Eliminating scientist Abdus Salam by declaring his community (Ahmadi) as non-Muslim.

[terry5]

You didn't get the question. I asked the exact (month & year) and not the content of the amendment.

You answered yourself as per you :

It is well known that the ulterior motive behind declaring Ahmadi as non-Muslims in 1974 was to eliminate nuclear scientist Abdus Salam


Cool it was well known by you .
So tell me ?

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

You answered yourself as per you :

It is well known that the ulterior motive behind declaring Ahmadi as non-Muslims in 1974 was to eliminate nuclear scientist Abdus Salam


Cool it was well known by you .
So tell me ?

But I don't know the month and day.

 

[ashley.1965]

It is well known that

You're right. It IS "well known", but only in the same Indian circles where it is also well-known that, among other things:
- Pakistan started all wars with India and lost them all;
- Pakistan is a state sponsor of terrorism;
- Hafiz Saeed is responsible for 26/11;
- Kulbhushan Jadhav is just a businessman and Pakistan's claims about him are so off-the-wall that the Indian government had to intervene and involve the ICC to prevent his hanging.

the ulterior motive behind declaring Ahmadi as non-Muslims in 1974 was to eliminate nuclear scientist Abdus Salam.

Fallacy #1: He was not a nuclear scientist, but a theoretical physicist, specializing in particle physics. Big difference.

Fallacy #2: Ahmadis were constitutionally recognized as non-Muslims in 1974, and the amendment had nothing to do with anyone trying to eliminate Professor Abdus Salam or standing up for Islam, but Bhutto's sharp instincts for political survival.

The Ahmadiyya community had overwhelmingly voted for the PPP in the elections that brought Bhutto to power. A series of Punjab-wide violent student movements broke out against the Ahmadiyya in 1974, and were initially opposed by Bhutto. However, his advisors convinced him that if the movements were allowed to simmer or be sidelined, Bhutto would lose the support of Punjab and National Assembly members. Ergo, the constitutional amendment followed on 7 September 1974.

He may still have survived had the public not known that he was Ahmadi.

The public knew about his Ahmadi background and he survived to the age of 70, and died a natural death. Come up with better revisionism than that.

But someone deliberately made this information public by shouting from rooftops about his association with the community and he was forced to leave the country.

Please provide proof - newspaper archives, television interviews, etc. - that people got onto rooftops all over Pakistan and shouted out Salam's Ahmadiyya affiliation, and that this forced him to leave Pakistan.

What still remains classified is who was behind this development? CIA or RAW?

No need to ask here. We understand. You are here to measure the stupidity of people who will buy the crap you are selling. And, you need to earn your 50 cents per post for the day. You will get a more accurate answer to your question by simply asking one of your handlers.

Can anybody throw light on this?

Light? There is no need to throw anything other than concentrated acid on your claims.

For readers unacquainted with the background: Salam was a Pakistani theoretical physicist and belonged to Ahmadi community. Salam was science adviser to the Ministry of Science and Technology in Pakistan from 1960 to 1974, a position from which he was supposed to play a major and influential role in the development of the country's science infrastructure.

Don't try to teach us our history.

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

You're right. It IS "well known", but only in the same Indian circles where it is also well-known that, among other things:
- Pakistan started all wars with India and lost them all;
- Pakistan is a state sponsor of terrorism;
- Hafiz Saeed is responsible for 26/11;
- Kulbhushan Jadhav is just a businessman and Pakistan's claims about him are so off-the-wall that the Indian government had to intervene and involve the ICC to prevent his hanging.



Fallacy #1: He was not a nuclear scientist, but a theoretical physicist, specializing in particle physics. Big difference.

Fallacy #2: Ahmadis were constitutionally recognized as non-Muslims in 1974, and the amendment had nothing to do with anyone trying to eliminate Professor Abdus Salam or standing up for Islam, but Bhutto's sharp instincts for political survival.

The Ahmadiyya community had overwhelmingly voted for the PPP in the elections that brought Bhutto to power. A series of Punjab-wide violent student movement broke out against the Ahmadiyya in 1974, and were initially opposed by Bhutto. However, his advisors convinced him that if the movement was allowed to simmer or be sidelined, Bhutto would lose the support of Punjab and National Assembly members. Ergo, the constitutional amendment followed on 7 September 1974.



The public knew about his Ahmadi background and he survived to the age of 70, and died a natural death. Come up with better revisionism than that.



Please provide proof - newspaper archives, television interviews, etc. - that people got onto rooftops all over Pakistan and shouted out Salam's Ahmadiyya affiliation, and that this forced him to leave Pakistan.



No need to ask here. We understand. You are here to measure the stupidity of people who will buy the crap you are selling. And, you need to earn your 50 cents per post for the day. You will get a more accurate answer to your question by simply asking one of your handlers.



Light? There is no need to throw anything other than concentrated acid on your claims.



Don't try to teach us our history.

And which country did he go to after leaving Pakistan?

 

[Sugarcane]

It is well known that the ulterior motive behind declaring Ahmadi as non-Muslims in 1974 was to eliminate nuclear scientist Abdus Salam. He may still have survived had the public not known that he was Ahmadi. But someone deliberately made this information public by shouting from rooftops about his association with the community and he was forced to leave the country.

What still remains classified is who was behind this development? CIA or RAW?

Can anybody throw light on this?

For readers unacquainted with the background: Salam was a Pakistani theoretical physicist and belonged to Ahmadi community. Salam was science adviser to the Ministry of Science and Technology in Pakistan from 1960 to 1974, a position from which he was supposed to play a major and influential role in the development of the country's science infrastructure.

Although I am always against the government or anybody else deciding about the faith of others but Google Expert on Pakistan must learn to use Google properly. The communal clashes which lead to amendment in constitution was clap with both hands. Ahmadiya leaders were giving chance to clarify/defense - Complete national assembly proceedings on this issue is available on net. So, stop over exerting your pea size brain in conspiracy theories.

 

[Kaniska]

by your logic jews are muslim too then, i think you know nothing about islam so stick with your hinduvata... ahmadiyat is against the basic principle of islam... it isnt hinduism where one day sati is ok but next day it isnt... in islam it is what it is, things dnt change over time in islam. btw i am sure you dnt know nothing about ahmadis beliefs too.

I think..he is a Muslim Guy...

 

[Kamikaze Pilot]

Although I am always against the government or anybody else deciding about the faith of others but Google Expert on Pakistan must learn to use Google properly. The communal clashes which lead to amendment in constitution was clap with both hands. Ahmadiya leaders were giving chance to clarify/defense - Complete national assembly proceedings on this issue is available on net. So, stop over exerting your pea size brain in conspiracy theories.

But which country did he go to after leaving Pakistan?

 

[Reichsmarschall]

I think..he is a Muslim Guy...

he is a wannabe Templer
A Jesus boi

 

[TMA]

Piss of Indian but yeah screw the Pakistani parliament, no government has the right to interfere with religion of its citizens. A government has to provide schools, hospitals, food and houses that's the basic minimum for a society to function normally, you took that and instead fed the masses poisonous propaganda and hate so we got sectarian killings, hunger, low literacy rate, terrorism, crime and corruption.

That is your opinion that the Government of Pakistan (rather the State of Pakistan) which ostensibly calls itself Islamic has no right to determine who is Muslim and who is not for the purposes of Constitutional Law (this is not to prevent a person from his worship, building of his place of worship, getting married in accordance with his religious views, etc etc). My opinion is different than yours on this matter. Although cases such as these should be done on an individual basis. I agree with the other bit, that also the government ought to provide healthcare, education etc etc.

 

[Jaanbaz]

That is your opinion that the Government of Pakistan (rather the State of Pakistan) which ostensibly calls itself Islamic has no right to determine who is Muslim and who is not for the purposes of Constitutional Law (this is not to prevent a person from his worship, building of his place of worship, getting married in accordance with his religious views, etc etc). My opinion is different than yours on this matter. Although cases such as these should be done on an individual basis. I agree with the other bit, that also the government ought to provide healthcare, education etc etc.

Look you want to call Ahmadis Kafir? Fine go ahead, there will always be disagreement when it comes to faith, there has been since dawn of mankind and it will always remain the same but any government that goes out of its way to target a specific community is allowing its society to become obsessed with religious extremism. It never ends well and Pakistan is a great example of religious extremism where burning children and then celebrating is considered religious duty.

 

[TMA]

Look you want to call Ahmadis Kafir? Fine go ahead, there will always be disagreement when it comes to faith, there has been since dawn of mankind and it will always remain the same but any government that goes out of its way to target a specific community is allowing its society to become obsessed with religious extremism. It never ends well and Pakistan is a great example of religious extremism where burning children and then celebrating is considered religious duty.

Don't conflate the issues. Burning peoples' homes and killing them is against the Law in Pakistan, whether those people are Ahmadi, Muslim, Jew, Sikh etc etc. There is no state policy to burn Ahmadi homes or kill them or prevent them from earning a living or educated their children. True there is societal/criminal problem but not a State problem. Undoing the Second Amendment will not solve this societal/criminal problem.

Now as to Kafir or not, those who do not accept Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and his claim(s) are Kafir according to Ahmadiyya. This goes two ways. The Ahmadis are not innocent of this claim. It is just that they make up a tiny percentage of Pakistan's population...

Look, a State which claims to be an ideological state (be it Islam or any other ideology) has the right to determine who is a follower of that ideology, at least for purposes of Law.

You do know that when the State of Pakistan refused to recognize Ahmadis as Muslims, it was done at a National level with all colours of the spectrum present with a liberal Prime Minister at the helm and the leadership of the Ahmadis were invited to the National Assembly. Now you can disagree with this Law, but it was "democratically" made.(If that holds any value with you) (Personally I think it ought to be done on an individual level and not de recognize a whole community as Muslims)

The State of Pakistan does not prevent Ahmadis from holding the belief that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was the Messiah or Mahdi or even a non Law Bearing Prophet, just that they ought to declare this for official purposes, just like everyone else ought to declare their beliefs. This is the crux of the matter. As certain key positions will then not be open to Ahmadis in the State Apparatus.

Indeed if one takes a historical look as to how Mirza Ghulam Ahmad weakened Muslim Indian resistance to British occupation, one can understand why great thinkers have thought ill of him and his followers, even as far as considering him to be like Sadiq az Deccan and Jafir az bengal.

 

[Jaanbaz]

Don't conflate the issues. Burning peoples' homes and killing them is against the Law in Pakistan, whether those people are Ahmadi, Muslim, Jew, Sikh etc etc. There is no state policy to burn Ahmadi homes or kill them or prevent them from earning a living or educated their children. True there is societal/criminal problem but not a State problem. Undoing the Second Amendment will not solve this societal/criminal problem.

Now as to Kafir or not, those who do not accept Mirza Ghulam Ahmad and his claim(s) are Kafir according to Ahmadiyya. This goes two ways. The Ahmadis are not innocent of this claim. It is just that they make up a tiny percentage of Pakistan's population...

Look, a State which claims to be an ideological state (be it Islam or any other ideology) has the right to determine who is a follower of that ideology, at least for purposes of Law.

You do know that when the State of Pakistan refused to recognize Ahmadis as Muslims, it was done at a National level with all colours of the spectrum present with a liberal Prime Minister at the helm and the leadership of the Ahmadis were invited to the National Assembly. Now you can disagree with this Law, but it was "democratically" made.(If that holds any value with you) (Personally I think it ought to be done on an individual level and not de recognize a whole community as Muslims)

The State of Pakistan does not prevent Ahmadis from holding the belief that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was the Messiah or Mahdi or even a non Law Bearing Prophet, just that they ought to declare this for official purposes, just like everyone else ought to declare their beliefs. This is the crux of the matter. As certain key positions will then not be open to Ahmadis in the State Apparatus.

Indeed if one takes a historical look as to how Mirza Ghulam Ahmad weakened Muslim Indian resistance to British occupation, one can understand why great thinkers have thought ill of him and his followers, even as far as considering him to be like Sadiq az Deccan and Jafir az bengal.

1. Why didn't Pakistani leadership declare Ahmadis as Kafir before its Independence? Or did they need Ahmadi votes in Punjab, its starting to sound like Ahmadis got conned.

2. My point still stands regarding disagreement in faith, I will never agree with you neither will you but I wouldn't support a law which says ban particular people from public life.

3. Anti-Ahmadiyya laws allows sectarian Mullahs to say whatever they want without consequences, hey who cares right? We're both in UK so our lives are much safer then in Pakistan.

4. This sectarian divide has opened a Pandora's box for Pakistanis.

 

[TMA]

1. Why didn't Pakistani leadership declare Ahmadis as Kafir before its Independence? Or did they need Ahmadi votes in Punjab, its starting to sound like Ahmadis got conned.

2. My point still stands regarding disagreement in faith, I will never agree with you neither will you but I wouldn't support a law which says ban particular people from public life.

3. Anti-Ahmadiyya laws allows sectarian Mullahs to say whatever they want without consequences, hey who cares right? We're both in UK so our lives are much safer then in Pakistan.

4. This sectarian divide has opened a Pandora's box for Pakistanis.

1. Does not change the fact that the National Assembly decided on this law and was representative of the vast majority of the People of Pakistan. It was a democratic action. Be it 1974, 1962, or whatever. I think that many Muslims in British India (pre 1947) did not like the fact that Ahmadis were disproportionately representing their interests but they could do little as the SuperPower of the day patronised a segment of the Ahmadis. Grass root support for this action started much before 1974 and it got to such a level by 1974 that the liberal PM Mr Bhutto had to convene a national debate. By the way Ahmadis supported Mr Butto's PPP a lot. At least before 1974.


2. Fair enough. But please note the Second Amendment does NOT prohibit an Ahmadi from holding whatever beliefs he wants about Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Just that for official purposes he is not recognized as Muslim. As far as I understand that for official state jobs, one has to declare his faith. That is all. True that certain key positions will be limited for Muslims only, but this is not a complete ban on public life.
It is because that certain key positions will be limited to them that many Ahmadis want this amendment repealed or if they really want that job they will not declare their true faith.

Also this also goes two ways, as Ahmadis consider those Muslims who do not accept the claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad to be outside of Islam. It is just that Ahmadis make a tiny percentage of Pakistan's population.

3. True there is a societal problem. The law does NOT give permission to spread hate or murder against Ahmadis. Don't conflate the issues. Those who do such things ought to be punished. (Most likely they won't given how corrupt Pakistan is but even if there was no Second Amendment, sectarian Mullahs will say whatever they want to and spread whatever they want to, as they say "haters gonna hate". Nothing to do with the Second Amendment.)

4. True there is a sectarian issue, but again nullifying the Second Amendment ain't gonna change or help with this.