Jinnah was irreligious all right; but he was not "secular", which in the Indian subcontinent means "religion-neutral." Look at the video again, and see how many times he looked like a proponent of a Muslim/Islamic state. If the Hindus and the Hindu leaders of the subcontinent were Muslim-hating monsters, he would have challenged them with a secular Pakistan if he were secular. He certainly did the opposite. Calling the so-called supreme leader who created a state for one religious group secular is foolish and intellectual dishonesty.
I have no doubt that people like Subimal Chakrabarty and Sukhamaya Bain would never propose a state for the Hindus, no matter how much barbaric atrocities they witness on Hindus in Bangladesh or Pakistan.
A tree is known by its fruits. There is no logic in keeping Mowdood or Barduddoza in any kind of high regards; they were not only puppets of Khaleda, they tolerated atrocities on religious minorities in Bangladesh.
SuBain
===================================
From: subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Was Jinnah Secular?
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Was Jinnah Secular?
Politics and hunger for power and position make a person a different animal. Jinnah was a good example. He was secular and irreligious no doubt. The video shows the negative aspect ( I would not be surprised if it is a concocted one) of Jinnah's political ideology that has been proven by his statements and speeches after partition. Probably he was being more and more captive of the Islamist (Sunni) forces. The last days of this father of the nation were not very happy. If the video is genuine, there is an explanation: in the divisive environment Jinnah under the influence of the rightist elements in ML might have invoked Islam to keep the nation united.
In BD politics also you can cite many examples. Think about Barrister Mowdood and Prof. Badruddoza Chowdhury? Do they really belong to BNP and do they really deserve to be puppets of half literate Khaleda Zia?
From: QR <qrahman@netscape.net>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2013 5:37 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Was Jinnah Secular?
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, August 17, 2013 5:37 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] Was Jinnah Secular?
We have separate myth from reality. According to scholars, Jinnah was a secular person who wanted to establish rights for Indian Muslims. Anyone who thinks Jinnah was a great Muslim does not know his life story very well. However we became a great leader of the Muslims. Some people say (Maulana Azad) he did not even wanted to divide India but wanted to use concept of Pakistan as a tool to bargain with fanatical faction of congress leadership. Our own Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was a very active member of Muslim League as well. It was the right thing to do since majority population was hostile to Muslims. As a Bangladeshi I do NOT consider him as my leader but I am not stupid enough deny his place in our history. Bangladesh is the final outcome and I am glad we can live as free people here. So Jinnah was a secular minded leader who became the leader of the Muslims. That is how it went down...... Shalom!
-----Original Message----- From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Fri, Aug 16, 2013 4:52 pm Subject: [mukto-mona] Was Jinnah Secular?
An interesting video indeed! Assuming there is no falsification in the dubbing; doesn't Jinnah look like a messenger of the Muslim Ummah?
Obviously, the pan-Islamic minds of the Indian subcontinent want to portray Jinnah as their great Muslim leader, and do not want him to look like secular. For, they want their countries to remain (for Pakistan and Bangladesh) and to be (for India) Muslim/Islamic havens.
My guess is that some secular people of the subcontinent want to portray Jinnah as a secular individual in order to encourage secularization of Pakistan and Bangladesh (which were fathered by their supreme leader, Jinnah). For the sane Bangladeshis who object to calling Jinnah their supreme leader, please recall the shameful history of the land that your forefathers made a part of Pakistan in 1947. To me, that kind of attempts to secularize the minds of religious hate-mongers is dishonest, would not work, and should not be done.
More later, may be.
Sukhamaya Bain
==================================
From: Shahadat Hussaini <shahadathussaini@hotmail.com>
......................................
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 9:08 AM
Subject: [mukto-mona] FW: ধর্মনিরপেতাবাদ ধর্মহীনতারই নামান্তর
......................................
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 9:08 AM
Subject: [mukto-mona] FW: ধর্মনিরপেতাবাদ ধর্মহীনতারই নামান্তর
............................................
Check this speech.
__._,_.___
