Since all identities are imagined, my identity as a Pakistani is no more, no less sacred than religious, cultural, ideological, linguistic or racial identities you subscribe to

A lot of people get upset that I mention Jinnah every now and then in my articles for many different reasons. Consequently, the personal ridicule and abuse that I have faced is extraordinary. For some unknown reason, I get a flurry of emails from across the border full of abuses and attacks, even though my articles are hardly ever addressed to our friends from across the border. Our own Pakistani brethren get upset for the same reason i.e. I claim that Jinnah was secular, because secular is a bad word for them.

Another fashionable statement, now getting a lot of traction, is that those liberals relying on Jinnah to make the case for a secular Pakistan are deluding themselves and that this Pakistan is exactly what Jinnah would have wanted. Sure, Jinnah, whose record on civil liberties and commitment to human rights is second to none, would have wanted a Pakistan where minorities are persecuted and sectarianism is rampant (including against his own Shia sect). It is a preposterous claim to say the least. Jinnah, by all accounts incorruptible and honest to a fault, the only one to be called the best ambassador of Hindu Muslim Unity, admittedly without even a hint of bias against any community — Nehru, Gandhi, Gokhale and even someone as critical as Margaret Bourke-white all attest to this — could not have wanted this Pakistan.

In my opinion, no one is above criticism and making Jinnah immune to criticism is a grave mistake that must not be committed by Pakistanis. However, the criticism should at least be based on fact. Positions are ascribed to Jinnah that are by no means his, actions are… read the rest @ http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/

The writer is a lawyer based in Lahore and the author of the book Jinnah: Myth and Reality. He can be contacted via twitter @therealylh and through his email address yasser.hamdani@gmail.com