Adil Najam
Mohamed Ali Jinnah, it seems, was not a “real freedom fighter” and he did “nothing for Islam.” (On Jinnah, see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here).
So says the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI). And by what logic does Maulana Fazlur Rehman and his party come to this conclusion? According to the party spokesman: ““Jinnah was not imprisoned during the independence struggle. That is why he did nothing worth remembering.â€Â?
I am left rather speechless. So, here is the news item from Daily Times (February 9, 2007) that reports on the matter:
The Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI) will celebrate 2007 by paying tribute to the heroes who played an important role in the independence of Pakistan ignoring Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah and his companions, JUI officials told Daily Times on Thursday. They said that the party would hold conventions in Peshawar and other cities of the NWFP in March to highlight the services of ‘real freedom fighters’.
“The decision to this effect was taken at the meeting of the JUI executive council in Lahore a couple of days ago. National Assembly Opposition Leader Maulana Fazlur Rehman presided over the meeting,� they added. JUI information secretary Maulana Amjad Khan said that Jinnah and his companions would not be commemorated because they had not done anything for Islam. “Jinnah was not imprisoned during the independence struggle. That is why he did nothing worth remembering,� Khan added.
He said the JUI would remember only those leaders who had sacrificed their lives for the creation of Pakistan or who had been imprisoned by the British Raj. JUI leader Qari Nazir Ahmed said the party would remember Hussain Maulana Ahmed Madni, Maulana Qasim Nanotri, Maulana Ubaid Ullah Sindhi, Maulana Mehmoodul Hassan, Syed Ahmed Shaheed, Shah Ismael Shaheed, Mauala Rasheed Ahmed and other leaders, who had rendered great sacrifices for the creation of Pakistan. “Maulana Qasim Nanotri established the Madrasa Darul Uloom Deoband. The institute produced a large number of freedom fighters,� Qari Nazir added. He said a schedule for conventions in the Punjab had not been decided yet. JUI Lahore chapter ameer Maulana Muhibun Nabi said the party would also arrange programmes in Lahore in this connection.
Interesting, by the way, that it seems that to be a “real freedom fighter” you have ‘Maulana’ prefixed before your name or a ‘Shaheed’ as a suffix.
Note: My thank to Watandost for alerting me to this rewriting of history.
Dear Adnan Siddiqui,
No point resorting to personal attacks when I used the same page that you produced for evidence:
From your own source:
Secularism, in one sense, asserts the freedom of religion, and freedom from the government imposition of religion upon the people, within a state that is neutral on matters of belief, and gives no state privileges or subsidies to religions. (See also Separation of church and state; see also Laïcité.)
As for your repeated attempts to equate secularism to anti-religion activity. Lets assume that there are “Secular Extremists” out there who do the things listed by Famalik. Would you also say that Islam is bad, because there are some extremists i.e. Taliban, you etc, who force women to wear the Burqah and persecute Non-muslims? US, Canada etc are examples of secular states in the western sense and yet you find an abundance of beards and hijabs there. So your point is?
Oh I forgot… your rage is pointless.
Dear Adnan Siddiqui and F A Malik,
Does every secular state do this? Is United States of America or Canada or Great Britain not examples of dejure and defacto Secular states… last time I went to any of these places, I saw many bearded men and hijabi women. So what is your point? Even Turkey and France - the two states which might fall in the purview of your example i.e. secular extremism- have not banned these things in toto.
To use your logic- Taliban forced women into veil, persecuted non-Muslims and forced men to grow beards… Islam also does the same, when it clearly does not.
So far you chaps have been unable to prove a single claim that you’ve made. I have quoted your own definitions to show that you are deliberately misleading people here.
This is from the page you referred to:
Secularism, in one sense, asserts the freedom of religion, and freedom from the government imposition of religion upon the people, within a state that is neutral on matters of belief, and gives no state privileges or subsidies to religions. (See also Separation of church and state; see also Laïcité.)
Now don’t be a spoil sport and accept that there are several meanings of the word.
On another note (to adnan siddiqui): Inculcate some of that Islam that you talk of and stop the personal attacks. Unless it is not Islam you are referring to but Abu Juhlism.
famalik,thanks for sharing this video. Surely secularist extreemism uses different dictionary while defining terms like freedom and equal rights.
famalik, have you ever considered why it was a big deal that a Sikh was recently commissioned in Army? Because for the last sixty years no Sikh was allowed in the Army even though they are equal citizens (in principal) of this country and have the same rights (in principal) as the rest. This in my opinion is certainly worst than the beard issue you have mentioned. Also are you aware that in Pakistan people can go to jail just for greeting someone or for their peaceful religious rituals? Again more severe than the hijab issue that you mentioned even though I am not sure hijab is a problem in Pakistan official yet.
So the two things you have mentioned are perhaps a dose of their own medicine to the “religious” elements?
Re: MQ
Thanks for your response. Your response is the core of the argument. As long as the argument is about various interpretations of the text (Quran)then all is good; diversity of opinion is welcome in Islam.
But the discourse of contemporary secular extremists is indifferent to ANY interpretation of Quran and Sunnah - religion has nothing to do with the state.
To an extend that State and Religion compete for power, hence you see Human rights abuses such as:
- Not allowing army officers to keep a beard
- Not allowing women to wear a Hijab in public spaces
…and u know the rest. I would like to share this 8-min documentary for those interested.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pJM6PatinI
YLH, you are better off ignoring certain people. Don’t let them drag you to their standard.
PS: My posts are there and so are yours. People can see who is resorting to personal attacks and who has hollow knowledge.
Dear Adnan Siddiqui,
I don’t about the strawmen you wish to bring down. When I talk of secularism, I mean state’s impartiality towards an individual’s religious beliefs and complete equality of all citizens regardless of those beliefs. That is it… and that is the definition I quoted above.