Terrorism, Shameless Religious Bigotry and Pakistani Mindset

[niaz]

Pakistan became Islamic republic on 23 March, 1956 not under Zia era. So before Zia era, Pakistan still stand as Islamic state


Quaid e Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah espoused the Two Nation Theory and led the Muslim League to adopt the Lahore resolution of 1940, popularly known as the Pakistan resolution. Two Nation Theory also know as The Ideology of Pakistan. Denying Two Nation Theory mean denying Pakistan resolution.


If we muslim we should not affread of shria law, we have example country well develope under shria law 'Saudia'.

Please dont relate TTP with religion, they are exposxed. And if you say that coz of TTP we must remove islamic logo. You cant say that on the base of TTP, they dont have any relation with religion thats why our Military fighting against them, they are emeny agents and their target is to repersent Islam, Pakistan and Muslim as terrorist, agenda for they working is to remove Islam from Pakistan.


Pakistan corrupt media workin with black water disply newz of blast and relate it with Islamic shedad pasand and Taliban but never say terrorist done it.

For the record it was not the Quaid but Allama Iqbal who came up with this idea. First seeds of the two Nation Theory were sown in December 1930 at Allahabad session of All India Muslim League, where Iqbal said:

"India is a continent of human groups belonging to different races, speaking different languages and professing different religions. Their behaviour is not at all determined by a common race conciousness. I therefore, demand the formation of a consolidated Muslim state in the best intrest of India and Islam."

Iqbal goes on to say

"I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Provinces, Sind and Baluchistan into a single State. Self-Government within the British Empire or without the British Empire. The formation of the consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of the North-West India."


This took final shape in Iqbal’s letter to the Quaid on June 21, 1937.

"A separate federation of Muslim Provinces, reformed on the lines I have suggested above, is the only course by which we can secure a peaceful India and save Muslims from the domination of Non-Muslims. Why should not the Muslims of North-West India and Bengal be considered as nations entitled to self-determination just as other nations in India and outside India are."

 

[khuramonline]

look who liked his post
very telling

its high time that Mods start a cleanup operation on fake / troll accounts.

I also saw this post and I felt sorry when I saw it was deleted. But while presenting my post ... That point was already in my notice. I have explained that Two Nation Theory was only a need of the day. Actual issue was allocation of number of seats to Muslims and Hindus. Quid-e-Azam had a great role in all the attempts to resolve this issue. Lakhnow Pact, then 14 points ... etc. then Round Table Conferences ... all were sincere attempts to resolve the issue of allocation of number of seats to Hindus and Muslims. It was after Nehru Report which rejected 14 points, and then after 1935 elections when Quid realized that Hindus will not let Muslims to Work with them and they will not give Muslims reasonable number of seats.

After it 2nd World War began. Initially it appeared that Britain will lose this war. This was the time when freedom from Britain appeared to be a possibility. Gandhi ji really tried to cash that crucial time through his "Quit India Movement". Muslim League also realized that Britain was in a weaker position. But by that time, Muslim League was in no position to trust or rely on congress. So the only way left for Muslim League was the demand of separate country. Muslim League needed some ideological basis for such type of demand. So they refined and adopted that two nation theory.

But even in 1945-46 .... Quid-e-Aazam had accepted the Confederation proposal of Cabinet Mission. Means even in 1946, one single country ... in the form of a Confederation (Like United States) was acceptable to Quid. Means that real theory was NOT any "two nation theory" Real theory was still "United Nation" theory.

But again .. fault was on the part of Congress who first accepted Cabinet Mission Proposal but then deviated from their own commitment.

Now really no other option was left for Quid. Now only option was the demand of separate country.

 

[All-Green]

Many thanks to Niaz Sb. for sharing his views.
His post is ofcourse spot on about what Pakistan was meant to be.

The major issue i see is that a majority of Pakistanis is completely unaware of the evolution of Jinnah's political vision and how it eventually led to Pakistan.
Without being aware of this critical information, we can never hope to understand what Pakistan stands for.

Jinnah was all for a united India but with ample checks and balances to ensure there was no dominance of Hindu vision on minorities.
He was disillusioned by congress due to the sole reason that he felt it was not Indian but Hindu in nature.
Even the cabinet mission plan (united India) was accepted by Quaid e Azam...yet Nehru rejected it.
We have established events which shed light on Jinnah's effort to safeguard Minorities in a united India.
For many reasons (not the subject of this post) he eventually lost hope in the social justice and equality a united India would offer to its citizens if Congress was not willing to change its ways.

It was a sociopolitical thought which evolved over decades, certainly it deserves a thorough mention in our history books, especially the ones taught in the schools.

Quaid e Azam was a Muslim but he did not envision a theocratic state (actually there is no concept of theocratic state in Islam), his aim was to create a state where there was no hegemony of a single religious group.
The state was to be inspired from the Islamic tradition of equality regardless of race, creed or color.
In brief Pakistan was to be a shining example of the social justice of Islam.

It is true that in the early days Pakistan was not at all biased in favor of Muslims.
However in 1956 it was renamed to the Islamic Republic and eventually the Islamic part was used as a political tool by those hungry for power.
I am sure the 1956 constitution would not have been acceptable to Quaid e Azam, if he were alive. He was too far sighted to ignore what the constitution indirectly facilitated in terms of an ideological derailment of Pakistan.
The threat was not at all from the Islamic principles of good governance and social equality which could only strengthen Pakistan, as emphasized upon by Quaid e Azam himself.
The actual threat was due to the extremely varying interpretation of political Islam by various sects. There was a huge risk in leaving a tool in the hands of religious parties like Maudoodi's JI to hijack Pakistan and take it in another direction.
Sadly the political leaders of the time did not see what would eventually happen in the guise of Islam.
Maudoodi and his clan prevailed in 56 and to this day Jamaat Islami is still damaging Pakistan instead of strengthening it.

Zia struck at this weak spot created by the past governments and in 78 he criticized the past governments for only using Islam for personal benefit and vowed to right the wrongs (what irony!!!).

Zia used and abused Islam as a political tool and did a tremendous damage to the ideology of Pakistan. Sadly his propaganda machinery did a good job so that the vision of Pakistan became extremely clouded and Quaid e Azam's dream was all but forgotten.

 

[sparklingway]

I am sure the 1956 constitution would not have been acceptable to Quaid e Azam, if he were alive.

He would have most definitely objected to the Objectives Resolution as well (not entirely). Many major players of the movement have written their views on this issue, the most scathing ones coming from Suhrawardy.

 

[sparklingway]

Tell me you didn't expect this:-

‘Attack on Ahmedis conspiracy to repeal laws against them’​

Wednesday, 09 Jun, 2010

LAHORE: A gathering of the leaders of 13 religious and political parties in Lahore claimed that the attack on Ahmedis on May 28 was part of a conspiracy to repeal the laws against them, BBCUrdu reported.

The meeting was held in an office of the Majlis Ahrar Islam in Lahore's Muslim Town. The parties concluded that a conspiracy was in place to debate the laws against Ahmedis, the report said.

Maulana Zahidul Rashdi, who is a founding member of the Muttahida Tehrik-i-Khatm-i-Nabuwat and also the Secretary-General of the Pakistan Shariat Council, read the joint statement at the meeting’s conclusion: The attack on Ahmedis is being used as an excuse to generate suspicions regarding the concept of khatm-i-nabuwat.

The gathering was attended by leaders of the Jamaat-i-Islami, Jamiat-i-ulema-i-Islam Fazlur Rahman group, Jamaatud Dawa and Markazi Jamaat-i-Ahl-i-Sunnat among others.

During the meeting, Maulana Ilyas Chinioti, a member of the PML-N and the Punjab provincial assembly, condemned Nawaz Sharif's statement in which he had sympathised with the Ahmedis and called them his brothers.

The meeting's participants demanded that Nawaz Sharif immediately withdraw his statement.

Earlier

Sharif’s statement on Ahmadis angers clerics​

June 07, 2010

ISLAMABAD: Top leaders of an organisation representing Deobandi madrassas across the country have reprimanded PML-N chief Nawaz Sharif for calling members of the Ahmadiyya community as “brothers” of Muslims.

“Sharif should be ashamed of calling them brothers of Muslims,” said a statement issued by the Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia (WMA).

Sharif said in Lahore on Saturday that Ahmadis were as important citizens of Pakistan as people from other religions and called them an asset.

He made the statement to express solidarity with the Ahmadiyya community following last month’s two synchronised attacks on their places of worship in Lahore which claimed more than 80 lives with many more injured.

In a statement issued here on Sunday, leaders of the Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia – an umbrella organisation of more than 12,000 Deobandi madrassas – called Ahmadis “traitors”.

WMA leaders Maulana Salimullah Khan and Qari Hafeez Jahalindri urged Sharif to retract his statement and advised him not to “defy religion for petty political gains.”

The statement termed the Ahmadis as “infidels” and said that they could not be brothers of Muslims until they convert to Islam again.

Ahmadis were declared a minority under the 1973 constitution – a move that some people believe intensified hatred against Ahmadis.

Published in the Express Tribune, June 7th, 2010.

 

[seekers]

Tell me you didn't expect this:-



In a statement issued here on Sunday, leaders of the Wafaqul Madaris al Arabia – an umbrella organisation of more than 12,000 Deobandi madrassas – called Ahmadis “traitors”.

.

Are "Wafaqul madaris al arabia" only know what is Islam, what is right and wrong in Islam,who are muslim or not,??????
Are they contractor "Tehkaydar" of Islam???

DO they care about the taliban Islam who use to breakfast by
be -heading of Muslims???

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Now really no other option was left for Quid. Now only option was the demand of separate country.

thanks for the wonderful post you spoke my heart
unfortunately we have so many versions for the reasons and aspirations towards the creation of Pakistan that its mind numbing.

Reasons to my understanding were simple, under the western democracy system Muslims were at a disadvantage. Muslims were minority but a major & signifinat part of India. Hence reason for division was to make two states on religious bases wherever there was Muslim majority was to become Pakistan & Hindu majority as Hundustan. The whole concept was not negating the fact that both countries thus created will still have minorities of either religion and that fact was very much recognised in our flag. The white portion represents the minorities and peace, green represents the majority Muslims.
Lets not be apologetic that reason for making Pakistan was to enable a significant minority to live its life with religious freedom.
A total migration of Hindus and Muslims to the newly created countries was impossible hence we have a sizable Muslim population

They didn’t stay there out of their choice but the heart rending stories of mass murder, rape & looting was enough to scare anyone holding his & his family life dear.

Just because there are 170 or 180 million Muslims in India doesn’t mean that concept of Pakistan was flawed (look at the size of India it is multiplied by 5). If we go by this premise then should all Gulf sates also become part of India because they have smaller Muslim population? Is this argument absurd?
Well so is the first referring to Indian Muslim Population hence questioning the creation of Pakistan.

Read again people, two countries made on the bases of which religion was in majority, the formula for states was different where either it was voting or state heads signing their allegiance (under duress or free will) to either state.

 

[All-Green]

Tell me you didn't expect this:-

A conspiracy theory being hatched by our Mullahs...what is unexpected?

They need some motivation for daily cardiovascular workout...
Best plan is to work up their toadies and march on the roads...smash a few windows, wreck a few cars, burn a few tires...
Purpose is to give something back to the people, mother earth and ofcourse to make our ancestors beam up with pride at such constructive and objective people who always take a stand for the greater good.

What better way to do it all than march up and down with puffed up nostrils...helps burn those carbohydrates and sugars which are taken in aplenty on a daily basis.

By the way this pathetic statement is sort of like saying

"This whole terrorism is an assassination of the people, for the people, by the people".

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Tell me you didn't expect this:-

very much expected it.
just surprised that it took them too long to come up with such glorious and pious conclusion

so Ahmadis get themselves slaughtered in dozens to get the sympathy and eventually remove the non-Mulsim tag?

I dont know if I should laugh, cry, curse or recoil with anger at their thoughtless 2 liners where they label others as conspirators, traitors, infidels while failing or refusing to condemn the people who are beheading the captives on regular bases.

with friends like Sipah Sahabah & TTP does Jamiat Islami & Jaimat Deoband really need anymore enemies?

May Allah rid us from these fanatics & their oppologists

Amen

 

[sparklingway]

A conspiracy theory being hatched by our Mullahs...what is unexpected?

They need some motivation for daily cardiovascular workout...
What better way to do it than march up and down with puffed up nostrils...helps burn those carbohydrates and sugars which are taken in aplenty on a daily basis.

But the problem is that they have nearly a million students in their seminaries and millions of adults attend their lectures, follow them and look upto them besides everybody at least hearing what they say. SO they end up affecting the public mindset in a profound way. They're inflamming hatred again and asking people to believe the Blackwater/RAW theory on this incident as well.

Highly unfortunate.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

To dear members of this forum.

In case you are wondering. I am in no way associated to Ahmadi faith and don’t have any special soft corner for Shias & other sects. I am peace loving Muslim thankyou
Basing on my Islamic teaching of tolerance and undying love for the Last Prophet & Massager Muhammad (Peace be Upon Him) I have all the love and respect for every human being regardless if he prays with crossed hands or open hands, has any other faith or none at all.

I thought I clarify, because every time I condemned a religious terror in Pakistan
Or talked about love, respect or tolerance citing the sayings & practices of our Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)
I get asked the following question

1. are you a shia
2. Are you an Ahmadi
3. are you beralvi (or do you believe in saints like data Gunj, Shabaz kalander (Allahs Blessings be on them)
4. are you Atheist?

My answer normally is according to the mental & tolerance level of the questioner in most cases the person exhibits either indifference & disbelief & I tell my self (don’t be disheartened my son, there are bound to be other Muslims who value life & respect for mankind and don’t harm the creation of Allah).

PS. just thought to clarify for the benefit of those who are more concerned about the religion of Ahmadis rather than the tragedy.

 

[All-Green]

But the problem is that they have nearly a million students in their seminaries and millions of adults attend their lectures, follow them and look upto them besides everybody at least hearing what they say. SO they end up affecting the public mindset in a profound way. They're inflamming hatred again and asking people to believe the Blackwater/RAW theory on this incident as well.

Highly unfortunate.

First of all mentioning religion on passport and ID card was not needed, however let us say that it was required.
In light of this calling Ahmedis as Ahmedis/Qadianis and not Muslim was enough to keep things in order regarding mainstream Muslim sentiments.
The first pillar of Islam is the Kalma in which a Muslim testifies that there is no God but Allah and Prophet Muhammad PBUH is his last and final messenger, anybody who disagrees with this is not Muslim in principle...though it does not mean he becomes evil.

However Zia's Islamization ensured that it was not just limited to the classical definition of a Muslim but he stepped it up a notch.

I saw firsthand the effect of Zia's pathetic laws about spreading Qadianiat.
One of my father's best friends (god have mercy on his soul) in the army was Qadiani, a gem of a man!
He and many like him felt insulted since using the Qadiani laws, it was made convenient for someone to mess up with a Qadiani by accusing them of spreading Qadianiat.
His family and our family was close and they suddenly became quite and were visible depressed.
Of course in Army it was checked despite Zia's obsessions because Army is a close knit band of brothers who share a lot of hardship, my father remained close to his friend and stuck by him as did many others.

Spreading Qadianiat is not a quantifiable action, it is not like you have forensic evidence for it...if a few witnesses come together and lie about someone spreading Qadianiat...it means a major headache for the person.

Now it does not mean that actual imprisonments for this newly defined crime happened a lot, mostly the community remained at ease in Pakistan since they were socially well integrated.
Mostly their friends did not turn on them or abandon them.
However the fact remains that we left a huge flaw in our laws by which someone with a particular background can be blackmailed or bullied into submission due to threat of being prosecuted over something which cannot be substantiated physically.

Laws are not meant to be vague, flawed and vindictive of a particular community.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

First of all mentioning religion on passport and ID card was not needed, however let us say that it was required.
In light of this calling Ahmedis as Ahmedis/Qadianis and not Muslim was enough to keep things in order regarding mainstream Muslim sentiments.
The first pillar of Islam is the Kalma in which a Muslim testifies that there is no God but Allah and Prophet Muhammad PBUH is his last and final messenger, anybody who disagrees with this is not Muslim in principle...though it does not mean he becomes evil.

However Zia's Islamization ensured that it was not just limited to the classical definition of a Muslim but he stepped it up a notch.

I saw firsthand the effect of Zia's pathetic laws about spreading Qadianiat.
One of my father's best friends (god have mercy on his soul) in the army was Qadiani, a gem of a man!
He and many like him felt insulted since using the Qadiani laws, it was made convenient for someone to mess up with a Qadiani by accusing them of spreading Qadianiat.
His family and our family was close and they suddenly became quite and were visible depressed.
Of course in Army it was checked despite Zia's obsessions because Army is a close knit band of brothers who share a lot of hardship, my father remained close to his friend and stuck by him as did many others.

Spreading Qadianiat is not a quantifiable action, it is not like you have forensic evidence for it...if a few witnesses come together and lie about someone spreading Qadianiat...it means a major headache for the person.

Now it does not mean that actual imprisonments for this newly defined crime happened a lot, mostly the community remained at ease in Pakistan since they were socially well integrated.
Mostly their friends did not turn on them or abandon them.
However the fact remains that we left a huge flaw in our laws by which someone with a particular background can be blackmailed or bullied into submission due to threat of being prosecuted over something which cannot be substantiated physically.

Laws are not meant to be vague, flawed and vindictive of a particular community.

Bless you

I have had many Ahmadi friends. I respected them for their character & personality. very proud Pakistanis and hardworking.
although I never raised the question about their faith but they sometimes did try to explain and it appeared to me that there was a lot of misinformation or misconception on top of the reality about their faith.

all we have is some fanatic Mullahs who hate all telling us what Qadianis belive. without any chance given to Qadianis to explain or correct.

correct me if i am wrong but what I understood from one of my long Qadiani friend was that they were considering the Gulah Ahmad as a saint of Messiah (not a Prophet) not sure how true that was but I never forced an explanation from him. maybe he was just self explaining due to constant prosecution on regular basis.

I pray for every one of us to understand & correct ourselves to the teachings of Our Holy Prophet Muhammad PBUH upon whom the faith completed and finished

Amen

 

[kugga]

Bless you

I have had many Ahmadi friends. I respected them for their character & personality. very proud Pakistanis and hardworking.
although I never raised the question about their faith but they sometimes did try to explain and it appeared to me that there was a lot of misinformation or misconception on top of the reality about their faith.

all we have is some fanatic Mullahs who hate all telling us what Qadianis belive. without any chance given to Qadianis to explain or correct.

correct me if i am wrong but what I understood from one of my long Qadiani friend was that they were considering the Gulah Ahmad as a saint of Messiah (not a Prophet) not sure how true that was but I never forced an explanation from him. maybe he was just self explaining due to constant prosecution on regular basis.

I pray for every one of us to understand & correct ourselves to the teachings of Our Holy Prophet Muhammad PBUH upon whom the faith completed and finished

Amen

Just go and find his book tazkirah which the mirza sb considers as Wahi(revelation) from God you will understand what mirza ghulam ahmad Qadiyan was....

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Just go and find his book tazkirah which the mirza sb considers as Wahi(revelation) from God you will understand what mirza ghulam ahmad Qadiyan was....

is that book written by him or some Qadiani or by someone else? I dont know if that will serve any purpose. all I know about them is what we accuse them for.

but if one of my friends disowns the Prophethood claim of Gulam Ahmad then I will take his word for it. not what Mullah "Feedme or I fart loud" claims about them

since my dealing with them was not on religious bases so it was pretty much irrelevent to grill them for their beliefs

we are told that Deobandi school and Qadiani school were both the creation of the British Empire to cause rifts & divisions among Muslims thats about it.

to me the concept is very simple Oneness of God & Muhammad being His final Prophet & Massenger (Peace be Upon Him)
no ifs but ors etc

there can be imams or sufis or saints or majadads etc but Prophethood closed on Muhammad PBUH.

I am worried that this thread will turn into an endless death spiral of chicken and the egg debate. my request is, please give them the right to live without fear otherwise we loose the right to blame Israeli treatement of Palestinians