Pak Tea House » Jinnah » Attention “Professor Emeritus” Ishtiaq sb

Attention “Professor Emeritus” Ishtiaq sb

May 28th, 2011 | 9 Comments

By Yasser Latif Hamdani

In a discussion on a public forum, Professor Ishtiaq Ahmed wrote the following – a claim that was extremely astonishing as having read most of Jinnah’s cases I have never come across any evidence of it.

“Jinnah was a politician – neither saint nor devil. From the 1930 onwards he progressively allied himself with reactionary forces in India – during his self-imposed exile in England in the early 1930s he earned most of… him income by appearing before the British authorities to plead the privy purse cases of maharajas and nawabs. I think that put him in networks which greatly undermined his earlier very liberal and patriotic views. Gandhi’s clumsy handling of such a bright and talented man turned him against the Congress. Jinnah could never forgive or forget and that is where the personal roots of his right-wing lurch in politics can be identified. Personal likes and dislikes and psyche do play a role in what one can and does in politics.”

I most respectfully asked Professor Emeritus to substantiate this extraordinary – and what I perceive to be yet another fib by the Professor Emeritus in a long list of fibs (His fibs against Ahmadis were exposed by a number of brilliant young researchers from that community earlier and his fib on a number of issues have been addressed by this writer elsewhere.) – claim. Instead of responding to the question, Professor Emeritus wrote this:

This is a typical tactic to derail the discussion from discussing Jinnah, Gandhi, Nehru, Ambedkar and other’s role in the break up of India and waste time on an what Jinnah did and did not do in England during the early 1930s.

Now I completely agree with the contention that what Jinnah did in England in the early 30s had no bearing on his later politics (especially since 1934 onwards, Jinnah’s Muslim League was funded by Hindu bourgeoisie of the Congress Party because League was allied with the Congress both in the assembly and in the elections – see Durga Das – Curzon to Nehru for example) but herein lies the rub : It was Ishtiaq sb who said that Jinnah’s alleged relationship as counsel for princes in privy purse matters from 1930-1934 made him abandon his secular liberal views and ally himself with reactionaries. Now when I ask for a source to show that Jinnah was indeed a ‘counsel’ for the princes before the British authorities in Privy Purse matters, Professor Emeritus resorts to personal attacks and abuse.

Since in the said public forum, Professor Emeritus beat a hasty retreat, I am however going to have to ask Professor Emeritus to please substantiate his claim that Jinnah represented Maharajas and Princes in privy purse matters before British authorities in England in the 1930s – whether or not it has any bearing on his later politics. If he cannot prove this – then he should accept that as on several other occasions- he was making it up – as is his wont.

Written by yasserlatifhamdani

Filed under: Jinnah · Tags: British, england, Jinnah, Professor Emeritus

9 Responses to "Attention “Professor Emeritus” Ishtiaq sb"

Attention “Professor Emeritus” Ishtiaq sb | Tea Break says:

May 28, 2011 at 12:39 pm

[...] Attention “Professor Emeritus” Ishtiaq sb [...]
observer says:

May 28, 2011 at 4:15 pm

Prof. Ahmed is doing good service to Pakistan by exposing Jinnah’s fakes and contardictions. In the speed of all this some errors are possible. No human being is perfect. This slip by Ishtiak should not be taken to mean that his entire research exposing Jinnah and his worshippers is wrong.

What is of interest is Jinnah’s politics in his last 10 years. How he earned his money or why he changed over to collaborating with islamic fascism and its falsified history-narration is of little consequence then.

What is crucial is that Jinnah was a shrewish megalomaniac with a very terse inflated ego. He saw his opportunity come and jumped on to the Pakistan band wagon in the rear seat (not the driver seat). His googly lies, lawyer tricks and opportunistic contradictions are a major reason for Pakistan’s downfall.
observer says:

May 28, 2011 at 4:26 pm

ylh too should desist from being too lawyer-ly and tricky in dealing with Ishtiak Ahmed.

Jinnah worshippers cannot save Pakistan. Reasons are all too clear now. Every attempt to glorify Jinnah in public will also pull his contradictory statements and pro-islamic romances and opportunisms in public view and thus ruin any chance of honest secular progress in Pakistan. “Let the dead bury the dead” (as said by Jesus). “Let sleeping dogs lie(?)” – said another.

Jinnah will be no saviour of any Pakistan. His record is too murky. Pointing out to the murkiness in someone else’s (e.g. M K Gandhi’s) record does not undo that. ylh is wont to rake up M K Gandhi’s murkiness, but that does not undo Jinnah’s murky dealings, which have proved to be far more heinous than M K Gandhi’s.

Prof. Ahmed should be able to do his task without being tripped by some side-line errors.
BJ Kumar says:

May 28, 2011 at 4:31 pm

Whether or not he made an inadvertant misstatement on that little minor point, Professor sahib appears to be a real scholar with whole bunch of books and publications to his name. What are your credentials?
BJ Kumar says:

May 28, 2011 at 4:35 pm

The last question (“What are your credentials?”) was for Yasser miaN.
Alberuni says:

May 28, 2011 at 7:20 pm

Just how did Jinnah make his money? 500 rupees a day or in that range fees – which parties could afford a lawyer like that?
kali yuga says:

May 28, 2011 at 7:58 pm

how is it to derail talk about nehru, gandhi, etc
by bringing legitimate question about your dear leader.

It is the muslims who said that they could not live in
minority status. rest is moot.

What politician thinks or says is irrelevant after all
he will change in 5 minutes if he could.

YLH’s agenda is really getting tiring. He is such a bore.
hoib says:

May 28, 2011 at 9:24 pm

Muslim leaders have all proved to be fakes over time. Either they have no commitment to honesty or their “honesty” is also a fake. The very first leader(s) of islam also displays this tendency. Every muslim leader, as soon as he brings in islam, realizes that he cannot “succeed” without lies. This was the case also with Jinnah. Jinnah was honest so long he did not stoop to personal vengence against Gandhi (who definitely was not a perfect man) and did not bring in religion in order to achieve his goal and fulfil his megalomania. Islam is not capable of bringing forth good honest leaders. Muslims will not accept this criticism but put blame for their failures and islam’s failures on the non-muslims. That is for them the “easy” way out. That was how it was right from the beginning and will continue to be so in future.
Fellow-Pakistani001 says:

May 28, 2011 at 9:55 pm

Dear YLH:

PLEASE HELP!

DAWN NEWS AND JAMAT-I-ISLAMI NEWSPAPER ‘DAILY UMMAT’ MAY 28’2011 ISSUE REPORTS THAT 1974 PROCEEDINGS OF NATIONAL ASSEMBLY THAT DECLARED KALIMA-RECITERS AS NON-MUSLIM IS TO BE MADE PUBLIC.

Please write on this news item.
Thanks.