Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

The late Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto is thought to have started the whole process. I think almost everyone apart from die hard jayalas agree that ZAB was a great leader, but a flawed one. His 1974 amendment was an example of his political cunning which went horribly wrong. Ahmadis were declared non-muslims “for the sake of constitution”, but ZAB started which could never be stopped. Pakistani politicians in the past had suffered for standing up against religious bigotry. But ZAB chose the easier option out, and all religious leaders were appeased for a few years by the amendment. Kausar Niazi, another great political mind and ZAB’s associate knew too well the religious mind. He himself was involved in 1954 anti-ahmadiyya distrubances.

I had written to Late Khalid Hasan about a few clarifications on Kausar Niazi, and in his reply he wrote

“As for Maulana Kausar Niazi, I had a very good relationship with him. You know, he began his political life with the Jamaat-e-Islami. In 1953, when the anti-Ahmediyya riots gripped Punjab, Niazi was barely 20 but he did take part in the agitation and was jailed. The escape in a burqa story is probably apocryphal. I have never heard it. If I were you, I would discount the tale. I can assure you of one thing though: if there was one man in the Bhutto cabinet in 1974 who was opposed to declaring your Jamaat and its followers a minority, it was Maulana Kausar Niazi. He told me this himself. He recalled telling Bhutto, “App iss 80-sala puranay maslay kau haath na lagaiyain. Jahan tuk inn maulvi hazrat ka ta’ullaq hai, aik maulvi doosray maulavi ke peechay namaz bhi parhnay kau tiyyar nahin hai.” (please do not pursue this 80 years old problem. As far as maulvis ar concerned, one maulvi can’t bear to stand behind another to say his ritual prayers) However ZAB went ahead with a decsion which was and will remain a blot on his good name and his judgement. It has divided the nation and it has led to the rise of Mullah power.”

Maulana Niazi helped Bhutto to put a political spin to this and other amendments made during the Bhutto era. Niazi wrote in his book “The last days of premier Bhutto”

"He was referring to the Constitutional Amendment regarding the Ahmadis, which has prompted country wide celebrations. Mr. Bhutto felt that the credit which should have gone to his government had not been accorded. “The maulvis are claiming all credit for the Amendment,” he complained, “we must portray the true picture before the people.” To this Niazi said

“This step has certainly enhanced your popularity in the religious circles,… but these circles do not have much significance from the elections point of view; it’s the majority that matter in a political decision. In context of the present political situation your graph is lower than what it was in 1973.”

But when it came to elections, Mullahs had changed their mind about their savior. Bhutto, the hero, the defender of Khatme Nabuwwat (finality of Prophethood) had become a sinner, a kafir himself. It is ironic that ZAB had to defend his own faith in the court during his trial and the torment is said to have continued even after his death when his faith was allegedly confirmed in a grotesque manner.

Ahmadis were a problem for ZAB not because of a set of relgious ideas. He couldn’t care less for the matters of faith. His close associates during his first election campaign were ahmadis who were loyal to PPP. The establishment and politicains resented the prominence of ahmadis in educated circles. Many top civil servants, army officers and professionals of the country were ahmadis. ZAB found out about the influence of the community when during 1971 elections, Punjab fell to PPP due to the campaign work carried out by ahmadiyya community. This political influence was a threat to every one. And ZAB used the opportunity to stab his own loyal friends in the back, by throwing them to mad mullahs.

As an Ahmadi, I know that although the Jamaat Ahmadiyya leadership severed ties with ZAB after his event, but in mid 1970s when anti-bhutto plans were being hatched in the army, he was sent a message from Rabwah to warn him of the conspiracy. ZAB, as his nature was, dismissed this warning as a cheap trick to confuse him. ZAB’s hanging was a sad day for Pakistan. But it was his actions against the soul of the Pakistani constitution which are his lasting legacy. No one remembers roti plants or the financial security or even the nuclear energy/arms development.

Zia knew the tricks to please the mullahs. He enforced the sharia laws in 1979. And held back the Qisas law until Bhutto was hanged. Fauzia Wahab’s article in The News sheds light on this The trial of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto

But Mullah’s lust for control and blood is insatiable. Zia himself was a mullah at heart. The ordinance XX should put every Pakistani to shame. I am heartened to find out that someone mentioned such non-ahmadi muslims who refuse to sign the declaration for their passport application. Did you know that an Ahmadi can be (and are) imprisoned in Pakistan for saying Alhamdulillah or Assalamo Alykum? The myths of what ahmadis believed in their hearts were further “improved” by these laws. At first, ZAB held an “in camera” session to declare Ahmadis non-muslims, and the proceedings of this meeting were never made public. A few impression which escaped from the members in later years tell of a hoax played in the name of democracy. Mufti Mahmood, the head of takfiri parties admitted in a speech that after the Ahmadi representative’s arguments, most of the non religious members of the Committee were asking why should we declare such a pious man and his followers kafir?

...

ZAB himself was not present at the proceedings by when the matter was brought to him about a possible revolt during the voting process, he himself made sure that each member of PPP voted in favor of the amendment. Such was his grip over his parliament.

As the 1974 proceedings were never made public, the mullahs have made attempts to portray the whole event as a great success, an “ijma” or a consensus by all 72 sects against the one heretic sect. One of the mullahs took the opportunity to write a pamphlet, claiming it to be a true account of what actually happened under the title “Parliament main Qadyani shikast‎”. I have read the booklet and find it unbelievable that the 17 day debate has been summarized in a few dozen pages. How convenient!

This book aside, there are hundreds of books in circulation which are aimed at the uneducated primary pass classes. In every library, you will find such books in Urdu section, written solely to inflame the reader’s sentiments against ahmadis. No wonder the public gets agitated when the eighth amendment is under threat. The anti-ahmadi laws are part of this amendment. Even poor Musharraf could not touch this part when he suspended the constitution. So it seems that Pakistani constitution has only one permanent feature, i.e., Ahmadis are non-muslims. The rest of it can be put in a rubbish bin, including civil liberties, freedom of speech, women’s rights, economic equality etc.. But beware of the 2nd amendment and ahmadi specific laws! I read a very touching line on a website, someone wrote that the constitution of Pakistan has been reduced to a fatwa. Does this bring any consolation to our hearts?

Zia’s islamization brought many new features to Pakistani society. We found Islamic militancy as an acceptable way of life. But most of it was a continuation of what ZAB started as a political move. Matters got worst when democracy returned. ZAB’s favorite daughter provided the political voice to Maulvis by giving the importance. The same maulvis virtually came back in power during Nawaz Sharif’s era. Everyone forgot about Islamic militancy as it was happening in Kashmir. Jhangvi and Sipah Sahaba groups were still active in Pakistan. You heard people being killed every other day. The frequency increased as more and more militants were recruited by the jihadi backed seminaries and training camps. They were put to use against Shias mainly. I guess this was inevitable. If you keep letting loose vicious guard dogs, they will bite any stranger that comes near them. The reason a hard-line Pakistani zealot finds it easy to kill is the Takfiri mentality he has been taught by his masters. Shia are Kafir, Ahmadis are Kafir, anyone who agrees with Kafirs is a Kafir. So all of us become Kafirs in the end and much easier to kill.

On March 14th, a couple was brutally murdered in their home in Multan. http://thepersecution-org.blogspot.com/2009/03/bru tal-murder-of-two-ahmadi-doctors-in.html… This was on the eve of the great celebration when Pakistanis got their justice system back. I searched for the news story on all the online papers and TV stations. I could not find it. Both victims were doctors and were receiving threats from unknown zealots. In September last year, two more prominent ahmadis were murdered after the broadcast of “Alim online” celebrating the great victory in ZAB’s parliament. The maulvis on the programme declared Ahmadis as “Wajibul Qatl” due to their heretical beliefs. These are examples of a deeply set disease in Pakistani mindset. The society ignores the victims of such crimes because they are not considered worthy to be cared for.

Last night I was having discussion with my non-ahmadi friends and one of them remarked that there are only two types of people you can kill. One, those who reject God and secondly those who blaspheme. I asked for a reason but he had none apart from some remnants of a mullahs opinion which got mixed up with his own naive understanding of Islam. Another of my friends earnestly believes that targeting civilians in Israel is fine as the situation there is “special”. Both these friends are graduates and do not belong to the religious classes. Now imagine the hundreds of thousands of madrissa graduates being churned out into Pakistani streets every year. And imagine what life skills they have got? What is their world view? How do they see Pakistan? Answers are very difficult and very alarming. May God save us all.

Further reading:

Anti Ahmadi laws. Ordinance XX - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The second amendment. http://www.pakistani.org/pakistan/constitution/ame ndments/2amendment.html…
Cosmic anger, by Gordon Fraser. Cosmic Anger: Abdus Salam - the … - Google Buchsuche 29&dq=eighth++pakistan+ahmadis&as_brr=3&ei=pM7ZSbD 2JaiSzQTajKnkAg&hl=en#PPA32,M1
First hand account by an Ahmadi delegate to 1974 proceedings.??? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ?? ?? ???](http://www.alislam.org/v/46.html)
Memorandum presented to the members of Parliament by the Ahmadi delegation in 1974 www.alislam.org/urdu/pdf/
Qadiani Problem. Maudoodi’s take on the issue. http://www.maududi.org/urdu/pamphlets/qadiani_masa la.php?p=35…

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

Zakat alllah

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi’s point of view:

His lawyer mentions something in passing in this BBC interview. I am not sure what he exactly meant though.

?BBC Urdu? - ?Institutional? - ??? ??? ??? ???](http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/multimedia/2009/04/09040) 4_090404_bhutto_anniversary.shtml

Why is such a law even in existence in the 21st century? In the US there is a sect of Christians called Mormons who are analogous to Ahmadyias. Instead of persecuting them they are part of society and enrich it. In fact, a Mormon finished second in the Republican presidential nomination battle and is considered the favorite to win the nomination in 2012. Even India, despite all its problems, has a Sikh prime minister.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

Brother, Quaid formed Pakistan as a Sunni Islamic republic on the ideals of Rasool-un-Nabi(saw) and on the model of Saudi Arabia where others faith can live but will have limited rights. The constitution change was very necessary- it only says Ahmadis are non-muslims. I guess Zia and ZAB knew better about Islam than you.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

lol. you make it sound like your proud.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

[quote]
I guess Zia and ZAB knew better about Islam than you.

[/quote]

So your argument is that the self-proclaimed "one true religion" is the only religion in the world terrified of the concept of equal rights? Christian countries give equal rights to minorities, India does, Buddhist countries do, atheist countries do, etc. Only in the "ummah" is religious apartheid so common. Well, let me amend that. Only among Muslim countries is it so common in the 21st century. Much of the rest of the world, especially the countries that today are advanced, evolved beyond medieval religious bigotry. Even what is now the USA once had laws limiting the rights of minority sects (i.e. the colony of Virginia made it illegal to be a Quaker). When will the OIC 57? There are only a few Muslim nations that provide religious equality, such as Turkey and Syria.

Saudi Irb does not provide limited rights to religious minorities other than minority Muslim sects. In Saudi Arabia, the country that Pakistanis adore, non-Muslims have 0 rights. It is illegal in Saudi Irb to be an adherent of any religion other than Islam. I think it is the only country in the world with such a requirement. This is the country Pakistanis revere? Damn. No wonder Pakistan is struggling. If Pakistan wants successful models to look at it needs to look at the USA, UK, Japan, South Korea, and for Muslim-specific issues Turkey in my view.

Slickstar he probably is proud of it. The Islamists think they are being generous by letting non-Muslims even live lol.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

can any one elaborate on this further what rights ahmedis dont have in pakistan please excuse me if i sound harsh i dont mean to.

they are declared non muslims: which is understandable.

they cant build places of worship resembling mosques: understandable.

other than that which form of state persecution ahmedis face in pakistan subject to law is not violated, not talking about individuals.
frankly i dont know.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi’s point of view:

This is nothing but a figment of your own imagination. Quaid was a progressive leader and wanted to see Pakistan as a prospeous modern muslim state not a shariah state or theocracy governed by narrow-minded and backward-thinking mullahs as some of you would have us believe. Remember these very mullahs notably Maulana Azad and Maulana Maudoodi were against the creation of a separate state for muslims.

Policy Speech on 11 August 1947
**"**There is no other solution. Now what shall we do? Now, if we want to make this great State of Pakistan happy and prosperous, we should wholly and solely concentrate on the well-being of the people, and especially of the masses and the poor. If you will work in co-operation, forgetting the past, burying the hatchet, you are bound to succeed. If you change your past and work together in a spirit that everyone of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges, and obligations, there will be no end to the progress you will make. I cannot emphasize it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities, the Hindu community and the Muslim community, because even as regards Muslims you have Pathans, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on, and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khatris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on, will vanish. Indeed if you ask me, this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain the freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free people long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time, but for this. Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this. You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State. As you know, history shows that in England, conditions, some time ago, were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. Thank God, we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days where there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State. The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today, you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen of Great Britain and they are all members of the Nation. Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State." Jinnah, 11th August 1947 - presiding over the constituent assembly.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jinnah

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

No he didnt "brother."

Zia was an educated extremist, while ZAB was a politician more then a Muslim.

As for Jinnah, he was a secular person... He took on the garb of a Muslim because he was also a shrewd politician.

If you havent read his speeches, you should go and do so. He clearly stated that Pakistan is meant to be a state where all people are free to worship in there way, and that the govt has no say in this matter.

The sad thing is, your here trying to confuse people when you yourself are obvioulsy completly ignorant of the basis of Pakistan.

I dont care what Islam says about Ahmadis, but im certain Pakistan and its constitution, were never meant to have such a bigoted and discriminatroy piece religious garbage in it.

Go and do some actual reading before you make such foolish ignorant comments. Pakistan was meant to be a secular state..

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi’s point of view:

How tragic for Pakistan that it those words were so calously ignored.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

understandable??

How about three years prison sentence of saying Assalamo Alykum or any other Islamic terminology?

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi’s point of view:

You can get some details here; The Persecution of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community

A few events from last few months;

Aggressive profiling of Ahmadis;

Passport Form (section 16c):

What disgusting language to use on a country’s passport form for beliefs of a section of its citizens (not really citizens though).

Same declaration on National ID Card application form (section 36)

Educational Institution Application Form

Why does a secular educational institution need to know the beliefs of an applicant?

============

I don’t understand your “understandable” bits. Do civil liberties
or freedom of religion mean anything to you?

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

Dear Ahmedis,

One again I would say that you guys have no future in Pakistan. This is a country where taliban will soon take over and kill all of you. Leave when you have a chance to do so.

Sorry this is the reality. Forget about ahmedis, soon barelvis, shias and non wahabi sunnis will also be outlawed when taliban complete their take over.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

I am contemplating another article entitled "Creation of Pakistan; A Qadiani conspiracy".

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

The cyberjihadis here and their "brothers" like the Khatm-e-nabuwat mullahs will not be satisfied until every single Ahmedi in Pakistan is killed or deported.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

Its not surprising that we in pakistan passed anti ahmadi laws. Corrupt politicians in a failed state such as Saudi arabia, pakistan and israel and many others besides always need to provide pacification to the few radical elements within it to justify their rule. The anti ahmadi laws are a disgrace. If our clerics have theological disputes with the qadiyanis then the mosques. universities and the media are where the debates should take place. The government has no right to

In the past 800 years the islamic world hadnt produced a physicist of renown. Then along came Abdus Sallaam. He helped in creating one of the fundamental theories of physics. When he accepted the Nobel Prize(only pakistani thus far) he quoted a verse from the quran, not from any qadiani pamphlet. He was unjustly vilified in our country. I am truly ashamed that we who once governed tolerant empires from India to the Iberian peninsula have become thus myopic and oppressive.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

Jinnah was definitely a secular person but he knew the interests of Pakistan lie in an Saudi-Arab style theocracy not a secular Indian-ishtyle democrazy. Pakistan's constitution is a mirror what Islam says about Ahmadis- do you think Zia was crazy or ZAB wasn't patriotic that they made these laws to make Pakistanis suffer?

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi’s point of view:

Whine ***** and moan.

The last Sermon of the Holy Prophet Mohammed (SAW) - Muhammad’s Last Sermon

Just declare Ahmadies as a seperate religion and the constitutional amendment can easily be revoked. As of now, your existence is a violation of the words of the Holy Prophet.

Re: Ahmadis in Pakistan: An Ahmadi's point of view:

Yes I do think Zia was crazy and ZAB cared more about his political career then the rights of few minority.

And no Jinnah wanted secular democracy, not a theocracy. Learn your history, your embarassing yourself.