Quotes About Jinnah

Jinnah cannot be honoured in India. He's responsible for the partition of our country. No Jinnah eulogy is acceptable in India.

The Empire seemed to be giving a veto on India's political advance to Jinnah, the princes and Ambedkar.

After Congress ministries resigned across the land, the parties led by Jinnah, Ambedkar and Ramasami jointly observed 22 December 1939 as Deliverance Day.

Jinnah was not tempted. 'India is not a nation', he commented. 'It is a subcontinent composed of nationalities.' More than willing to fight the Congress, henceforth, he would fight even more the notion of one India and seek allies in that fight.

Khaliquzzaman suggests that if Jinnah had responded positively to Gandhi in 1944, a peaceful separation might indeed have replaced the 1947 tragedy.

My party was the party which was created by Mr Mohammad Ali Jinnah. He didn't create that party. But he was the main pillar of the party. Our party is a very forward-looking, progressive, democratic party.

The most important film I made, in terms of its subject and the great responsibility I had as an actor, was a film I did about the founder of Pakistan called 'Jinnah.'

Only three visionary and golden figures were born on the soil of present Pakistan, Mohammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, and Muhammad Iqbal, the national poet, philosopher, and the thinker of Pakistan and Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, the founder of the constitution and the hero of atomic energy.

Pakistan was created by Jinnah's will and Britain's willingness'—not by Nehru's wilfulness.

Jinnah proved obdurate: he was determined to obtain Pakistan. The Muslim League leader declared 16 August 1946 as 'Direct Action Day' to drive home this demand. Thousands of Muslim Leaguers took to the streets in an orgy of violence, looting and mayhem, and 16,000 innocents were killed in the resulting clashes, particularly in Calcutta.

Jinnah's "Pakistan" did not entail the partition of India; rather it meant its regeneration into an union where Pakistan and Hindustan would join to stand together proudly against the hostile world without. This was no clarion call for pan-Islam; this was not pitting Muslim India against Hindustan; rather it was a secular vision of a polity where there was real political choice & safeguards, the India of Jinnah's dreams, a vision unfulfilled but noble nonetheless.

The Unionist construct of "Muslim interest" that was eventually incorporated in the Government of India Act of 1935 was a rude shock for minority- province Muslims, accustomed as they were to riding on the coattails of their coreligionists in the majority provinces. The revival of the AIML in 1934 with Jinnah at the helm was a direct result of minority- province Muslim dissatisfaction with the new constitutional arrangements.

The exigencies of maintaining the West Pakistani political, bureaucratic and military elite in power were the major reason why, after Jinnah's death, the secular Muslim nationalist path was hurriedly abandoned.

If Jinnah—a Western educated and, by all accounts, nonpracticing Muslim—could inspire India's Muslims to create a state by appealing to their religious sentiment, Maulana Maududi reasoned there was scope for a body of practicing Islamists to take over that state.

India's blood and India's gold was sought and unfortunately given - given to break Turkey and buy the fetters of the Rowlatt legislation.

Mountbatten was stunned by the rigidity of Jinnah's position. 'I never would have believed,' he later recalled, 'that an intelligent man, well-educated, trained in the Inns of Court, was capable of simply closing his mind

I am almost inclined to say that India will get Dominion Responsible Government the day the Hindus and Muslims are united.

In any case, Jinnah died within a year of independence, leaving his successors divided, or confused, about whether to take their cue from his independence eve call to keep religion out of politics or to build on the religious sentiment generated during the political bargaining for Pakistan.

Jinnah said, as early as in the first decade of the twentieth century, that separate electorates would lead to the destruction of Indian unity; and so they did.