:M.Imran 14:40, February 21, 2006 (UTC)

Resetting Tabs

If my paragraph deemed on sided by you then following paragraph in the same section should also be deemed one sided.

Official discrimination against Muhajirs began in 1958 when General Muhammad Ayub Khan seized the presidency of Pakistan in a military coup. General Ayub Khan systematically eliminated Muhajirs from important positions in the civil service, bureaucracy and local government. The subsequent administration of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto of nationalizing Muhajir businesses, unfairly taxing them and enforcing quota system at university seats and governments vacancies.

The Sindhis will demand the restoration of Sindhi as a sole official language of Sindh as it was initially passed by Sindh assembly in 1973-74. It was riots by Muhajir that forced Bhutto to include Urdu as a co-official language. If you open the pandora's box then you will find many unexpected choices. The status quo is the best solution.

Siddiqui 14:02, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I must caution User:M.Imran not to vandalize the MQM page. Siddiqui 20:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

I strongly agree with Mr SiddiquiNadirali 04:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

I strongly agree with Mr Siddiqui too--Ajmalahmedkhan 11:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Changed some wording in the " clashes with political parties " . I thought the previously written subsection had a very hostile tone against Imran khan. Possibly Vandalism. Also added a line after watching the recorded interview last night , and added a link to its summary ,although since its my first edit i may have got the format a Tad Wrong

BedheadPak 08:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Who... What?

This is an informative article but there is room for improvement. Since I am just an observer and do not know much about the subject at hand I request that someone initiate some improvements...

For example there are a lot of references to people and events that are not in this encyclopedia and context missing. To start: Who is Azim Tariq? What is his affiliation with MQM?


[edit] Edits by M12390

I don't want to have to report M12390 but he/she seems to paste the same newsweek article everywhere. Link to the article and simply don't overwrite other people. You might be an MQM supporter and not like what other people write but simply because they do not agree with you does not make them anti-MQM as you like labelling other people. Please contribute positively. Regards.Shehzadashiq 19:19, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I have tried to constructively work with M12390. His talk pages can be looked at for proof of this. However as he does not want to engage in constructive editing any chnages from now will be reverted as vandalism immediately.Shehzadashiq 13:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I have tried to constructively work with your version, but you and Muamshai continue to insist on a negative starting point of view. Let the neutral point of view prevail. Let's agree on certain neutral elements in the page and build from there. I know enough about MQM, and I don't need to shove my negativity or positivity down people's throat. People are smart enough to know when a page has a negative bais from the get go. If you insist on vandalism instead on constructive development of the page, then I will revert your vandalism immediately. M12390 23:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Shehzadashiq: I can give your suggestion from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Shehzadashiq a try with the following sub-conditions:

1. We study other pages which have acheived high quality ratings and then come up with a framework for Altaf Hussain and MQM pages.

2. We divide these pages in two sections. The top section contains mostly official/positive data, which can be countered with negative data. The bottom secion contains controversies/accusations, which can be countered with postive/official data. Anyone should be able to challenge any third-party source, and the user of the source has to justify the quality of data, and the neutrality of the source. If the user of the source cannot justify the neutrality of the source, then that item gets kicked out. M12390 01:49, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

On http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Shehzadashiq didn't we agree to work together? I haven't changed any of your edits yet so what do you want to do? Do you want us to work in partnership or do we have to go back to editing things? If possible why not edit the talk page, notify me and then we can discuss it civily. After all it is nearly 14 August :)Shehzadashiq 15:29, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Shehzadashiq: I suggested the sub-conditions, primarily as a more focused gameplan. If you agree to the above gameplan, and convince Muamshai to stop whining, then we can definitely work together and hopefully have better readable pages, not only on MQM and Altaf Hussain, but other important pages related to Pakistan. Thanks. M12390 16:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Consistent Vandalism and Page Hogging By Shehzadashiq and Muashai

This page should neither be run be MQM-lovers nor MQM-haters. As I suggested earlier, let's agree on bringing neutrality to the page. I think that is fair. M12390 21:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Page's Structure

Based on my agreement with Shahzadashiq, and hopfully with Muamshai, above, I suggest that the structure of this page should be modified to reflect something like: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_%28United_States%29

All the information stays, but the structure is changed and the information is shuffled among the agreed-upon sections. M12390 04:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What does Muttahida Qaumi mean?

What does Muttahida Qaumi mean in English? This should appear at the start of the article. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 03:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

It means united national movement in Urdu. Noor Aalam (talk) 19:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. What is the Urdu name of the Pakistan Peoples Party? (In the Roman alphabet). Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 03:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

In urdu and english the party is called pakistan peoples party, ppp, or peoples party. the translation of pakistan peoples party would be "pakistan awami jamaat", however i have never seen this used to describe the party. Noor Aalam (talk) 19:45, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

So when Pakistanis are speaking to each other in Urdu, they say "Pakistan Peoples Party" in English? How strange. Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 09:23, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

'Pakistan Awami Jamaat' would be a hypotetical translation of PPP. In urdu, the name PPP is written پاکستان پیپلز پارٹی, literally pakistan piplz parti. Strange? Thats what a few centuries of colonialism does. Note that Muslim League, is also muslim lig in urdu. Jamaat-e-Islami is a Persian name (i'm not sure whether this is seems as 'un-urdu-ish' though. But more direct urdu grammar would be 'Islami Jamaat'). MQM combines both urdu and english words in its name. Awami National Party also combines but Urdu and English terms in their name, but in Pashto they do a full translation of the English terms (not sure is 'Awami' is not a Pashto word, would guess that it wasn't). --Soman (talk) 10:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, Pakistan's had 60 years to get over colonialism, and most of it was British-ruled for a century or less (Sindh 1843, Punjab 1849, Baluchistan 1876). Intelligent Mr Toad (talk) 11:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

a bit of topic, but anyway; note that Urdu language is not the native tongue of the regions of Pakistan, but brought into the political system and culture from what today is northern India. Thus the colonial heritage of the Pakistani political elite is not necessarily following the exact same chronology as British rule in the areas today making up Pakistan. --Soman (talk) 12:50, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] SELFPUB

In accordance with WP:SELFPUB, we should keep MQM's self-published theory to a reasonable level and not treat them as fact on contentious matters.Bless sins (talk) 05:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] May 12,2007 Riots

The May 12,2007 Riots section needs to be cleaned up and needs better NPOV, it looks like someone tried to advocate for them and failed.69.201.144.162 (talk) 11:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)