Re: Jinnah: Q & A
some links..
http://www.deccanherald.com/deccanherald/feb132005/artic.asp
…
http://www.pakistanlink.com/hussaini/12062002.html
…
http://www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/events/partition.html
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
I don’t know what a non practising shia means…If you are not a practising shia then are u a practising sunni?
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
Mutlab ye CheGuvera bhai, ke I believe the Shia faith, but dont partake in Maatam.
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
homer, the most authentic book that i mentioned "Jinnah of Pakistan" by Stanley Wolpert is the only source thatll give you th true fair picture...pakistani books hide stuff, indian books put some extra 'namak mirach'...
and, Quaid did thes ethings, but he wasnt 'rangeen'.
a section in Fatima Jinnah's book My Brother narrates a story abt Quaid when he live with an English family while studying as a law student at Lincolns Inn in London. at that time if youve seen his pictures he indeed was a charming and handsome young man. the landlady had a daughter and there was a christmas party and Jinnah and the young girl ended up under a mistletoe...as per tradition they were reqd to kiss, and the girls insisted that he did, but Jinnah refused and walked away explaining it was against his teachings...
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
Lets not make Jinnah a prophet.
He was a successful career oriented man, and politician. He used certain 'catchy' slogans that might convince Indian Muslims to support him.
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
Obviously Jinnah was not a prophet, nor are we making him out to be. Astagfur-Allah, that sugestion is offensive.
But dietary habits aside, he was a man who has given Muslims in South Asia a land where they are free from the threat of persecution. He was a man destined by Allah to create a Muslim homeland in South Asia.
It should be a crime to insult him on this board. ( I think it is in Pakistan, someone clarify this).
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
Jinnah never wanted Pakistan to be named ‘Islamic Republic of Pakistan’, it was the ‘Dominion of Pakistan’ in his time, this change was made by the constituent assembly in 1956 I believe. Jinnah never wanted Pakistan to become what it has today. He never wanted the mass exodus that took place during partition.
Remember his speech about the Pakistanis being free to go to their mosques, churches and temples, and his speech about ‘Muslims cease to be Muslims and Hindus cease to be Hindus, not in the religious sense’. Its sad to look at the present state of affairs of Pakistan, which are totally against the wishes and aspirations of the great leader we once had.
I would highly recommend one of my favourite books of all times, ‘Jinnah of Pakistan’ by Stan Wolpert, especially if youre interested about how events in his personal life affected some of his dynamic political moves.
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
iraq is facing the same situation can kurds ,shias and poweful sunni minority(but majority
in wider islamic world) can live toghether?
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
An indian muslim can have 4 wives without obtaining any wife’s consent. A pakistani muslim can not. Now, what more freedom u want?
How many Indian muslims were killed while offering prayers? How many religous places were bombed?
So I dont get it, when u say Jinnah got a muslim land where they could live without persecution. BJP the most fanatic hindu party could not do anything, why? Because of India being democracy and constitution entity, where different insititutuons keep each other in control, like judiciary, parliament, govt, bureucracy.
As I said, Jinnag gave muslims a catchy slogan, which is still in the market (u r buying it ! ). In reality, the slogan was misleading and dividing.
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
I don’t know why people tend to give a ‘mahatma’ status to political leaders. Their greatness is not in their private ethics but how publicly their ideas benefit the nation they claim to lead. You can be faithful to your spouse, most people are, and there is no greatness in it. The greatness comes from the courage that leaders display facing difficult decisions, their vision, and the responsibility that they bare in leading the nation.
Jefferson owned, traded and bred slaves while being President of a nation that constitutes that all men are created equal. Gandhi slept (not in that way) with women to assess his temptations, Nehru & Gandhi both had a very colorful youth with Nehru having an active affair with Edwina (Mountbatten’s wife), and JFK and MLK both were womanizers.
So, quit worrying about if Jinnah ate pork or not, his principles, vision and leadership should be the focus of discussion.
Now, did you guys know that up till the late 20s and early 30s he would get angry at the idea of partition? Because in his view if English did anything good to India, it was to unite it under one rule. And even in the late 40s he accepted the offer for India to be made a federation (meaning no partition)?
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
I stated clearly that I care not if Jinnah enjoyed pork or Port, I was just asking for clarity of information.
I am currently reading Jinnah of Pakistan by Stanley Wolpert.
Lostsoul,
In Pakistan, Muslims dont have to worry abt incidents such as Babri Moqsue and Gurjat. So its not an empty cause. Yes I know he initially favored a United India...he later changed his mind.
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
legbreakgoogly,
Babri mosque incident needs to be considered in its due perspective. It is not any mosque, but a mosque claimed to be on a hindu sacred site. Hindus did have a valid reason to demand its destruction. Many muslims in pak take pride in invaders like Mehmood Ghaznavi, who were proud of destructing hindu temples and idols. So hindus claims did have some historical support. But even after coming to power, BJP could not do one thing about Ayodhia temple. Supreme court was quite powerfull. Had India being pakistan, Vajpai ji will be on the bulldozer, rolling down the Babri mosque.
On the other hand, shias and Ahmedis r regularly bombed and killed, often by groups trained by pak govts for Kashmiri jehad. It is a diffrent game.
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
The key parts of your post are " but a mosque claimed to be on a hindu sacred site". CLAIMED! No proof!
And “Hindus did have a valid reason to demand its destruction.”. This is a dangerous precedent for you to set in any discussion. Valid reason to destroy something based on a CLAIM!
Well then, and these are not my actual views, in response to your Ahmedi ect point, we have valid reason to say they insult our religion and degrade it, thus we
“have a valid reason to demand… destruction” of them.
See how dangerous a road you are treading on?
If Jinnah had lived...
I just want to gauge your opinions on what would have happened if the Great Leader had lived on, let us say until 1960, about a decade after Pakistan had been created.
It is my view, and all my readings (I refer mainly to Jinnah by SW and Pak: Eye of the storm by OB Jones, as well as most the online stuff I can get hold of) seem to suggest that the Qaid never invisioned an ISLAMIC state, indeed his vision, and that of the first 2 generations of Pakistan's political rulers, was of a nation were Muslims could live in safety, and not an Islamic theocracy.
The numerous speeches of Jinnah on this topic, and any neutral analysis of Pakistan's early history, must I feel reach this conclusion. Zia ul Haq, in his mad ways, can be seen as the man who turned the dream sour, creating a theocracy, where before there was not one.
Also lesser degree of blame must rest with Z.A. Bhutto, for his tendency to pander to the whim of Islamic extremists for short term political benefit.
Jinnah I am certain would have successfully moulded a state apparatus true to the modern and humane views he himself advocated. Using the force of his personality and his standing as the Father of Pakistan to win over any opposition.
Off topic, to some extent, I have decided that my study of History will now focus on 20th century South Asia (esp 1900-1947). This I have found is utterly viable as all primary documents of this period are in English. :)
I hope one day, in my own small way, to help gear Pakistan back to the esteemed path laid in the mind of our national father.
Re: If Jinnah had lived...
i think he would have emigrated to UK, got its citizenship, and and settled there.
Re: If Jinnah had lived...
I dont think so. He was there often enough, he always came back "home". No Jinnah was committed to the freedom struggle, and his impact on it after inception is a source of great debate.
Incidentally, what makes you take such a view of the man?
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
[quote]
he was a man who has given Muslims in South Asia a land where they are free from the threat of persecution. He was a man destined by Allah to create a Muslim homeland in South Asia.
[/quote]
Your types who don’t believe in the supremacy of Islam yet are blindly patriotic are always desperately trying to look for other reasons to justify Pakistan but you always come up with crap ones.
Even if we had remained one country the present day Pakistan regions would have remained unaffected by persecution. From what I’ve heard from my elders, Muslims ruled the roost in our areas despite there being a large Hindu minority, Hindus were very docile and usually kept to their shops and what have you. There are also reports of Sikhs being here at one time but I am told our heroic ancestors drove their Kaafir butts right out along with some warrior caste Hindus.
Today we Muslims are separated into three different countries, if we had stayed together it would have prevented a lot of the Muslim genocide in Kashmir, Gujarat and other places in India at the hand of devout Hindus, it’s not like Pakistan has stopped any genocide, if anything it’s worsened it and divided us, together even if were persecuted slightly it’d at least have kept us united and ethnicity and sect would have been of less importance.
Re: Jinnah: Q & A
..and the Taj Mahal is not a mausoleum built by Mughals but rather a temple called Tejo-Mahalaya dedicated to that Penis-god dude Shiva. 
You guys should shove your head back up your pundits dark arse and suffocate.
Re: If Jinnah had lived...
because he was very disappointed with the way Pakistan was coming out to be, in his last days. Various statements of his r on the record (not corrobrated though), which betrays his lack of faith in pak and its leadership. His lack of respect for the the PM was evident.
Jinnah was deeply impressed with English culture. He had divorced everything that had one cultural link to his roots. His wife, her revealing dresses, his drinking, eating pork, not offereing his prayers, etc. He came into politics in Indo Pak, just because only there he could play big politics. He did not join congress because they were not offering any big role.
The last refuge was 'Islam is in danger', and he took it.
Re: If Jinnah had lived...
^^ true.. in fact had he lived longer he would have brokered a deal with india for reunification.