More on Advaniji's Actions and Pronouncements

Actually, in my opinion, the issue is not that Advani called Jinnah a Secularist.
The issues were
  a) Advani did not raise India's concerns about Terrorist support in Pakistan, did not speak about known
absconders being given harbour in Karachi -- as an Indian leader his duties were to bring up
these issues
  b) Advani spoke of "the saddest day" of his life while in Pakistan   -- as the leader of a political party
in India who led what was, for all intents and purposes, a political action against a ruling
party, he cannot and should not raise a domestic issue in Pakistan
  c) Advani chose to pick and choose what he wanted to say about Jinnah -- he highlighted only one
fraction of Jinnah's life as if Jinnah had lived by those few words all his life

When people talk of the Partition, they are talking of the past.  The Pakistan of the 1940s is NOT
the Pakistan of the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s.  The Pakistan we have been facing in the last 3 decades
is one that has supported terrorism in Punjab and Jammu and Kashmir and has indulged in military
adventures against India.  Advani chose to go back in time to 1946 as if the 1980s , 1990s and 2000s
have never happened.  He chose to speak counter to India's stand in the past 3 decades.

WHY did he do so ?  I can only think that it is the same reason as why Atalji and Manmohanji
are pro-Peace :   Economics {dependence on Iranian gas,  the ability to reduce threat levels
and defence spending,  being able to focus on energy and growth,  getting better FDI if
India is seen as a safe country},  USA {the everpresent OverSeer},
the desire to project India as a peaceful nation {even get a Permanent Seat at the UN}. 
The leadership thinks that what we might achieve in the next 3 to 5 years will far outweigh what
we have lost in the last 25 years.