Jinnah article

This article, right from the beginning is biased against Jinnah, and is highly in favor of Hindus. This alone, makes it clear to the reader that he is reading one strongly backed up perspective having a confirmation bias. The writing and the tone used in emotional and incites people against the Muslims, and Jinnah particularly. The fact that the article starts with “I am not prepared to discuss ethics. We have a pistol and are in a position to use it." So said Mohammad Ali Jinnah while delivering his presidential speech at the Muslim League convention on July 19, 1946.” Shows how biased it would be. The aim of the article is to support the RSS as other parties are bad. The knowledge issue is not clearly defined but what I concluded out of it is that it aims at showing how other parties are bad and being firm and unmovable is better.
The article is biased towards Dr. Syama Prasad Mookerjee who converted 90% of Indian Muslims into Hindu. At the same time the author criticizes Jinnah to such an extent, that the reader ends up believing that he was not even a proper Muslim. Furthermore, he states how Jinnah was the root cause of many problems and followed a strict policy against the Hindus leading to massacres and calamities. Thee article highlights how other parties do not stick to their word and decisions.
Every party follows propaganda to gain votes and let other parties down; it is justified and acceptable in the world of politics but this article reignited the fire that was actually starting to cool down. Is it justified to bring up hatred for Muslims after 60 years? The writer is completely pro- Hindu and anti Muslim and reiterates the fact that only Hindus belong on this holy land. The sentiments of only one religion have been taken into consideration and that is not justified. The religion of Hinduism believes in ‘non –violence’ or ahimsa but they are looking up to a man, who is going against these holy principles. This is what the article fails to bring out. Although this article may incite some 100-300 people, it may not have such a great impact as people, no matter what, realize when only one perspective is given to them, and tend to get skeptical after a while. Although, it is justified to some extent, as Hindus have been oppressed by Muslims, this article is extremely biased against Muslims explicitly criticizes Jinnah. This did not work for me.